View Full Version : Closed thread
SpecialBruce
26 Feb 2001, 08:43
I'm surprised that you decided to close the "Get over it thread." I wake up this morning, log onto the net and I find a thread closed. I have got some questions on why it was closed.
Firstly, What was the real reason you closed it? Was it really the supporters being pissed off with Olmy's valuable views or were you worried that Olmy was winning a debate? I think it was the second one.
Secondly, it did not need to be closed. IMO you could have just deleted some posts. Do you see threads on the Lions forum being closed?
Thirdly, just because some dropkick decided to come onto that thread and swear, doesn't mean you have to close the thread. Why not delete that message? Being a Moderator, I thought that deleting people's insane messages was one of the options?
In the end, that thread shouldn't have been closed and some posts should have been deleted.
------------------
Go Hoppers!!
[This message has been edited by SpecialBruce (edited 25 February 2001).]
Chris - to answer your questions:
1) The 'real' reason it was closed, is exactly the reasons I stated. It was getting nasty, and out of hand. It offended some people. These people made it known to me.
2) There was certainly no personal issues involved and I left the thread open overnight after receiving the concerns of some members, to try and alieviate the perception that I may close it due to personal issues.
3) What does what happens to posts on the Lions Forum have to do with this site? But since you brought it up, you should remember that many a topic has been removed from the Lions Forum over the last 2 years.
4) Why didn't I just delete the posts or topic? Bluey made it clear to me that the preference is to lock a thread, rather than delete it. That is why.
Hope this clarifies some of the issues for you.
[This message has been edited by Danni (edited 25 February 2001).]
Danni.
Firstly, if you took offense to my mock quotation of you, then I apologise. I was a comment in jest - I thought you would have picked up on that. In the time that I've known you, I've usually found you to be fairly think-skinned to piss-taking (excuse my language), and therefore I felt that you'd see the humour side of things.
In regards to the comment 'get a grip on reality', well, I'll tell ya, I do have a good grip on reality. Reality is how we see things as individuals. Is my reality more genuine than yours? I doubt it. Therefore, yours is no more genuine than mine.
Apart from that, I'm taking that comment as being your way of saying you've had enough of the topic for a while. Fair enough.
However, I will say though, that apart from piss-taking, I never became abusive, and always endeavoured to discuss the issue(s) at hand in a fair and reasonable manner.
As to the comment from someone else (not sure who it was - Brissylionsgal perhaps? I wouldn't really know, she doesn't come on here to talk footy much), that I am in some way forcing my opinion on someone else, and telling them that they're wrong (ie: not accepting their opinion), well, what a load of crap, my dear!
What I am doing, Brissylions_gal, is arguing my point of view. I can come back for seconds as many times as I want! I never told Danni, or anyone else, that their opinions were wrong. Neither did I become abusive or make personal judgements as you did. If you can't handle me posting my opinions, than I suggest you don't look! Similarly, if you think that by posting my opinions, that I'm somehow trying to undermine others, or tell them that they're wrong, then you seriously need to re-evaluate that assessment.
As to the 4 or 5 other extremely abusive posters (I won't give them the dignity of using their names - they have no dignity - some of them are regular posters too), well, if that's the best you can do, then you should feel ashamed!
After all, I post my opinions on here, not abuse. Yet, the first thing some of you do in response is abuse, abuse, abuse.
The good thing is though, that the comments you make about things I've said are sooooo far off the mark, it just confirms further in my mind that what I'm saying is actually worthwile. As far as I can see, none of the abusive posters have even argued against anything that I've said! You've all argued about things I haven't said at all! (ie: saying that I've bagged the Brisbane Lions - when I clearly haven't).
You know, the Brisbane Lions forum used to have a lot of abusive posters of this ilk. Funny, since it became members only, they seem to have disappear. Coincidence?
Lastly, it's also noticeable, that those abusive posters, either seem to be new posters (ie: just started a new profile to have a go at me), or they very rarely post on here. To me, that says that these people not only have very little to say about football itself (or at least they haven't displayed it yet), but they are nothing but stirrers. Abusive, incomprehensible, lacking in cognition, and thoroughly misguided.
Cheers!
Olmy - you and I have crossed swords on many occassions before, and are likely to do so more than once or twice in the future. We also have agreed or 'been of the same opinion' on more than one occassion.
As I said - the topic had become abusive and you will note that in my above post I didn't point the finger at any individual, or insuate that it was closed because of you, either on your own, or along with others.
I received feedback about that particular topic from a number of people, from both this board and other boards, and from 2 moderators as well. It was most definately not a 'personal issue' to close it.
However, I do feel the need to say that THIS particular topic seems to have stemmed from personal issues/agenda from the author due to an 'altercation' (for want of a better word) between him and myself over the last week, IMO.
So had I been in the habit of closing topics for personal reasons, this would have surely been one of the first to go!
BUBBALOUIS
27 Feb 2001, 12:14
Gee your Brisbane Lions board is a lot more exciting than the Hawks board, passion dont you just love it! Now if you guys could just harness this passion for good and not evil ................ http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/wink.gif
Danni, I wasn't suggesting that you 'closed' the thread due to the comment I had made (in jest) towards you. I was merely saying that the rather perculiar line of "get a grip on reality" smacked of "I can't be bothered continuing this at the moment", rather than a well pointed comment.
But . . . it doesn't matter anyway!
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 16:38
I really don't understand what the fuss is all about. I'm going to read all that stuff again now.
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 16:54
Right, OK, I've read it. Look, I for one would like to state my opinion.
Whether you agree with Olmy or not is entirely not the point anymore. I really can't see what is so offensive and abusive about the posts in the closed thread, and I think you'd have to be pretty thin skinned to be seriously offended. OK, maybe Olmy did go overboard a little.
It's too early to be eloquant, so I'll spit it out... I hope we're not going to become too politically correct on this board. We all have a right to our opinions, and we can post as many opinions as we like. I thought one of the best things about bigfooty.com was that you COULD say what you wanted (within reason) without censorship. It's a hell of a lot better than the draconian censorship you get in some sites. If I feel that I can't say what I want, even though it MAY offend someone, I won't come back.
I'll probably rewrite this when I have a coffee and my brain is working. But I'll finish on a quote.
Cheers,
Sbagman.
"I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it"- Voltaire.
Sbagman - as I said - it was not a personal issue to close the thread. After I had received a number of complaints from other members of the board, I sough the advice of 2 other moderators as to what I should do, as closing it was not my 'cup of tea' at that time. Whilst receiving feedback from those moderators, I was also approached by another 2 members in the chat room.
I think here that the word 'offensive' should be defined. I am not using it the sense of 'swear words', and only referring to the personal attacks contained in the thread in a minor way.
The 'big picture' of how it portrays our club, and it's supporter's relationships is more of the issue.
This board will never be politically correct - and for that I (and I hope others) will be greatful.
A topic such as that is not condusive to a couple of issues. One being any of the newly arrived 'fitzroy' folk who may consider joining the lions, another the folk who may come across the site for the first time, and also those that are new to the club and left wondering what the hell they have gotten themselves into.
The continual infighting and pushing of points is not doing anyone any good. When it get's to the stage that (and I believe this did happen) some people 'registered' just to be able to add fuel to the topic - on both sides of the issue - and that some of those people were possibly already registered under another name - then enough is enough.
If this doesn't explain the position I took, then nothing will. Maybe I should have just taken the advice I was given 'not to bother explaining at all, just do it'. Tho that isn't normally in my nature.
BTW, if I feel a similar situation arises again, I would still take the same stance, and I will not be opening that thread again.
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 17:25
Originally posted by Danni:
The 'big picture' of how it portrays our club, and it's supporter's relationships is more of the issue.
A topic such as that is not condusive to a couple of issues. One being any of the newly arrived 'fitzroy' folk who may consider joining the lions, another the folk who may come across the site for the first time, and also those that are new to the club and left wondering what the hell they have gotten themselves into.
The continual infighting and pushing of points is not doing anyone any good. When it get's to the stage that (and I believe this did happen) some people 'registered' just to be able to add fuel to the topic - on both sides of the issue - and that some of those people were possibly already registered under another name - then enough is enough.
If this doesn't explain the position I took, then nothing will. Maybe I should have just taken the advice I was given 'not to bother explaining at all, just do it'. Tho that isn't normally in my nature.
BTW, if I feel a similar situation arises again, I would still take the same stance, and I will not be opening that thread again.
Danni, first I want to say that I am not having a go at you. It must be quite difficult to moderate this type of topic. But I do find some of the above parts of your posts quite worrying. You seem to be saying that it is more important to give a good impression of the club, and that fighting in these types of topics enventually leads nowhere. I would have preferred to hear you say that you closed it because of the abuse. I think ultimately, this is not a board to promote the club, and should not be used in this way. It is a forum for fans to give their opinion about their club, and whether it leads anywhere or not, whether it scares people off or not, this is what they feel. If you don't like it, don't read it. Or reply. This is totally irrelevant of the Fitzroy issue, or any other. This is now an issue of, based on your points above, would I start a new thread if I thought you were going to close it because (a) you didn't think it portrayed the club in a good light; (b) it scares people off; (c) the thread won't "lead" anywhere. I am a very strong believer in free speech, and I feel, and I hope everyone here would feel, that these reasons for closing the thread are not acceptabel if they were applied to other threads. I accept that posts should not be overly abusive, or incorporate racism, sexism, homophobia, violence, etc etc. But what one finds offensive, another will not. Allowance must be given for this. And for anyone to tell Olmy that this board "may not be for him", then I find that really worrying. Maybe we should subtitle the board "for Brisbane fans whose opinions are only constructive, lead somewhere and display the club in a good light". Bad or good, everyone's opinions are worthy. Whether you agree with them or not.
Far be it from me to tell you how to moderate, Danni. But if this is the stance you will take with all threads, I will not post here.
I emplore everyone who recognises the significance of free speech to post their objections here, regardless of how you feel about Olmy, Fitzroy, are anything else brought up on this board.
SpecialBruce
27 Feb 2001, 17:28
I would like the nicknames of those 2 moderators and the people who complained. Either through ICQ or posted publically on this board. I need to know who they are. Can you please tell me?
------------------
Go Hoppers!!
No Special Bruce - without their permission - I will not give that out - how ever I will ask their permission - as I am sure you are aware - there are some people that chose to not to be 'outed' in any manner on these boards.
SpecialBruce
27 Feb 2001, 17:33
Originally posted by sbagman:
But if this is the stance you will take with all threads, I will not post here.
I emplore everyone who recognises the significance of free speech to post their objections here, regardless of how you feel about Olmy, Fitzroy, are anything else brought up on this board.
I am with that 100% SBM.
------------------
Go Hoppers!!
SpecialBruce
27 Feb 2001, 17:35
Originally posted by Danni:
No Special Bruce - without their permission - I will not give that out - how ever I will ask their permission - as I am sure you are aware - there are some people that chose to not to be 'outed' in any manner on these boards.
Thankyou for asking their permission.
I'm now out of here to watch Who Wants To Be A Milionaire.
------------------
Go Hoppers!!
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 17:35
There were lots of mistakes in my post... still no coffee... but I hope it was clearly understood.
BTW, Perugia is covered under a foot of snow, it's gorgeous!
As I said Sbagman, abuse was part of - as was the portrayal of a totally divided supporter base that where it comes down to a 'we want more' and 'why should we give you more' sense (as does a lot of the arguements), not being in the best intrest of the club we all support.
BUT, the main issue was the registration of some people more commonly known under other names - just to be abusive. So possibly that should have come under the term of 'abuse'.
SpecialBruce
27 Feb 2001, 17:38
Originally posted by sbagman:
There were lots of mistakes in my post... still no coffee... but I hope it was clearly understood.
BTW, Perugia is covered under a foot of snow, it's gorgeous!
Lucky you. I want it to snow where I am located. Hasn't done that for like 50 years or something.
------------------
Go Hoppers!!
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 17:41
Originally posted by Danni:
As I said Sbagman, abuse was part of - as was the portrayal of a totally divided supporter base that where it comes down to a 'we want more' and 'why should we give you more' sense (as does a lot of the arguements), not being in the best intrest of the club we all support.
BUT, the main issue was the registration of some people more commonly known under other names - just to be abusive. So possibly that should have come under the term of 'abuse'.
That's not what I'm talking about. Read the post I wrote second before last.
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 17:42
And that's the 250.
Thank you all....
Congratulations on your 250th post - and yes I have read your post.
And I agree - far be it for you to tell me how to moderate - infact I am not even telling myself how to moderate! I have taken on board in each action I have made, the concerns of other members. I assure you that had there only been one or 2 complaints, the thread would have still been there.
So maybe I should just start to do it on my own, not listen to peoples concerns, ask for an outside opinion on those concerns, from people that have nothing to lose or gain or even any interest to an extent of what happens here. Or gain the advice of others in an - I don't want to be too harsh, so what would you do if this was on the board you moderate - style opinon.
And BTW - To Special Bruce - One of the Moderators involved has declined to be named, he feels that seeing as there are so few moderators, you should have been able to work it out. I have to respect his decision.
Danni, your in a no win situation here. Drop these losers and come join the family at the roos board. Or is it that you are just a thrill seeking masochistic junkie in disguise.Why else would you want to be a moderator on this board?
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 18:25
Originally posted by Redd:
Drop these losers and come join the family at the roos board. Or is it that you are just a thrill seeking masochistic junkie in disguise.
Yeah Danni, drop us losers and don't be a masochistic junkie. Go hang out with Kanga supporters.
Oh hang on....
Cheers,
Sbagman.
Originally posted by Danni:
No Special Bruce - without their permission - I will not give that out - how ever I will ask their permission - as I am sure you are aware - there are some people that chose to not to be 'outed' in any manner on these boards.
You should not give out personal details without the person's permission should you Danni.
You see I know someone else who has given out private information.
Maybe I should ask the moderator what to do? What do you think I should do Danni?
I don't know ghost? What should you do?? Maybe talking to the person that gave it out in the first place should be the best course of action? I am sure he would oblige!
Posted by sbagman:
I thought one of the best things about bigfooty.com was that you COULD say what you wanted (within reason) without censorship. It's a hell of a lot better than the draconian censorship you get in some sites.
That is exactly the point of locking the thread. Everything everyone said is still there unedited for all to see.
This is why locking is better than deletion of either the individual posts or the entire thread.
This is also the point of moderation - we are not to necessarily act as censors, inhibiting freedom of speech, but to moderate the actions of others on this board so as to to set and enforce reasonable boundaries of behaviour.
It is felt by Danni that personal attacks is not acceptable behaviour.
Originally posted by SpecialBruce:
I would like the nicknames of those 2 moderators and the people who complained. Either through ICQ or posted publically on this board. I need to know who they are. Can you please tell me?
SpecialBruce,
I am one of the moderators Danni consulted. Feel free to email me if you have any problems with my counsel.
------------------
TigerFury.net (http://www.tigerfury.net) - Independant Richmond Tigers website
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 18:50
I disagree with the decision to lock the thread. What message does it send to those who contributed? I don't really see the point in it. To me, it was an unwarranted exercise of power, designed to actively discourage future threads on this topic. I don't think the moderators are there to dictate which topics can be commented on and which can't (within reason of course).
Originally posted by Danni:
I don't know ghost? What should you do?? Maybe talking to the person that gave it out in the first place should be the best course of action? I am sure he would oblige!
You see the thing is, I have already spoken to him.
What if the person he (1st party) gave the information to (2nd party), then gave it back to him (1st party) plus a confirmation. Then they (2nd party) provided the information to another person (3rd party), who then told the person who supplied the information initially (1st party) how they had found out.
ahh you see there are so many possiblities with your theory!!
Like
What if the 1st party - gave it to the 2nd party - who DIDN'T give it back to him , but just said the simple word yes - which btw doesn't fall under the presupposition of privalage - AND to add on top of that the 2nd party and 3rd party had discussed the situation at great length with information provided by that 1st party for quite a few weeks? And then without any evidence the 1st party presumed the 3rd party knew about it thru inuendo, and then the 1st party confessed out of assumption?
And then there is a little matter of the simple fact that the 2nd party - had nothing of evidence - until the 1st party provided confirmation - of their own accord. There is word in the vocabulary "NO".
Oh and the 2nd and 3rd party have the whole transcripts as well.
What happens to you innuendo's under that possiblity?
BTW- it may be more appropriate to discuss such possibilites via email - so that the general 'nonsense' posts, don't restart. However if you feel that inappropriate, then by all means, let me know. And please do let that alleged 3rd party know as well. I have many an forwarded email relating to this topic, but it's relevance would be lost on this board.
And apologies to all but there was one other point:
That the 1st part may have asked the 2nd party, thru transcripts to obtain such information, for 1st parties personal gain (ie they wanted prove that 1st party was not involved), then decided to use the outcome of that request for personal justification?
joshhem
27 Feb 2001, 19:45
Um...I'm pretty sure I've said this before, but "GET OVER IT!!!!!" Pls leave Danni alone. U 2 think that because you didn't want it locked, that everyone thinks the same way. Obviously the majority....everyone that complained.....whanted it closed.
Have you guys noticed that noone is posting here anymore????? Have you any idea why?? Looking the morror and GET OVER IT!!!!!
We're getting pissed off!
joshhem
27 Feb 2001, 19:47
We used to have fun around here.....at the moment it is being flooded by you guys......FOOTY (what's that??) disscussions have gone?? COMEON GET OVER THE LOCKING ETC AND PLEASE TALK FOOTY LIKE THE WAY IT WAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Or the rest of us will leave
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 19:47
Originally posted by joshhem:
Um...I'm pretty sure I've said this before, but "GET OVER IT!!!!!" Pls leave Danni alone. U 2 think that because you didn't want it locked, that everyone thinks the same way. Obviously the majority....everyone that complained.....whanted it closed.
Have you guys noticed that noone is posting here anymore????? Have you any idea why?? Looking the morror and GET OVER IT!!!!!
We're getting pissed off!
Of course, your contributions are always constructive... considering we have over 3000 posst, no I haven't noticed noone is posting here anymore. Frankly, if you get upset by Olmy's posts, you don't have to read them to post a new topic.
Get a spine.
Sbagman, where did his post mention Olmy as the reason??
Did I miss something here?
"U 2" could have easily encompassed yourself and specialbruce.
It is assumptions like that, that start the problems.
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 19:59
*sigh*
lioness
27 Feb 2001, 20:00
Originally posted by joshhem:
We used to have fun around here.....at the moment it is being flooded by you guys......FOOTY (what's that??) disscussions have gone?? COMEON GET OVER THE LOCKING ETC AND PLEASE TALK FOOTY LIKE THE WAY IT WAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Or the rest of us will leave
I stopped visiting this board once upon a time because it was dull. Then I hear of a post-beating competition with the Roos and I remember to come here. And all I see is discussions on which player is cuter, which player has the most interesting nickname (all of which might be interesting if I cared about getting to know the players personally, which I don't http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/rolleyes.gif and a stack of mindless posts about.........well not much at all.
Then comes the truce.
Then the place livens up a little with some fiery discussion about various Lions-related issues. Most of which turn ugly coz people all turn on one man (hi Olmy!!!! http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/wink.gif), and nevermind that some of us agree with him, and post as such, we are left alone, he posts, and everyone jumps on him.
So tell me, are we going back to talking about who saw which players bum at training???? A few more cutesy nicknames perhaps??? http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/rolleyes.gif Or can we ALL just talk footy, and ignore the posts we don't wanna read????
I'd love to see that.
------------------
*the one and only lioness*
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 20:01
I think you're missing the point Danni... why can't we discuss whatever we want?
I knew who he meant, also.
lioness
27 Feb 2001, 20:04
Originally posted by Danni:
Sbagman, where did his post mention Olmy as the reason??
Did I miss something here?
"U 2" could have easily encompassed yourself and specialbruce.
It is assumptions like that, that start the problems.
It isn't assumptions. As I mentioned in my post. I, for example, will say something that is essentially exactly what Olmy is saying. Yet I cop nothing. He posts, and it is a competition to see who can shoot him down first!!!!!!!!! Simple reading of the posts speaks more than anything.
------------------
*the one and only lioness*
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 20:06
Well said Lioness. Seems the really important topics can't be discussed.... maybe just swept under the carpet....
So.... How about those bums???!!!
Simple Sbagman - Olmy has made it clear he feels he is not at fault.
At the same time his 'sense of humour' is not understood by all, maybe not even half!
As you have tried to assoicate things by using Olmy as an example - I am entitled to reply!
I am totally able to switch hats!
Even yourself is surely able to see when I am wearing my 'moderator' hat - - and when I am wearing my 'general poster' and supporter hat?
Surely the fact that I was saying something in Olmy's defense gave it away?? ;-P
(btw if necessary note the 'graphic' at the end of the above sentence)
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 20:12
Nup. Not relevant.
I have expressed my feelings on the matter, and justified them end of story.
Now, how about those player's bums?
lioness
27 Feb 2001, 20:13
Originally posted by sbagman:
Well said Lioness. Seems the really important topics can't be discussed.... maybe just swept under the carpet....
So.... How about those bums???!!!
Well you know sbagman, I don't spend enough time watching them as you know http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/rolleyes.gif but I hear that 'rear of the year' may be going to.........oh wait, if I tell you now it will give us nothing to talk about for a few months http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/eek.gif
------------------
*the one and only lioness*
Now Sbagman, let me put on that moderator hat you seem to have an issue with.
Let me attempt to allay your fears!
Of course you are entitled to discuss what you want.
However, should that discussion turn personally abusive, upset or offend others, then I will re-evalute the continuation of that particular discussion. Of course, I am still relying on the feedback of members to let me know if they find it offensive, but should they say they do? well then I will look a the said discussion then make an evaluation, possibly with the input of others who have no stake in it, then decide what to do. If you don't agree with that process???? Then??? Whatever you decide to do, is simply up to you.
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 20:21
Originally posted by Danni:
Now Sbagman, let me put on that moderator hat you seem to have an issue with.
Let me attempt to allay your fears!
Of course you are entitled to discuss what you want.
However, should that discussion turn personally abusive, upset or offend others, then I will re-evalute the continuation of that particular discussion. Of course, I am still relying on the feedback of members to let me know if they find it offensive, but should they say they do? well then I will look a the said discussion then make an evaluation, possibly with the input of others who have no stake in it, then decide what to do. If you don't agree with that process???? Then??? Whatever you decide to do, is simply up to you.
Danni,
Fine, I understand this. This however is NOT what you said earlier. Please reread your earlier posts, about scaring off potential Lions supporters, threads that go nowhere etc. We are NOT here to recruit Lions supporters, and if threads that went nowhere were locked, 98% of Bigfooty would be locked up.
Of course it could be said that in your opinion that 98% of posts on bigfooty could be locked up - but that is not up to me.
I certainly have read and remembered my posts, and yours. MY position has not changed, and is not likely to change.
I have stated my reasons that as moderator what I will and will not 'lock up' and how I will come to that decision.
I have also reserved my right to post as a supporter - not as a moderator.
And by the way - once again I have gone against advice of others to explain myself. The reason being that I think our club is different to all other clubs. There are many issues that are going to come up either now or in the future that could never be an issue for another club. Due to our clubs 'parentage' and the way it happened.
You can question my motives on this issue all you like - but my answer is going to stay the same.
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 21:26
Umm.... yes.... why do I get the impression noone understands what I am trying to say?
Forget it.
Anyway, best of luck on your position as moderator, Danni. It wasn't meant as a criticism, just an expression of concern.
You are certainly entitled to your concern - however - it is unfounded.....and obviously only time will prove that to you......btw, not that I am obligated to prove anything......my expression/explanation is purely voluntry - for people like you, it makes no difference, so pretend I never even did it.
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 21:42
This is all getting rather strange... umm... no, I wasn't after a justification. The justification doesn't mean anything to me. It's rather obvious noone who has responded to this thread understands exactly what I mean.
(supporter hat on here)
or maybe you just feel you need the last word? (genuine question btw)
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 21:57
Err no not really. I'm not actually having an arguement here.
I made my point on the first page and you still haven't addressed it, I don't see why you'd start doing so on the fourth.
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 21:58
Originally posted by Danni:
You are certainly entitled to your concern - however - it is unfounded.....and obviously only time will prove that to you......btw, not that I am obligated to prove anything......my expression/explanation is purely voluntry - for people like you, it makes no difference, so pretend I never even did it.
What are people like me like?
How about people that are so concerned with what they percieve their point as being, and instead of reiterating in a diffent way - seeing as they claim no one get's it, just keep referring to it as 'my point'.
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 22:14
Originally posted by Danni:
How about people that are so concerned with what they percieve their point as being, and instead of reiterating in a diffent way - seeing as they claim no one get's it, just keep referring to it as 'my point'.
OK then. My point is:
If people think that Olmy was being offensive (I don't think he was, but I'm not moderator, so let's ignore that) and that was the reason the thread was closed, I accept that.
However,
If the reason the thread was closed was because it presents a picture of the Brisbane Lions being divided, it scares off potential Lions supporters, and the topic was not going anywhere, then I am concerned that if I post a similar topic, and the moderator deems it to present a poor picture of BL, etc etc, then it will be locked as well. And just because the moderator does not think it is going anywhere, etc etc, doesn't mean everyone else should be denied the right of reply. I mean, its easier not to reply to a thread that's going nowhere than to reply to a locked thread, correct?
My point is completely independant of the whole issue of Brisbane vs Fitzroy. It is on the reasoning that if these reasons, ie the portrayal of the club and the worthiness of the topic, are the reasons which the moderator closed the thread, then I feel strongly against it, as it is an impingement of freedom of speech.
I don't really know how to make my point any clearer than that.
And did I not indicate the number of factors that I took into consideration in closing that thread???
The Abuse
The multiple personalities
The affect it had on others
The affect it had on the perception of the club
?????
I made those points clear, obvioulsy the weighting I indicated had a bearing on each of those, you did not agree with, but you did also say that if you felt that I was perpetuating some or another aspect of them, that you woulnd't be posting here again.
You have since posted here on multiple occasions, so obviously you decided you didn't have a problem with it.
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 22:32
Umm... no offence... I still don't think you understand.
OK let's have an example. Let's say Brisbane Lions player X comes out and says the club is poorly run, and wants to return home. Am I allowed start a thread on these comments, considering it may show the club in a bad light and attract negative attention, and attract a debate which ?
Example 2: Let's say I start a topic on which people have given their opinions before. Will the topic be allowed to stand, considering it may be deemed to be going nowhere?
These are the concerns I have. I know that you may answer, "of course they won't be locked", but going on what has been written in this thread, could this be the thin edge of the wedge?
example one - of course you are.
example two - or course you are - again.
Should either of these topics become abusive between 'posters' as in those commenting on the topic, and I recieve complaints, then I will have to 'evaluate' them, and if I feel that I am not in a situation to make an 'impartial' judgement, then I will seek outside advice.
Now haven't I said all that already?
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 22:51
yes you did, but they weren't the reasons you gave earlier.
please lock this topic!!!!!!!
Not locking it without a number of complaints via email, a couple of moderators, and the proof that unregistered posters are the stirers! LOl
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 22:57
AAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!
I got my signature working, at least.
Sorry to draw this out so much Danni, it was something you wrote on page 1 that quite possibly you didn't mean that got me jumping. However, maybe you didn't read into it what I read....
Cheers,
Sbagman.
------------------
Life has meaning only in the struggle.
OR mabye you didn't read the intention into the post due to that 'lack of coffee'???
sbagman I can assure you that the origin of this thread, was purely personally motivated, after an altercation the other day over a 'multiple' personality disorder the author appears to have......anything other than that, time, date, and amount of food I have consumed is likely to have some bearing on how I currently express myself.
sbagman
27 Feb 2001, 23:05
Lack of (or too much) coffee is a pretty good explanantion for most things I do...
FunkyBlue
27 Feb 2001, 23:32
Originally posted by Olmy:
As to the comment from someone else (not sure who it was - Brissylionsgal perhaps? I wouldn't really know, she doesn't come on here to talk footy much), that I am in some way forcing my opinion on someone else, and telling them that they're wrong (ie: not accepting their opinion), well, what a load of crap, my dear!
I think you are refering to me Olmy, not Brissylions_gal. I never said you were "forcing" your opinion, I said that you seemed adamant on having people agree with your point of view. That's entirely different to "forcing".
What I am doing, Brissylions_gal, (Funkyblue) is arguing my point of view. I can come back for seconds as many times as I want! I never told Danni, or anyone else, that their opinions were wrong. Neither did I become abusive or make personal judgements as you did. If you can't handle me posting my opinions, than I suggest you don't look! Similarly, if you think that by posting my opinions, that I'm somehow trying to undermine others, or tell them that they're wrong, then you seriously need to re-evaluate that assessment.
It's pretty hard NOT to look when you appear to have an opinion on every topic. As for you telling people they are wrong, didn't you just do so in telling me that my assessment needed to be re-evaluated. You use big words Olmy, but the meanings behind them are the same. As for being abusive, I think you pretty much crossed that line when you suggested I was a Carlton supporter!
[This message has been edited by FunkyBlue (edited 27 February 2001).]
Iwould like, if I may, to put an outsider's point of view.
Firstly, just so there in no misunderstanding, I agree with Sbagman, Olmy and the others that disagreed with closing the thread.
In the original topic, I could find no abuse - verbosity perhaps, but no abuse.
I also couldn't see anything that would put the club in a bad light. There was just a group of people putting their point of view.
I found it enjoyable reading.
Danni
I can imagine being a moderator is sometimes not an easy thing as you will cop flack no matter what you do. With that in mind, I would suggest you seek no advice from anyone but take sole responsibility yourself. If you have any doubts whether a deletion or closure is neccessary, then leave it open.
If contrary views cause some people to take offence they will be in the minority.
The majority will enjoy the stoush.
------------------
I am grateful that I am not as judgmental as all these censorious, self-righteous people around me.
Good to see the vocal minority are at it again.
It seems that a few vocal people continue this thread on.I for one was horrified that Olmy said what he said to the moderator.
He may not have seen it as wrong, but I did.
If what he says is tongue in cheek, maybe he shuld let us all know or maybe he should say nothing in these circumstances. What he is saying can be taken the wrong way.
Also this thread was closed, why the continual badgering of Danni. I agree with Joshem, let this go guys.
It aint acheving a thing, except maybe getting this thread closed, or maybe people chucked off big footy.Or maybe the whole board closed.
This has degenerated into a slaning match.
Agree to disagree as I have said before.
For goodness sakes a pre schooler acts better than this.No means no.
Roger The Sheep
28 Feb 2001, 08:43
Originally posted by Danni:
No Special Bruce - as I am sure you are aware - there are some people that chose to not to be 'outed' in any manner on these boards.
What a vague thing to say...whatever could she mean? http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/confused.gif
------------------
http://www.afunzone.com/shep_anm.gif
Roger.
Roger The Sheep
28 Feb 2001, 08:47
Originally posted by ghost:
What if the person he (1st party) gave the information to (2nd party), then gave it back to him (1st party) plus a confirmation. Then they (2nd party) provided the information to another person (3rd party), who then told the person who supplied the information initially (1st party) how they had found out.
Perhaps the person (3rd party) had more than a rough idea in the first place! But then, what would a poor little sheepie know?
------------------
http://www.afunzone.com/shep_anm.gif
Roger.
brissy_lionsgal
28 Feb 2001, 10:53
Olmy, may a suggest that you get you information correct before you go off with both barrels blazing.
I, at no stage, said that you do not have the right to your own opinion, I simply stated that I don't have to agree with it.
I do not know whether the post that you are referring to was my work, or whether you misquoted Funky Blue's words. I have had a quick look through the last weeks posts to see which one you maybe referring to, and I am yet to find it. Could you please tell me which post it was so that I might be able to defend myself of the accusations?
As for me not discussing football related issues, obviously what you regarded as football issues, does not included discussing the players abilities, discussing the way the team played on the weekend and the passion I feel for my club.
While I may not have hundreds of posts, like yourself, I would have liked to have thought that maybe I had contributed some of my so called football knowledge and observations to some of these topics. Obviously I was wrong.
My bitchy swipe at you about having to be right, because you are a Victorian, and knowing everything about the game was totally uncalled for.
I would like to sincerely apologise to you, and anyone else who may also been offened at this remark.
I believe (and this is only my opinon), in he scheme of things, a 19 year old female from Brisbane is not usually taken too seriously when she is trying to discuss football. Two of my biggest passions in this world, one of them the Lions, and the other is AFL. You and I obviously share these passions, just from different view points.
Well that is that is all I wanted to say. I will no longer be adding any more comments on any such topic again. I will only try to make the odd observation on football performances, as I feel that I am incapable of commenting on such topics diplomatically.
Originally posted by joshhem:
Um...I'm pretty sure I've said this before, but "GET OVER IT!!!!!" Pls leave Danni alone. U 2 think that because you didn't want it locked, that everyone thinks the same way. Obviously the majority....everyone that complained.....whanted it closed.
Have you guys noticed that noone is posting here anymore????? Have you any idea why?? Looking the morror and GET OVER IT!!!!!
We're getting pissed off!
Actually Joshem, a lot of people felt the same way about you a few weeks ago. Remember all those useless posts you made in your pathetic effort to overtake the Roos board?
Well, when you say "no-one posts here anymore", that is all you can refer to. People are now talking football, rather than nonsense - and you don't like it!
FunkyBlue, my point wasn't about your comments, rather about Brissy_lionsgal. Anyway, I'll reply to what you've written later. http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/smile.gif
Brissy_lionsgal, no need to apologise for the comment. I give it out, and I can also take it in return (fair's fair after all). Similarly, I don't 'really' think you have nothing to say about footy - I just said that to get ya going! My issue was though, that by me putting my ideas on here, and arguing them, I am not saying that other people's ideas are incorrect or wrong. I just like to discuss things! http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/smile.gif
Anyway, gotta go. I've probably got a few more things to say in this thread before it get's swiped!
lioness
28 Feb 2001, 16:13
Originally posted by Olmy:
Actually Joshem, a lot of people felt the same way about you a few weeks ago. Remember all those useless posts you made in your pathetic effort to overtake the Roos board?
Well, when you say "no-one posts here anymore", that is all you can refer to. People are now talking football, rather than nonsense - and you don't like it!
That's exactly what I said, except Olmy always puts things better. http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/smile.gif hehe
------------------
*the one and only lioness*
sbagman
28 Feb 2001, 16:28
Seeing as I have contributed so much to this thread already, just thought I'd say... all you people in Brisbane... get behind your other footy team... the Brisbane Strikers! Without your support, they look like being excluded from the NSL next year. And I'll have no soccer to go to this year. And unless you guys start singing at the football, I will have no use for my witty footy songs and chants, which would be depriving us all of something, don't you think?
GO STRIKERS!!!!!!
Anyway, where was I?
Brissy-lionsgal, I think you should feel free to comment in which ever topic you wish to. For what it's worth, IMO, a lot of your observations are pretty good and your contributions are always interesting. I didn't really take offense to your comment, and I don't think you should have taken my comments that seriously either (after all, a lot of it is tongue in cheek).
True, we probably do see things from different view points. That's why I endeavour to argue my case from where I'm seeing it. It's probably reasonable to suggest that I don't understand all of the issues relating to QLD, just as you mightn't understand all of the issues relating to Victorians.
However, if people are prepared to listen to each other, then that's at least a good start! http://www.bigfooty.com/ubb/smile.gif
FunkyBlue - asking someone to re-evaluate their assessment of my actions/contributions isn't telling someone that they're wrong, but rather offering them another opportunity to see issue from your point of view (whether they agree with it or not).
Well, that's what I was meaning anyway!
Originally posted by anna:
Good to see the vocal minority are at it again.
It seems that a few vocal people continue this thread on.I for one was horrified that Olmy said what he said to the moderator.
He may not have seen it as wrong, but I did.
If what he says is tongue in cheek, maybe he shuld let us all know or maybe he should say nothing in these circumstances. What he is saying can be taken the wrong way.
Also this thread was closed, why the continual badgering of Danni. I agree with Joshem, let this go guys.
It aint acheving a thing, except maybe getting this thread closed, or maybe people chucked off big footy.Or maybe the whole board closed.
This has degenerated into a slaning match.
Agree to disagree as I have said before.
For goodness sakes a pre schooler acts better than this.No means no.
Calm down Anna. How could you be 'horrified' at what I said to Danni? It was a JOKE!!! It wasn't even directed at you anyway. This is only the internet by the way - not a convention for peace in the Middle East.
Gee, were you also horrified when people started dropping the f-word and other abuse at me? Funny you haven't mentioned anything about that (it wasn't you was it?).
And who said we're the vocal minority? I might point out that I have suspicions that you're the same person who has posted under a number of different names just to have a go at me (in other topics). Sounds to me like you're the minority, only trying to pass yourself off as the majority.
Danni - not that I disagree with the topic being closed (to curtail the abuse), however to use the reason of it (the topic) portraying our club in a bad light, is exactly the point I was making about the name of the board. I know it's not down to you, but I'm just trying to let you see the point I was making earlier.