Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
"Ireland Keep Your Taxes Low: Vote "NO" " Ad
Options
Comments
-
-
-
See, this is what I meant. You're sure that Nice says we'll lose a commissioner, but in fact it doesn't. Nothing's agreed on in Nice to say who loses and for how long, that was the point of that part of Lisbon (and Cowen said this on the record on Sunday).Deleted User wrote: »It states clearly in the NICE treaty (that Ireland has already ratified) that once the EU membership reaches 27 countries,there will no longer be a commissioner for each country.
That means that Libertas is lying in their boards banner ad because ...well if Lisbon isn't ratified,we can still lose a commissioner.
So Libertas isn't lying. They're technically completely correct - Lisbon does guarantee we lose a commissioner. It's just that they're not giving the full context, and I'll be a monkey's uncle if you can prove the Yes side aren't doing exactly the same thing.
So just take the bloody money and use adblock anyway
I'd hate to see the day when here shuts down because there wasn't enough cash to pay for hardware, net access, power and time.But I'd hate to see the day when political advertisements start to appear here.
Bullcrap. It's precisely the same principle, and you're making an argument on principle. Either argue it that way, or make the argument another way, but you can't argue against it on principle and then defend against counter-arguments on pragmatism.It's a tad more principled an issue in my opinion, than say the example brought up earlier regarding el casei immunitas in my yogurt.0 -
-
Thats actually incorrect.See, this is what I meant. You're sure that Nice says we'll lose a commissioner, but in fact it doesn't. Nothing's agreed on in Nice to say who loses and for how long, that was the point of that part of Lisbon (and Cowen said this on the record on Sunday).
So Libertas isn't lying. They're technically completely correct - Lisbon does guarantee we lose a commissioner. It's just that they're not giving the full context, and I'll be a monkey's uncle if you can prove the Yes side aren't doing exactly the same thing.
So just take the bloody money and use adblock anyway
Both treaties confirm that all countries will be without a commissioner at some point.
Thats a bit melodramatic.I'd hate to see the day when here shuts down because there wasn't enough cash to pay for hardware, net access, power and time.
Boards shutting down on account of a lack of adds from political parties or campaigns for referenda?
I'm sure now that the admins of this site are well capable of attracting advertising and indeed that theres lots of available advertisers out there that recognise the fertile advertising medium that this place is.
I hold the running of my country to a higher regard than whats in a product.Bullcrap. It's precisely the same principle, and you're making an argument on principle. Either argue it that way, or make the argument another way, but you can't argue against it on principle and then defend against counter-arguments on pragmatism.
I can absolve myself from el casei immunitas but not the country I live in.
Anything that can ultimately impact on the way this country is run.DeVore wrote:Define "political".
I'd be of the view that hopefully you didn't need them as advertisers and that they wouldn't be offended by that.Secondly, I think there is already a huge disconnect between people like us and the political process. Are you saying we ban all political parties from advertising here simply because we dont trust any of them to be truthful?
For what it's worth,I'm on record as having decided to vote yes to this referendum but I'd be saying this about yes advertisements aswell even if they were 100% accurate which they aren't either.
I take your point regarding the efficacy of trying to determine that-hence thats why I'd be in favour of ruling them out.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
See, this is what I meant. You're sure that Nice says we'll lose a commissioner, but in fact it doesn't. Nothing's agreed on in Nice to say who loses and for how long, that was the point of that part of Lisbon (and Cowen said this on the record on Sunday).
So Libertas isn't lying. They're technically completely correct - Lisbon does guarantee we lose a commissioner. It's just that they're not giving the full context, and I'll be a monkey's uncle if you can prove the Yes side aren't doing exactly the same thing.
Nice does guarantee that the number of commissioners will be reduced (once we reach 27 member states). It just doesn't specify how much the number of commissioners will be reduced by and the precise mechanism of rotation.
Either way, stating this:
is demonstrably false.and use adblock anyway
I would urge anyone doing this to do the decent thing and buy a subscription.0 -
Except that it's not. If you vote yes and accept Lisbon, you will lose your commissioner. That's a clause in the treaty. If you vote no, you probably will lose your commissioner. Again, that's a clause in the (Nice) treaty.Either way, stating this:
<image snipped>
is demonstrably false.
However, an ad saying "vote no" with the justification of keeping your commissioner is technically valid because "probably will" != "will" and if you don't vote to give up your commissioner, there is mathematically a possibility that you could keep him (doesn't matter how small that possibility is, it's still technically there, just like the possibility that you'll be hit by a meteor before you finish reading this post).
This is what I was talking about when I said you can't decide on ads based on which ones are the truth. You take Libertas to the advertising standards crowd and you wouldn't have a leg to stand on because technically they're correct. Doesn't matter if in practical terms they're dead wrong - the law doesn't say an ad has to be correct in practise, just in technical fact.
Ditto. I've got mine already...I would urge anyone doing this to do the decent thing and buy a subscription.
0 -
Ditto to that, haven't a leg to stand on. And mo matter how dirty their tricks are, Libertas seem to know more about the lesbian treaty than the referendum commission which is a small bit ironic.Except that it's not. If you vote yes and accept Lisbon, you will lose your commissioner. That's a clause in the treaty. If you vote no, you probably will lose your commissioner. Again, that's a clause in the (Nice) treaty.
However, an ad saying "vote no" with the justification of keeping your commissioner is technically valid because "probably will" != "will" and if you don't vote to give up your commissioner, there is mathematically a possibility that you could keep him (doesn't matter how small that possibility is, it's still technically there, just like the possibility that you'll be hit by a meteor before you finish reading this post).
This is what I was talking about when I said you can't decide on ads based on which ones are the truth. You take Libertas to the advertising standards crowd and you wouldn't have a leg to stand on because technically they're correct. Doesn't matter if in practical terms they're dead wrong - the law doesn't say an ad has to be correct in practise, just in technical fact.
I'll have to throw a few euro in the kitty ones of the days after the exams. Still I see no harm in leaving the ads there as well as subscribing. I only ever enable adblock on Boards when the website is running slow and to speed it up ever so slightly.Ditto. I've got mine already...0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
Er, no.Incorrect
That's the first reason that Libertas can run that ad and technically not be lying. Voting yes does mean you lose the commissioner.Yes to Lisbon: We lose the commissioner in 2014
There is a non-zero chance that we could be one of those countries. Frankly, I think it's as likely as a meteor impact, but it's still non-zero.Nice applies, we lose the commissioner in 2009 (unless we're one of the countries selected to get one, in which case we'll have one until 2014 at least).
It's not 0. In practical terms it's never going to happen, but the probability, mathematically speaking is not zero because there's no clause in any prior treaty that specifically bans it. It's theoretically possible, just not plausible. But that's sufficient for the ad.Lisbon gets renegotiated, we lose the commissioner at some point in the near future. (There is 0% chance that we'll have 27 commissioners in the 2014 commission. Not 0.000000001%, 0%.)
See, this is my point. The Libertas ads are in theory correct and possible scenarios. In practical terms they're never going to happen - but that doesn't mean they're lying, it just means the scenario they're describing is very unlikely.
Actually, I'm not sure there's a legal mechanism to allow us to withdraw - I'm pretty sure that the mechanism is only introduced in the Lisbon treaty. Which is rather ironicWe withdraw from the EU. We lose the commissioner. 0 -
-
-
Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 24,056 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 21860
I doubt the Yes or No side really know any facts tbh. Its a hit and miss sitatuion. The government cba to read about it, and those other netrual partys find it difficult to understand parts. Its a joke, you cant say whos right or whos wrong in this one.
And the Yes side could easily come back and hit back at the No vote but they havent. If you block one, you gotta block them all.
Boards needs to get cash to keep running the site as it is and I have to say the adverts have paved the way for a MAJOR improvement of the site and we now have moved from a hamster slave to a human salve (CuLT). I couldnt care less who advertised (well, I do but it depends ) once Boards can continue to raise funds to give us one hell of a site.
End of conversation.
Topic Closed. 0 -
Can you prove this?what is the big deal anyone who is swayed by a banner add will never make it to the polls anyway
No.sparks wrote:The Libertas ads are in theory correct and possible scenarios.
They are not correct in anyway.
To be correct,we would have to be guaranteed a commisioner under Nice.
We are not.
DeV as you know,I only mentioned the commissioner issue in answer to your asking to point out a reputable source that proves any part of the libertas ad is a lie.
I've done that.
If sparks want to debate that in every micro detail,he can go over with me to the EU forum and I'd be delighted to debate it there-I've not yet seen him there actually.
He can also debate the point there with Scofflaw if he wishes-best of luck to him *
* Any regular of the EU forum and of course it's mods will get what I mean there
0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
Libertas wrote:3. Abolishes Ireland’s Commissioner for five years at a time
The Lisbon Treaty proposes to reduce the number of Commissioners to two thirds of the number of member states. This would mean that, on a rotating basis, Ireland would have no seat for five years out of every 15 in the body that has the monopoly on initiating legislation. This would clearly affect a small country like Ireland to a far greater extent than, for example, Germany which is having its voting weight doubled under the Treaty.
If thats Not scaremongering. I dont know what is.
our loss of commissioner has already been agreed to, in Nice II0 -
This isnt the place for a debate on Lisbon, I'd rather stay on the topic of acceptible advertising.
DeV.
DeV - i'm hugely in favour of boards.ie becoming an advertising destination. The website deserves it, and i usually pay more attention to boards.ie ads than ads elsewhere.
Would you accept the point that a (good) few people who have posted in this thread have noted that what annoys them is that the Libertas ad is stating something which is (apparently) wrong, or at least misleading? Surely that's where the line should be drawn at not accepting ads?
How about an advertising 'rule' that says:
- all commercial ads acceptable (this is the easy bit!)
- for political ads:
All ads acceptable except:
1) ads that would be considered an insult to any particular ethnic group of people in the country if they were to see the ad. E.g. an ad that says we have too many polish and they are a bunch of wasters.
2) ads that your common sense dictates are an attempt to mislead. If you get the sense that the ad is attempting to mislead then you ask the advertiser to tone down their ad. It doesn't matter what they have on the website linked to ad, it is just whether the ad itself seems to be misleading.
An important note about this last point is that 'normal political banter' is allowed. E.g. a claim by Fianna Fail, Sinn Fein etc etc to be the best party to lead the country is misleading, but would fall under the category of 'normal political banter'. 0 -
-
-
-
-
-
Join Date:Posts: 29920
frankgrimes wrote:I agree that all political parties and indeed commercial adverstisers mislead the audience to some extent. I just have a notion that boards.ie are 'the good guys' and are one of the few truly independent media out there. Seeing that Libertas ad and the Freemont just gave me a gut feeling that boards.ie have got it wrong here.
I think we probably could be accused of being a little naive but I think you havent separated your dislike for the message/people from the issue. Clearly some people DONT think Libertas is being dishonest. Personally anything in a 460x768 box is immediately suspect to me and I consider all advertising to be lies at some level. (They arent the citizens information bureau you know!)
One thing you might note, is that this thread now exists as a result of their ad's questionability. ie: If the ad didnt make those claims we wouldnt be discussing that aspect of it. As a result, their "dodgy" claim may rebound on them and is open to question, in a way that an advert in the papers or on a lampost simply isnt. I think that will make advertisers begin to think about how outrageous claims makes them look...
DeV.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Join Date:Posts: 29920
Perhaps you should be asking why the "YES" campaign is not as interested in reaching people in this manner.
I take your point though, I just feel that you are still arguing aginst this particular ad because you are opposed to the treaty
I think this ad is pushing the boundaries and we will need to put something in our terms and conditions against false advertising.
I wonder what the ASAI would make of this ad...
DeV.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement