Religious Threads in After Hours

dr.bollocko

padd b1975 wrote: »

Maybe you and your mods should look at removing lines from the charter.

EG.


No way is even a token effort made by you guys to enforce this.

Enforce what?

Yeah that's not a rule.

It's a link to a forum.

dr.bollocko

Steve wrote: »

I don't think Xavi6 is asking for a specific rule in the charter - just a general hint that sports topics belong elsewhere. And yes, I just had a reasonable look at the charter and it's not apparent.

The spin that 'it's been like that for ages' or 'the regulars know that is the case' is bullcrap tbh if a mod can't back their actions up by reference to posting guidelines or rules somewhere. It's all to easy for regulars and mods alike to assume everyone knows what goes because they are up-to-date on current decisions - and those decisions have become policy but without the forum rules being changed to reflect it.

How, in that case, is a new user (or indeed an experienced user who doesn't frequent the forum but knows to peruse the charter before posting) supposed to know how to behave or what to post or not post?

You know I'm looking at the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy charter and I don't see a rule there telling me not to post about sport.

El Guapo!

dr.bollocko wrote: »

You know I'm looking at the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy charter and I don't see a rule there telling me not to post about sport.

To be fair, that's totally different and you know it is.
Most forums on Boards are specific to a certain subject. AH is almost like an off topic forum. It's a catch-all place where people talk about any number of different topics. It's more likely that a user will think its ok in AH to start a thread about football, rather than starting one in the pregnancy forum, for example.

If I'm being totally honest, your response seems really childish and the attitude towards the subject smacks of "It's my forum and no ones gonna tell me what to do with it."
And I don't mean to sound smart in saying that. That's just how the post is coming across in my eyes.

dr.bollocko

El Guapo! wrote: »

To be fair, that's totally different and you know it is.
Most forums on Boards are specific to a certain subject. AH is almost like an off topic forum. It's a catch-all place where people talk about any number of different topics. It's more likely that a user will think its ok in AH to start a thread about football, rather than starting one in the pregnancy forum, for example.

If I'm being totally honest, your response seems really childish and the attitude towards the subject smacks of "It's my forum and no ones gonna tell me what to do with it."
An I don't mean to sound smart in saying that. That's just how the post is coming across in my eyes.

Well fair enough.

My point here is that AH is a catch all.

Now if we put in a rule that says NEVAR any sports threads then we never have any sports threads.

I remember when we tried to enforce a particular soccer only in the soccer forum rule on a night when Mr. Henry decided to play handball and the attempts to enforce the rule did not exactly go down too well. Big fall out. Lots and lots of unhappy people. Posters, mods, the general balance of the forum was upset. Now the balance is aways an uneasy treaty where the mods are trusted to have common sense. AH is an organic thing. The posters in general respond well to mod rules because, in general, they come from the prevailing opinion of the forum. It's not cat herding and I'm not complaining but it's hot to handle at times.

I think, myself, with regards to letting topics and threads run we've come a long way since 2009 when the charter was written and I've heard recently more and more indications that it has to be re-visited.

That's why I run screaming from blanket rules when it comes to stuff like this. We can talk about sports from time-to-time, in mega-threads or extreme times of great vacuum cleaner kicking national crisis etc. and that should be OK too.

In the general sense we will move posts best suited elsewhere or point people in the right direction. So as a result of this I just genuinely can't see the problem.

Dades

I don't think it would be any harm to add something to the charter. It doesn't have to expressly allow or prohibit sports threads, just something that alludes to the fact that there may be a better forum to post it in.

For example:

Threads relating to sport may be closed or moved to an appropriate sports forum at the mods discretion.

(Edit - just saw El Guapo! suggesting similar!)

dr.bollocko

Dades wrote: »

I don't think it would be any harm to add something to the charter. It doesn't have to expressly allow or prohibit sports threads, just something that alludes to the fact that there may be a probably a better forum to post it in.

For example:



(Edit - just saw El Guapo! suggesting similar!)

Hmm.

Looking through the charter we have something here:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63136796&postcount=13

It's a bit absolute in its wording though. In the sense that it does not, in all cases, as K-9 suggested above, reflect the reality of the daily scope of topics in AH.
Changing an "It will be moved..." to an "it may be moved..." solves one problem but creates others.

Goddamn the idiot that wrote that charter.

El Guapo!

dr.bollocko wrote: »

Well fair enough.

My point here is that AH is a catch all.

Now if we put in a rule that says NEVAR any sports threads then we never have any sports threads.

I remember when we tried to enforce a particular soccer only in the soccer forum rule on a night when Mr. Henry decided to play handball and the attempts to enforce the rule did not exactly go down too well. Big fall out. Lots and lots of unhappy people. Posters, mods, the general balance of the forum was upset. Now the balance is aways an uneasy treaty where the mods are trusted to have common sense. AH is an organic thing. The posters in general respond well to mod rules because, in general, they come from the prevailing opinion of the forum. It's not cat herding and I'm not complaining but it's hot to handle at times.

I think, myself, with regards to letting topics and threads run we've come a long way since 2009 when the charter was written and I've heard recently more and more indications that it has to be re-visited.

That's why I run screaming from blanket rules when it comes to stuff like this. We can talk about sports from time-to-time, in mega-threads or extreme times of great vacuum cleaner kicking national crisis etc. and that should be OK too.

In the general sense we will move posts best suited elsewhere or point people in the right direction. So as a result of this I just genuinely can't see the problem.

Yeah I see exactly where you're coming from but it doesn't have to be a blanket ban on sports discussions.
As Dades and myself have said, it could be something along the lines of.....

"After Hours is not the place for sports discussions except in certain circumstances (Olympics, World Cup etc). This is at the mods discretion. Any other sports threads will be locked and/or moved to the appropriate forum.

This way, its not a blanket ban but it clearly states the mods position on sports threads in AH. Nobody could argue against that rule if it was in the charter.
And for what it's worth, I think the AH mods do a fantastic job controlling the forum. And the periodic sports "mega threads" work very well.

padd b1975

dr.bollocko wrote: »

Enforce what?

Enforce what you (plural) recommend in the charter regarding where posters should locate their threads when starting them.

Post #13....

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63136796&postcount=13
I honestly can't recall any thread about politics or the economy being moved or nipped in the bud in the last six months.

Back on topic, religious threads are totally unsuited to AH for the exact same reasons as have been outlined for soccer threads in my opinion.

They always follow the same pattern, aetheists tripping over themselves to post up unfairly general, insulting, sometimes libellous, sectarian and bigoted insults at the catholic church.

There is one poster that I have noticed that can be gauranteed to start a Catholic bashing thread given just a whiff of a chance to do so.

He/she is using AH and the way its moderated to further his/her own bigoted opinion of the Catholic Church.

Super-Rush

padd b1975 wrote: »

Enforce what you (plural) recommend in the charter regarding where posters should locate their threads when starting them.

Post #13....

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63136796&postcount=13
I honestly can't recall any thread about politics or the economy being moved or nipped in the bud in the last six months.

Back on topic, religious threads are totally unsuited to AH for the exact same reasons as have been outlined for soccer threads in my opinion.

They always follow the same pattern, aetheists tripping over themselves to post up unfairly general, insulting, sometimes libellous, sectarian and bigoted insults at the catholic church.

There is one poster that I have noticed that can be gauranteed to start a Catholic bashing thread given just a whiff of a chance to do so.

He/she is using AH and the way its moderated to further his/her own bigoted opinion of the Catholic Church.

What way is AH being moderated?

padd b1975

Super-Rush wrote: »

What way is AH being moderated?

Moderation is generally very good in my opinion.

However, the fact that religious threads inevitably turn into tools for catholic church bashing is not something mods should be proud of

Micky Dolenz

Report them. I close a lot of religion threads.

Super-Rush

padd b1975 wrote: »

Moderation is generally very good in my opinion.

However, the fact that religious threads inevitably turn into tools for catholic church bashing is not something mods should be proud of

People have a right to criticise the church.

P. Breathnach

Super-Rush wrote: »

People have a right to criticise the church.

True.

But people posting on Boards do not have a right to be dicks. Many of the attacks on religion or on churches are quite intemperate. As a convinced atheist, I do not feel that I have a need or an entitlement to pour scorn on the beliefs of adherents of any religion; I have even less entitlement to pour scorn on the believers themselves.

Where people use slash-hooks where a scalpel might be appropriate, I think mods should intervene.

Super-Rush

P. Breathnach wrote: »

True.

But people posting on Boards do not have a right to be dicks. Many of the attacks on religion or on churches are quite intemperate. As a convinced atheist, I do not feel that I have a need or an entitlement to pour scorn on the beliefs of adherents of any religion; I have even less entitlement to pour scorn on the believers themselves.

Where people use slash-hooks where a scalpel might be appropriate, I think mods should intervene.

We do intervene when we feel its appropriate.

padd b1975

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Report them. I close a lot of religion threads.

Point taken.

When I see mods trotting out the old 'report posts' mantra, I am always tempted to reply with 'try and find the time to read some of the busier threads on the forum you moderate'.

Look, I appreciate where you're coming from on this so I will definitely make more of an effort to report posts I feel are out of order.

Doctor Strange

P. Breathnach wrote: »

True.

But people posting on Boards do not have a right to be dicks. Many of the attacks on religion or on churches are quite intemperate. As a convinced atheist, I do not feel that I have a need or an entitlement to pour scorn on the beliefs of adherents of any religion; I have even less entitlement to pour scorn on the believers themselves.

Where people use slash-hooks where a scalpel might be appropriate, I think mods should intervene.

Goes for the religious posters too. In my nearly 2 years here, I've seen the first shots fired by both sides, so blaming those nasty atheists doesn't cut it, imo.

Super-Rush

padd b1975 wrote: »

Point taken.

When I see mods trotting out the old 'report posts' mantra, I am always tempted to reply with 'try and find the time to read some of the busier threads on the forum you moderate'.

Look, I appreciate where you're coming from on this so I will definitely make more of an effort to report posts I feel are out of order.

When in see posts like yours I'm tempted to say stop crying because someone disagrees with you.

padd b1975

Super-Rush wrote: »

People have a right to criticise the church.

Criticise? Yes, absolutely no problem with this from my end.

But 'bashing' is a totally different animal entirely.

Example; all clergy are child molesters.

Childish references to the sky fairy and flying spaghetti monster.

How old are the posters that trot out this gibberish???

11??



No offence implied to 11 year olds.

padd b1975

Super-Rush wrote: »

When in see posts like yours I'm tempted to say stop crying because someone disagrees with you.

Then you would be mistaken.

Last time I checked this was the FEEDBACK forum where FEEDBACK is supposed to be welcomed from posters.

LizT

padd b1975 wrote: »

Point taken.

When I see mods trotting out the old 'report posts' mantra, I am always tempted to reply with 'fry and find the time to read some of the busier threads on the forum you moderate'.

Look, I appreciate where you're coming from on this so I will definitely make more of an effort to report posts I feel are out of order.

The average amount of posts per day in AH over the past week has been around 1500/1600. Per day. And that's not a busy week at all. Sometimes stuff slips through no matter how much of the forum we read, that's why we appreciate people reporting posts.

To suggest we don't read the threads in the forum we moderate is a bit insulting.

P. Breathnach

Super-Rush wrote: »

We do intervene when we feel its appropriate.

I'm not going to claim that you don't.

I read a bit in AH, but post rarely. I sometimes open threads where religion is discussed, and generally exit them fairly quickly because I think the discussions are awful. Perhaps if I read further, I might see mod interventions.

Cabaal

padd b1975 wrote: »

Criticise? Yes, absolutely no problem with this from my end.

But 'bashing' is a totally different animal entirely.

Example; all clergy are child molesters.

Childish references to the sky fairy and flying spaghetti monster.

And yet you just called another religion childish?

I'm sorry but how dare you belittle the church of the flying spaghetti monster. May his noodly appendages forgive you for such comments.

Dav

Super-Rush wrote: »

When in see posts like yours I'm tempted to say stop crying because someone disagrees with you.

You know what, posting like this helps no one and only damages your reputation as a mod.

He's got a very valid point, I see people being scorned and mocked for having religious belief's on this site all the time.

That's a world apart from criticism of an institution like the RC Church which should, as far as I'm concerned, be burnt to the ground for it's corruption and complacency and indeed active defence of some of the most horrific acts of violence against other humans.

keelanj69

Super-Rush wrote: »

When in see posts like yours I'm tempted to say stop crying because someone disagrees with you.

I wonder what reaction this would get on a regular thread.

Czarcasm

Dav wrote: »

You know what, posting like this helps no one and only damages your reputation as a mod.

He's got a very valid point, I see people being scorned and mocked for having religious belief's on this site all the time.

That's a world apart from criticism of an institution like the RC Church which should, as far as I'm concerned, be burnt to the ground for it's corruption and complacency and indeed active defence of some of the most horrific acts of violence against other humans.

Dav while I appreciate where you're coming from, I do feel it's important that we make the distinction that it was only certain people that carried out these acts, using religion and the RCC as their justification. It was only certain people that facilitated these crimes against other human beings.

I'm RC myself, and you're damn right I have issues with the hierarchy, but I wouldn't paint the whole institution of the RC as a pack of kiddie fiddling facilitators, nor would I condone the actions of a bastard like Brendan Smyth.

These people were child molesters and rapists before they were ever part of any organisation, it's just that, and this may not be a very palatable opinion, but if we can specifically refer to Irish society- Society is to blame for the children that were abused in the so-called care of the perverts that were allowed free reign the Laundries and the Church. Society colluded just as much to rid itself of the "scourge" of indisciplined and "problem" children. Pedophiles and perverts saw the RCC as easy and authoritative access to these children that society had rejected, and tbh Dav you'll see it in ANY organisation or religion, not just the RCC.

Paddy makes a good point earlier about the whole thing with these RCC "criticising" (since we're going to use that word instead of just calling a spade a spade) threads- posters tripping over themselves to express their faux revulsion at something they have never experienced, but it's the cool thing to do apparently among back slapping atheists in AH- "Look at me, I just came up with a new word for the kiddie fiddlers and the sky fairy believers, ain't I great, I'm not a thanks whore at all at all". It's just bloody juvenile tbh and the same posts would get fcukall traction in the actual Atheist forum, but are tolerated aplenty in AH.

To be honest, it just makes the posters themselves look bad, and the same regurgitated ****e just makes me think "Oh would you ever just fcuk off with your faux outrage". I'm married to an atheist many good friends of mine are atheist, decades before atheism and criticism of the catholic church was the cool thing to do, and none of them go on like some of the posters in AH when they get the opportunity to have a good go at expressing their faux dismissive intellectualism of all anything catholic related. We wouldn't tolerate anti-semitism (I know it's not quite the same thing) on boards.ie, but somehow everybody gets a free pass to jump in the group think and belittle the RC, extra thanks for originality.

It's tiresome, and it's lazy, and it makes AH out to be a den of mob rule and popular opinion goes, it's emperors new clothes style intimidation and tbh it's sinister as fcuk, and takes all the pleasure out of posting there or even participating in the forum with the amount of religion "criticism" related threads on there, even the ones that start off as a reasonable and secular discussion of issues in Irish society such as abortion, etc, eventually you'll have somebody declare "as an atheist" so on so on, "the church can fcuk off before they'll tell me what to do", etc. It just makes me think "Good for you and all, but nobody really gives a fcuk!".

There was a while there when Micky was actively closing religion threads when AH became over-run with them, and they went out of fashion for a while, but now they seem to be making their comeback with a vengeance.

After Hours comes under the "Rec" category, Religion comes under some the "Soc" category, and with the introduction of the "Start a discussion" function with the intention of directing posters to the right forum for their discussion, perhaps it's best if AH isn't confused with the Recycle Bin given the amount of times religious threads get recycled in there.

As the ethos of After Hours is supposed to be the forum where it's like a chat down the pub with your mates, does anyone here honestly think I go down the pub and discuss religion with my mates?

I do in my fcuk, we have better things to be talking about!

padd b1975

LizT wrote: »

The average amount of posts per day in AH over the past week has been around 1500/1600. Per day. And that's not a busy week at all. Sometimes stuff slips through no matter how much of the forum we read, that's why we appreciate people reporting posts.

To suggest we don't read the threads in the forum we moderate is a bit insulting.

Sorry its not meant to be insulting.

I don't think its unreasonable to expect a mod on seeing a thread as divisive as a religious thread racking up the post count not to make a mental note to keep an eye on that thread, or even better exchange a quick pm with their fellow mods to make them aware of it.


Without wishing to tell you how to do your job, I feel mods would get a much better feel for the ebb and flow of threads and the context in which some posts are made if they read them, especially those where the debate will clearly be feisty.

Once again, apologies if I insulted you.

K-9

Czarcasm wrote: »

As the ethos of After Hours is supposed to be the forum where it's like a chat down the pub with your mates, does anyone here honestly think I go down the pub and discuss religion with my mates?

Well there is no sports discussion allowed so it isn't much of a pub, and if we don't allow religious discussion, it wouldn't be much of an Irish rural pub anyway. I'm not really a fan of the pub analogy much!

As for religion, I appreciate it can be difficult to read some of the comments about the Church that some posters belong to, unfortunately many people are justifiably angry at the organisation, indeed I'm more angry at the repeated cover ups here in Donegal, countrywide and globally. Some people will get irate when the heads of that same church pontificate on morals or standards.

Some people are still furious with FF after bankrupting the country, others at FG/Labour breaking promises. We can't sugar coat or overly censor AH, particularly if people want to compare it to a pub!

Also, it's a bit unfair to call some posters thanks whores, showing faux outrage or being atheist because it's the "in" thing, appears condescending to me and if it occurs in a thread, not very helpful either, it happens a fair bit and it is often Church goers getting their retaliation in first.

Czarcasm

K-9 wrote: »

Well there is no sports discussion allowed so it isn't much of a pub, and if we don't allow religious discussion, it wouldn't be much of an Irish rural pub anyway. I'm not really a fan of the pub analogy much!

I'm not a fan of the pub analogy much myself K-9, but I just used the phrase because that's what's in the charter. To put religion in the context of a sports discussion- Religion threads are like Man U supporters on one side calling Liverpool supporters a shower of ****. We wouldn't tolerate it. Even more of us who have been around a while would say "Hasn't this been done to death already?".

So why is it that a majority of atheists are allowed free reign to sneer at religion and use AH as their own personal "Look at this lads- I just found another reason to pat myself on the back for being an enlightened atheist intellectual as opposed to those kiddie fiddling delusional religious numptys". If there was ever a more apt use of the phrase "thinly veiled", it's a thread that starts off with "Have you ever witnessed someone losing their religion?" that quickly descends into a tiresome tirade against the RCC. What the fcuk is posters affirming their atheist status and their hatred of religion supposed to achieve if not just to make them feel more smug about themselves?

As for religion, I appreciate it can be difficult to read some of the comments about the Church that some posters belong to, unfortunately many people are justifiably angry at the organisation, indeed I'm more angry at the repeated cover ups here in Donegal, countrywide and globally. Some people will get irate when the heads of that same church pontificate on morals or standards.

It's misdirected anger IMO though. Instead of getting angry at the church- get angry at the bastards that facilitated and perpetuated these crimes under false pretences. Get angry at the people who still corrupt and twist religion to further their own agenda. The important thing is to do so in the right forum. AH in my opinion isn't it. That's just, to coin a phrase- preaching to the converted.

Some people are still furious with FF after bankrupting the country, others at FG/Labour breaking promises. We can't sugar coat or overly censor AH, particularly if people want to compare it to a pub!

You wouldn't tolerate soap boxing in the Politics forum, why should AH be viewed as the home of the intellectually challenged mob?

Also, it's a bit unfair to call some posters thanks whores, showing faux outrage or being atheist because it's the "in" thing, appears condescending to me and if it occurs in a thread, not very helpful either, it happens a fair bit and it is often Church goers getting their retaliation in first.

I'm not a fan of sugar coating either tbh, I wouldn't actually say the above IN a discussion in After Hours though as it would be uncivil. But this is Feedback, and I was making the point about the run of these religion threads, as opposed to taking swipes at individual posters.

returnNull

Cabaal wrote: »

And yet you just called another religion childish?

I'm sorry but how dare you belittle the church of the flying spaghetti monster. May his noodly appendages forgive you for such comments.

R'amen to that brother!

Steve

dr.bollocko wrote: »

You know I'm looking at the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy charter and I don't see a rule there telling me not to post about sport.

HHGTTG has lots of sporting references, discussion on them is welcomed on the forum - as are any religious topics that the guide covers.