wasn't too bad yesterday, still a fair bit of junk in there but not quite so much and a few more posts worth reading in there as well.

fairfranco - please report any 'rubbish' you see while I work on some longer-term things that should go a very long way to stopping the problem

BCM - Your efforts are genuinely appreciated. WIsh you all the best.

As they say "The proof of the pudding is in the eating." I will start a Pak Vs Eng thread tonight and shall do a count of how many junk posters vs meaningful posters do post on this thread and display the results. (Yes I do have some time tomorrow)

If there is a "club" on Twitter, would I be welcome guys. If so, how do I join (don't use it at the moment as you probably guessed) The analysis on forum is beyond the pale now

rohit - just select 'other' from the drop-down. There is a box into which you can add some detail, although that isn't essential

I think Morse is a tw@ t

just sayin'

BCM, how long does it take to process when we report someone for rubbish posts ?

I have reported a repeat offender a few times, but he's at it again today.

I don't like that idea, it means you can't contribute if you haven't taken a position even if you intend to at some point

Freelance - it varies, but generally if action is going to be taken (ie posts deleted etc) it is less than 30 minutes

just a note BCM2, I reported someone yesterday, you are one of your colleagues did an excellent quick job in removing both the posts and presumably banning the user.

However by the end of the night the person had posted several times with a new account as well as sending me an abusive private message!

I know it's very easy to circumnavigate but do you ever do any IP blocking if there is a repeat offender like that?  Being a moderator on another forum I know how difficult it can be to stop people creating new accounts to post again after being banned, though I'd think with betfair being much more than the forum and so having much more security you'd be able to cut down on multi account people?

rohit,

The strategy I suggested does not have an upside of one tick. It involves a trade that would, under most circumstances, result in the client either losing a very small amount or breaking even on the given match depending on the outcome. It would be conducted by clients who wish to minimise losses and maintain a small balance whilst continuing to abuse the forum if Scottyn's suggestion were to be enacted.

The suggested trades involve backing the favourite for £2 at price x and, as stated, laying off for £2 at 1 tick higher. If successfully conducted this would guarantee a 1 tick (£0.02) loss on that outcome and break-even on all other outcomes.

I stated a starting balance of £3+ because as soon as the available balance dips below £2 it would no longer be possible for the client to place such bets due to the minimum bet rules. A balance of around £3.50 could enable such trades on over 100 matches.

As an example, consider the upcoming T20 Pakistan v England. At the time of writing, England are available to back at 1.91 and lay at 1.92. If you back and lay England for £2 at the current prices, you would lose £0.02 if England won and break-even if Pakistan won or the match was tied or a No Result.   

I take your point about a sudden drift in an unfavourable direction but if the trades were conducted near simultaneously pre-match, avoiding the toss time, the client would be highly unlikely to lose more than a few additional ticks and conversely there would also be some occasions were a small profit would be made.

I am also aware that not all matches have the available liquidity and tight margins of the England v Pakistan match at any stage but most of the high profile matches that attract those who wish to abuse the forum do.

For similar reasons I also believe that your suggestion of a requirement to hold a bf account to access the bf forum would do little to resolve the problem. Most people can comfortably afford to open an account and deposit £2. It's possible that a proportion of the recent objectionable posts come from clients resident in areas where opening a bf account may prove more difficult than for UK clients but I suspect that if they wish to continue to post on bf forum they will be well capable of finding a way to open multiple bf accounts.

Trust me not allowing people who do not haave a BF A/C will work. The junk started when Betfair removed the link between the BF Betting A/C and the forum account.

99.9% of people in the Subcontinent wont have friends or family in countries where BF and hence cant open A/C and that is also the reason for  flourishing of illegitimate bookies. Anyone who has an option would prefer Betfair to an Illegitimate bookie (I have access to both and do all by betting on here).Anyways lets see when the linking back to the BF Betting A/C happens whether it works or not

Still my answer to my point about linking forum posters to their Return on Investment. It is the ultimate in transparency and is not being answered. There are no data protection issues for the details are known by the platform servicer (the exchange) but not shared.

That would not only separate the wheat from the chaff but substantially improve the integrity of the forum. My post below from a week ago refers.

Grim - serious question here.

Where does harmless patriotic needling stop and borderline racism start?

Can you be certain the line is not drawn by yourself and others amongst your countrymen according to your own patriotic preferences? 

Regarding Asian Runlines, you might argue he starts a lot of threads/makes posts based on one single topic, but then one could equally argue he is  consistent and has a fair point, even if the way he expresses it offends some sensibilities. 

I for one would hate to see free speech curtailed on here in order to appease what might be seen as a critical mass of posters.  I have no problem with censorship of mindless offensive abuse, but would like to see it deployed with an even hand.  I am sure BCM2 is on the job.

By the way, how did you enjoy the pomglomerate being currywashed by Pakiscam in the recent test series? 

Re displaying posters' ROI ... this site doesn't exist in a vacuum. For most of us, P&L on here is just one part of a bigger picture involving bets with bookmakers and spread firms or in betting shops. A huge slice of Betfair's turnover is money being hedged or arbed against investments via other platforms.

Knowing a poster's Betfair P&L would therefore be meaningless.

Even if you don't accept that argument, remember that some of the usernames on here are real people who personally know each other. There's no way I'd use the Forum if some of the bookmakers and punters I know on here could be tracking me.

Grim, it would be remiss of me if I didn't start here by conceding the point that I have never conceded a point on here. 

I am not so certain about your analogy with Australia's genetic background though.  People who are clearly South African playing for England(and I am not referring to the Prior's of the world here) is not only a different issue to Australia's gene pool, it belongs to a whole different genre of issues.  The first issue has direct relevance to cricket, the second has no direct relevance to cricket.

Maybe I am being kind to Asian Runlines, and I am aware that he is also keen to point out there are English players of Asian descent playing for England.  I take these posts as a little tongue-in-cheek, with a little social comment angle to them, whilst also taking a jab at the rules of qualification to play cricket for alternative countries.

As far as trolling, ok, he starts a few threads, but this is surely in character with the above, it is only ever 3-4 threads here and there, and when you want to sing something from the rooftops so to speak, that is a legitimate method in my opinion.  It is not as if he is starting enough threads daily to drive all the other threads off the front page.

Perhaps I am reading this wrong, because I don't read all of his posts and threads, but I suspect a lot of people here don't "get" Asian Runlines, and although I have probably lost a small fortune on his namesake recently, I am ok with at least most of his posts that I have read.

Grim, I am on as TONYF6651, trying to get a message to you!

Will English court rule that Tweet was just not cricket?

Posted by Cleland Thom on 27 February 2012 at 14:20

Tags: Journalism, Law, Online

England’s first Twitter libel (or twibel, to the converted) trial starts in the next few weeks, and could be a key ruling for journalists.

The case will establish the extent of libel risk on Twitter.

It involves former New Zealand cricketer Chris Cairns, who is suing ex-Indian Premier League commissioner Lalit Modi for stating on his Twitter page that Cairns had a ‘past record in match fixing in the Indian Premier League.’

Modi has already failed to get the case thrown out on the basis that the tweet was not widely read in England. The High Court gave the OK in November for the case to proceed as one of the UK’s latest ‘libel tourism’ claims.

Mr Cairns told the Daily Telegraph in 2010: “Until he [Modi] retracts what he has said, my name will always be tainted by the cheat label. Had he really had any concerns about my probity as a sportsman he could have called me at any time or instructed any of his executives to do the same. He chose not to.

“Instead he chose to make his allegation in public and to repeat it in public. For any doubting Thomases out there: I have never **** a match.”

Cairns was captain of the Chandigarh Lions in the ICL and was sacked in 2008. He claims that was for fitness issues.

So far, Wales is the only country in the UK to have dealt with a Twitter libel. In March 2011, a Welsh councillor was ordered to pay damages after making a false claim about an election rival on Twitter

The English case will determine whether the courts follow the view expressed by top libel and privacy judge Mr Justice Eady in 2008 He said comments on internet “bulletin boards” were more likely to be slanderous than libelous. He compared them with people chatting in a bar.

In Twitter’s early days, some people questioned if it was possible to defame someone in 140 characters. But those doubts were dispelled by American singer Courtney Love, who used her Twitter account to describe Texas-based fashion designer Dawn Simorangkir as a “drug pushing prostitute” during a dispute over payment for clothes.

Love is currently being sued for another Tweet, this time by a law firm. She Tweeted: “I was ****ing devastated when Rhonda J Holmes esq of San Diego was bought off. I’ve been hiring and firing lawyers to help me with this.”

The case Cairns v Modi starts at the beginning of March before Mr Justice Tugendha

Might make a concerted effort to come back on here.. Getting bored of Twitter and always enjoyed the forums when they were busy.

IPL was better with Modi in charge. Far more even contest. now the big teams simply bully the rest.

If you watched the ICL and saw the huge lumps of money that just happened to know that certain batsmen wouldnt be scoring many runs then you'd be unwilling to believe that it was just coincidence.

Lots of money often appeared laying when Cairns was batting..