Privacy settings

We use a number of cookies on our website. Some are essential, while others help us improve our portal for you.

Privacy settings

Here is an overview of all the cookies we use. You can choose to accept whole categories or view more information and select only certain cookies.

Essential (6)

Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the website to function properly.

Statistics (3)

Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us to understand how our visitors use our website.
If the statistics cookies are subsequently deselected, they will remain on the computer until the expiry date. However, they are neither updated nor evaluated.

Off topic & small talk: Chatterbox (Page 1290)

Topic created on 14th Jan. 2019 | Page: 1290 of 1309 | Answers: 13,086 | Views: 1,679,437
JJepsa96
Rookie
New forum moderators wanted:

- Verification required
- Monthly membership fee of 10,00€ due
- no participation in lotteries allowed

I would be very interested to know how many people would still be interested?

Then the whole "theater" would be dissolved in no time....

This post has been translated automatically

slotliebe89
Elite

Langhans_innen wrote on 09.09.2024 at 14:58:

I would never have thought that possible either. For us "auxiliary new moderators", there was no immediate reason to interfere at the moment when members complained about the procedure/selection etc. at the company management. At least I didn't see any, which was also intended to de-escalate the situation. The fact that the situation gradually got more and more out of hand is of course extremely regrettable, but it happened even though we stayed out of it. I'm no clairvoyant, but I suspect it would have gotten a lot rougher if we, as newcomers, had been involved. The start was supposed to be calm and peaceful for everyone and even if that wasn't necessarily to be expected, adding fuel to the fire probably wouldn't have been a good idea.

Probably the right decision, but it's still a shame that you have to keep your opinions to yourselves in situations such as the user ban.

This post has been translated automatically

Langhans_innen
Expert
slotliebe89 wrote on 09.09.2024 at 15:04:

Probably the right decision and still a pity that you then have to keep your opinion behind the mountain in situations such as user blocking.

There is no muzzle here. But I also don't think that I, as a private fan, would have interfered too much during the hot phase...I can't remember exactly who threw what at whom - there was just too much action for that. But at least I personally wasn't offended and I don't have to get involved in every explosive clique. But that's not new since last week and I'll keep it that way

This post has been translated automatically

Patizi
Elite

slotliebe89 wrote on 09.09.2024 at 15:04:

Probably the right decision and still a pity that you then have to keep your opinion behind the mountain in situations such as user blocking.

I think the thing with the mods is considered too big. They don't really have any additional functions and they're not allowed to make decisions on their own. I have the feeling that others just see it as incredibly big, bigger than the mods themselves. Why should a mod also comment on the topic yesterday? I agree with Hans, it would only have added more fuel to the fire. I think it's rather strong that the mods stayed out of it and didn't cause any more trouble. Maybe even a sign that it was the right thing to do regarding the mods

This post has been translated automatically

Falke
Expert

Patizi wrote on 09.09.2024 at 07:16:

"just locks"


You really didn't get it. What do you do if you admonish someone 10-20 times and even give them a temp. ban but they don't stop? I'll try to explain it to you even more clearly. Dear Falcon, someone spits in your face 10-20 times, do you just say "You, you, that's not ok" every time or do you act yourself at some point? No matter how well you know someone or how much you like them, if they spit in your face or hit you 10-20 times, you will react.

In this case, you spat in their face just like that, to use your own language. You made a very provocative post and then continued to provoke in the other thread. And a good moderator would have admonished both of them in this case or simply let them let off steam as long as no boundaries were crossed.


But now you are presenting yourself as an innocent lamb as if you had no part in the whole thing and, as someone else has already mentioned here, that comes across as very unsympathetic.

I have no problem at all with the fact that you counter them and that you're happy to do so a little more harshly. But the fact that you're screaming for consequences and inciting Julian to ban them is more than just borderline. So you played your part in escalating the situation. And then you even added to it after the ban. I much prefer Blubbo, with whom I've often clashed myself.

So your behavior was absolutely out of line and certainly not in the spirit of a good community. But you won't be banned. Can you tell the difference? You can continue to spout off and even attack the defenceless after the fact. You called for a ban and your wish was granted. Does that make you a happier person now?

This post has been translated automatically

Stromberg
Legend

Patizi wrote on 09.09.2024 at 16:15:

I think the thing with the mods is considered too big. They hardly have any additional functions and they can't make any big decisions on their own. I have the feeling that others just see it as incredibly big, bigger than the mods themselves. Why should a mod also comment on the topic yesterday? I agree with Hans, it would only have added more fuel to the fire. I think it's rather strong that the mods stayed out of it and didn't cause any more trouble. Maybe even a sign that it was the right thing to do regarding the mods

Yes, far too big... 😄It doesn't really matter. It's good to express your concerns about it once, if you have any. You might also bring up points that others might not have had on their radar.


It's kind of absurd that something like this is coming out now.

This post has been translated automatically

Donnie
Expert
You could have simply ignored the two now banned. Like a child who is crying and screaming, but would have cried himself out at some point and calmed down again. Blubbo is very special, almost everyone has clashed with him. I once called him an "official snob" and was given a warning, so I just kept my mouth shut

I don't even want to know how many times Julian or Andre have wanted to throw me off the cliff, i.e. wanted to ban me. I think it's stupid that they've been banned now, even if it was partly justified. Just ignore the guys and the problem would have gone away by itself

This post has been translated automatically

frapi07
Elite
Donnie wrote on 09.09.2024 at 17:28: You could have simply ignored the two now banned. Like a child who is crying and screaming, but would have cried himself out at some point and is quiet again. Blubbo is very special, almost everyone has clashed with him. I once called him an "official snob" and was given a warning, so I just kept my mouth shut

I don't even want to know how many times Julian or Andre have wanted to throw me off the cliff, i.e. wanted to ban me. I think it's stupid that they've been banned now, even if it was partly justified. Just ignore the guys and the problem would have disappeared by itself

If two or even three people go off on you, then it's more difficult to ignore the whole thing. But that doesn't really matter. Patizi has explained it several times: the ban is the result of years of provocation directed at various users. He is not to blame for this, but the two themselves are responsible for their bans, because they behaved in this way. They were not forced to always provoke. Patizi has also always given in. Even yesterday he had his post deleted with Julian's consent. The two were not so cooperative yesterday. As Julian himself writes, one ignored him coldly and the other danced around on his nose (wrote to him privately to stop the provocations, but then continued straight away). As a mod, you can't skillfully ignore something like that - that would be a fatal mistake.

This post has been translated automatically

Patizi
Elite

Falke wrote on 09.09.2024 at 16:47:

In this case, you spit in their faces just like that, to use your parlance. You made a very provocative post and then continued to provoke in the other thread. And a good moderator would have admonished both of them in this case or simply let them let off steam as long as no boundaries were crossed.


But now you are presenting yourself as an innocent lamb as if you had no part in the whole thing and, as someone else has already mentioned here, that comes across as very unsympathetic.

I have no problem at all with the fact that you counter them and that you're happy to do so a little more harshly. But the fact that you're screaming for consequences and inciting Julian to ban them is more than just borderline. So you played your part in escalating the situation. And then you even added to it after the ban. I much prefer Blubbo, with whom I've often clashed myself.

So your behavior was absolutely out of line and certainly not in the spirit of a good community. But you won't be banned. Can you tell the difference? You can continue to spout off and even attack the defenceless after the fact. You called for a ban and your wish was granted. Does that make you a happier person now?


How do you know that I didn't get a warning?


Tell me what happened before, if you're so involved. Why did I say that something had to happen there? Can you answer that or do you lack the knowledge?

And at the end you talk again about "but you won't be banned"! You're comparing me to them. I never had a temp ban or umpteen warnings. Why should I be banned? Whether I have already attracted negative attention for you is not relevant in this case because you are not the measure. The measure in this case is GJ and the two of them have been noticed incredibly often. I repeat myself. They both had a temp. ban. I didn't. They had the preliminary stage to the Perm. Ban. But now please answer my questions and don't ignore them. To what extent do you know what happened to judge all this. Faded out yesterday in the process.

This post has been translated automatically

Jenn-R
Expert
Jenn-R

This post has been translated automatically

Hot Topics19th Sep. 2024 at 03:12 am CEST

GambleJoe is aimed exclusively at user whose allowed to play legally with his current location in online casinos and does not violate the current law.
It is the responsibility of the user to inform himself about the current legal situation. Gambling is prohibited for children and adolescents under the age of 18.
GambleJoe is a registered trademark with the EUIPO of GJ International Ltd.

© 2012-2024 GambleJoe.com

Forgotten your password?

Create a new password here

  • 1. Fill in the 3 fields carefully and click on the green button
  • 2. Check your email inbox for a message from GambleJoe
  • 3. Click on the confirmation link in the email and your new password will be active immediately