Martin McGuinnes Thread interned

Morlar

I am wondering why have boards.ie locked the Martin McGuinness thread from After hours ?

At almost 40k views it was the most popular thread on there at the moment, and is a widely interesting general topic.

It is now closed and posters referred to the politics /election forum, however this is odd to me as I don't recall any of the multiple Norris threads in after hours getting the same treatment.

Also, can anyone confirm if or when boards.ie intends to include martin McGuinness in the 'Presidential canditate boards.ie video interview' series ? Such as was the case also with Norris.

I pm'd about this on monday and got no meaningful response.

The Master

In response to the closing of the thread in AH, all threads regarding the presidential election(if they haven't already died off)will be closed in time and users directed to the Election forum

My name is URL

I guess it was seen as too politically charged for AH.. unlike the Norris threads which were more of a flavour of the day type of thing.

Wolfe Tone

The Master wrote: »

In response to the closing of the thread in AH, all threads regarding the presidential election(if they haven't already died off)will be closed in time and users directed to the Election forum

This doesnt seem to be happening, any reason why?

K-9

Don't think the Dana one was moved either.

stovelid

Not to worry, if historical precedent is any guide, it will return from its internment in a different guise; skilfully gainsay its tumultuous past and have many people that should know better queueing up to endorse it.

FetchTheGin

stovelid wrote: »

Not to worry, if historical precedent is any guide, it will return from its internment in a different guise; skilfully gainsay its tumultuous past and have many people that should know better queueing up to endorse it.

What a fail.

jimdeans

Frankly, I don't want to talk politics with anyone who would log on to an election forum.

The pres election is classic pub talk and is well suited to AH.

K-9

Always seems to be the same main posters on MMG threads anyway and very little difference in the content or style.

Darlughda

Outrageous. Will there be a dirty protest?

stovelid

FetchTheGin wrote: »

stovelid wrote: »

Not to worry, if historical precedent is any guide, it will return from its internment in a different guise; skilfully gainsay its tumultuous past and have many people that should know better queueing up to endorse it.

What a fail.

Bang to rights.

Darlughda

Jayzus, I was only messin' bout the dirty protest.

Where the hell did that last thread go to?

wont tell anyone, I swear....

jimdeans

There's an awful lot of threads being moved or locked in there lately isn't there? Seems a little odd to restrict what people can talk about, within limits.

El Weirdo

jimdeans wrote: »

There's an awful lot of threads being moved or locked in there lately isn't there?

Lately? What time period are you using as a benchmark?

jimdeans wrote: »

Seems a little odd to restrict what people can talk about, within limits.

Now, this one is really confusing.

FetchTheGin

El Weirdo wrote: »

Now, this one is really confusing.

What's confusing? All the other presidential threads are open while the MMG one was locked, it isn't rocket science.

El Weirdo

FetchTheGin wrote: »

What's confusing? All the other presidential threads are open while the MMG one was locked, it isn't rocket science.

Read the line I quoted.

Morlar

No news on the Martin McGuinness boards.ie video interview ?

I remember boards.ie pushing the Norris interview on the front page, was told it was equally open to all candidates.

Norris is no longer officially a candidate and McGuinness is so I would expect boards to offer the same platform to McGuinness as it has done in the past to Norris. No ?

Can anyone confirm has it been scheduled or has anything been done to arrange it ? Have any decisions been made in regard to that ?

jimdeans

El Weirdo wrote: »

Lately? What time period are you using as a benchmark?


Now, this one is really confusing.

I'm using the last few days. When I wrote this there were 4 or 5 threads locked or moved on one page.

Dunno what's confusing about what I wrote.

Insect Overlord

Morlar wrote: »

No news on the Martin McGuinness boards.ie video interview ?

I remember boards.ie pushing the Norris interview on the front page, was told it was equally open to all candidates.

Norris is no longer officially a candidate and McGuinness is so I would expect boards to offer the same platform to McGuinness as it has done in the past to Norris. No ?

Can anyone confirm has it been scheduled or has anything been done to arrange it ? Have any decisions been made in regard to that ?

Pretty sure Darragh was the man who dealt with that kind of thing. His position is yet to be filled, as far as I'm aware, so the resources aren't there to do more interviews yet.

Morlar

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Pretty sure Darragh was the man who dealt with that kind of thing. His position is yet to be filled, as far as I'm aware, so the resources aren't there to do more interviews yet.

Set the date and time, arrange an office & I will do it.

If boards.ie is so short staffed as to not be able to spare anyone for 1- 1.5 hrs to tape an interview with a leading candidate in the Irish Presidential election of 2011 I will personally offer my time to help out.

How hard can a call or email to the SF press office from boards.ie be ? Outlining your audience and programme of video interviews with ALL candidates ?

You could do it for other candidates quite easily enough, so if boards.ie is to be taken seriously as a politically impartial group then it is a requirement to treat candidates in an even handed manner - no ?

Treating candidates in an even handed manner would require an even platform to all. If it's only given to one candidate, or engineered such to refuse coverage to another candidate, then it's not an even platform it's an endorsement in disguise.

Insect Overlord

Morlar wrote: »

Set the date and time, arrange an office & I will do it.

If boards.ie is so short staffed as to not be able to spare anyone for 1- 1.5 hrs to tape an interview with a leading candidate in the Irish Presidential election of 2011 I will personally offer my time to help out.

Fire in an oul' CV there for yourself there so, like a good man. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056339045

Morlar wrote: »

How hard can a call or email to the SF press office from boards.ie be ? Outlining your audience and programme of video interviews with ALL candidates ?

You could do it for other candidates quite easily enough, so if boards.ie is to be taken seriously as a politically impartial group then it is a requirement to treat candidates in an even handed manner - no ?

Treating candidates in an even handed manner would require an even platform to all. If it's only given to one candidate, or engineered such to refuse coverage to another candidate, then it's not an even platform it's an endorsement in disguise.

Blah blah blah, political conspiracy, blah. This has gone way beyond the point of the OP, but anyway.
It shouldn't be the site's responsibility to approach every single political party in the country. The candidates should be contacting the site if they're so interested in being interviewed, not the other way around.

Morlar

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Fire in an oul' CV there for yourself there so, like a good man. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056339045



Blah blah blah, political conspiracy, blah. This has gone way beyond the point of the OP, but anyway.
It shouldn't be the site's responsibility to approach every single political party in the country. The candidates should be contacting the site if they're so interested in being interviewed, not the other way around.

I think it's a serious enough issue not to be laughed off.

Also to point out - the OP had 2 parts, (this one has been ignored so far).

I didn't use the words 'political conspiracy' you did.

Would you agree with these points here are legitimate concerns (rather than dismiss them offhand) ? ? ? :

How hard can a call or email to the SF press office from boards.ie be ? Outlining your audience and programme of video interviews with ALL candidates ?

You could do it for other candidates quite easily enough, so if boards.ie is to be taken seriously as a politically impartial group then it is a requirement to treat candidates in an even handed manner - no ?

Treating candidates in an even handed manner would require an even platform to all. If it's only given to one candidate, or engineered such to refuse coverage to another candidate, then it's not an even platform it's an endorsement in disguise.

FetchTheGin

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Blah blah blah, political conspiracy, blah.

If you can't give reasonable feedback on the issue, why do you bother posting?

The OP still hasn't been responded to by any of the mods or admin on the site, which is a clear enough message of bias in my opinion.

jimdeans

FetchTheGin wrote: »

If you can't give reasonable feedback on the issue, why do you bother posting?

He always seems to be here, fighting boards' battles at every opportunity. Don't know why.

My name is URL

Morlar wrote: »

No news on the Martin McGuinness boards.ie video interview ?

I remember boards.ie pushing the Norris interview on the front page, was told it was equally open to all candidates.

Norris is no longer officially a candidate and McGuinness is so I would expect boards to offer the same platform to McGuinness as it has done in the past to Norris. No ?

Can anyone confirm has it been scheduled or has anything been done to arrange it ? Have any decisions been made in regard to that ?

A post DeVore that made in the Politics forum would suggest that an interview is at least being considered.

DeVore wrote: »

I'm not trolling, I genuinely would like to hear the guys answer to that. Unfortunately, I doubt I'm going to be allowed to do the McGuinness interview for Boards.

DeV.

Morlar

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Fire in an oul' CV there for yourself there so, like a good man. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056339045

FWIW I pm'd Dav on this subject on 19th Sept and was told that they would be in contact with the other candidates 'in due course'.

However since then, nothing has been announced to the best of my knowledge. So given the respective handling of different candidates, I think it's a fair question.

Morlar

My name is URL wrote: »

A post DeVore that made in the Politics forum would suggest that an interview is at least being considered.

I don't follow, (tone or context or link would help) is that saying Dev will not be permitted to perform the interview ? Permitted by whom exactly ?
Does that mean the candidate has refused or internal boardspol means that a different interviewer be selected ? Or that there is some other barrier to that interview proceeding ?

My name is URL

Here's the link to the thread - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=74565672#post74565672

I'm guessing what DeV means is that he wouldn't be seen by others as impartial enough to conduct such an interview himself. Pure speculation on my part, mind you.

Morlar

My name is URL wrote: »

Here's the link to the thread - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=74565672#post74565672

I'm guessing what DeV means is that he wouldn't be seen by others as impartial enough to conduct such an interview himself. Pure speculation on my part, mind you.

I'm decidedly opposed to this person representing me in any way, or indeed being near me. It wouldnt be fair for me to conduct it.

I have a feeling that the norris boards interview and any future McGuinness one will make for an interesting comparison.

Insect Overlord

FetchTheGin wrote: »

If you can't give reasonable feedback on the issue, why do you bother posting?

The OP still hasn't been responded to by any of the mods or admin on the site, which is a clear enough message of bias in my opinion.

jimdeans wrote: »

He always seems to be here, fighting boards' battles at every opportunity. Don't know why.

Say the two lads who only showed up here a month ago. LOL.

I gave only proper feedback in my first post. And there was honest feedback in my second post too. Ye just highlighted the flippant part. Poor debating on your parts, I must say.

FetchTheGin

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Say the two lads who only showed up here a month ago. LOL.

Which has to do with what?

You are coming across as a bit of a dick, as a moderator surely you enforce the "don't be a dick" rule.

jimdeans

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Say the two lads who only showed up here a month ago. LOL.

I gave only proper feedback in my first post. And there was honest feedback in my second post too. Ye just highlighted the flippant part. Poor debating on your parts, I must say.

My account got mongled during the database hacking thing. I've been around boards for as long as you, though rarely as a poster, and you're always at it.

Insect Overlord

FetchTheGin wrote: »

Which has to do with what?

You are coming across as a bit of a dick, as a moderator surely you enforce the "don't be a dick" rule.

jimdeans wrote: »

My account got mongled during the database hacking thing. I've been around boards for as long as you, though rarely as a poster, and you're always at it.

If you know the site as well as you claim to, you'd both also know that personalising a debate will rarely get you anywhere. How often I post in this forum has nothing to do with what I posted in this thread.

Honestly, if ye want to get to the bottom of the whole argument, stop bothering me and focus on clarifying your point and what you want done about it.

castie

Im sure the guys will do any interviews that make sense and are convienent.

Im pretty sure the guys are not holding back an interview because of being biased but because there are more important site related issues to deal with.

boards.ie duties > political interviews

And why exactly should boards let you represent them to a presidential candidate as their representative???

Also note mods/cmods/admins are volunteer for the most part and dont engage in those offical duties either.

Morlar

Considering the lack of update to this and the absence of a McGuinness interview it seems clear the boards policy on this.

I'd have a lot more respect for boards.ie if they conducted themselves in a more politically neutral manner as regards candidate interviews. I think there was a missed opportunity here.

stovelid

Get Marty to shoot them a steely glance, pregnant with menace.

Morlar

There wasn't much steely glances present when I checked.

To illustrate this point here he was meeting the relatives of the 1916 Proclamation signatories last Friday at the GPO as part of the 'Save 16 Moore St' Campaign.

Wolfe Tone

On the Frontline debate you may have noticed he wore a small badge. That was a "save Moore Street" badge.

Morlar

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

On the Frontline debate you may have noticed he wore a small badge. That was a "save Moore Street" badge.

I did indeed

'Save 16 Moore St' from the property developers who want to put a Mall there. Kind of poignant that he wore the badge when he addressed the FF candidate for taking 5k envelopes. I was there when he was given the badge btw,

Here is a pic of it :

Dudess

And last week there was the thread bemoaning too much air-time being given to SF, along with claims that Boards.ie was backing a pro SF agenda.

Personally, I don't see evidence of Boards censoring MMcG discussion, nor enabling a SF agenda.

Wolfe Tone

I think people are just disappointed that not all the candidates had boards.ie interviews and as far as I can see little effort has been made to get the interviews.

Morlar

Dudess wrote: »

And last week there was the thread bemoaning too much air-time being given to SF, along with claims that Boards.ie was backing a pro SF agenda.

Personally, I don't see evidence of Boards censoring MMcG discussion, nor enabling a SF agenda.

At the point in time this thread was started after hours was coming to an end of a couple of weeks of wall to wall david norris threads.

The first Martin McGuinness thread had approx 40k views was in full flow when it was shut down.

The second part of the thread was about the apparent reluctance on the part of boards.ie to follow through & interview ALL candidates, after having made such a big deal about the david norris interview. It's political correctness gone mad I tells ya.*





.



.



*this part was a joke.

justsomebloke

Morlar wrote: »

The second part of the thread was about the apparent reluctance on the part of boards.ie to follow through & interview ALL candidates

McGuinness seemed to have a bit of "schedule" problems during the election though as I know at least one major evening Radio show couldn't tie him down for a 1-1 interview so maybe the same just happened here

Morlar

justsomebloke wrote: »

McGuinness seemed to have a bit of "schedule" problems during the election though as I know at least one major evening Radio show couldn't tie him down for a 1-1 interview so maybe the same just happened here

Or 'maybe' there was just less desire on the part of senior boards management to interview that candidate ?

K-9

Morlar wrote: »

Or 'maybe' there was just less desire on the part of senior boards management to interview that candidate ?

And the staffing issues!

Was Mitchell interviewed?

Morlar

K-9 wrote: »

And the staffing issues!

Was Mitchell interviewed?

I doubt mitchell would have spoken to boards, besides with his thundering mandate of 2% it hardly matters.

This thread (and question) is about the removal of the McGuinness thread at a time when it was the most popular in after hours, while at that same time after hours was also cock in both ears chockablock full of Norris threads. If you recall posters had taken to first name terms, it was all 'David this and David that' ad infinitum.

The 2nd part of this thread was about the lack of a McGuinness video interview, despite requests for same. I don't recall senior boards figures making negative comments about Mitchell however - can you ?

K-9

Morlar wrote: »

I doubt mitchell would have spoken to boards, besides with his thundering mandate of 2% it hardly matters.

This thread (and question) is about the removal of the McGuinness thread at a time when it was the most popular in after hours, while at that same time after hours was also cock in both ears chockablock full of Norris threads. If you recall posters had taken to first name terms, it was all 'David this and David that' ad infinitum.

The 2nd part of this thread was about the lack of a McGuinness video interview, despite requests for same. I don't recall senior boards figures making negative comments about Mitchell however - can you ?

Morlar wrote:

The second part of the thread was about the apparent reluctance on the part of boards.ie to follow through & interview ALL candidates, after having made such a big deal about the david norris interview. It's political correctness gone mad I tells ya.*

Ah right, I thought it was some idea about fairness for all candidates as you posted earlier today, not just ones that have a small vote as per polls.

That's that clarified anyway.

I haven't really followed comments from the staff tbh.
Still think it's a staffing issue and not a conspiracy against McGuinness or Mitchell for that matter, but that's probably what they want us to think!

Morlar

Why, Yes. That certainly explains why they shut down the first McGuinness thread yet left the Norris ones to run in circles for weeks on end prior to that !

henbane

Morlar wrote: »

... also cock in both ears chockablock...

Stay classy