Jump to content
oneBoro Forum

Boro V Blackburn (A) 0-1


Recommended Posts

Guest Riverside Dreamer
1 minute ago, Denzel Zanzibar said:

Unless some of your posts were deleted by the moderation team before I saw them, there's no way you should have been banned for 24 hours. Such bans are very rare.

Thanks for the support but nothing was deleted I did not offend anyone. It must of been me being new and going against his big win. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 569
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hi very long time reader, and I usually love reading what people have got to say but do people really think we are relegation candidates if we don’t win our next match. I know it has not been the grea

Saturday 17th August 2019 - 3pm KO - Ewood Park Preview: Both sides come into this fixture following home league cup fixtures against lower league opposition - Blackburn oversaw a battling O

Ok far too many members have now been made aware that in the opinion of Riverside Dreamer moderating action by Boro_Unger was unfair and uncalled for and some members were siding with his views.

Posted Images

1 minute ago, Riverside Dreamer said:

Thanks for the support but nothing was deleted I did not offend anyone. It must of been me being new and going against his big win. 

Nobody should be getting banned for being new, that's ridiculous. There must be more to this. I've been given a few warnings by BU, mainly for insulting other posters and I've not been banned for that.

Think this needs making public, @Downsouth

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Denzel Zanzibar said:

Nobody should be getting banned for being new, that's ridiculous. There must be more to this. I've been given a few warnings by BU, mainly for insulting other posters and I've not been banned for that.

Think this needs making public, @Downsouth

a few good men you cant handle the truth GIF by SundanceTV

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Riverside Dreamer
7 minutes ago, Denzel Zanzibar said:

Nobody should be getting banned for being new, that's ridiculous. There must be more to this. I've been given a few warnings by BU, mainly for insulting other posters and I've not been banned for that.

Think this needs making public, @Downsouth

 

2 minutes ago, Foogle said:

a few good men you cant handle the truth GIF by SundanceTV

This is what I got for what appears to be no reason. 

warning.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Riverside Dreamer said:

Sure, I could only bring this to light in the public arena and was disappointed I could not get involved when the match was going as I suddenly found my self banned for no reason at all. Surely thats not right? 

 

33 minutes ago, Denzel Zanzibar said:

Nobody should be getting banned for being new, that's ridiculous. There must be more to this. I've been given a few warnings by BU, mainly for insulting other posters and I've not been banned for that.

Think this needs making public, @Downsouth

Ok far too many members have now been made aware that in the opinion of Riverside Dreamer moderating action by Boro_Unger was unfair and uncalled for and some members were siding with his views.

Nearly every bit of moderation is kept within the moderating team and not made public, and not for sinister reasons I can assure you but the aim is to keep the forum clear of those persons who for whatever reasons have their own agenda, or want to create multiple accounts, which is against form rules and to circumnavigate bans they had received under a different user name. Or most importantly whose opinions vastly differ from what we all consider decent.

AdamBoro was recently banned for homophobic comments placed within the forum that were not acceptable to the forum and away from being decent.

Sadly, and yes perhaps took too long to spot it, though Boro_Unger did, Riverside Dreamer was an attempt to re-join the forum under another guise, little by little the façade was eroded because certain traits appeared once again leaving me with no choice but to delete his account, not banning him because he is already banned.

I have deleted many attempts by him to re-join since his original ban and on a daily basis, but IP addresses, user names, and other aspects give him away.

We do not want negative attitudes on the forum, we do not want multiple user names and I hope that all members even those initially supporting Riverside Dreamer can understand and accept my actions, he really should not have mentioned it because he may have got away with it for a bit longer but how long before other homophobic comments would come out.

The only person who gets away with multiple accounts is CT who needs the support:classic_biggrin: 

Joking aside well done Boro_Unger for some really good moderating!

  • Like 4
  • Wow 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh wow, so I was half defending the person who I called for to be banned in the first place.

That's ironic! I did think something was up though, well done to you and BU for spotting what he was up to, and for the record I'm glad it's been made public in this instance.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Downsouth said:

Nearly every bit of moderation is kept within the moderating team and not made public, and not for sinister reasons I can assure you but the aim is to keep the forum clear of those persons who for whatever reasons have their own agenda, or want to create multiple accounts, which is against form rules and to circumnavigate bans they had received under a different user name. Or most importantly whose opinions vastly differ from what we all consider decent.

Appreciate the explanation DS and good work if the information shows this was a homophobic member who has previously been removed from the forum, arguably this forum is incredibly clean of that so that's very much appreciated.

I appreciate that this isn't one of those cases given the offender having previous (and surely knowing full well the reasons behind being banned) but I presume any other warnings/bans are at least given alongside a message to inform them why actions have been taken? Just the way this read was a little like decisions and discussions are kept amongst mods and mods only, so offenders would perhaps never know what they did wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, wilsoncgp said:

Appreciate the explanation DS and good work if the information shows this was a homophobic member who has previously been removed from the forum, arguably this forum is incredibly clean of that so that's very much appreciated.

I appreciate that this isn't one of those cases given the offender having previous (and surely knowing full well the reasons behind being banned) but I presume any other warnings/bans are at least given alongside a message to inform them why actions have been taken? Just the way this read was a little like decisions and discussions are kept amongst mods and mods only, so offenders would perhaps never know what they did wrong.

In the vast majority of cases Wilson then the answer is yes.

Very often the case is a pm is sent out before hand before any action is taken though at times instant action is definitely required for the very reasons you have mentioned. BU simply had no choice and gave himself some breathing space for follow up investigation

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

i coose not to get into mod issues as a rule but in this case i must admit i was shocked during the original posts . but full marks to DS for clarifying the situation with an explanation  of the case involved.  See how easily you can get everyone onside with open-ness.   all it needed was CLARITY.  are you reading MFC.  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your comments all. I've checked my PMs. My inbox was 470% used. Must have got a smaller inbox with the move to the new software. I've emptied the messages so I can now receive PMs from people. 

Feedback taken on board and I should have put a reason for the ban on the ban-form (i put a reason in for the other mods). There was just too much didn't add up with RD!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, boro-unger said:

Thanks for your comments all. I've checked my PMs. My inbox was 470% used. Must have got a smaller inbox with the move to the new software. I've emptied the messages so I can now receive PMs from people. 

Feedback taken on board and I should have put a reason for the ban on the ban-form (i put a reason in for the other mods). There was just too much didn't add up with RD!

I noticed this with my PMs too, looks like a smaller inbox when I went to empty a few out. Ended up cleaning it out entirely barring our love notes.

  • Haha 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Latest Posts

    • Arsenal scored before the ref blew the whistle, it's his responsibility to manage the game. He clearly wanted to stop it, as he indicated no goal to Smith-Rowe as soon as the ball went in to the net.  However the quick shot beat the refs decision and reaction time, therefore it's a goal. Based on the rules you can't blame anyone in this situation.   
    • I can't see anything in the laws that says that. It does say that an injured goalkeeper doesn't have to leave the field of play to receive treatment, and that in itself prevents play from restarting until the keeper has received treatment, but it doesn't say anything specific about goalkeeper injuries stopping play. The ref has to stop play if they deem a player to be seriously injured, but I wouldn't class stepping on someone's heel as a serious injury. Which I think is reinforced by the fact De Gea was up and about walking within a minute. It also say the ref "allows play to continue until the ball is out of play if a player is only slightly injured" and if Fred had stepped on any other Man United player, I definitely think that would be deemed only a slight injury and waved on.
    • Btw. does anyone know if the club do half-season online match tickets, like they do with normal season tickets? I vowed never to buy a match as long as Warnock was manager, but I might change my stance now, although I rarely get to see entire games due to other commitments.
    • Yeah I get that. It's probably the best time to not have midweek games with Fry and Payero getting back and the players learn the new routines and build up more fitness. But that still doesn't change the fact, that I want games.
    • If you follow the rule book it was the refs fault. The rules specifically say that the goalkeeper has to be fully functional at all time for the game to be continued. It was Arsenals luck that the ref didn't see he was down injured and blew his whistle before the ball had gone in. It's the refs responsibility to stop play as soon as the keeper isn't functional. That is what makes it controversial. If a keeper is hurt while trying to stop the ball from going into the net ie. bangs his head against the post and the ball goes in then it's obviously a goal. But if the keeper is down hurt before the 2nd 3rd or whatever touch then the ref has to stop play. 

×
×
  • Create New...