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

A discussion on the rules.

2456789

Comments



  • Originally posted by Sparks
    posting as a moderator.

    a moderator will remain neutral in a thread if posting as a moderator.

    With respect to that then ( :o ) you would be ruling out some of the best arguments, that I've read on here in the last year or two for or against particular topics, and I wouldn't agree there.
    By the phrase "if posting as a moderator" you reckon they should go under another nick to express opinions or to throw their weight in on one side or the other, that to my mind would be a bad rule.
    To my mind theres no stigma attached to any reasonable opinion or approach to a discussion whether agreeable or otherwise.
    And besides multiple registrations are frowned upon on the boards I think?
    ( Having said that it has often occurred to me that some posters on here may be using more than one nick, perhaps in an effort to stimulate or bring a discussion along in a certain way... or argue with themselves even! I'm wondering if that has ever been noticed, and action taken or does it matter provided no charter breaking occurs in the discussion? I might add at this point that I don't , nor do I have any intention of such activity. )
    mm


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Originally posted by Sparks
    and no policy that says that a moderator will remain neutral in a thread if posting as a moderator.

    Could you clarify what you mean by this, because I can see loads of different ways of interpreting this statement, and I'd much rather not try to second guess you about which one you meant.

    jc


  • Registered Users Posts: 40,055 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Right, I should have made this clearer - when I say "posting as a moderator", I mean posting in that offical capacity - ie. posting warnings and so forth. Not posting their own opinions - the mods usually have well-thought-out opinions. It's a case of issuing warnings in a neutral manner and so on.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Originally posted by Sparks
    It's a case of issuing warnings in a neutral manner and so on.

    OK...I'm not trying to be obtuse, but I'm still not clear how a warning could be issued non-neutrally or neutrally.

    Of course...maybe thats the problem ;)

    jc


  • Registered Users Posts: 78,218 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    I think this is what people are saying they don't want.
    Let us say bonkey wants a new Irish flag of XYZ colours to get over historical baggage. MuppetProvo23 wants to keep the Irish flag because of it's historical links. bonkey bans MuppetProvo23.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,924 ✭✭✭Cork


    My main problem is going a little off topic. It is always unintentional - but you tend to give examples or respond to somebody elses point.

    It is very hard to keep keep rigidly to topics without vering off a little.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,335 ✭✭✭Éomer of Rohan


    Right, c'mon let's use some of that material dialectic for which my kind are famed lol.

    Victor wants to stop 'stupid people' and I have read that which he posted on the matter. What he classifies as stupid people, we might think of as those who lie or post unsubstantiated and unprovable material on the boards.

    To come up with a solution for this, I would be greatful if the mods could post what are the degrees of penalty they can impose on a poster...


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Originally posted by Éomer of Rohan
    To come up with a solution for this, I would be greatful if the mods could post what are the degrees of penalty they can impose on a poster...

    Well, there aren't that many degrees.

    We can edit/delete posts, close threads, and ban people. Bannage is permanent unless we go back in and unban the person at a later stage.

    Thats about it.

    Personally, I think if so many people stopped getting indignant at other people's stupidity, and simply ignored them rather than posting long rants about how clueless a fscker you'd have to be to consistently come up with such garbage.....then it would be a lot less of a problem.

    jc

    jc


  • Registered Users Posts: 78,218 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Originally posted by bonkey
    Personally, I think if so many people stopped getting indignant at other people's stupidity, and simply ignored them rather than posting long rants about how clueless a fscker you'd have to be to consistently come up with such garbage.....then it would be a lot less of a problem.
    :(

    :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 240 ✭✭Qadhafi


    Freedom of speech; if someone doesn’t give a toss if a kid got slated (I’m not saying I dont) well they should be able to voice their opinions on the matter, it doesnt have to be listened to by anyone but how do you define acceptable? Is desent not allowed on the board?

    Political correctness in a US import, if someone wanna bitch, be political incorrect, slag off something why cant they express it without getting threatened kicked or banned(within limitations) .

    Foul language; its not like we haven’t ever heard foul language before. Are certain people trying to sanitise this board?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 40,055 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Originally posted by Qadhafi
    Freedom of speech; if someone doesn’t give a toss if a kid got slated (I’m not saying I dont) well they should be able to voice their opinions on the matter, it doesnt have to be listened to by anyone but how do you define acceptable? Is desent not allowed on the board?

    Political correctness in a US import, if someone wanna bitch, be political incorrect, slag off something why cant they express it without getting threatened kicked or banned(within limitations) .

    Foul language; its not like we haven’t ever heard foul language before. Are certain people trying to sanitise this board?

    Bad argument. We don't have freedom of speech here, observe:
    **** **** **** ******

    We feel it's better that some words be blanked out, but it's a form of censorship that most people feel comfortable with because it serves no purpose to use those words beyond viscereal satisfaction for the user.

    There are other artifical restrictions in here - you can't attack the poster, you can't start a thread without giving your opinion, and so on. Requiring that posters with opinions that offend everyone (without the saving grace of being right and/or defendable) keep those opinions to themselves is not a massive impediment to debate.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23 redflaremist


    heya

    i'm involved in running a (real life) political discussion group called "bad thoughts" which usually runs every fortnight or so. its not aligned to any political party! its just a discussion group. i guess its aligned to the Bad Books librarywhich is here ( http://www.geocities.com/badbooksdublin/index3.htm )

    read the posting guidelines for this board. there's nothing about posting up notices for events - but is it alright to do this?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,335 ✭✭✭Éomer of Rohan


    I've seen the anti-globalisation lot post up events notices every so often - so I guess it is ok - but please I wouldn't fall into their mistake of posting the same flipping message in three seperate purpose created threads - it's just spamming.

    If you feel that this still might be dubious, announce your event and continue to justify the announcement with a discussion began by yourself on the topic of the announcement since it would naturally be political.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 90 ✭✭thesecret7


    you are allowed to say what you wish on this board as long as you conform to what boards.ie says.Have a nice day:)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,034 ✭✭✭Rock Climber


    Whats the position on polls?
    Should there be a new guideline whereby a poster puts up a maximum of two polls and no more for a month.

    I don't know about anyone else, but there are nearly as many polls as threads here now and all mostly from the one poster.

    It's making me dizzy :(

    Opinions anyone?
    Mods what do ye think?


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,944 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    Originally posted by Rock Climber
    Opinions anyone?
    Mods what do ye think?

    Yep I defo think a limit should be put on polls, arcadegame2004 has gone mad posting polls. Theres 6 in the first page!!!:rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 78,218 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Originally posted by Rock Climber
    Should there be a new guideline whereby a poster puts up a maximum of two polls and no more for a month.
    I'm not sure if there shold be a hard and fast limit, but some spamming could be addressed. For example, having a poll for each EU contituency is good. Having several on the constitutional amendment is a bit mad, Ted.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    A couple of thoughts as to how this could be limited?

    I thought about perhaps :

    1) No poll on a "general topic" which has a poll on teh first page without first clearing with a moderator. (e.g. IRA, Palestine/Israel, War on Iraq, Referendum etc.)

    or the more draconian :

    2) No poll without clearing with a moderator

    ...but I haven't even discussed any of this with the other mods...who may prefer to leave it the way it is for all I know.

    But please....reasonable suggestions only.

    Brown (or other-coloured) envelopes to the usual address please : /dev/null
    jc


  • Registered Users Posts: 78,218 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    I would go with 2 - moderator approval - right across boards.ie. While, I've been known to have post a few polls myself, at least I try to cover as many points of view as possible, in a graduated scale from 1 to 5, not 1,4,2,5,3, not 1,5 not 1,2,3 (when the scale extends to 5).

    There are just too many people out there that spam polls, without thinking.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭The Corinthian


    There are just too many people out there that spam polls, without thinking.


  • Advertisement


  • Hi moderators and users of this forum.
    Seeing this thread in politics this morning when its probably more suited to somewhere else.
    I'm wondering if a sticky thread might be in order in the politics forum for links to threads elsewhere that aren't necessarally politically related but that would interest and might generate a post or two from the regulars in the politics board.

    If people see a debate of note on another forum then they could link to it and give a brief description of what it's about.

    Just a thought.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,659 ✭✭✭✭dahamsta


    How about a News forum under Politics, where the thread starter doesn't have to comment on the article? I wanted to post this story for example, but according to the rules I'd have to comment on it, and I really don't want to --I just though it might interest other people, and it's political, and there's nowhere else to post it.

    adam


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    dahamsta wrote:
    How about a News forum under Politics, where the thread starter doesn't have to comment on the article? I wanted to post this story for example, but according to the rules I'd have to comment on it, and I really don't want to --I just though it might interest other people, and it's political, and there's nowhere else to post it.

    I don't think there's a need for a sub-forum.

    Within reason, we've no major problem with people posting articles (with [ARTICLE] at the start of the topic) "sans comment". We're somewhat more wary of anyone doing this as their first post (as it smacks of advertising), but for anyone who has clearly been around a while, just make sure its noticeable in the subject and you'll be fine.

    Also...isn't there an entirely seperate news forum now anyway?
    jc


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,254 ✭✭✭chewy


    explain to me this article thing...

    whats the difference to posting a an article with or without the [article] title

    when ya moved the mobo racist/homophobe thread to music it died....

    i too would like to post political questions without commenting, cos i'd prefer to hear other peoples thoughts on a subject rather then a reaction to mine?


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    chewy wrote:
    explain to me this article thing...

    whats the difference to posting a an article with or without the [article] title
    The idea behind it is that if ppl feel there is stuff important enough to post as some sort of "discussionless" content, it gives them the ability to do so.

    It kinda marks an intent that you aren't really interested in discussing what you've posted....which may or may not determine whether or not other ppl will bother posting responses to it.

    The idea for [Article] and [announcement] arose (I think) out of the RTS guys posting stuff up here about their latest meeting, event or whatever, and then after a couple of posts coming up with something along the lines of "I didn't really want to discuss this anyway...just wanted to let ppl know about X".

    As I said...I'm going from memory, but I think Swiss brought up the idea with gandalf and myself that we should allow this stuff as long as its clearly marked...and as long as it doesn't subsequently turn into a big "rash" of announcement and article postings.

    Our general stance is that this is a discussion forum, so we're somewhat wary of encouraging ppl to use it for other purposes, but like I said...as long as the volume is reasonable, and the stuff is clearly marked ....
    too would like to post political questions without commenting, cos i'd prefer to hear other peoples thoughts on a subject rather then a reaction to mine

    Aren't they the same thing tho? Ppl who post up that they agree with you, obviously have the same (or similar) thoughts. Ppl who disagree with you end up explaining their own thoughts.

    Personally speaking, I generally dislike the stance of "tell me your thoughts on X, but I'm not telling you mine", because I don't see it as being conducive to discussion (which is what I see as the major function of the board). Maybe I'm wrong....but I really don't get how ppl can be interested in a discussion that they don't want to participate in....and I don't get how you can participate in a discussion without taking a position in one way or another.

    jc


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,252 ✭✭✭FTA69


    Fair enough the rules dictate that if a thread goes of topic it will be closed;

    I would, however, like to ask gandalf why was the Paisley thread closed considering the final post made on it was to do with the original topic, ie the putting of arms beyond use?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 47 poneill


    FTA69 wrote:
    I would, however, like to ask gandalf why was the Paisley thread closed considering the final post made on it was to do with the original topic, ie the putting of arms beyond use?

    Probably because Mods get bored too ;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,252 ✭✭✭FTA69


    Many discussions taking place here also bore me to tears but I recognise that people having a discussion is their own business and it is boorish to shut it down mid-flow.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23 Alex27


    Perhaps in order to make threads more clear posts that are merely repeat opinions posted before are to be deleted.

    Alot depends on the vision for this board. Should it be the place were everyone just post whatever their think about certain topic related to politics? Should it be the place were constructive discussions are to be held? Place to be heard? :D


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,406 ✭✭✭arcadegame2004


    I think the polls should be brought back, at least sometimes. I think the complete banning of polls is a bit far-reaching and unfair. :mad:


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement