We understand the frustration many are feeling, and the overwhelming, relentless sentiment surrounding the club at the moment.
However, we are not going to tolerate abuse or harassment directed at others simply because they may hold a different opinion. This also extends to individuals within the club itself and players.
We all expect standards from our club and players. We also expect standards on this forum.
For clarity's sake, the majority of posters have not crossed the line.
Moving forward, we will begin shutting down blogs, archiving threads, or removing content where necessary, and expect people to de-escalate in order to avoid further moderation action.
Replies
Wtf, which blog was this in?
NOS, Muttman and I have been members of this forum for the better part of 20 years.
I completely respect him and often compliment his considered judgment.
On one occasion, out of frustration, I reacted to his regime of agendered negative commentary that lays the blame at the feet of our admin and MoN for our current footy results. He may be absolutely right, but he may also be wrong and is simply finding the simplest punching bag to vent his frustrations.
I was mad when James Hooper was pissing all over our Club in the media and nothing was being said in rebuttal. Then, the bald cunt got drunk and drove his car (and brain) into a tree. With a bit of luck it knocked some sense into him. When Lomax and the NRL tried to piss all over us, this admin - and MoN - stood up and said, "No more!" For that I'm grateful. That's why I continue to reserve judgment over the current admin.
To suggest my expression of my opinion on Muttman's views on the Club and admin is an example of a "personal attack", and to the extent that moderation is 'one-sided', is completely mischievous. The amount of shit folks like me had to put up with, pretty much since COVID when all the crazies on the forum went mad, is extraordinary and I've managed to keep the sand out of my vagina.
Bourbon Man, I'll go even further than you. Way before Covid, because I've been on 1EE for decades, it became absolutely impossible to keep track of the very personal attacks on me. Now, apparently, because I have stated clearly that I don't think scapegoating is a productive critique, that's is a very personal attack? And to boot, mods are biased toward me by letting this claimed very personal attack slide?
You folks want personal attacks? Up until very recently when moderation cracked down on the tone of speech, my history on this site has been to put up with LOADS of freaking "very personal attacks". My profession: apparently both an elite and a parasite, and indoctrinating kids, and slurs on professional integrity. Also my relationship integrity: the amount of times a reply of "not sure that's factual" was met with "cuck". Unclear how that follows but whatever. One time there was even a whole thing about me driving a Toyota, which I've never owned, but apparently something about my sexuality wasn't man enough. Huh? Unclear how that identity speculation was relevant but there you go! Also unclear who's Toyota related. Anyway, talk of which car I drove and its relation to some posters deciding to speculate on sexuality was apparently an answer to "no climate change is not due to solar flares". What? Unclear how that follows. My teenage daughter even knows to tread on identity claims more respectfully but nah, it was fair game on 1EE! Most recently it was the old refrain about lefty Marxists actually want to kill everyone. Which seems a crazy jest until I'm also told I just can't be trusted as a person and deserve constant personal remarks because (see stuff about crazy lefty Marxists something or other).
So I think it's now a little but rich to all of a sudden discover that very personal attacks are actually bloody terrible and what's going on! Because I agree, very personal attacks are bad. So I'm just wondering why - IF I'm now accused of making them - they were not apparently worth defending me from for god damn about two decades?
Frak me, if it's one thing I do in fact try to indoctrinate into my students, it's that claims should display self-consistency! If very personal attacks are bad, guess what, that didn't start yesterday.
Couldn't agree more Daz.
Not wanting to make it sound political, but, this is what the "right wing" / "real Australians" / "non-politically correct" / "anti-woke" crowd carry on with. They shit can everyone they don't agree with and when they get push back, they're the biggest fucking snowflakes this side of Thredbo!
BM, snowflake is right in this context. The interesting thing there is that it's possibly the new moderation standards have created more space for perceived personal attacks. Via a weird inversion. Those of us who tried to actually debate via arguments not insults usually received personal trolling via pile ons in reply. Now that such trolling is basically banned, that cuts off many personal attacks. But weirdly, without the trolling as a viable reply, "you're personally attacking me" becomes a viable - but snowflaky - reply? No, it's just that a good critique is based in argument and now there is a bit more space to actually use reasons not insults in debates?! That excess of reasons can look like personal attacks if the site is just not accustomed to debates turning on reasons not insults?
Daz, can we please get back to the main topic, and thats the sackings of Sarantinos, O'neill and the recruitment manager, and stop worrying about moderation. The moderation has never been better apart from a few blog closures which I didn't agree with.
Chiefy, I didn't raise the moderation issue. It was thrown at me even though I'm not a mod. Can you imagine me moderating. I would ban you first, for misspelling Cheefy as Chiefy and for hinting that a wide mustache is cool. I mean obviously that would be first order of business. Obviously.
The main topic is our players' first contact is poor, our edge defense is brittle, and we could do with a little extra speed and about 10 less injuries. The other topic is fine so long as scapegoating is avoided.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/dave-ramsey-says-millionaires-drive-...
Nothing wrong with Toyota's, I've got a Corolla which does the job. I have a chuckle to myself when stopped at a set of lights next to some bloke in a car you know he's forking out hundreds each week in payments just to look the part.
Adam, I truly didn't get the Toyota comments. Like outside of saying BMW drivers drive like they're entitled to something, and giant Ute drivers are just plain annoying, both of which are factual and well-proven hypotheses, how does anyone's speculated car constitute a response to their claim about climate change? Baffling! It was some kind of class or culture war thing I suspect. Went over my head
Bourbs,
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
-
8
of 8 Next