Time to ban Sisu

How do we see who voted for what?

 

I voted but don't agree it was for a non Mod to start the thread; and continiously having such threads will undermine the Mods and make our board look like a playground.

 

It was done as a "closed" poll, so you can't. There would have been the option of an open poll, then you'd just click on the numbers.

 

The thread has been up for awhile so I assume if the mods didn't want it to mean anything they would have closed it. The fact they didn't suggest they were happy to go with it.

Maybe it was done the wrong way but it was democratic and fair and to that end it should be treated as such. The few that voted against the ban can't now say it's wrong AFTER they voted and didn't get their way. sorry, that is just wrong.

 

Thanks, I just wanted to see if the only people moaning now are the one's who didn't get what they voted for. I somehow doubt they'd be arguing that a new vote should be held through the mods had they got the vote they wanted.

 

Maybe but then again with the HIAG vote we knew there would be a definitive decision (there was even a time limit for voting) where as this was somewhat unofficial. Not saying the vote would be any different but it may have been. People may have taken the 'yeah **** him and ban him' attitude just because he is a liverpool fan without knowing the real reasons why the vote is there.

Sisu can be difficult but I don't even know exactly why this vote was started and I'm a pretty regular contributor. The fact I din't know was why I voted 'no' (as I'm generally against banning in ther first instance). With the 'evidence' presented, I might change my view.

 

I didn't vote but think a ban is unnecessary, especially if that is then the benchmark for what merits a ban. What is the supposed crime anyway?

A poll by a mod rather than an attention-seeker would be more credible but whatever the result it shouldn't be the only thing used to make a decision. Mods are chosen fairly and the proletariat should have the right to an opinion, just not a binding one.

 

It was a free and fair vote and to be frank you have zero right to question why people voted as they did and even less right to suggest they didn't know why they were voting. That is insulting.

 

I'm not questioning why people voted, I'm explaining why they may have voted in a way which may be different to an official poll. And the fact in the last 2 posts both me and Watford have confirmed we don't really know why a vote was even started kind of negates your silly 'insulting' comment.

This isn't a general election, it is concievable that people are just ticking a box for the 'fun' of it.

 

I can see where people are coming from on this, but I suppose the difference is that HIAG is a self confessed wum who sets out to try and goad other fans into a spat, whereas Sisu just seems to make a few comments that people don't agree with.

 

Insulting, maybe. Correct, likely.

 

And that is perfectly acceptable. People have the right to vote for any reason they want. And if you didn't know why you should have asked BEFORE you voted.

Hand on heart, answer me this.

Had the vote been 18-5 against a ban and had I come on and argued that the vote shouldn't count as it wasn't through the mods would you be backing me up and insisting we revoted through the correct channels or would you be saying hey, it was 18-5 and you're just showing sour grapes because you didn't get your way.

Hand on heart.

 

What are you talking about 'own way'? I doubt any of us are particularly fond of sisu so why would we care about him getting banned? Out point is that this is totally the wrong method of going about it, it has absolutely **** all about getting our own way!

 

Hand on heart, I at no point thought this decision would be upheld by the Mods. At best I thought that if it was clear the vast majority wanted a ban then the mods would either contact Sisu direct and warn him or maybe start an official vote with a time limit and reasosn explaining why the vote was taking place.

I'm more bothered about voting for bans becoming some sort of norm than the outcome of this particular one. Personally I have no problems with HIAG (so voted for him not to be banned) but Sisu can be annoying so if he goes, so be it.

 

Did you vote? If you did did you raise your concerns before you voted? Did you expect when you voted that your vote would count?

If you did those things before the result you have a point.

 

.

 

I did, I voted 'don't care'.

 

Now the issue is being raised we can move forward but people saying things AFTER the vote and AFTER they voted just has a bad feeling about it. Those points should have been raised before.

Would I be here demanding a revote via mod poll had it been against my vote? Not in a million years.

I guess we'll see shortly if the mods go with the majority or with the minority.

 

Again you seem to be under the misguided view that just because there was a vote that it must be upheld. People have on-line petitions all the time for causes and beliefs, doesn't mean the government suddenly have to implement legislative change based on the results.

At no point was it agreed the result would be binding. If you are passionately behind a ban, I would suggest contacting the Mods for them to take action (whatever that may be as they may not deem a ban appropriate).

 

And neither was it said it wouldn't. Again, you might have had a point had you raised these things BEFORE the result.

I am not passionately behind a ban, I am passionately for accepting a free and fair vote regardless of the outcome.