We're not talking about a few puns, we're talking about page after page of them
Printable View
We're not talking about a few puns, we're talking about page after page of them
So what?
We're not talking about one poster objecting to what you're doing; we're talking about page after page of them. You're still ignoring that point.
It's nice to see a busy thread on foot.ie again
I did a bit of digging into the Sammon forum to see how bad the pun problem is.
The thread started on 13 November 2010, and the first 22 pages (440 posts) took it to 23 September 2014, a three year, 10 month period which roughly coincided with his peak/Ireland years. In five years, four months since then, there are 71 posts on four pages:
- There are six puns on page 23 (23 September 2014 - 26 July 2015), the first of which acknowledges an Irish Indo headline that contained a Sammon pun.
- There are 10 on page 24 (26 July 2015 - 23 January 2018).
- There are four on page 25, (14 January 2018 - 10 July 2019), if ‘I never expected him to sink so low’ is a pun - while it references his name it could be taken as a face-value comment.
- There are five in 11 posts on page 26 (10 July 2019 onwards).
That's 25 puns in 71 posts in a little over five years. I don’t think that's excessive, though I don’t overlook the possibility that some puns may have been deleted, and that could skew the figures.
We need a solution, not finger-pointing: Tets doesn’t need to apologise or rationalise his dislike of puns. In every other thread he’s a good, even-handed moderator and I think we all respect him for that.
As I see it, the options are:
- The thread can be moved – RAM suggested to his LoI threads;
- Another moderator can take over just this thread;
- The thread carries on as most posters want it, with puns allowed. We’re looking at a player at the end of his career: the last five years show how little activity there’s been, and how little there’s likely to be. Meanwhile we try to avoid obvious puns that have been done to death. Up the game, lads – nets, scales, streams and the like are the low hanging fruit of punning. (Maybe they come in punnets…?)
Are there any other suggestions? Should it be put to a vote? Or can we reach an agreement?
You’re swimming upstream with this PS.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
The only option I have any interest in is allow puns.
Or, to follow the rule that was established the last time this happened.
Puns allowed for a day, and if that's ignored they all get deleted.
Literally the point of this thread is that that was your rule, and nobody wants it.
Why won't you accept this?
No, there’s no justification or support for it. Only one person has a problem with the puns.
But you ignored the rule that puns can't be deleted on days ending in y. I find this difficult to understand. It's a perfectly simple rule.Quote:
Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
I can confirm that this was indeed an attempt at a pun. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Eminence Grise
Sssh. I figured as much, but you're weakening the argument!
Users: Mods are allowed to set local rules, to the forum or even the thread. If it's stated as a rule for that forum, or thread, it's a rule. If it's a silly rule, it can be appealed, but not in the way this thread started. So let's continue focusing on appealing the rule please, and not attacking the mod.
Tets: While I agree with you that silly threads can be annoying and/or disruptive when they drag on, it's clear users want more leeway here. Do you have a suggestion for a way in which that can be accommodated? We've had free-for-all threads on Foot.ie before, including ones that called me every name under the sun. :)
(I'm not saying player threads should be free-for-alls BTW, they shouldn't. Just that there must be a way to accommodate people in some way.)
So what exactly was wrong with my opening post?
Like this post?Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
I give it 9/10.Quote:
Originally Posted by SkStu
If you'd started with 'Aloud or not' I'd have given you full marks.
I think given tets is posting elsewhere, he's now ignoring this thread and the various - quite reasonable - requests to change the current rule (although I don't really like to legitimise it like that).
I think that's very bad form.
FWIW there are times when I enjoy a load of puns in a thread and other times when they are annoying and you just want to read actual posts about the subject. Can see both sides of this TBH.
Just scroll past the stuff you don't want to read like the rest of us do.Quote:
Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
These puns only pop up once in a blue moon anyway. It's not like they are disrupting an otherwise active and healthy thread and getting in the way of loads of other posts. There hadn't been a post on the Sammon thread in what, 5 months, and at Sammon's goal-scoring rate, there probably won't be another for quite a while either. The Towell thread hasn't had a single post since 9th of June 2019.
Is it really that much of a deal to just let it slide?
Does it give you any pause for thought that you seem to be the only one that is so bothered by it?
haven't been ignoring it at all, I just haven't replied.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I still think my way is the best - a day where you can post any puns you want, and then we all move on with our lives
You haven't addressed the overwhelming disagreement of the posters with you on this - could we even find one person agreeing with you if we trawled through the whole thread?Quote:
Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
I would also argue you did not communicate effectively in the Sammon thread. "One day" was the entirety of your post, and it might as well have been whale song - I certainly had no idea that this was a mod warning and seem not to have been alone in that.
I thought it was obvious after the last time this came up
Total BS and an abuse of your role of moderator. You've shown no willingness to be flexible on this, or find a reasonable solution. It's pitiful that you're so intransigent - and for what? The silliest, pettiest of reasons. You don't like puns. Give me strength. What's next on the humorous banned list? Malapropisms? Spoonerisms? One-liners and quips?
Put it to a vote and see if the majority support your one day rule.
Christ almighty. This was a fun place once - cool dog's awesome adventures, the crossword thread, the one sentence story thread that seemed to have Roddy Collins as a punchline on every page, the Termonbarry references.... There was even a jokes thread. The last post on Cool Dog was over two years ago!! Bonnie stumped us all on the crossword thread six years ago!! (Any chance you might give us the answer, BS?) What does that tell us about where this place is going?
That's kind of the definition of "ignoring" to be honest.Quote:
Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
I agree with EG on this - this is an abuse of moderator power. Almost everyone on the thread is against you on this. It's not your forum. "My way is the best" is not acceptable when no-one else wants your way.Quote:
Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
Yet you repeatedly refuse to engage in conversation about this. It really shows a remarkable lack of respect for the rest of us.
I'd like to appeal that rule that allows mods make up silly rules. I don't see the need for it. There is a comprehensive list of foot.ie rules that cover personal abuse, staying on topic, etc. Clearly a certain amount of discretion is required and no two mods will be the exact same, but to actually have the power to create rules within forums or threads on a whim, based on their own personal preference in this case, is a step too far.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
It'd be no harm to reiterate the point that this is nothing personal. I think I speak for everybody when I say Tets is well liked and respected, and the great work he does both here and beyond is really appreciated. He obviously feels backed into a corner now so isn't willing to give an inch, but in my opinion this should have never been allowed happen in the first place. I don't think anybody knew mods had the authority to make up new rules as they see fit.
I can't really understand why a compromise was even suggested either, as honourable as the intentions were. It's one person against basically everybody else (who cared enough to contribute anyway). Compromises and happy mediums should be saved for close-run conflicts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eminence Grise
I suggested this a week ago... I don't think any of us saw it dragging on like this when it could have been resolved so easily in so many ways, and a compromise would have given everybody a win. As for Tets' lustre? I'm afraid that for me some of the sheen has worn off. And I hate saying that.
[Edit] I second your call for an appeal, DeLorean.
For what it's worth, I've no major issue with a 24 hour limit for puns in certain threads, even though I don't think it's needed. The main issue was the 'one day' post wasn't particularly clear at all, I also interpreted it as "one day this will stop happening" rather than one day to post puns. For the sake of clarity, if the rule was implemented, there should be a clear post from the moderator in the thread stating "puns will be allowed for 24 hours on this thread from the time of this post, any posted later will be deleted".
Ye know I hate it when I have to make decisions! Where's the actual rule posted? What is it exactly?
Looks to be this slice of vagueness.
Disagree that this was the main issue, it wasn't. And anyway has since been comfortably surpassed by how Tets has chosen to handle this.Quote:
Originally Posted by passinginterest
Let's try to be fair here. Looking after a busy forum is a very difficult pundertaking.
Genuinely, I thought you meant it as a "one day, I won't have to see puns".Quote:
Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
Wasn't actually aware of the one day rule, which is a little bit extreme, and takes away from the fun to be honest.
Ok, so the rule isn't very clear. Can we make and publish a rule everyone agrees with, and stick to it? Because I agree with tets that there needs to be a limit.
Suggest abolish the rule entirely for the moment and see what happens? I'd say outside the Sammon thread - his career is coming to a close anyway - any puns will quickly die out. But you'd get a view as to the extent of the issue - if it is an issue - that way
Pineapple's suggestion sounds practical to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
By way of an alternative: Puns are always acceptable providing they are in an on-topic post. Where a sequence of posts containing only a pun and no on-topic contribution are interfering with a discussion, the mod can place a very limited temporary ban on puns, e.g. one day. This will be indicated by posting "One day" in the thread. (Or "Mod warning: posts containing a pun and no contribution to the conversation are banned for 24 hours and will be deleted." Whichever is clearer.)
My intention there is as follows: If someone works a pun into an on-topic post, the conversation continues and kudos to the wordsmith. If there is no other discussion, there's nothing to interfere with and a string of puns is better than dead air. Only if someone is trying to converse, and it's getting lost in lots of non-contributing pun posts, is there any real justification for an intervention. This is likely a pretty rare eventuality, and therefore I still prefer pineapple's suggestion.
I agree with Pineapple, pun away, if it becomes an actual problem rather than a mod using being a mod to tailor the forum to their own personal likes / dislikes then revisit it and apply some criteria. I say this because whatever reasonable sensible rule might be applied, the puns thus far wouldn't have over stepped anyway it in all probability.
This is the crucial point. We would need to establish if the pun usage up until now has ever exceeded a reasonable limit. It's the view of almost everybody here that it hasn't. Therefore, we can make a rule for rule sake, but if it's a rule so harsh that it would have interfered with the pun making up until now, then it's not going to be accepted by the majority anyway. So, basically, what Crafty says - if it becomes an actual problem, revisit.Quote:
Originally Posted by CraftyToePoke
It's a real pity that the Cool dog thread froze, maybe he was just too cool in the end upQuote:
Originally Posted by Eminence Grise
1. Stop personalising the subject. The mod is entitled to an opinion too.
2. Everyone here is not everyone on the forum. How many people have actually posted in this thread, a half dozen?
3. The moderator is clearly not happy with a free for all. Come up with a compromise or the rule will be formalised as-is.
Generally speaking, grow up ffs. Ye sound like spoiled teenagers the lot of ye.
I think you'll find that only the spoiled teenagers have offered anything in the way of a compromise. Your mod appears unwilling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tetsujin1979
14 different posters posted in this thread. An additional 5 posters didn't post but indicated their "thanks" of a post that was relating to the use of puns. So 19. Of the 19, only 2 have indicated a problem with the use of puns - yourself and the moderator. There is no evidence put forward that anybody - except the moderator - has ever complained about the use of puns before. The only problem is the one was actually created by having a (terrible) rule. Therefore, why is a compromise necessary?Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
PineappleStu has suggested a very reasonable experiment to see if the use of puns actually is a problem for the broader foot.ie population that may not have seen this thread. Wouldn't that experiment be a logical first step before trying to determine an appropriate countermeasure or rule?