At least Richo wasn't happy....

[Bluthy]

There was also a very positive 80 mins of footy, where we were outstanding... But didn't come close to maintaining it.

Another 20 mins of pressure and hard running football and it might well have been out of Ports reach. Just 20 mins short of beating a probable finals side on their home deck. And with everyone (including Hinkley and Malthouse) saying we were underdone because of the missed NAB game. That's something to chew on. I think Richo is happier than you realise.

[BigMart]

I think he speaks honestly...

You believe what you want, not sure you know Allan... Or what he think, that's just your opinion.

I'll take his words in the Presser as pretty sincere, one thing I do know about AR
He doesn't play games, just speaks his mind, in a very measured way, at all times

[BackFromUSA]

Banter and/or fun... Simon is cracking down on both.

It won't be tolerated.

You have been warned.

Warning WAS issued because it was teasing, mocking and baiting a poster. Clear breach.

As others have pointed out, the purpose of this thread was clearly to bait other posters that bigmart considers to have loser mentality and perpetuate the myth of a culture of accepting mediocrity.

Was bluthy's post reported reported by anyone? Is the rule that a post has to be reported before you get involved?

Disagree completely!

The OP was about the topic of a coach not giving players easy outs with excuses .... yet accepting there are reasons.

Any coach / team manager or even business manager knows that if you give the team an "out" that permits failure THEN they will take it. A very valid point.

You (and maybe others) have read the opening post with your prior prejudices in place rather than on it's merit.

Without re-reading it, I do not recall anything in the OP that referenced other posters "accepting mediocrity" or having a "loser mentality" AT ALL.

Instead he made VALID points regarding mana management and the importance of raising expectations and standards and not giving team members an excuse.

Having said that ... I didn't re-read the OP before responding to this ... perhaps we should ALL re-read it.

On a final note - no it is NOT a rule that a post has to be reported before we egt involved - we can act on posts that we find in our own reading ... HOWEVER we cannot read every post and as it clearly explains in the rules ... if a reader / poster wants a post assessed for a breach then it is best to report it so it can be assessed - why ... because we cant read every post!

[Con Gorozidis]

No reflection on BigMart who made a valid OP but the certificate idea was funny and at least creative.
Better than just personal insults. Should be encouraged. I doubt BM was offended.

[BackFromUSA]

No reflection on BigMart who made a valid OP but the certificate idea was funny and at least creative.
Better than just personal insults. Should be encouraged. I doubt BM was offended.

I acknowledged that it was funny and creative HOWEVER it was a breach of rules. And as per BigMarts own posts here ... he was baited into an argumentative and inflamed response ... with every indication that he was offended.

His OP was VALID footy commentary.

The response was a clear breach - it teased, mocked and baited BigMart. I quoted the exact rule it breached.

What is the big deal of a warning? Only an issue if the poster is a repeat offender - either 3 warnings in a week or continues ongoing feuds endlessly.

[maverick]

Banter and/or fun... Simon is cracking down on both.

It won't be tolerated.

You have been warned.

Warning WAS issued because it was teasing, mocking and baiting a poster. Clear breach.

And yet monotonously start thread after thread about the same thing is not baiting...
Said before, said again one rule for one....

Show me where BigMart has started thread after thread on the actual CONTENT of the Opening Post? The content is about the game and the coaches reactions and the posters opinion on the matter. ZERO breach there. It is a genuine footy opinion on a footy topic on a footy board. There is one rule AND it is applied equally.

Negative replies in two separate posts, creating two new threads on a negative, couldn't reply in one of them??
It's called spamming

[dragit]

This thread was started straight after this post in another thread

Don't be too happy with a 5 goal loss.... Which it seems many are... That is the hallmark of mediocrity

Sole aim was to troll posters who were happy with aspects of our performance. If you can't see the baiting/trolling you should hand over the keys.

Fair enough that you can't read every post made on here, but save the punishments until someone actually reports something... Otherwise you are just too prone to your own opinions and biases. Dangerous territory.

A number of posters in this thread have admonished your self-instigated moderating here, please take it on board.

[8856brother]

Boys on the couch all agreed with Marto. Interesting.

[maverick]

This thread was started straight after this post in another thread

Don't be too happy with a 5 goal loss.... Which it seems many are... That is the hallmark of mediocrity

Sole aim was to troll posters who were happy with aspects of our performance. If you can't see the baiting/trolling you should hand over the keys.

Fair enough that you can't read every post made on here, but save the punishments until someone actually reports something... Otherwise you are just too prone to your own opinions and biases. Dangerous territory.

A number of posters in this thread have admonished your self-instigated moderating here, please take it on board.

+1

[BigMart]

It was not aimed at any one person directly, was it??

The general feel on here was we were very accepting of the loss... It was a general statement not having a personal go at anyone...My opinion is that there were disappointing aspects to the game.... With the many positives.

Was it that offensive what I posted?!

Maverick... Seriously man, give it a rest... I know that you get annoyed with my posting, but let it go...
To say I START thread after thread

I barely start a thread these days
About 5 in the last few weeks
2 or 3 on Sunday after the game

What I don't do is spend 3 paragraphs trying to mock or belittle another poster, dress it up as humour and get supported by others because it ain't a popular poster it was directed at...


To a man that works with teenagers, that behaviour sounds familiar... It's a behaviour that does not impress me ...

[saintspremiers]

I'm siding with dragit on this. BigMart does create threads to inflame and a funny but slightly baiting post should be treated lightly.

As I've said before, Marto likes to take on a plugger type role on this forum - albeit less aggressive and persistent. This should be encouraged as it gives this forum oxygen.

For the real serious/hard core footy chat there is Big Footy. Saintsational is for entertainment and footy talk - a nice combo of both works best here.

[BigMart]

Had my say on this

I didn't appreciate it... Still unsure how I baited anyone, making a pretty straight forward observation

No more comment...

I don't care who's with who, this is not a school yard where you pick your 'side to be on'

BTW
The new P66

That's offensive
I was on this forum 5 years or more before him...

[dragit]

Marto it doesn't need to be directed at a particular poster to be considered baiting/trolling...

You've made it clear that the intention of the thread was to raz up those you consider losers... it's a well warn path now.

I don't actually mind you starting trolling threads provided the responses in kind are also tolerated. You can't complain when people troll back...

[Jacks Back]

Banter and/or fun... Simon is cracking down on both.

It won't be tolerated.

You have been warned.

Warning WAS issued because it was teasing, mocking and baiting a poster. Clear breach.

You eliminate soft mockery and banter - you eliminate personality. Leave it alone unless reported. Then have a think anyway. This is a footy forum, banter and mockery are part and parcel. May as well have a forum populated by spambots.

And here they are:

Sorry, I thought you said fembots.

[BackFromUSA]

Marto it doesn't need to be directed at a particular poster to be considered baiting/trolling...

You've made it clear that the intention of the thread was to raz up those you consider losers... it's a well warn path now.

I don't actually mind you starting trolling threads provided the responses in kind are also tolerated. You can't complain when people troll back...

This is where you are wrong! He made NO SUCH THING CLEAR!

BigMart's opening post was a pure footy post. The rest of you made it into a debate about losers / mediocrety ... He didn't!

It wasn't a bait. It was commentary on what the coach said.

And this IS a footy forum.

He made a thread on a valid footy topic.

Debate it but don't mock, tease and bait.

[BackFromUSA]

Banter and/or fun... Simon is cracking down on both.

It won't be tolerated.

You have been warned.

Warning WAS issued because it was teasing, mocking and baiting a poster. Clear breach.

And yet monotonously start thread after thread about the same thing is not baiting...
Said before, said again one rule for one....

Show me where BigMart has started thread after thread on the actual CONTENT of the Opening Post? The content is about the game and the coaches reactions and the posters opinion on the matter. ZERO breach there. It is a genuine footy opinion on a footy topic on a footy board. There is one rule AND it is applied equally.

Negative replies in two separate posts, creating two new threads on a negative, couldn't reply in one of them??
It's called spamming

NOT accurate at all.

Started 3 threads.

This one about the coaches analysis and his opinion on it. Was actually POSITIVE.

A post about Hickey ... And admitting he was perhaps wrong!!! So a POSITIVE.

And a post after the match stating first up we did well but tried to analyse what went wrong AND FAIR ENOUGH! Some of that analysis is fair accurate and definitely things we need to fix up if we want to win. Only seems negative because we lost.

[dragit]

This is where you are wrong! He made NO SUCH THING CLEAR!

PLEASE STOP SHOUTING SIMON IT IS VERY RUDE.

I get the feeling you have never been wrong in your life, this thread follows directly after a post made about accepting mediocrity and how people here have a loser mentality, he even referenced that again in here... this is the context... and it is part of a long history.

If you won't consider context & intent then you shouldn't be issuing warnings until someone actually reports something, the citywest debacle is a bright red flag on your ability to read a situation... Here is another.

Bigmart baited and bluthy trolled him back, it's as simple as that.

[matrix]

I messaged a mate who was there and is a port member
Said it had been a great game, it was 3 qtr time and he was a bit worried

I said tbh experience and fitness should see you run it out even with one kess on the bench with whites sore shoulder
I thought it was onvious that it was going to happen
Fitter, more experienced and a home crowd to bring you home

We'll be ok
Its not the end of the world and tbh no of us thought we would take it up to them
Its really 15 to 20 mins of footy in the last that we lost

[maverick]

Banter and/or fun... Simon is cracking down on both.

It won't be tolerated.

You have been warned.

Warning WAS issued because it was teasing, mocking and baiting a poster. Clear breach.

And yet monotonously start thread after thread about the same thing is not baiting...
Said before, said again one rule for one....

Show me where BigMart has started thread after thread on the actual CONTENT of the Opening Post? The content is about the game and the coaches reactions and the posters opinion on the matter. ZERO breach there. It is a genuine footy opinion on a footy topic on a footy board. There is one rule AND it is applied equally.

Negative replies in two separate posts, creating two new threads on a negative, couldn't reply in one of them??
It's called spamming

NOT accurate at all.

Started 3 threads.

This one about the coaches analysis and his opinion on it. Was actually POSITIVE.

A post about Hickey ... And admitting he was perhaps wrong!!! So a POSITIVE.

And a post after the match stating first up we did well but tried to analyse what went wrong AND FAIR ENOUGH! Some of that analysis is fair accurate and definitely things we need to fix up if we want to win. Only seems negative because we lost.

There is no point debating with you, as dragit more eloquently states, you are unable to contextualise what is going on.
To call them positive threads is laughable, to post the same thing time after time is spam.
This thread was started to validate his opinion and deride others, nothing more.

[BigMart]

Was not going to reply in this thread anymore Dragit, but I simply must, due to the absolute inaccuracy.... Not sure why you are he'll bent on trying to win an argument to see me defeated, when really no one probably cares... Except my bias detractors who never see a positive thing I post, and take any criticism to the extreme, and get personal over it...

And really
Are you considering me, a supporter of StK for over 30 years, a member for over 20... Been on SS for over 15... And a person who loves StK as much as anyone on this forum... A troll?
I mean, seriously....

I simply made an observation... Correct or not... I'd love to know who, why and how I baited?

A trolling thread, really?... Sharing my opinion, as to the flavour of AR's press conference, which tended to agree with my viewpoint that we cannot be totally happy with a 6 goal loss.... Is that not a reasonable suggestion?!
But you also failed to mention the fact that I stated MOST of the game StK was tremendous!!!!

It's true people only hear what they wanna hear.

At least you agreed, the whole reason for Bluthy's post was baiting... That was clear

Three entire paragraphs to make a point of denigrating someone, in order to what???.... Publicly mocking someone to entertains the masses... Garner popularity, at someone's expense...

Truth be told, it didn't offend much at all, just don't like people who think it's ok to have a go at people because they think they will get away with it... I will always call out such behaviour, as I stand up for myself.

[matrix]

Bring back pluggs
He'll sort it out

[White Winmar]

No reflection on BigMart who made a valid OP but the certificate idea was funny and at least creative.
Better than just personal insults. Should be encouraged. I doubt BM was offended.

I must agree, Con. The mods have an impossible job. A bit like the coppers. You only notice them when they've done something wrong, or you think they've wronged you. Baiting, sarcasm, wit and humour are what makes a forum enjoyable and exciting. It's a fine line between pleasure and pain, though. A forum without controversy and "colourful" characters, is a bit like a curry without the chillies. Tastes alright, fills you up, but isn't fully satisfying because it's missing something. Too much chilli, however, and it's ruined. I think the reporting method strikes a good balance. If you are offended by a post, report it and let the mods deal with it. If not, let's all get on with more important things. We all seem smart enough and mature enough to regulate ourselves, for the main part. It's a footy forum, not the Houses of Parliament. Now f$ck off all of you idiots that don't agree with me. And delist Geary and Gilbert. Raph Clarke as well.

[BigMart]

What was the point of the 'certificate' idea?

Who was it funny for?

And yes, Con
I wasn't too offended, just decided to make a point. I thought it was a big effort to make, in order to try and belittle me... Possibly inferiority? I don't why he could be bothered?...
Over people mis-representing my commentary due to bias though... And I loathe keyboard heroes.

[prwilkinson]

What was the point of the 'certificate' idea?

Who was it funny for?

And yes, Con
I wasn't too offended, just decided to make a point. I thought it was a big effort to make, in order to try and belittle me... Possibly inferiority? I don't why he could be bothered?...
Over people mis-representing my commentary due to bias though... And I loathe keyboard heroes.

Yeah, I thought it was a little bazaar. That's a lot of effort for a footy chat forum that's supposed to be a bit of fun.

[dragit]

No reflection on BigMart who made a valid OP but the certificate idea was funny and at least creative.
Better than just personal insults. Should be encouraged. I doubt BM was offended.

I must agree, Con. The mods have an impossible job. A bit like the coppers. You only notice them when they've done something wrong, or you think they've wronged you. Baiting, sarcasm, wit and humour are what makes a forum enjoyable and exciting. It's a fine line between pleasure and pain, though. A forum without controversy and "colourful" characters, is a bit like a curry without the chillies. Tastes alright, fills you up, but isn't fully satisfying because it's missing something. Too much chilli, however, and it's ruined. I think the reporting method strikes a good balance. If you are offended by a post, report it and let the mods deal with it. If not, let's all get on with more important things. We all seem smart enough and mature enough to regulate ourselves, for the main part. It's a footy forum, not the Houses of Parliament. Now f$ck off all of you idiots that don't agree with me. And delist Geary and Gilbert. Raph Clarke as well.

This is the point, Mart has said he wasn't offended... Hasn't reported the post, many others have found bluthy's post funny, but we have Simon making a captains call once again.

Yes marto you often post to incite a response, that's what trolling is... Many others including myself do it to... Let's not have a cry when you get the response you are inciting.

At least Richo wasn't happy... unlike all those losers on here.

That is exactly what this thread is about. Most people would recognise this.