Calling ALL Posters

[SaveByRichter35]

So now how do we overcome all of this and make this place fun again for everyone?

 

 

LGR

 

I'm just logging back in after a nice 3 day weekend off from work so I have to catch up on the rest of this thread as well as everything else but I wanted to comment on this before I continue my reading since I have as few pages to read.

 

IMO people just need to fucking chill and not take this shit so damn seriously and personally. It's a message board. This place is full of grown ass men who's feelings are getting hurt over what people post on a New York Rangers message board. I used to frequent an Acura message board that was like no holds barred and that place never had even a fraction of the amount of wining that I see on here. And those kids can get pretty damn brutal. Were there arguments here and there? Yea, of course but everyone knew it was just the internet and it was all in good fun.

[SaveByRichter35]

Eliminate the political threads and any news story that could lead into arguments about race, guns, religion, etc ... Imo, it'll prevent the fighting and also reduce the amount of bullshit mods have to go through for something they don't get paid for. Volunteer work should be fun, and my guess is that it can't possibly be fun for them having to deal with this. We've tried the "tread lightly" in thread topics and it's pretty clear that it doesn't work. I want to post here for hockey, and couldn't care less about anyone's political or religious views and beliefs. They're meaningless discussions where no one is ever going to change their stance, ever. No offense to anyone, but world leaders can't change a fuckin thing ... What makes you think 43 guys on a hockey forum could?

 

I get what you're saying here, Mikey, but honestly I don't agree with this one. I like to read some of the stuff in there as you get it from both sides instead of all the bias you find on any particular news station. Not to mention it keeps people entertained during the break.

[Mike]

I get what you're saying here, Mikey, but honestly I don't agree with this one. I like to read some of the stuff in there as you get it from both sides instead of all the bias you find on any particular news station. Not to mention it keeps people entertained during the break.

 

I understand what you're saying, but the bad outweighs the good imo.

[SaveByRichter35]

SaveByRichter, you say you're not reporting offensive posts because you just don't do that. Yet you have no problem derailing threads by complaining about posts you find offensive. That's the exact reason we have the report feature. So that a thread on a certain topic doesn't turn into a personal argument between two users. Since you OK'ed us sharing your discipline interactions, that leads us to this.

 

Here's your most recent infraction. It was for ignoring staff warning:

 

Original Post:

 

To get this more out in the open, the mod you're talking about is Pete.

 

When you receive an in-thread warning about something from a Mod or Admin (in this case it came from me) that is not an invitation to continue commenting about the same topic in thread. It's a warning that if you continue, you'll receive an infraction. This is like if you got into a fight in a bar and the bouncer grabs you and is telling you to stop. You then take that opportunity to grab a bottle off the bar and throw it at the person you were fighting with. Or worse, at the bouncer. It's completely unacceptable. So this is cut and dry. If you want to continue the discussion privately with us, report the post and leave a message with it or PM one of us. You did PM me after I issued the above infraction.

 

Here is that PM:

 

 

 

So you restate your point with even more hostility, calling Pete a punk and have to throw in the complaint about "this place" that the owner, Phil, pays for each month and the mods like myself not only post at but also spend extra time maintaining. Not the first time, certainly we've gotten insulted and won't be the last. But again, let me point out, report posts you think are over the line. Don't lash out in thread complaining about users or mods. And when you're warned for it, ignore the warning and then choose to PM us doubling down on your insults, I'm not sure what response you expect. I decided not to respond at all, rather than get in a shouting match with you.

 

Here's a post you received a warning for trolling for not long after:

 

 

 

The post you were agreeing to was from Pete. So this is clearly you trolling him. If you out of the blue say, "I hate to agree with the almighty" when talking about another user, isn't it you that's instigating a situation? That's the common thread we often find when discipline becomes necessary. A debate goes on for a while, gets heated, then a user makes a personal comment against another. They get a warning or infraction, depending on their history and the severity of the situation. Then they complain that the other person started it or the other person did it too. Sometimes they're right and we warn/infract both parties. Sometimes they're wrong and only they get warned/infracted.

 

The infraction for ignoring staff warning came from the Kaepernick thread. It's still there, so I encourage anyone who thinks any mod broke a rule to go through that thread and find it for us so we can discuss it. I think what you will ultimately find is a heated debate where everyone involved up to the point of the in thread warning were heated, but completely on the topic of Kapernick refusing to stand for the pledge.

 

http://www.blueshirtsbrotherhood.com/showthread.php?18250-Colin-Kaepernick-Refusal-to-Stand-for-National-Anthem-Ignites-Controversy

 

Anyone is free to look through that thread and report any post by any mod or user they think was against forum rules and we will certainly discuss it. On the first infraction for you, here's the start of the interaction which led to me giving you an in-thread warning:

 

http://www.blueshirtsbrotherhood.com/showthread.php?18250-Colin-Kaepernick-Refusal-to-Stand-for-National-Anthem-Ignites-Controversy&p=856386&viewfull=1#post856386

 

You and Pete had been going back and forth when you dropped this:

 

 

 

The "some one like you" part is meant to be dismissive. It could have probably earned a quick in thread warning. You're making this about Pete, the user, as well as what he's saying. It's a fine line we, as moderators probably need to clear up. Anyway, Pete responds:

 

 

 

It's pretty clear that your shot at him, personally, was noticed. He quoted it. You could have choosen that moment to apologize for making it personal. At the very least, you could have moved on in a different direction. Instead you said:

 

 

 

You saying that you're glad he's not a relative of yours comes up to the line again. You're talking about a poster, even if it's somewhat connected to the topic at hand. So you didn't get any warning about this, but again, maybe you could have. Pete then responds with:

 

 

 

He's approaching that same line now after you've taken two shots at him. He's basically responding in kind to you. And it's still connected to the topic. So he did not get a warning about it either. Except from you.

 

 

 

And that is when I came in with the in thread warning. So your claim that if the roles were reversed doesn't stand. The roles were just reversed. You both made very similar comments. They were both technically on topic, because the entire thread is about our personal feelings about the flag. Neither received moderation for that reason.

 

This is often the case we find when a post gets reported about a user or a mod. A heated discussion which doesn't violate any forum rules leaves one user feeling as if they were slighted. So they report it. We read and discuss the reported post and look at the context and then decide if there was a violation.

 

Getting back to Pete, because I think he's one of the mods that this discussion is mainly about. He's very opinionated. He, like many of us, has passionate discussions here. Those discussions get heated. But heated discussions are fine. It's only breaking forum rules that we moderate. So again, when ever anyone thinks any one else posts something that breaks a forum rule, we need that to get reported.

 

Do you really want me to comment on this or should I just walk away and let you have the last word?

[SaveByRichter35]

I understand what you're saying, but the bad outweighs the good imo.

 

Fair enough. Everyone is allowed their opinion :thumbs:

[phillyb]

I'm just logging back in after a nice 3 day weekend off from work so I have to catch up on the rest of this thread as well as everything else but I wanted to comment on this before I continue my reading since I have as few pages to read.

 

IMO people just need to fucking chill and not take this shit so damn seriously and personally. It's a message board. This place is full of grown ass men who's feelings are getting hurt over what people post on a New York Rangers message board. I used to frequent an Acura message board that was like no holds barred and that place never had even a fraction of the amount of wining that I see on here. And those kids can get pretty damn brutal. Were there arguments here and there? Yea, of course but everyone knew it was just the internet and it was all in good fun.

 

As someone who's admin'ed, mod'ed, posted on, and trolled countless forums, I agree with this post. There are also a lot of prime examples in this thread alone.

[Albatrosss]

one person who turned me off of this forum is Peetie. now I just lurk

[-ERIK-]

I really don't follow the advance statistics mumbo jumbo talk,and no disrespect to people that do or that like to use that.But I can definitely see how that sometimes turns posters off,specially ones that do know a lot about hockey but don't have the understanding of these statistics or the time to try and get a grasp on all of it. And it definitely feels at times that unless you use some of these statistics in a reply or post a novel ,you get ignored in the conversation. Eventually you just don't post as much.I don't know if there is a solution to this.

 

As far as the mods not getting the same treatment as the normal users,I can't say I agree or disagree, it does feel like certain mods get away with more from time to time.

 

And I don't want to say Cliquey here cause all forums have groups but it also feels at times that unless you are one of the alpha users you just get lost in the fray,pr overlooked,which in turn leads you to post even less .An example,I say : Man Girardi looks awful tonight,who was he even passing the puck to on that play?.

Two posts later someone else says the same thing and because of who they are ,they get replied to and can banter back and forth.

[Mike]

I really don't follow the advance statistics mumbo jumbo talk,and no disrespect to people that do or that like to use that.But I can definitely see how that sometimes turns posters off,specially ones that do know a lot about hockey but don't have the understanding of these statistics or the time to try and get a grasp on all of it. And it definitely feels at times that unless you use some of these statistics in a reply or post a novel ,you get ignored in the conversation. Eventually you just don't post as much.I don't know if there is a solution to this.

 

As far as the mods not getting the same treatment as the normal users,I can't say I agree or disagree, it does feel like certain mods get away with more from time to time.

 

And I don't want to say Cliquey here cause all forums have groups but it also feels at times that unless you are one of the alpha users you just get lost in the fray,pr overlooked,which in turn leads you to post even less .An example,I say : Man Girardi looks awful tonight,who was he even passing the puck to on that play?.

Two posts later someone else says the same thing and because of who they are ,they get replied to and can banter back and forth.

 

As far as the AS go, I disagree with you. There's a few of us that don't gaf about them yet participate in a thread where people use them as evidence to whatever point they're trying to get across.

 

 

Friends, mods, whatever it may be do not get special treatment. Jimmy and I are proof of that. Pete gets warnings too. Here's the thing, and I'm not saying this because Pete is my friend. I'm saying it because it's the truth ... Pete knows how to walk the line without crossing it better than anyone else here including myself. That's why I get infractions and bans, and he gets warnings. For argument sake, if you and I are fighting in a thread, we're both getting disciplined, infractions, or bans because we both go over the line in what we say. If it's me and Pete, he gets a warning and I get an infraction basically because he walked the line like a dick, and I told him go fuck himself. It's not because he's a mod, it's because he's smarter. Me? I just want to tell him to fuck off, has nothing to do with not being as smart.

[Guest]

Do you really want me to comment on this or should I just walk away and let you have the last word?

You were nice enough to let me use your discipline history as an example so we could show how and why we go about making the decisions we do. I appreciated that because without volunteering that all we could do is give hypotheticals.

 

I'm not looking for the last word at all. I'm looking to understand whether the complaints of moderation bias have merit or if it is a misunderstanding of what we allow and what we don't. So please comment.

 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Ba Ba Bluey]

I miss Josh

 

I miss you....and Josh too.

[Vodka Drunkenski]

You guys are welcomed to use my history as well to show examples. I'm friendly with some mods here but have been infracted and banned multiple times. But since I started the thread, I'll take the criticism to make a point.

 

 

LGR

[Phil]

I know there's still active talks around the myth of moderator bias/favoritism, but to speak more to the general call to action I think Vodka was getting at, my suggestion to you, especially you longtime users, is to post threads more often. From my perspective that's been an issue forever. It's generally the same five users making threads about any topic, even just news updates. Just this summer and through preseason I can't tell you how many times I've gone and made threads about relatively big stories at like 7/8pm when I'm home and finally settling in when the story broke at 10am.

 

Forum activity tends to follow the news cycle. You aren't being asked to pen a dissertation, but when a guy gets suspended at 11am on a Monday and the thread isn't posted until 6pm on Wednesday, it makes the forum look out of touch and always a day late and a dollar short.

 

Be more proactive. It's your forum, too. If you think a topic is interesting, post it. Stop waiting for anyone else to do it, because there's times it may never get posted at all. Like a bad game of poker where everyone folds because no one has the guts to ante up.

 

On this note, Blue Heaven has done a great job of this this week. West Point story, Gudas hit, etc.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[Vodka Drunkenski]

Agreed, good point Phitalic

 

 

LGR

[SaveByRichter35]

As someone who's admin'ed' date=' mod'ed, posted on, and trolled countless forums, I agree with this post. There are also a lot of prime examples in this thread alone.[/quote']

I think that has a lot to do with why I may sometimes come off that way when I really don't mean to. I mean I have a sarcastic personality as it is and its sometimes hard for that to be understood correctly in text form without posting some emojis to get the point across. I've since lost interest in the Honda/car scene so I don't go on those BBs anymore but I guess that way of posting is just ingrained in me. The other hockey BB I go on is really lax too, though not to the same extent, much more than here though. Something I will try to be more mindful of.

I really don't follow the advance statistics mumbo jumbo talk,and no disrespect to people that do or that like to use that.But I can definitely see how that sometimes turns posters off,specially ones that do know a lot about hockey but don't have the understanding of these statistics or the time to try and get a grasp on all of it. And it definitely feels at times that unless you use some of these statistics in a reply or post a novel ,you get ignored in the conversation. Eventually you just don't post as much.I don't know if there is a solution to this.

 

As far as the mods not getting the same treatment as the normal users,I can't say I agree or disagree, it does feel like certain mods get away with more from time to time.

 

And I don't want to say Cliquey here cause all forums have groups but it also feels at times that unless you are one of the alpha users you just get lost in the fray,pr overlooked,which in turn leads you to post even less .An example,I say : Man Girardi looks awful tonight,who was he even passing the puck to on that play?.

Two posts later someone else says the same thing and because of who they are ,they get replied to and can banter back and forth.

I'm 33 and have been playing hockey since I was a little kid, still play today. I get the game of hockey, I understand the game of hockey. I don't get nor understand a lot of these new advanced stats either so I feel your pain. I admit I usually tend to stay out of threads where the topic is about such analytics because I really have nothing to offer to that discussion. When its a gameday thread or any other type of thread is brought up and someone makes a post dealing with the analytics I either ignore it and move on, or if its some of the more easy to understand ones, I try to make sense of it and contribute what I can. Which by the time I digest that information and type something up someone else says the same thing and I just say fuck it. Try not to get too caught up in it.

 

You were nice enough to let me use your discipline history as an example so we could show how and why we go about making the decisions we do. I appreciated that because without volunteering that all we could do is give hypotheticals.

 

I'm not looking for the last word at all. I'm looking to understand whether the complaints of moderation bias have merit or if it is a misunderstanding of what we allow and what we don't. So please comment.

 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

 

Ok so here it goes.

 

I wasn't complaining about a post I found offensive. I was complaining that he said something that, from what I have seen over the time I have been here, would have gotten some kind of a response from a mod. Actually now that I went back and read the specific post you quoted I was pointing out how if someone had a response to one of his posts and totally ignored his whole post to focus on one tidbit of said post, he would have a fit about it and come back with a post along the lines of "Actually this is not correct but that actually is, thanks for ignoring the rest of my post since it didn't fit your narrative" or something similar. I've noticed him do it time and time again.

 

The post about "The Almighty" you got me red handed on. It was in fact a post about a person who seemingly cannot do any wrong. Was I instigating? I guess you could say that, yes. I guess its not ok to instigate? Or is it just ok to instigate someone so long as you walk the line without crossing the line, as its been noted that Pete tends to do. Walk the line and then sit back and wait for you to cross the line that he knows so much better than everyone else and knows where to stop, setting you up for the fall.

 

Another thing some people should consider is to stop assuming things about what people say. When I said "Someone like me" vs "someone like you" I do not mean that in any kind of dismissive or condescending way. In that specific conversation I meant it simply as "someone like me", a Veteran, vs "someone like you" as in someone who did not serve. Regardless of who you know that did swerve, knowing someone who served is not the same as serving so yes, I will dismiss that kind of comment/conversation.

 

Hopefully this post didn't come off as me attacking your position, I was simply explaining my angle of what you posted.

[The Dude]

Eliminate the political threads and any news story that could lead into arguments about race, guns, religion, etc ... Imo, it'll prevent the fighting and also reduce the amount of bullshit mods have to go through for something they don't get paid for. Volunteer work should be fun, and my guess is that it can't possibly be fun for them having to deal with this. We've tried the "tread lightly" in thread topics and it's pretty clear that it doesn't work. I want to post here for hockey, and couldn't care less about anyone's political or religious views and beliefs. They're meaningless discussions where no one is ever going to change their stance, ever. No offense to anyone, but world leaders can't change a fuckin thing ... What makes you think 43 guys on a hockey forum could?

 

Definitely. I stay away from the political and religion type threads. They are insanely tense and I agree with Mike that it seems to carry over into different discussion's.

 

It's bad blood type of baby bullshit, where some people just can't see past another's views on some other topic and just talks condescendingly or with attitude on every topic, simply for their strong beliefs about something completely different.

[The Dude]

Pete's a good friend to me, so I'll call it out here ... It's not the thought/feeling of how mods are treated differently than users, it's the thought/feeling that Pete (who is a mod) is treated differently. I'm the closest person here to everyone without being a mod, and I just proved that that's not actually the case. Whether or not you make me a mod or remove Pete from being a mod is irrelevant because perception is reality. What I'm trying to say is, I wouldn't have posted differently if I was a mod, and would have deserved every warning, infraction, and ban that I received. At the same time I'm sure Pete won't change the way he posts either, and even if he's removed as a mod everyone will still say "same shit, he was a mod all this time, same friends, same treatment".

 

As far as having to feel like a scholar to post in threads goes, I do understand how some can feel intimidated at times. There's a decent list of guys here that are very well educated in the game and can point things out that others don't see or don't know. I think people need to be more receptive to the more educated posters rather than combatant with them. There's no shame in asking questions either in the thread or pm. I've gotten plenty of pm's regarding the game from youth hockey on up to the NHL. Do I know everything that goes on at every level or behind the scenes? Of course not, but I do have knowledge and information about a lot of things. Me getting criticized or questioned after plenty of people know me well enough that I'm not trolling, guessing, or making things up does in fact bother me sometimes and makes me not want to share information, which imo is top notch and I think you along with others would agree. I can list at least 5 people on here that have equal, or even better info/insides and I respect and believe everything they share and post here.

 

Issue with that is, not everyone knows you or are familiar with what you do know. Just because you are close with a group of people here and you go way back with them, does not mean I know your background, and who and what you know. So, you getting annoyed about that kind of thing isn't exactly fair to every person who ever calls you out on some inside info, or in game knowledge.

 

Not everyone knows or cares to really remember exactly who you are man. Your a friend to what seems like a handful of posters here. The new guy, the guy who's been here for two years, hasn't a clue who you are.

 

It's a message board. They're known to be riddled with "insiders". Not exactly sure how everyone is to know to trust in your info, when there isn't an in depth bio about you or anything.

[Mike]

Issue with that is, not everyone knows you or are familiar with what you do know. Just because you are close with a group of people here and you go way back with them, does not mean I know your background, and who and what you know. So, you getting annoyed about that kind of thing isn't exactly fair to every person who ever calls you out on some inside info, or in game knowledge.

 

Not everyone knows or cares to really remember exactly who you are man. Your a friend to what seems like a handful of posters here. The new guy, the guy who's been here for two years, hasn't a clue who you are.

 

It's a message board. They're known to be riddled with "insiders". Not exactly sure how everyone is to know to trust in your info, when there isn't an in depth bio about you or anything.

 

No offense but if you're here for 2 years and don't know who's who, then you're not paying attention.

[Phil]

What you are saying is only partially true, Dude. For someone like you, for example — you've been around long enough to know who is who. To the new users, I get it. But historically we've answered to that kind of thing in a thread if a users questions someone like Mike on information he shares by legitimizing his knowledge.

[The Dude]

No offense but if you're here for 2 years and don't know who's who, then you're not paying attention.

 

Paying attention to what? Not everyone is friends off the boards. Me having to know that you have an inside track to info, is like you having to know that I've been a steam fitter for 10+ years. There isn't a BSBH roster and a bio about you. Expecting people to know exactly who you are is a bit conceded no? And to think everyone that visits and so on should know you too? The Legend of Mike37? Come on man. Seriously? LMAO

[Mike]

Paying attention to what? Not everyone is friends off the boards. Me having to know that you have an inside track to info, is like you having to know that I've been a steam fitter for 10+ years. There isn't a BSBH roster and a bio about you. Expecting people to know exactly who you are is a bit conceded no? And to think everyone that visits and so on should know you too? The Legend of Mike37? Come on man. Seriously? LMAO

 

Paying attention to who knows what. This isn't about me, there's plenty of people here that have vast knowledge on certain things, some more than others. I'm confident in saying that plenty of the regulars here know who knows what.

[The Dude]

What you are saying is only partially true, Dude. For someone like you, for example — you've been around long enough to know who is who. To the new users, I get it. But historically we've answered to that kind of thing in a thread if a users questions someone like Mike on information he shares by legitimizing his knowledge.

 

I know him only by what has been said about him by you and I'm sure another poster or two. And when it was told to me, it was as if it should be public knowledge. I'm not referring to myself as the person who been here for two years. I feel I have a grasp of who's who, and who talks best about what. The path travelled there was rocky as fuck, and I get why people could be turned off from this place at times.

 

I get that the goal is to make this place the above average Rangers message board. Not a bunch of dumb trade proposals and complaints. But the fucking nit picking. The absolute NEED for people to be right, one up a poster, and split hairs can get out of hand. I feel THAT attitude, is more of a problem than the analytics, as far as shutting people out.

 

"Ahhh no dick, he scored 29 goals not 30, you're wrong..." I mean really. It can get ridiculous.

 

That and the ol' "Stay on topic" warnings.. After said subject has been derailed/ changed within the boundaries of the topic, six times prior..

[The Dude]

Paying attention to who knows what. This isn't about me, there's plenty of people here that have vast knowledge on certain things, some more than others. I'm confident in saying that plenty of the regulars here know who knows what.

 

I guess I don't chat enough with everyone. I don't know shot about you or anyone else. Not sure exactly how im supposed to know the info you are describing. Or how I'm to remember if I did read something about any of you.

 

Obviously this place is constructed of a few off internet friends, and members that came from another board all at once. So, maybe THOSE regulars know who's who, but me not knowing a single one of you off of here, and being here what? 3 or so years...? Again not sure how I'm supposed to know who coached pee wee hockey, and who was a former assistant gm of a ECHL team back in 98.....

[Mike]

I guess I don't chat enough with everyone. I don't know shot about you or anyone else. Not sure exactly how im supposed to know the info you are describing. Or how I'm to remember if I did read something about any of you.

 

Obviously this place is constructed of a few off internet friends, and members that came from another board all at once. So, maybe THOSE regulars know who's who, but me not knowing a single one of you off of here, and being here what? 3 or so years...? Again not sure how I'm supposed to know who coached pee wee hockey, and who was a former assistant gm of a ECHL team back in 98.....

 

I think that you believe that people on here are closer than they really are. There are plenty of posters here that I couldn't pick out of a line up, yet I know plenty about their lives, history, etc...

[fletch]

As far as the AS go, I disagree with you. There's a few of us that don't gaf about them yet participate in a thread where people use them as evidence to whatever point they're trying to get across.

 

 

Friends, mods, whatever it may be do not get special treatment. Jimmy and I are proof of that. Pete gets warnings too. Here's the thing, and I'm not saying this because Pete is my friend. I'm saying it because it's the truth ... Pete knows how to walk the line without crossing it better than anyone else here including myself. That's why I get infractions and bans, and he gets warnings. For argument sake, if you and I are fighting in a thread, we're both getting disciplined, infractions, or bans because we both go over the line in what we say. If it's me and Pete, he gets a warning and I get an infraction basically because he walked the line like a dick, and I told him go fuck himself. It's not because he's a mod, it's because he's smarter. Me? I just want to tell him to fuck off, has nothing to do with not being as smart.

 

This bold is gold... I need to rep other users before I rep Mikey.

 

If you need to throw an insult, throw it at yourself.... 'I must be a f...ing idiot' or 'What the hell was I thinking'. Therefore, you are directing the attack at yourself, instead of another user.

 

Analyze and criticize the opinion of other users, don't make fun of the user.