Policy on Talking about Dead People

jtsuited

Can someone explain boards policy on this?

WindSock

Do you mean recently deceased condolence threads? Or dead people in general?

Otis Driftwood

He's referring to his helpdesk thread and an AH ban.

Re dead celeb threads,there was a bit of a kerfuffle a while back and IFIRC the rule of thumb is if you are going to post in a dead celeb thread then be respectful and just dont act like a geebag.

jtsuited

any chance this could be stated somewhere?

jtsuited

WindSock wrote: »

Do you mean recently deceased condolence threads? Or dead people in general?

obviously not condolence threads.

tbh

http://www.boards.ie/terms/tou.php

You agree NOT to use Boards.ie to:

post any abusive, harmful, vulgar, obscene, sexually explicit, indecent, profane, inappropriate, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable Material, except where the content is appropriate to the content of the forum and you have been granted specific permission to do so and subject to our guidelines on said content

so how do you know if something is inappropriate?

maybe if the mods said something like this:


MOD WARNING - Keep all comments in this thread civil and respectful please

jtsuited wrote: »

If you want to have a policy like this, please state in the OP that you are not allowed to say anything bad about Gerry Ryan.

the mod warning was in the OP.

Simple really.

you'd think so, wouldn't you?

Conor

jtsuited wrote: »

any chance this could be stated somewhere?

It is, here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/faq.php?faq=bie_faq_guidelines#faq_bie_faq_guidelines_civil

There's no explicit policy on talking about dead people. There is explicit policy about talking to or about people in general. "Don't be a dick".

terenc

I dont think the mods can handle criticism of some body who has passed away even though people in whom we pass comment on have courted the media and made a good living from it.
I made a comment and came close to been banned?

jtsuited

in the context of 'civil and respectful', i would interpret respectful as being in relation to other users. In fact I imagine that's what was meant.

Removing posts that say anything negative about a recently deceased celebrity is an entirely different matter.

So I'm going to ask this explicitly...

Are we allowed to talk about the dead negatively on this site?

jtsuited

Conor wrote: »

It is, here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/faq.php?faq=bie_faq_guidelines#faq_bie_faq_guidelines_civil

There's no explicit policy on talking about dead people. There is explicit policy about talking to or about people in general. "Don't be a dick".

so is your implication that I was being a dick?

TheZohanS

jtsuited wrote: »

any chance this could be stated somewhere?

It's stated by the mods on every condolence thread. Generally several warnings are given; posts are deleted and only if someone really extracts the urine infractions/bans are handed out.

jtsuited

TheZohan wrote: »

It's stated by the mods on every condolence thread. Generally several warnings are given; threads are deleted and only if someone really extracts the urine infractions/bans are handed out.

didn't know it was a condolence thread. actually, is it? I'm fairly sure it's not. I was never warned. No infraction. Nothing. Just a big aul ban.

TheZohanS

jtsuited wrote: »

didn't know it was a condolence thread. actually, is it? I'm fairly sure it's not. I was never warned. No infraction. Nothing. Just a big aul ban.

This is more of a HelpDesk thread tbh.

I can remember some of your posts, you ignored several mod warnings and if you were banned it was probably deserved FWICR.

jtsuited

eh, you've got the wrong guy here Zohan. I posted TWICE in the thread. Didn't ignore any warnings.
And I've put a thread up in helpdesk. The mod who banned me said he wasn't willing to explain the policy by pm so I should ask here. So that's what I've done.

Conor

jtsuited wrote: »

so is your implication that I was being a dick?

Certainly:

jsuited wrote:

really?? fcuk that then. everybody quote me. makes the mod's life a pain in the hole.

Otis Driftwood

jtsuited wrote: »

in the context of 'civil and respectful', i would interpret respectful as being in relation to other users. In fact I imagine that's what was meant.

Removing posts that say anything negative about a recently deceased celebrity is an entirely different matter.

So I'm going to ask this explicitly...

Are we allowed to talk about the dead negatively on this site?

Hitler,what a c**t.

Im probably safe enough because the general consensus is that he was.

Most celebritys will have more fans than detractors so if people start flaming the dead celeb then obviously the celebs fans get pissed off,start flaming back and all of a sudden there is a giant clusterfook and the thread gets locked.

If you are going to post in dead celeb threads for no other reason than to have a cheap pop or to try and get a few thanks then whats the point?

Common sense would point to the fact that the dead person is someones son/daughter/parent/sibling so a bit of respect isnt too much to ask is it?

jtsuited

so I can't say Gerry Ryan was an embodiment of everything that was wrong with Modern Ireland, but you can call me a dick?

Right o. I have no problem with that. Once I'm allowed to do the same.

jtsuited

nedtheshed wrote: »

Hitler,what a c**t.

Im probably safe enough because the general consensus is that he was.

Most celebritys will have more fans than detractors so if people start flaming the dead celeb then obviously the celebs fans get pissed off,start flaming back and all of a sudden there is a giant clusterfook and the thread gets locked.

If you are going to post in dead celeb threads for no other reason than to have a cheap pop or to try and get a few thanks then whats the point?

Common sense would point to the fact that the dead person is someones son/daughter/parent/sibling so a bit of respect isnt too much to ask is it?

Common sense would also point to the fact that somebody who makes a CAREER out of publicity is fair game for criticism. Alive or dead.

Kiera

jtsuited wrote: »

so I can't say Gerry Ryan was an embodiment of everything that was wrong with Modern Ireland, but you can call me a dick?

Right o. I have no problem with that. Once I'm allowed to do the same.

Acting the dick and calling someone a dick are two different things! You ignored the mod warning in the first post so quit you whining and suck it up!

Conor

jtsuited wrote: »

so I can't say Gerry Ryan was an embodiment of everything that was wrong with Modern Ireland, but you can call me a dick?

Lovely way to interpret what I said.

jtsuited wrote: »

Right o. I have no problem with that. Once I'm allowed to do the same.

Good luck with that.

TheZohanS

jtsuited wrote: »

so I can't say Gerry Ryan was an embodiment of everything that was wrong with Modern Ireland, but you can call me a dick?

Right o. I have no problem with that. Once I'm allowed to do the same.

You were asked to show some respect for someone that had just passed, it was a mod warning. Mr Ryans son Rex is a poster here on boards. How would you feel if your dad was slated just after him passing away?

You really should be ashamed of yourself.

Cookie_Monster

people have been posting all sorts about Gerry Ryan (and others) all the time for the last number of years. why does it only become inappropriate when he (and others) died?

jtsuited

oh my heart bleeds. ffs. pathetic. i couln't care less if his son posts here. if i think someone who makes a career out of being in the public eye is crap, I'm going to say it.

Yes I should be ashamed of myself. By saying what anyone with half an ounce of common sense knows.

Good stuff.
Populist sentimentality ftw!

jtsuited

this is our diana.

haha.

Overheal

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

people have been posting all sorts about Gerry Ryan (and others) all the time for the last number of years. why does it only become inappropriate when he (and others) died?

Hey, even Megatron felt a little remorseful when he killed Optimus Prime.

In all seriousness though Trampling on someone's grave is a sensitive issue. In this case he was both loved and hated, and a father of 5. A controversial radio personality albeit, but a part of daily routine for hundreds of thousands of people.

Sarky

I'm happy for you jtsuited and I'ma let you finish, but Princess Diana had the greatest outpouring of public grief of all time. OF ALL TIME.

Your crusade for the right to hurl abuse at a dead man is damned heroic. I salute you!

jtsuited

Sarky wrote: »

I'm happy for you jtsuited and I'ma let you finish, but Princess Diana had the greatest outpouring of public grief of all time. OF ALL TIME.

Your crusade for the right to hurl abuse at a dead man is damned heroic. I salute you!

haha. about time.
if you can't hurl abuse at dead people, well, i don't even want to finish that hypothesis....

Sarky

Yeah!

Wait, what? Oh Christ, you're serious. Um, sorry.

jtsuited

sarcasmometer is broken???

pookie82

Hang on a second. I was over in that thread and several of my comments were removed. I wasn't even close to "Ryan-bashing" but because I commented that the RTE headline on Quinn was a more pertinent issue than his loss I was told to "get real" by some offended fan. My reply was then deleted, but his post remained. So you're only allowed to praise Gerry Ryan in a thread which indicates nothing of the sort in the title.

The guy who told me to get real for making a fair comment was allowed to have his post stand, presumably because he was posting with the general consensus. I wasn't, so it got deleted.

Are we really moving towards a forum where the slightest chance of someone's relative reading anything about anyone will affect what we can and can't post? And do you really think that any of his relatives are spending the evening reading this?

Most pathetic excuse in the world. I'd have no problem with any of this if the thread title clearly stated that it was a condolences thread ONLY. But the title indicates no such thing. If you're going to delete posts for disagreeing with each other on a thread like this, delete all or none. By the way I've already pm-d a mod on this but have had no comeback as it seems they're too busy deleting posts they don't agree with.

jtsuited

TheZohan wrote: »

You were asked to show some respect for someone that had just passed, it was a mod warning. Mr Ryans son Rex is a poster here on boards. How would you feel if your dad was slated just after him passing away?
.

sorry i didn't answer this earlier. If my dad was gerry ryan, who was paid over half a million a year for being in the public eye and whose only source of income was celebrity related, I'd think 'this comes with the territory'.

jtsuited

fcuk me boards has really gone to the dogs if the main fundamental policy is 'let's not upset anyone'.

Overheal

pookie82 wrote: »

Hang on a second. I was over in that thread and several of my comments were removed. I wasn't even close to "Ryan-bashing" but because I commented that the RTE headline on Quinn was a more pertinent issue than his loss I was told to "get real" by some offended fan. My reply was then deleted, but his post remained. So you're only allowed to praise Gerry Ryan in a thread which indicates nothing of the sort in the title.

The guy who told me to get real for making a fair comment was allowed to have his post stand, presumably because he was posting with the general consensus. I wasn't, so it got deleted.

Are we really moving towards a forum where the slightest chance of someone's relative reading anything about anyone will affect what we can and can't post? And do you really think that any of his relatives are spending the evening reading this?

Most pathetic excuse in the world. I'd have no problem with any of this if the thread title clearly stated that it was a condolences thread ONLY. But the title indicates no such thing. If you're going to delete posts for disagreeing with each other on a thread like this, delete all or none. By the way I've already pm-d a mod on this but have had no comeback as it seems they're too busy deleting posts they don't agree with.

Probably more a case of it being a condolence thread that the mods didnt want to be derailed by the Quinn layoffs.

pookie82

Overheal wrote: »

Probably more a case of it being a condolence thread that the mods didnt want to be derailed by the Quinn layoffs.

Sorry but that's a cop out. And if that was the case his response (which compared both scenarios) should have been deleted too. But guess what, it wasn't, because he was saying what the mods wanted to hear.

And again, WHERE does it say condolence thread in the title???????????

jtsuited

so any chance they could rename the thread 'condolences only' then?

Ghost Train

jtsuited wrote: »

so any chance they could rename the thread 'condolences only' then?

when most posts include the letters rip, it sort of obvious its a condolence thread

pookie82

Ghost Train wrote: »

when most posts include the letters rip, it sort of obvious its a condolence thread

Hang on so I'm supposed to read the 50 odd pages of the thread to gauge what I can and can't post now? Titles don't have to be descriptive anymore, no?

I couldn't care less how many RIPs he gets. Unless the title is specific in directing that I can ONLY express a similar sentiment, I think all or none of the conflicting opinions should stand.

Can I reiterate again that I was not bashing the guy, i was expressing an opinion. But it was the wrong one according to some.

jtsuited

Ghost Train wrote: »

when most posts include the letters rip, it sort of obvious its a condolence thread

yeah but see it's sort of obvious that when there's a condolence thread it should be stated. The reason I say this is because usually when there is a condolence thread it says it in the thread title.

rebel10

jtsuited wrote: »

oh my heart bleeds. ffs. pathetic. i couln't care less if his son posts here. if i think someone who makes a career out of being in the public eye is crap, I'm going to say it.

Yes I should be ashamed of myself. By saying what anyone with half an ounce of common sense knows.

Good stuff.
Populist sentimentality ftw!

Jesus what kind of person are you? Obviously have never been unfortunate enough to lose a father very suddenly. Show some respect. If you had "half an ounce of common sense" you would keep your completely disrespectful and unfeeling comments to yourself. What kind of a statement is "if i think someone who makes a career out of being in the public eye is crap, I'm going to say it". So what? You listened to him on the radio a few times and disliked him? As much as I can say that he wasn't my favourite radio presenter, I realise that many people are shocked and upset, and I respect others enough to let them grieve and come to terms with what has happened over the last 12 hours, and acting like a dick may make you feel great, but tonight there are 5 children who have just lost their father, whether he was in the public eye or not is completely irrelevant tonight, they don't need to see the c**p you are coming out with. Show some respect and just drop it.

Conor

jtsuited wrote: »

yeah but see it's sort of obvious that when there's a condolence thread it should be stated. The reason I say this is because usually when there is a condolence thread it says it in the thread title.

fcuk me boards has really gone to the dogs if the main fundamental policy is 'let's explain everything in excruciating detail to everyone and not require them to use their brains'.

jtsuited

rebel10 wrote: »

Jesus what kind of person are you? Obviously have never been unfortunate enough to lose a father very suddenly. Show some respect. If you had "half an ounce of common sense" you would keep your completely disrespectful and unfeeling comments to yourself. What kind of a statement is "if i think someone who makes a career out of being in the public eye is crap, I'm going to say it". So what? You listened to him on the radio a few times and disliked him? As much as I can say that he wasn't my favourite radio presenter, I realise that many people are shocked and upset, and I respect others enough to let them grieve and come to terms with what has happened over the last 12 hours, and acting like a dick may make you feel great, but tonight there are 5 children who have just lost their father, whether he was in the public eye or not is completely irrelevant tonight, they don't need to see the c**p you are coming out with. Show some respect and just drop it.

i can see you're still struggling to come to terms with Jade Goody's passing, so it's probably best not to argue with you on this.

pookie82

anyone going to answer my question? Or have the mods gone suspiciously quiet again on this one? Wondering why this thread employed a selective deletion policy.

pookie82

Conor wrote: »

fcuk me boards has really gone to the dogs if the main fundamental policy is 'let's explain everything in excruciating detail to everyone and not require them to use their brains'.

No one has explained anything to me yet. I'm pissing into the wind here it seems.

jtsuited

Conor wrote: »

fcuk me boards has really gone to the dogs if the main fundamental policy is 'let's explain everything in excruciating detail to everyone and not require them to use their brains'.

or just be consistent in your rulings.

rebel10

jtsuited wrote: »

i can see you're still struggling to come to terms with Jade Goody's passing, so it's probably best not to argue with you on this.

What? Really is this the best you can come up with?

jtsuited

better it?

pookie82

ANYONE?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Conor

pookie82 wrote: »

ANYONE?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Feedback is not the place to find out why a mod deleted your posts. PM the mods of AH and they might tell you.



jtsuited: You have a thread in Help Desk, it will be dealt with in due course. There's no need to pollute Feedback with the same topic.

Thread locked.