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

History forum general discussion

Options
12346»

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    Bannasidhe
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    + 1


  • Options
    #153
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    Go for it


  • Options
    #154
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Makes sense.


  • Options
    #155
    jonniebgood1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    I need to clarify a query that has been made in relation to threads that contain Unionist and Nationalist views and subjects on the History forum. Not only are discussions on these subjects allowed, they are encouraged. Requests for sources to back up contentious views have been made to ensure (a)points are based on evidence and (b) if the basis for a viewpoint is understood, it makes opposite views understandable.

    I will rename this thread for any reasonable suggestions or for discussions regarding the development of this forum. If people have any ideas in this regard they should post them here.


  • Options
    #156
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Guidelines for posting on politically sensitive history?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    jonniebgood1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    slowburner wrote: »
    Guidelines for posting on politically sensitive history?

    Yes- it could be something to add to the forum charter. It would be a good idea for forum users to make some suggestions of what these guidelines could be. In particular it is difficult to draw the line between looking for sources on the one hand, and encouraging people to contribute on the other (i.e. if moderators look for everything to be sourced then people stop posting).


  • Options
    #158
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    jonniebgood1 wrote: »
    Yes- it could be something to add to the forum charter. It would be a good idea for forum users to make some suggestions of what these guidelines could be. In particular it is difficult to draw the line between looking for sources on the one hand, and encouraging people to contribute on the other (i.e. if moderators look for everything to be sourced then people stop posting).
    I suppose that it is really all down primarily to the mods' judgement and secondarily to peer review (if the term applies here).
    Fair enough for a new poster to enter into the fray with unreferenced material but after a while, if they persist in doing so, they should be gently reminded that unreferenced material is worth nothing to either contributor or reader. A gentle reminder shouldn't deter someone from contributing if their interest is genuine.
    I am a relative newbie to this forum myself. I've often thought of asking if some of my posts could be deleted because they are so embarrassing. But with small corrections and encouragement from 'peers' (cheers CDfm, Marchdub & Bainnsidhe) I persisted, felt welcome and I learned and continue to learn one heck of a lot. Whether or not I can remember it all, is another matter.


  • Options
    #159
    Nhead
    Closed Accounts Posts: 309 ✭✭Nhead


    jonniebgood1 wrote: »
    I need to clarify a query that has been made in relation to threads that contain Unionist and Nationalist views and subjects on the History forum. Not only are discussions on these subjects allowed, they are encouraged. Requests for sources to back up contentious views have been made to ensure (a)points are based on evidence and (b) if the basis for a viewpoint is understood, it makes opposite views understandable.

    I will rename this thread for any reasonable suggestions or for discussions regarding the development of this forum. If people have any ideas in this regard they should post them here.

    When posting about unionism/nationalism posters shouldn't personalise their posts. Saying 'well that is the way it is and I know that because I live there isn't, in any way shape or form, history (unless you can back it up) it is personal experience. I also think generalising is stupid i.e. the English are all like x,y and z, the Irish are this, that and the other. Sectarianism has many insidious forms and should be avoided as it is difficult to distinguish when someone is being sectarian. This happened to me on this forum, as a poster said something that to them may not have seemed sectarian but when I was growing up was regularly used to put down the Republic. We should all respect that Unionism/ Republicanism each made/make valid points to those that follow these ideologies by and large no forum is going to make a unionist become republican and vice-versa.


  • Options
    #160
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    I always looked on this as being Brians history forum and boards was a bit incidental.

    If nobody is posting any "sensitive" history then discussing how to deal with it is abstract.

    I would have thought a general let bygones be bygones approach might suit everbody and, while it is not the boards way, history is a discipline but this is not History Ireland and there is no need to be all snobby about it.

    There is no such thing as pure history and it always is going to be subjective.

    Why not just simplify it .

    Boards rules apply

    no soapboxing or personalised insults

    No winding others up

    If you have a link post it or cite a reference or run the risk of having your source attributed to "Your Ma" and lore has its place in history.

    And most things should not go to warning stage where a simple, "chill out" or "chill out dudes" will suffice.

    It should not be any more difficult than that as it is not happening here anymore.


  • Options
    #161
    jonniebgood1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,577 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    CDfm wrote: »
    ...
    If nobody is posting any "sensitive" history then discussing how to deal with it is abstract.
    ...

    There is no such thing as pure history and it always is going to be subjective.

    Why not just simplify it .

    Boards rules apply

    no soapboxing or personalised insults

    No winding others up

    If you have a link post it or cite a reference or run the risk of having your source attributed to "Your Ma" and lore has its place in history.

    And most things should not go to warning stage where a simple, "chill out" or "chill out dudes" will suffice.

    It should not be any more difficult than that as it is not happening here anymore.

    This is all agreeable but also I would have thought it is the way it is. Comments are taken on board and 'sensitive' threads are encouraged once people stay within reasonable boundaries (i.e. charter or suggested rules as per quoted post) as per post 155. Moreso any variation in threads within the history and heritage scope is welcomed as we all like to learn new knowledge from them.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    jonniebgood1 wrote: »
    This is all agreeable but also I would have thought it is the way it is. Comments are taken on board and 'sensitive' threads are encouraged once people stay within reasonable boundaries (i.e. charter or suggested rules as per quoted post) as per post 155. .

    History is a discipline and the idea that you can apply boards logic to a discipline or a culture is funny. :pac:

    There are no sensitive posts as nobody is posting any and maybe its time to just relax, chill out and see what happens.


Advertisement