Moderator Action Sticky

Submitted by Zone Left on December 16th, 2011 at 9:35 PM

Brian has requested that instead of deleting each individual comment in the Moderator Action Sticky, that we instead just create a new thread. It takes hours of less time, preserves the comments for future explanations, and just clears things up faster.

You'll notice that the previous thread is now locked, and will slowly fade back into darkness. For the time being, the link from the Useful Stuff menu will point to the wrong location. We're working on a fix for that.


This thread is an ad-hoc way of tracking what threads and comments get removed. Mods that remove a thread should post the title here with a brief reason as to why the thread is gone.

NOTE: if you leave an irrelevant comment in this thread it will be deleted.



January 27th, 2013 at 3:46 AM ^

Literally everyone involved in that thread besides TGOY explained it wasn't the opinion being downvoted, he refused to seriously respond to any discussion of the matter, then continued to complain about his opinion being trampled because he 'dared' say something unpopular. As if we all haven't seen firsthand some rather unpopular opinions of coaches turn out to hold water. Actually, he probably didn't, considering his join date.

I let the WCC comment get under my skin, like too many other petty things around here lately. Sorry for the trouble, Justin, but I'm thinking I should just pull a chitownblue, without the 2. 


January 27th, 2013 at 8:43 AM ^

That is part of the problem I brought up when I said he derails discussion and turns everything into "TheGhostof Yost show."

He doesn't actually want to engage in discussion, and that is where the trolling part comes in. Any time you see him post, it's the exact same pattern over and over again, leading to the exact same conclusion, regardless of who the other parties involved in the discussion are. You can ask M-Wolverine about it. I know he's had several run ins with TGOY.

His method of trolling is far more incidious, and even worse than those who simply outright hurl racial epithets, or who directly insult players and/or coaches. People by and large are easily able to spot those trolls and ignore them. 

I understand simply ignoring him, but these types of posters feed off of each other a mulitply. You can see it in the sorts of post loss meltdown threads that pop up. I've just been seeing this type of behavior a lot more recently, and I know others have as well. Hell, it's part of the reason BiSB stepped down.


January 27th, 2013 at 2:43 PM ^

and will keep your thoughts in mind for the future. For now, I stand by my assessment from last night, and I think a lot of the friction can be explained by difference of opinion (discounting the UFC thread, as I said above).

I do try to keep my opinion of users fluid and based on their posts, so in that sense my opinion of him, you, M-Wolverine, LSAClassOf2000, or anyone else changes as time goes on. If anyone is starting to cross the line to where I think they're trolling, I'll handle it at that point.


January 27th, 2013 at 3:26 PM ^

Opinions of me probably change daily.

There is a particularly kind of trolling; that's trolling of the one track mind. I think there's an argument that could be made that for some reason Red doesn't get an criticism for the program's (minor) decline, where we still talk about "two eras" of Lloyd's coaching, so maybe he is a little Teflon. I could see a discussion of that, though with heavy negging. But you'd have to being something more than "Unacceptable at Michigan!!", an attitude that I thought was pretty much laughed off the blog at this point. Going in to debate the merits of UFC in a UFC thread is as bad as saying you need to do a testicle check if you have heard of ice dancers. I was a little surprised to see a UFC thread on here; but it got like a hundred posts; someone was interested, so who cares if I don't care?

There's a point and a way to say completely permissible things, but if that's all you say, you're just trolling the boards to hear yourself think. It's the BRCE syndrome. Don't go over the line, but if EVERY post is negative ranting, you're not bringing anything to the community but pissing people off. That's not an alternative viewpoint "keeping it real"; that's just being an asshole.

Has any one poster hit that point? I don't know. Won't say it's not for me to say because I was glad to point out BRCE's many identities. But that doesnt take much with me. Someone like 'Clever' being fed up, it is something worth monitoring.


January 27th, 2013 at 2:54 PM ^

but you would be missed if you did, even if there were a couple things that you shouldn't have said/shouldn't have been said about you last night.

Just as a programming note, I'm all for keeping things transparent, but we also need to keep this sticky somewhat clean. This line of posts will be deleted after a few days to try and keep the clutter down, so don't be alarmed when that happens.


January 28th, 2013 at 2:04 PM ^

The people have spoken. Personally, I didn't get what the big problem with the OP was. I know there were some grammar issues and that "hire Brad Stevens" isn't exactly an original idea, but it was definitely something I had thought about last night while watching BTN Journey with Bacari Alexander. At this point, though, the thread was devolving into nothing but criticism and jokes, so it comes down.

Maybe the better thread for today would be something along the lines of "Where in the World is Bacari Alexander, 2014 Edition".


January 28th, 2013 at 7:37 PM ^

Good grab. What made it particularly bad is it directly followed the Poggi update, so from a quick glance at the board it looked like there was Poggi news after Bama, then a thread explicitly for crying about that.

I was about to pull this but I ran to the Poggi thread first to find out if I should be in the crying thread.


January 29th, 2013 at 12:10 AM ^

There's a new post that discusses the relevant part of the president's comments without getting into the politics.

Rule of thumb to use when politics touches on the topic of description: if you can tell how the OP voted in the last election simply by reading his post, it's politics.

Also now that it's unpublished it means anyone with mod priveleges can still post in there. Wheeeeeeee fun mod-only politics time wheeeeeeeeeeee


January 29th, 2013 at 12:32 AM ^

Referencing Obama in a debate about football safety is not politics and should not warrant deletion. But deleting a thread where a poster might hint at political bias, as you suggested, could be considered politically motivated moderation. Let's have only the highest standards here.


January 29th, 2013 at 10:11 AM ^

I think the mods do have a political bias, in that they enforce the ONE FRICKING RULE around here, which is "no politics."



January 29th, 2013 at 12:26 PM ^

Speak for your former self.  I have no bias - I let everything through in order to haze/initiate the noob moderator (JGB).  Unfortunately, he's doing a much better job than I'm doing and putting in more hours than me.  I think that makes me expendable.  Dammit!


February 7th, 2013 at 11:40 AM ^

I don't think there's a person alive who doesn't have some sort of political bias, and I'm certainly no exception, and I apologize if that ever influences the way you read the site. I certainly welcome any criticism in that direction (people shouldn't downvote you for that).

That said, I stand by my moderation here.

For one the author made a political statement in the O.P. with his rhetorical question. The post wasn't about the president doing anything but weighing in on a topic I imagine he hasn't given a ton of thought to. Like, Teddy Roosevelt saying "I'm banning this game unless you stop the people dying from it" is on topic, but "Hey guys can you believe Teddy Roosevelt is so uninformed that he said...?" is politics. The difference is the phrasing invited the thread to become a political flame war. And there was another topic posted 20 minutes later that was on the same topic but approached it from a "let's debate head trauma in football" standpoint instead of "let's talk about how much of an asshole this political figure is for saying this about head trauma" standpoint.

Two, the author has history. This O.P. has been moderated many times previously for testing the political line, and his tendency to beat a particular topic with polticial overtones into equine molecules. The extent of that moderation has gone so far previously that I even created a new blog for him so people like me who cared about the stuff he was saying could read it without pissing off all the readers here who were rubbed the wrong way by it. He gets a tenth of the leeway another poster might get.

What I said here was meant as guidance, since our moderating system is kind of precedent-based. I would prefer a broader range of things we can talk about civilly. The other option is to say "anything that anyone thinks is political is political." I'd rather have it stay kind of ambiguous and go by feel. 


January 29th, 2013 at 2:37 PM ^

I'm not sure I'm comfortable with where this is going. The OP has a picture that is (allegedly) freshly posted and deleted, but the general tone suggesting that a recent recruiting prospect didn't come here because he was paid is, to me, dangerous to throw around everywhere. Mods?

EDIT: This picture has gone viral, SBnation has a story on it, and our Fearless Leader has just tweeted about it; it's relevant, not just a bitter Michigan thing, apparently. So I retract my complaint.


February 7th, 2013 at 11:49 AM ^

I don't want to extend the insta-die rule any further. Foster and Sharp and Valenti are there because any given week they will say something flame-worthy, and the odd time they say something relevant or insightful it is just there to lure people in so they can be trolled again. Obviously "MAKE PLAYS" doesn't count--that can be posted for ever and ever. Ace Williams is on the list because he doesn't just print lies, but prints lies that are meant to hurt peoples' reputations.

With the rest, treat on a case-by-case basis. That probably means 99.9% of anything Bayless says.


February 1st, 2013 at 5:06 PM ^

Left it up for about an hour thirty before posting the OP as a comment in the ticket sticky.

OP: If you need any of the emails, ask here. Mods can still see the post.


February 5th, 2013 at 9:46 PM ^

Seriously, go look at his comment history.  He has made it his personal mission to do nothing but call Morgan names in game threads.  That's all he does.  But hey, maybe the mods here are cool with this dude continually trashing a respected Michigan basketball player.  I'm sick of it, though.


February 5th, 2013 at 9:59 PM ^

And I apologize for the attitude in my post, I was just fed up with the bull that was constantly being spewed, all just for the sake of being an ass.

I know you mods are really stretched thin around here, and your efforts are definitely appreciated.  Thank you again.


February 5th, 2013 at 10:04 PM ^

I definitely had my share of posts like that before starting the moderating work, so it would be kind of ridiculous for me to have anything bad to say about yours (which definitely didn't cross any lines).

Thanks for the heads up and the kind words.


February 7th, 2013 at 12:50 PM ^

Thanks Moleskyn.  That would be my guess too.

FWIW - a post like that does warrant a few minutes of Mod investigative work I believe to see if the IP addresses match.  It is SO over the top and uncalled for here that if anything warrants a permanent ban - that would be it.

Based on his comments I'd guess whoever he is that he's a sad, fat, unhappy little zit faced loser living in his mom's basement who only dreams of kissing a girl someday if he loses the weight and gets a job and he's unlikely to buy much from our advertisers nor donate to beveled guilt.  So no loss on the revenue front if he's smoked.

Thank you for removing those comments.


February 7th, 2013 at 12:56 PM ^

That may be the case, but probably not a good idea to let the target of the abuse decide the punishment :)

Anyways, I'd like to advocate for the censure of that emueas_c90250235203 character (can't ever remember what his name is, nor do I care to). Doesn't add anything of value to the board, he's generally negative, offensive, and annoying, and spends most of his time trolling. There's a difference between a poster writing something particularly assinine on one occasion, and a repeated pattern of degrading the quality of the conversations here. This character is the latter.


February 7th, 2013 at 1:14 PM ^

Am I wrong?

Do you not pimp out your wife like she's some D list pornstar trying to catch a big break?
Do you not want to show off?
Do you not secretly want all the guys on here to masturbate to your wife's videos?
Did you not buy your slut wife from some Russian human traffickers because the only way she's with a goon like you is because you supply her with heroin?

Also, fuck you JGB come at me bro you have no idea how many of us there are.
I'll check my inbox ;)