|
Don't forget there's a sneaky PL game on tonight. Man city v West Ham. Can't say I'm bothered by this game or the other two Champion's League fixtures today and City should win comfortably, but the City game might be worth watching to see if the West Ham fans are chanting anything about their ban haha. I'm sure there'll be some boos or 'cheat' chanting. The Leicester/City game on the weekend could be a big one. Definitely one I'll be watching.
|
|
|
|
Yeah, momentum is never taken into consideration either. A similar thing happened for Real Madrid a while back. I can't remember what game it was but a player struggled to stop and clashed into Marcelo and knocked him over and the goal that was scored after was disallowed because of it. It was ridiculous.
I think you are talking about the champions league game between Real Madrid and PSG. Although it wasn't a goal but red card to Courtois and penalty to PSG. But later on VAR ruled out the card and penalty and Real got free-kick due to Gueye foul on Marcelo in build-up near half-way line. Yeah, that was it. I was flabbergasted by that, especially when I didn't think it was a foul and any rational person can see what happened. I can't wait for the time a player punches someone in the face but VAR finds a foul earlier in the build up and then has no option but to rescind the card  and the player gets away with a free punch. I mean, it's not a foul right if VAR says otherwise  ? It really annoys me when they pull things back like that. Unless UEFA can invent a time machine play should stop whilst they make the decision. Or just not bother with it if the ref hasn't called it. |
|
|
|
Forgot about this pool and forgot I'm actually in 5th spot here WOW myself!
Feels like forever since this pool, but cryptofrka I'm like you I think. Fancy myself more knowledgeable in English top division but sitting at shitty 21 in THAT pool. Well it's obviously much more difficult to predict because these teams don't play each other twice a season and often teams have to go against different styles of play that the European leagues have. Travelling to different countries makes the away games even more difficult than usual as well I think. Maybe even climate plays a part. England is sure a lot colder than Spain especially right now . If Klopp plays like Klopp, he's going to again rest Bobby or Mane, in favour of Origi or Minamino or Ox, but I'm really hoping he just goes for the full-strength squad. I'm hoping there are NO draws tonight but it's the first leg so logic dictates safe play esp for the away teams. I do like my away goals though... I think he would be unwise to play anything other than their full strength team and I can't see him resting players. I don't think this game will be easy for them. A draw is likely what I'm going for unless they do put out a weakened team. Edit: Line-ups: Atletico Madrid Starting XI: Oblak, Vrsaljko, Savic, Felipe, Lodi, Koke, Thomas, Saúl, Lemar, Correa, Morata Liverpool Starting XI: Alisson, Alexander-Arnold, Gomez, Van Dijk, Robertson, Fabinho, Henderson, Wijnaldum, Mane, Salah, Firmino I had 1-1 in but 1-2 is looking tempting or maybe even a 1-0 Liverpool win now. Liverpool seem to have their full strength team out and Atheltico are without Costa, though he is on the bench. Liverpool are by far the better team and Madrid haven't been playing great, but as above away in Europe is a big factor. |
|
|
|
Don't forget the Chipmixer Broke Bums Merit Mafia. Only the best worse sig spamming gangsters are invited to join and they are deeply involved in both the laundering of merit and acquiring trust via numerous nefarious ways and all just to be able to bribe themselves onto a spot on one of the highly lucrative campaigns, specifically Chipmixer. Perhaps Cryptohunter's schizoid split-personalty alt accounts "friends" could also be considered as a gang? Cult of Lauda - probably the biggest gang of the forum Supreme Leader: Lauda, also known as The Cat Members: hilariousandco Ex Member. He's not on my trust list any more. I'm now a lone wolf. |
|
|
|
I watched the game. The kick incident was 50/50 to me. At first from the angle shown it didn't look like he did much and maybe he just kept his leg up to avoid a clash, but then from the replays he did extend his leg as if to give a light kick. I've seen players sent off for things like that but it was very light. I'm not sure it was a sending off offence but I suppose you could make the argument that it was technically violent conduct. One thing people were complaining about though was the ref didn't even review via VAR.
It's a real shame about the two disallowed goals. VAR strikes again with someone being an inch offside. I thought the disallowed goal for the push was harsh too. He went down real easy.
1st, Maguire case. I saw the post match interview and he was asked about this. According to him it was just the natural reflection. If we remember the red card for Son few weeks ago then we will see there was very similar situation but Son was shown red card for that. Well of course he's going to say that. He's not going to admit to violent conduct and suggest he should have been sent off . The Son situation is very similar but a bit different. He blatantly kicked out at someone in frustration. Son's was worse and more clear cut in m,y opinion. 2nd, the disallowed first goal. The Chelsea player was in the middle of two Utd defenders (if I am right about it). He was pushed from behind and from natural reflection his hand stopped on the back of the player in front of him. I think referee did not take that in consideration.
Yeah, momentum is never taken into consideration either. A similar thing happened for Real Madrid a while back. I can't remember what game it was but a player struggled to stop and clashed into Marcelo and knocked him over and the goal that was scored after was disallowed because of it. It was ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Chelsea fans are crying over the fact that Maguire kicked Batshuayi in the balls yet he wasn't sent off...Did he deserve a red card? Bear in mind that Maguire scored the 2-0
I watched the game. The kick incident was 50/50 to me. At first from the angle shown it didn't look like he did much and maybe he just kept his leg up to avoid a clash, but then from the replays he did extend his leg as if to give a light kick. I've seen players sent off for things like that but it was very light. I'm not sure it was a sending off offence but I suppose you could make the argument that it was technically violent conduct. One thing people were complaining about though was the ref didn't even review via VAR. It's a real shame about the two disallowed goals. VAR strikes again with someone being an inch offside. I thought the disallowed goal for the push was harsh too. He went down real easy. |
|
|
|
Hi,
I understand where your concern is coming from.
But I can assure you, and prove that our project is not another ponzi scheme or other scam.
I can prove our results, show trades, screenshots and even plug you in for free so you can assert of its authenticity.
I can also connect a Deribit Test account if you'd like to make one.
Thanks
But we've heard this all before. I'd suggest you remove any mention of specific profit levels and just advertise it as a trading bot if you're serious about it being legit. If what you were saying is true you really wouldn't need to sell it because you could just reinvest your own money time and time again and profit infinitely until you have all the money in the world. |
|
|
|
...If you believe a post has been removed incorrectly or they're being removed often without reason and suspect a mod is abusing his power or attacking a person then create a thread about it or contact theymos. If mods were abusing their power and repeatedly removing posts for incorrect reasons it would be instantly apparent...
So, there is no other way and I would have to open a new special thread to know why my posts were deleted? I don't know if mod in the mining section is abusing his power or even if it was a moderator from this board who deleted my posts and that is the biggest problem. It is clear that somebody removes posts from this section and many times is very hard or even impossible to find a reason for this, additionally, it happens frequently as other members stated in this thread. The mining board looks pretty bad in terms of discussion frequency, new posts, and threads, so such behavior is at least strange in my opinion. Not unless you ask a mod. If you're confused just said a friendly PM to the sub board mods to see if they can shed some light on it. If you're repeatedly having posts removed that you don't believe should have been then either contact an admin/Global or create thread in Meta with an argument as to why you believe they were removed in error. You can PM as well and I can search the report queue to see if there's any handled reports but if another mod has just removed the post of his own volition then I wouldn't be able to tell. As I've said before, I think the best solution would be for theymos to implement a system where we can choose a reason from a drop down menu and/or give comment in an additional field and that would solve a lot of problems. Sometimes users might make a relevant and on topic post but if it's for instance in a thread that has been necrobumped then all new posts are liable to be removed and this has annoyed a lot of people in the past because they just see their relevant and constructive post get deleted. |
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure what he's trying to say but I don't think those are threats and especially not death threats, probably just bad English. The use of 'unconscious' here I think he's just meaning something like shock instead. Maybe it's similar to saying something like if you knew my age you would be shocked.
As others have said, I would try to move on unless any other direct threats are made.
|
|
|
|
You can move it back yourself at the bottom left if you believe it's been moved there in error, but you should clarify exactly what the bot does or what this actually is. sketchy (scammy) HYIP/Ponzi Sounds about right to me. Promising 48.7% ROI makes it a scammy HYIP. Maybe he should reword it because I'm not sure if this a HYIP or he's just exaggerating the returns to be expected, but clearly specific returns can't be guaranteed with a bot. |
|
|
|
What about this Parlay as these all are in good and can destroy opponents Liverpool PSG Atlanta and Spurs odds are good enough @20.5 these are demanding for small amount.
I doubt that you can win such parlay, these games are too tricky. Liverpool are favorites, but they will plsy away, so I'm not 100% sure about their win. P$G playing amazing in Ligue 1, but it doesn't mean much IMO, simply there isn't any team who can compete against them. And Borussia very rarely lose at home. And finally, Leipzig - Spurs pair is hardly predictable, there isn't clear favorite there. Yeah. I think Liverpool are the better team but away in Europe is a different matter. Personally I think it'll be close and will probably go for the draw. That will be the game to watch though. I think Borussia Dortmund will win at home, but again it will be close and maybe only one goal in it. I'll probably go for all home wins with Atlanta and Spurs on the Wednesday games though. Next weeks games are more interesting to me. Chelsea v Bayern and Madrid vs Man City. Both got draws in provisionally but I'll see how Chelsea do against United tonight as a Bayern win might be more likely. |
|
|
|
Norwich 0-1 LFC
Really ugly game, the storm (wind & rain) didn’t help to make it an attractive game. Norwich defended with 11 men behind the ball & rarely even tried to attack so it was a frustrating game, not much room to work with.
We did what we always do though & found a way to win, Sadio Mane wow, what a player.
I said they could struggle against Norwich. I wonder how long they can go scraping these wins? Annoyed at the Villa/Spurs result. Would have grabbed points for the draw if not for the last minute goal. Chelsea/Man United game tonight. Don't know whether to go for the home win or draw. I'll probably wait for the line-ups before I commit. Chelsea should beat this current United squad but I don't have that much faith in them. |
|
|
|
Did anyone else see Wolverhampton's goal which was disallowed by another controversial VAR call ? Goal or not ?
I watched the game. Pisstake. I'm still not entirely sure if it was offside. It never should have been an offside call imo, Let's analyze this way, the corner was played short to Jota(which definitely according to the rules can't be offside right ? And it was played back to who ever took the corner (he was clearly onside too, as shown in the screenshots below), He crossed the ball into the box (then Jota was totally eliminated from the play, he has no influence whatsoever on the play) How was that ever even a call to be reviewed to begin with ? There was absolutely no protest from any Leceister player, not even the staffs. For those looking to make a call you can find the highlight in the link below, It's a 7 minutes video but you can start from 3:57 to see goal in question. https://highlightsfootball.net/video/wolverhampton-vs-leicester-city-highlights/Well that's what I was thinking and other people were saying that was the case, but the commentators or pundits after the game didn't bring that up, and how would all the officials get that wrong? Must have been something else going on surely to allow it? Regardless, this is another example of VAR going out of their way and looking for something. Not a single player Leicester player complained. Things should only be reviewed at request of the team or manager. |
|
|
|
Did anyone else see Wolverhampton's goal which was disallowed by another controversial VAR call ? Goal or not ?
I watched the game. Pisstake:  I'm still not entirely sure if it was offside. Just heard about this and wrote a post with couple more links in it, this will hurt city badly but they still have right to appeal. If punishment stays like this it will set City back for a long time. They'll appeal and likely win. Punishment does seem quite harsh, but at the same time there really does need to be some ramification for breaking these sorts of rules otherwise clubs will just break them continually and eat the fines. If they don't manage to appeal successfully I wonder how this will effect the big players with no Champion's League football? A lot of them could leave. |
|
|
|
I don't think sending them the entire list of rules is really that helpful, you could maybe point them to it at the top of the screen (like until they become a JR member, there's an additional banner that says "please read the rules" or something like that). I don't think they should be blitzed with the entire list there and then, but they should be linked to at least. What I previously suggested was they get a brief welcome message with a few of the most important rules with a link to the full ones and also a few links to helpful guides and so on. Since I don't want to start another topic I will ask this in here, if I may. I have read the forum unofficial rules, guidelines as you called them and I saw (understood) that ref links are allowed, but not spamming them. I had one post with a ref link and a quote of it. Is this considered spam? I am asking because I had them deleted. Thanks! Ref links aren't allowed. You can have them in your signature but posting them on the forum they will be removed 99% of the time. The only exception they're sometimes allowed for is if the thread is of substantial value. |
|
|
|
Do mods actually have the power to deprive the user of the usual notification by PM?
Yes. ON another SMF forum there is a post:  As a global moderator I click delete and get this dialogue box:  I click ok, and the message is gone. No advice to the user.
Which is why I know the moderators are making bold face lies about what they can and can't do here. It only takes minutes to set up an SMF forum on a website (and it's free!) - give it a go and see what you can and can't do Vs what you are told can and can't be done on an SMF based forum. So where exactly is the deprive this user of notification box or button? The only person that is lying here is you. You're spreading misinformation about something you know nothing about. Again, you really don't know how this forum works. Stop being paranoid and stop spreading false information. Do you really think I'm going to publicly post a 'bold faced lie' when theymos or any other mod could contradict me or prove otherwise? To reiterate a fact: staff here cannot choose to deprive a user of a notification of a deleted post. Whether you can on any other version of the software or on any other fourms is irrelevant. |
|
|
|
Well this is something I and others have suggested in the past as many users are just not aware of the rules and when they do have posts removed they have no idea what for or have to work it out for themselves, but along with this a better option would be to allow staff to give a reason why a specific post was removed to avoid confusion and that has also been recently discussed. I'm not sure why theymos doesn't include the link to the rules with the PM, but he has said in the past he's not a fan of strict rules and they are 'unofficial' after all, so maybe that's why, but we obviously do have some rules here and I do think people should be made aware of them. I also think they should be shown/linked to when users sign up which would help a lot. 1. Sometimes a post was deleted by the topic owner in a self-moderated topic and there's a chance the user didn't do anything wrong, just the topic owner didn't like the post (to say it nice).
Maybe there's a different PM for this or some sort of differentiation and then it's not the subject of this topic.
If it was removed by a user they get a different message and that probably doesn't need to include the link to the rules. I think it should be made more clear or bolded when a user deleted the post though as its not uncommon for users to mistake it for a mod action. |
|
|
|
Well you can make that argument if you want but it's not a fact that someone is a weak child just for self-modding. Sure, it's not great for an open debate and doesn't look good as they should be able to debate you openly but maybe they just don't want to get involved or are tired with certain people and they are free to do that just like you are free to call them weak or childish. If someone on the street challenges me to a fist fight for whatever reasons and I decline and walk away it doesn't necessarily mean I am weak or scared or can't beat them; maybe I just don't want to get involved with such shenanigans or pettiness and avoid that situation. If the other person wants to call me a weak child then they can do so but that would just be their opinion which may or may not be correct. Please reread what I said, you seem to be conflating separate comments. No one is forcing anyone to engage in the Politics & Society subforum, everyone is free to have as much or as little participation in that section as they like. The preservation of this platform as one of the very few remaining outlets for free speech very much outweighs the petty annoyances you describe. Well ok. Yes, you are free to make the argument that self-modding makes people scared little children that need a safe space and also free to shame them for it, but as I said, I don't think just because someone self-mods a thread makes them so for the reasons I've already stated. Does locking and re-opening threads in Meta make you a scared little child or weak? I wouldn't say so, but others may make that argument, but to me it just looks like you're tired of certain people chiming in and maybe that's what's happening with people who self-mod threads in P&S. So yes, ideally people should be able to openly debate without feeling the need to potentially censor anyone and it doesn't look good for them when they do, but either ignoring discussion or self-modding threads doesn't inherently mean they are weak or can't make a valid or strong argument, but I would take it on a case by case basis. EDIT: FYI- this was posted in Politics & Society originally. Considering it is addressing not only the forum subsection but the nature of free speech itself, I don't see why it was moved to Meta, but the local moderator there enjoys interfering with my activities there as much as he is able to. As usual, any chance he gets to act upon my posts are taken advantage of immediately while almost all the reports I make there go ignored.
Just seen this edit. It was me who moved it here based on a report. Any discussion about specific boards or features of the forum do belong in Meta, but I can see how you can make an argument it belongs there. I would say it's not merely addressing free speech though, but free speech within a specific subboard and the confines of forum features hence why it belongs in Meta. |
|
|
|
Regarding abuse of the reporting system, perhaps some kind of compromise can be reached. Some users use reports as a method of interfering with, silencing, and getting retribution upon other users. Of course this makes moderator complicity indistinguishable from them simply doing their job, and it is unreasonable to expect them to keep up with every petty dispute.
My suggestion for a potential mitigation of this problem, is to create a system that notifies the moderator if a single user is reporting a very large amount of posts for a single user. The idea being, that if a user is targeting another user by spamming reports, those reports would start being highlighted from a yellow, to orange, to red scale, making identification of users reporting large amounts of posts from a single user easily identifiable. This at the very least will allow moderators to quickly identify potential abuse of the reporting system and take that into account as part of their judgement call in taking action against a reported post.
I think this would, assuming that in fact there is no moderator complicity in these actions, help them to recognize this kind of abuse, and prevent it, as well as help assuage any accusations of complicity while still maintaining opacity regarding individual moderator actions to the general forum public. Of course I have no idea how difficult this would be to implement, so I have no way of knowing if this would be worth the time to create such a system, but if it is not exceptionally difficult I think it might be a valuable addition for all involved.
Sounds complex and maybe it would help, but it usually quickly becomes apparent which users have issues with each other as you'll see the same names popping up in the queue. For instance, I tend to avoid reports from certain users or against certain people and especially when they have your name in them or when they're from users who are known to have issues with you. Oftentimes the reports might be accurate or technically against the rules - off topic etc - but it's usually not you who started the subject going off topic and I'm not going to go through all the posts just to try find where things went sour. Of course, another mod may see the report and then act on it and just remove your posts and I can see why that would leave you feeling like there's biases going on. Personally, I don't find slight deviations in topics that much of a big deal as that's naturally going to happen but when entire threads are derailed and overtaken by personal beefs that's when things become a problem. |
|
|
|
Self-modded threads aren't great for a true and honest open debate and it might be antithetical to the very concept of free speech but at the same time people are also free to self-moderate their threads whether we like it or not. If you don't like that they've self-modded then you are free to create your own thread to discuss or reply to the posts in there and they can choose whether to respond or not. I would look at their thread as their own property and they can do what they want with it whether you like it or not, much like you are well within your rights to kick someone out of your house if you don't like what they say. I think we should encourage users not to self-mod political threads but at the same time people are free to do so and everyone else is free to either not comment, comment or create their own threads in response.
All you are doing is telling me a matter of fact, not arguing a principle. You aren't telling me anything I don't already know. They are free to be scared little children that need a safe space, and I am free to shame them for it. Well you can make that argument if you want but it's not a fact that someone is a weak child just for self-modding. Sure, it's not great for an open debate and doesn't look good as they should be able to debate you openly but maybe they just don't want to get involved or are tired with certain people and they are free to do that just like you are free to call them weak or childish. If someone on the street challenges me to a fist fight for whatever reasons and I decline and walk away it doesn't necessarily mean I am weak or scared or can't beat them; maybe I just don't want to get involved with such shenanigans or pettiness and avoid that situation. If the other person wants to call me a weak child then they can do so but that would just be their opinion which may or may not be correct. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
