Forum Questions

[britbox]

This is a thread for anybody who wishes to field a question to Admins or Moderators related to the running of the website.

 

[britbox]

You're probably right in the application of a double standard if you look at the off-topic boards but they haven't generated anything like the number of complaints that this subject has attracted. If they did then I guess they would get looked at too.

This explanation worries me even more. So, essentially you are admitting that these
new guidelines are not based on the principle of not allowing slanderous posts, but is
due to the fact that a large number of complaints were made.

Suppose someone posts a message that Player X played terrible today. Assuming
that most of the members this forum are fans of X and they feel offended by the remark
and complain, will there be a ruling that form now you cannot post messages that
reflect on X's play poorly.

The policies should be based on principles or quality of complaints and not merely
based on number of complaints.

Who said they weren't quality complaints? Some of the complaints were well reasoned and not all were made in public.

If you're prepared to use your real name and make unsubstantiated claims specifically directed toward a player and call them out as a doper - fine, I'll explain how you can set up a free site on wordpress.com which will allow you to do it and you'll also be able to carry the can if someone decides to take legal proceedings against you.

I don't agree with your second paragraph - it's been made clear that it was doping related. Calling someone out publically for being a cheat carries more responsibility than discussing how well somebody is playing.

And yes, there probably is a double standard in the Off Topic forum where there is greater flexibility on sensitive issues - but it's not a free for all either - there has been the odd thread in there that got out of control and ended up being moderated.

Principles of quality as you suggested at the end of your post DO come into it. There were back and forth accusations of trolling, racism, being anti-some player or another, bringing in other players names in retaliation etc.... Hardly up there in the quality department.

The bottom line is that it's been asked that posters do not to name specific players as doping cheats via speculation. It's a serious charge in the scheme of the sport. Other than that, I don't think anything else has changed.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Can you move post #81 from the "biological passport" thread here?

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Also my post #152 from the Rafa Injured thread.

 

[britbox]

This was your post #81

^ It is not, GSM. "Probably doping" or even "might be doping," is complete speculation and not allowed. Here's an example: you can mention that Sara Errani went to that Dr. del Morral who has been charged with assisting cyclists to dope, because it is a fact, and she acknowledges that. You cannot, however, draw the conclusion that therefore she is "most probably doping," because she has not been charged as such in any official way.

As to freedom of speech, we're pretty liberal about it around here. But you do see there is are reasons to draw lines. On doping, the primary one is that impugning a professional athlete's integrity on an issue so volatile (and illegal) as a matter of "opinion" is unfair and, in fact, libelous. A secondary one is that allowing those opinions causes every thread that involves such talk to go down in flames.

You bet. That is why one of my posts to this thread after your above message was summarily
deleted without any notice or explanation to me.

The only message I had in that post was a question seeking clarification on the new guidelines.

This is acting like a big brother even though you are my big sister.

 

[britbox]

and #152

General purposes announcement: We, the admins, agreed to prune this thread of that which was off-topic and offensive, including unfounded doping allegations against multiple players; wildly off-topic political tangents; back-biting and insulting posts from one member to another, and all quotations of those posts. Tellingly, the thread has gone from 23 pages down to 8. For those who posted earnestly, and especially tried to right the ship or otherwise to serve the greater good and higher minded discussion, your posts were sometimes the babies that went out with the bathwater. We're grateful for the effort, and it would be too difficult to PM you all, thus the general statement. This is not something we would normally do, but the thread was in extremis. We hope you will accept this as a blanket explanation, and that you understand.

And now back to your regularly scheduled thread about Rafa's wrist...

The only understanding I had was that off topic posts from this thread will be moved to
a different thread with more appropriate title.

In any case, deleting posts made by members arbitrarily is heavy handed.
You should realize that none of these posts violated any policies as you did not have any guidelines
at the time they were posted. This is against the basic principle that you cannot enact
a law today and use it to retroactively punish those who did not obey the law yesterday.
nono:nono

Also, I wanted to study these posts and in particular the assorted links in them carefully
as I did not have enough time to go through them at that time.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Those two are the questions that I have for forum administrators.

 

[britbox]

OK, I'm not sure what was deleted but I'm sure one of the other admins will be able to answer that question.

 

[Billie]

I feel for you BB, it is not easy to deal with people.

I think the problem lies in having too many strong personalities supporting one player that clash with equally stubborn fans of another. We know who those players are. Fans of other players don't matter

 

[GameSetAndMath]

You're probably right in the application of a double standard if you look at the off-topic boards but they haven't generated anything like the number of complaints that this subject has attracted. If they did then I guess they would get looked at too.

This explanation worries me even more. So, essentially you are admitting that these
new guidelines are not based on the principle of not allowing slanderous posts, but is
due to the fact that a large number of complaints were made.

Suppose someone posts a message that Player X played terrible today. Assuming
that most of the members this forum are fans of X and they feel offended by the remark
and complain, will there be a ruling that form now you cannot post messages that
reflect on X's play poorly.

The policies should be based on principles or quality of complaints and not merely
based on number of complaints.

Who said they weren't quality complaints? Some of the complaints were well reasoned and not all were made in public.

If you're prepared to use your real name and make unsubstantiated claims specifically directed toward a player and call them out as a doper - fine, I'll explain how you can set up a free site on wordpress.com which will allow you to do it and you'll also be able to carry the can if someone decides to take legal proceedings against you.

I don't agree with your second paragraph - it's been made clear that it was doping related. Calling someone out publically for being a cheat carries more responsibility than discussing how well somebody is playing.

And yes, there probably is a double standard in the Off Topic forum where there is greater flexibility on sensitive issues - but it's not a free for all either - there has been the odd thread in there that got out of control and ended up being moderated.

Principles of quality as you suggested at the end of your post DO come into it. There were back and forth accusations of trolling, racism, being anti-some player or another, bringing in other players names in retaliation etc.... Hardly up there in the quality department.

The bottom line is that it's been asked that posters do not to name specific players as doping cheats via speculation. It's a serious charge in the scheme of the sport. Other than that, I don't think anything else has changed.

1. I am aware of wordpress.com and know how to use it. Thanks for the offer though.
As you know, I am not even a blogger on regular tennis topics in TF itself. I am primarily
a poster indulging in conversations with fellow posters.

2. Having said that, I am not particularly interested in making cat calls from darkness
even in my conversations. I am willing to engage in the conversations with my
real name, if everyone else is also willing to do so.

3. Actually, even if the members are not using their real names, If they think that
their identity would be impossible or difficult to find, they are fooling themselves.
It would be very easy to connect their login name with their email address which
they provided to you at the time of registration. From their it won't be too difficult
for the authorities to get hold of the actual person.

4. I understand that you and other administrators are probably worried about a
libel suit; perhaps another member even threatened one. While I am not an
expert in law, I think it is fairly straightforward reasoning that TF administrators
cannot be held responsible for the views expressed by the posters. Perhaps,
you folks can consult a lawyer on this to get preliminary opinion which often
does not even involve cost.

Anyway I am very confused at this time and am really beginning to lose faith in
the forum. Will free expression of ideas be allowed? Will posts not be deleted in a
heavy handed manner? Will fans of one player be allowed to dominate over
fans of other player?

 

[britbox]

You're probably right in the application of a double standard if you look at the off-topic boards but they haven't generated anything like the number of complaints that this subject has attracted. If they did then I guess they would get looked at too.

This explanation worries me even more. So, essentially you are admitting that these
new guidelines are not based on the principle of not allowing slanderous posts, but is
due to the fact that a large number of complaints were made.

Suppose someone posts a message that Player X played terrible today. Assuming
that most of the members this forum are fans of X and they feel offended by the remark
and complain, will there be a ruling that form now you cannot post messages that
reflect on X's play poorly.

The policies should be based on principles or quality of complaints and not merely
based on number of complaints.

Who said they weren't quality complaints? Some of the complaints were well reasoned and not all were made in public.

If you're prepared to use your real name and make unsubstantiated claims specifically directed toward a player and call them out as a doper - fine, I'll explain how you can set up a free site on wordpress.com which will allow you to do it and you'll also be able to carry the can if someone decides to take legal proceedings against you.

I don't agree with your second paragraph - it's been made clear that it was doping related. Calling someone out publically for being a cheat carries more responsibility than discussing how well somebody is playing.

And yes, there probably is a double standard in the Off Topic forum where there is greater flexibility on sensitive issues - but it's not a free for all either - there has been the odd thread in there that got out of control and ended up being moderated.

Principles of quality as you suggested at the end of your post DO come into it. There were back and forth accusations of trolling, racism, being anti-some player or another, bringing in other players names in retaliation etc.... Hardly up there in the quality department.

The bottom line is that it's been asked that posters do not to name specific players as doping cheats via speculation. It's a serious charge in the scheme of the sport. Other than that, I don't think anything else has changed.

1. I am aware of wordpress.com and know how to use it. Thanks for the offer though.
As you know, I am not even a blogger on regular tennis topics in TF itself. I am primarily
a poster indulging in conversations with fellow posters.

2. Having said that, I am not particularly interested in making cat calls from darkness
even in my conversations. I am willing to engage in the conversations with my
real name, if everyone else is also willing to do so.

3. Actually, even if the members are not using their real names, If they think that
their identity would be impossible or difficult to find, they are fooling themselves.
It would be very easy to connect their login name with their email address which
they provided to you at the time of registration. From their it won't be too difficult
for the authorities to get hold of the actual person.

4. I understand that you and other administrators are probably worried about a
libel suit; perhaps another member even threatened one. While I am not an
expert in law, I think it is fairly straightforward reasoning that TF administrators
cannot be held responsible for the views expressed by the posters. Perhaps,
you folks can consult a lawyer on this to get preliminary opinion which often
does not even involve cost.

Anyway I am very confused at this time and am really beginning to lose faith in
the forum. Will free expression of ideas be allowed? Will posts not be deleted in a
heavy handed manner? Will fans of one player be allowed to dominate over
fans of other player?

Other than asking posters not to call out specific players for being drug cheats do you think moderation is heavy? I think it's fair to say that there is very little at all and long may that continue.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

britbox could you please delete the lasts few poasts in the biological passport thread..:huh:

despite me asking gsm and luxborg to stop spamming the thread they have continued..and maybe open a childrens playpen with fluffy animals in so they can play.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

britbox could you please delete the lasts few poasts in the biological passport thread..:huh:

despite me asking gsm and luxborg to stop spamming the thread they have continued..and maybe open a childrens playpen with fluffy animals in so they can play.

Mr. Grownup Adult, my non-related posts in the biological passport forum were
seeking explanations from the administrators regarding guidelines that were formed.
It was your thread that was blocked and it was your thread in which the guidelines
were posted. So, it is quite logical to post a message seeking clarifications on
those in your thread.

Once an alternate spot to post such messages were suggested by britbox,
I moved my questions over here. However, it was LB who posted non-related
messages there after knowing the availability of alternate place. I was trying
to direct him over here, but should have known better.

 

[Billie]

and maybe open a childrens playpen with fluffy animals in so they can play.

:laydownlaughing :lolz:

 

[mrzz]

GameSetAndMath, I sympathize a lot with most of your opinions about this topic, but I fully understand the moderator's position.

I understand that someone can honestly believe that player X is doping, and that she could use this opinion/conclusion in a given argument "honestly". In a world of civilized people, that could be the rule.

Unfortunately, it is an empirical fact that if you let the door open for this kind of argument, people would use it in a multitude of ways, most of them hardly "honest" (as others pointed out). What I think that should be explicit is that, yes, the forum comunity is *presumed guilty*, and therefore it looses its right to express its genuine opinions on the subject. In the end, it works as players are presumed innocent (of doping) and posters presumed guilty (of being idiots). Sounds hard, but that is exactly what I would do in their place.

Even if you think that they might be "protecting" player Y or Z, in the end they are just beeing practical. They are presuming that opening this door would end in an ugly way, even if it is not a law suit. Loosing good and reasonable posters because of irrational claims is close to disaster to a forum. This forum has a lot of good and reasonable posters to care about, so they are looking for them.

Such decisions are made over double standards? Sure, they *must* be.

So, the only thing I would do differently, if I was on their position (and I am happy I am not), is that I would not try to put is as matter of principles (something that you criticised pretty well). I would right away say something like, "look, this simply won't work, ok? Let's change the subject".

Anyway, I still think that you'll have plenty of freedom around here. You fought for it, so you deserve it. But remember Hegel: "freedom is the recognition of necessity".

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I feel for you BB, it is not easy to deal with people.

I think the problem lies in having too many strong personalities supporting one player that clash with equally stubborn fans of another. We know who those players are. Fans of other players don't matter

You may be right Billie. Last year, just before USO, there was discussion of some eggs
and it did not generate this much heat or necessitate a change in policies, even though
everyone had something to say about it.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

do what you want then zfgjl;rfd9okvlj ngk,jrmgvo,b miuvfffffffntjmfudoi bn,x.k./x',c bk mdgficbnjvfiofcbv dc gkihjemk ,lgjem09mighm,,0xlfhj,m\hnvm,cdljn mi, b njh, dsúígofjkre98dvymkckhv dhjc ,jic kvnfdijvgjvj

 

[Moxie]

Suppose someone posts a message that Player X played terrible today. Assuming
that most of the members this forum are fans of X and they feel offended by the remark
and complain, will there be a ruling that form now you cannot post messages that
reflect on X's play poorly.

The policies should be based on principles or quality of complaints and not merely
based on number of complaints.

This is actually a situation we've faced in the WTA forum. Some members have complained that others make comments about the quality of play of a player, or rather insult them based on their looks, behavior, etc., which we have told them is allowed, as they are public figures. Here is an example: you are allowed to call a particular player a clown, or a moron, or demean their play. They are public figures, and how they play is what we discuss here, sometimes rudely, and this is not subject to majority rule opinion.

However, we (now) have stated a policy about impugning their integrity vis-a-vis drugs. This is not based on a majority opinion, but a policy we have always held and discussed internally, but have not felt the need to express or enforce until now. Up until recently, members have held up their own end, in terms of integrity of conversation.

You seem to keep asking where the boundaries are. (The deleted post you were asking about was the last in a series of a variation on the same question.) I would refer you to the policy that we have delineated, once again, and to this post from britbox (post #54):

http://www.tennisfrontier.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=2815&page=3

I highlight this point from britbox:

The consensus was not to allow direct accusations of players based on conjecture. That doesn't mean the mechanics of doping can't be discussed, court cases can't be discussed, doping doctors can't be discussed, drugs can't be discussed, rulings can't be discussed, players who have failed tests can't be discussed ..etc - They all can. (and again, speaking for myself, I believe doping is more widespread than a lot of other people who post on the boards).

Basically, be smart - don't accuse specific players of doping where there isn't any sort of evidence other than conjecture or joining the dots backwards.


You've asked about parameters in more than a few ways. And I think we've addressed them. Hopefully, there is no longer any confusion about boundaries.

 

[tented]

I feel for you BB, it is not easy to deal with people.

I think the problem lies in having too many strong personalities supporting one player that clash with equally stubborn fans of another. We know who those players are. Fans of other players don't matter

You may be right Billie. Last year, just before USO, there was discussion of some eggs
and it did not generate this much heat or necessitate a change in policies, even though
everyone had something to say about it.

I found a few threads, with a few posts, written by posters who could be counted on one hand discussing the egg. Hardly "much heat" and not even close to "everyone had something to say." Hyperbole doesn't help what is already a delicate discussion.

More importantly, however, the egg has never been, nor is it now, illegal. Furthermore, we know he did, in fact, use it, so it's not speculating to state: "Novak must have been using that egg thing." We know he did, and we know it wasn't illegal.

There is a world of difference between that, and making accusations that a player is, indeed, doing something which is illegal.

 

[Billie]

I feel for you BB, it is not easy to deal with people.

I think the problem lies in having too many strong personalities supporting one player that clash with equally stubborn fans of another. We know who those players are. Fans of other players don't matter

You may be right Billie. Last year, just before USO, there was discussion of some eggs
and it did not generate this much heat or necessitate a change in policies, even though
everyone had something to say about it.

It is hard to maintain the integrity when admins are just fans of players. So it is normal that you see them protecting one fan base and not do the same for the others. In their mind they might think they act fairly towards everybody but it is impossible to do. I've known some of the members since 2010 and I've seen all kinds of things, even the dissing and making fun of Nole fans just because we were happy that our guy was winning and proving a lot of them wrong. His family, his religion, where he lives, his fans were ridiculed a lot in past because "he is a public person" and everything is open to discussion. We just have to accept that this is their board and they make the rules and that's it. Just like anything in life. You work under the rules of your employer, you live under the rule of your government....I know it is a little bit simplistic but that is the basis for everything.

I try to enjoy and converse with people that I feel I can, I also try not to reply to provocations from some posters. In the end we are all here voluntarily and should work towards trying to engage in civil conversations.