Replies

  • As much as I admire and like Fong sometimes his,'blog' topics can be a bit negative, argumentative and pointless in terms of the Eels Rugby League season at hand. I can understand why it would have been questioned by the moderators and it wouldnt have been deleted being disrespectful to Fong but more related to the essence of the topic.

    •  Censorship is an evil and toxic thing. It can come back and bite the sensor. Fong`s work does go over the top and needs to be removed often. But could not the offensive word or words be removed leaving the blog otherwise intact? It may read strange but something is better than nothing.

  • The blog was only an introduction.....people can see it how they like.....personally I saw nothing controverial in it or likely to offend anyone. Everyone knows that Arthurson was a crook and I was interested in seeing what else he had to say.

    I now understand that Fong has been suspended.....I think that is totally unfair and unwarranted.

    I think in this case that it needs to be explained to the site, why it was deleted and Fong banned.....did anyone but Fong know where it was headed? If so how?

    Moderation is a good thing for the site and Super has a bastard of a job, but if you want to have control as a moderator you need to explain the credibility of your actions, otherwise people just see it as a Dictatorship.

    That doesn't mean every action, some can be obvious but in this world of political correctness, I cannot see anything that Fong has done is dangerous or threatening or more insulting of anything we read here on a daily basis.

    Over to you Super, you can fix this or rethink it at least.

    • Poppa I didn't delete the blog so you can p!ss off with accusing me of doing that.

      And I'd like to point everyone to the code of conduct available here: https://www.1eyedeel.com/notes/1Eyed_Eel_Code_of_Conduct

      There's a section towards the bottom that states:

      "Moderators may edit or delete content that breaches the code of conduct. If your content has been moderated or deleted, you should consider it an indication that you have breached the code of conduct. If you do not feel this to be the case then respectfully raise it in the Site Matters group. Content that strays into defamation or might be considered a legal threat to the site, will be likely be deleted upon suspicion to protect the site."

      So there is a process for any issues regarding moderation to be raised and that's the main reason I rarely respond to blogs on the main page questioning moderation decisions. If you don't follow the process in bringing up an issue with moderation respectfully then I'm simply not responding to it. Mick, given you're not the blog author, the moderation of Fong's blog is of little concern to you. If Fong has an issue he can bring it up in the Site Matters group.

      • Super, all you needed to say was you didn't delete it....saves every one time and energy.

        I gave an opinion, recognised the bastard of a job you have and suggested you should respond to it. You have, good for you. It is not just me you are satisfying but many other are discussing it and calling for an explanation.

        If your response is indicative of you being criticised for the constant barage you receive, so be it.....but I cannot see why I have to "piss off for the accusation". 

        I am one of the few people here that will defend you if you have been hard done by. 

      • Super I Disagree with this statement “Mick, given you're not the blog author, the moderation of Fong's blog is of little concern to you. If Fong has an issue he can bring it up in the Site Matters group.”

        Would it be true that anyone that contributes to a blog raised by another person is in fact a Co Author of such blog.

        I acknowledge that you didn’t delete it however I do believe what should have happened is that the blog could have been closed for comment with a statement for the reasoning as to why it is closed. 

        This would have lead to a lot of people dropping the topic, as it currently stands a lot of people are justifiable asking questions about why this blog was closed because on the face it seemed harmless and was actual an interesting and from memory factual read.

        Now if in fact it’s not factual then a comment saying why and closing the blog for comment would have satisfied a lot of us. 

        To be honest it seems like a knee jerk reaction caused by a build up of a lot of past in fighting. 

        Like I said I acknowledge that you didn’t delete the blog so my comment is purely food for thought for you guys on how to treat future such blogs and I also acknowledge that you don’t have to listen to my thoughts however just remember that without us there is no site.

        Normally yeah just delete but I think sum smarts needs to be shown in this case to realise that this blog was gathering some interest from members and by no means in a viscous way.

    • So very true Poppa, these are events that happened 20-30yrs ago. Before we shoot Super down, I feel this decision to delete Fongys blog has come from the top, there was nothing wrong with what was said, it was very interesting reading and I feel it filled a few blank spaces in the minds of us supporters re: the running of the game all those years ago. This blog was not a deletable offence but, more to do with what was to come. To top it off, it's a disgrace if Fongy was banned for this.

      • Agree Doc

  • As much as i can’t stand the bloke I didn’t see any issue with the blog and it should never have been removed. Perhaps it should be up to us punters to have a vote on the value of the blog. Perhaps a 5 star rating system on blogs. Any thing over 3 stars can stay. 

    • Nice idea parra dice

This reply was deleted.

Latest comments

GRUNTA BIGWAD - Soggy Salada replied to Sir SuperEel 22 Hail King Arthur's discussion Phil Gould reveals he spoke with Brad Arthur post-2018 disaster
"Nobody is interested in your Grinder links, Ecniv."
18 minutes ago
GRUNTA BIGWAD - Soggy Salada replied to Sir SuperEel 22 Hail King Arthur's discussion Phil Gould reveals he spoke with Brad Arthur post-2018 disaster
"Love the kick in the nuts to Norman. "They removed some problems ".
And yes I agree. Gould is the Trump of rugby league. He's that far up his own arse he's got two navels.
 "
19 minutes ago
Clintorian replied to Mudskip's discussion Top Guns
"Well played Brissy - hahaha"
4 hours ago
Kramerica replied to Magpie's discussion 'Merica: Just how f@#ked is it?
"My point is that violence solves nothing - violence for, against, with or in the name of blacks, whites, yellows and any other color (American spelling) you choose to nominate is unacceptable.
That's not a point that makes me sound like a Nazi, or i…"
4 hours ago
Wile E. Coyote replied to Magpie's discussion 'Merica: Just how f@#ked is it?
"Nailed it Tank"
4 hours ago
Johnny B Good replied to Sir SuperEel 22 Hail King Arthur's discussion Phil Gould reveals he spoke with Brad Arthur post-2018 disaster
"When that cat looks in the mirror,  he sees a lion. "
4 hours ago
Wile E. Coyote replied to Magpie's discussion 'Merica: Just how f@#ked is it?
"Racist police killed a black guy so let's kill a couple of black cops to make it even????
Havent been watching the news but looks to me like the puppet masters are manipulating the situation for their own political agenda. Doubt there would any of t…"
4 hours ago
BEM replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Round 4 Team List v Sea Eagles
"Ain't that the truth."
5 hours ago
Longfin Eel replied to Frankie Fong's discussion WHERE THE HELL ARE SNAKE AND BIG AL HUNT ??
"looks like Snake has had a visit by the Burgess brothers"
6 hours ago
Frank The Tank replied to Magpie's discussion 'Merica: Just how f@#ked is it?
"Yes mate
Theres a reason Trumps DOJ is investigating the FBI, CIA and DOJ - they've been politicised and used for political reasons. They are trying to clean out the joint - so yeah they are corrupt."
7 hours ago
Frank The Tank replied to Magpie's discussion 'Merica: Just how f@#ked is it?
"Please!!!!
ANTIFA far right hahaha.
Hilarious mate.
Far right groups are armed and dangerous, these ANTIFA pansies are young adults with F all to do with their time or their lives. "
7 hours ago
Frank The Tank replied to Magpie's discussion 'Merica: Just how f@#ked is it?
"Yeah matter of fact I do Princess....
I've got one on my old fella and it saysAntidisestablishmentarianism.
 "
7 hours ago
Longfin Eel replied to Sir SuperEel 22 Hail King Arthur's discussion Phil Gould reveals he spoke with Brad Arthur post-2018 disaster
"Maybe Gould told BA to relieve Penrith of all the excessive deals they made to players."
7 hours ago
Slugg replied to Magpie's discussion 'Merica: Just how f@#ked is it?
"When is enough enough. "
7 hours ago
Prof. Daz replied to Magpie's discussion 'Merica: Just how f@#ked is it?
"Kram, maybe the violence in the protests will make it worse; maybe it won't. What we do know is that the whole thing shows a  society that features a whole (black) population totally fed up, with some more violent about it than others, plus a large…"
7 hours ago
Prof. Daz replied to Magpie's discussion 'Merica: Just how f@#ked is it?
"Bullshit Frank. It's already been shown the antifa have on many occasions been far right groups posing as  antifa. And I mean documented fakery. But no worries, you never met a fact you couldn't shove to the right"
7 hours ago
More…

 

<script src="https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js"></script>
<!-- Sidebar -->
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<script>// <![CDATA[
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
// ]]></script>