Thunderdome and bullying.

Artful_Badger

I didnt have access to the thunderdome after it went private but from what I have gathered a number of posters have been banned for bullying and harassing an other poster or posters. From Davs post in prison it seems this didnt just happen on boards but other social media sites. These poster bullied and harassed a boards poster here then followed them elsewhere and continued it.

I thought one of the biggest issues facing social media and online communities was that of bullying. These posters have only gotten a months ban, have since organised and started their own thunderdome forum elsewhere using non banned friends from boards to send word out. While the thunderdome continues on.

Why has boards been so lenient to these posters given the nature of the offence ? Its a dangerous precedent to say bullying and harassing other people and stalking them to other social media sites (I assume they found out who this persons or persons were) is a lesser crime than shilling or spamming which routinely get lifetime bans.

returnNull

Just playing devils advocate here but maybe all the posters did on boards.ie was elligible for a 1 month ban?Boards cant punish users for what they do on other websites.

Artful_Badger

returnNull wrote: »

Just playing devils advocate here but maybe all the posters did on boards.ie was elligible for a 1 month ban?Boards cant punish users for what they do on other websites.

They were banned for bullying and harassing on boards as well as other websites though which I dont see how in any form only warrant a 1 month ban. As for being punished for what they do on another website it is a tricky one. But seems to me like it was just a spillover from what was going on here.

Gokei

Any information boards.ie has should be forwarded to the guards

Insect Overlord

Gokei wrote: »

Any information boards.ie has should be forwarded to the guards

What? O.o

Gokei

Insect Overlord wrote: »

What? O.o

Not sure if bullying is illegal, but harassment is.

returnNull

Artful_Badger wrote: »

They were banned for bullying and harassing on boards

and again preumably it only warranted a 1 month ban.It also started in the thunderdome which had some very unique rules regarding posters behaviour.One of them iirc was that anything you posted on boards.ie was fair game.

Quixoticelixer

They really should never have gone back on their original decision to close the forum in the first place. Of course the decision was going to be met with resistance by the small group of posters that used the forum (Did admins/staff expect otherwise??), but the Thunderdome was an awful, awful part of boards, I remember browsing the threads there, it served its purpose in threads going back 10, 9, 8 years ago but over time it evolved into something far more dark and nasty and sinister (even if it was just a form of "humour") and totally unrecognisable from what the forum originally was in the first place.

From what I have read on the Prison threads here, I'm not really sure why the bans weren't permanent given the nature of the reasons for the bans being handed out, but having said that I don't know the full story.

returnNull

Gokei wrote: »

Any information boards.ie has should be forwarded to the guards

it would up the poster/posters that were allegedly bullied/harrassed to make a complaint to the AGS.And then for the AGS to contact boards.ie.

Quixoticelixer

Gokei wrote: »

Not sure if bullying is illegal, but harassment is.

We don't know what happened and in any case it's none of our business. If what happened was something that required the intervention of the Gardai I have every faith in boards that they would have done that. For all we know, they may actually have done that.

returnNull

Quixoticelixer wrote: »

They really should never have gone back on their original decision to close the forum in the first place. Of course the decision was going to be met with resistance by the small group of posters that used the forum (Did admins/staff expect otherwise??), but the Thunderdome was an awful, awful part of boards, I remember browsing the threads there, it served its purpose in threads going back 10, 9, 8 years ago but over time it evolved into something far more dark and nasty and sinister (even if it was just a form of "humour") and totally unreconisable from what the forum originally was in the first place.

There was an opt in/out option for the thunderdome.It was all voluntary.It should of stopped when the people getting hassled opted out.

but having said that I don't know the full story.

Nobody does except the posters involved and boards staff.

Quixoticelixer

returnNull wrote: »

There was an opt in/out option for the thunderdome.It was all voluntary.It should have stopped when the people getting hassled opted out.

Nobody does except the posters involved and boards staff.

Fully aware of all the above, my opinion still stands. I ain't judging individuals who posted, but I just don't personally believe it is a necessary/useful part of the site.

Maybe I'm wrong and this was just a case of a handful of posters just taking things too far.

rovoagho

Thread title made me LOL. Apparently contact sports can lead to injury too. Who knew?

returnNull

Quixoticelixer wrote: »

Fully aware of all the above, my opinion still stands. I ain't judging individuals who posted, but I just don't personally believe it is a necessary/useful part of the site.

Maybe I'm wrong and this was just a case of a handful of posters just taking things too far.

Thats fair enough Q(ye can feck off if you even think im gonna attempt and spell your username correctly :pac: ).

For me I always enjoyed reading the dome.

Artful_Badger

returnNull wrote: »

and again preumably it only warranted a 1 month ban.It also started in the thunderdome which had some very unique rules regarding posters behaviour.One of them iirc was that anything you posted on boards.ie was fair game.

But thats the issue I'm raising, bullying and harassment is bullying and harassment and if it needs investigation and leads to bans then it cant have been anything trivial. I dont see how there are varying degrees of it, if you are done for bullying on a website like this then surely the sanction must be one of the most serious that cound be handed down. A months site ban is extremely lenient.

I doubt there is anything in those rules which excuses anything than can be classed as bullying. So what those posters did must have been way beyond regular thunderdome stuff if Dav himself was informing them they were being banned for bullying and harassment on boards and other social media. If what went on in the forum before it was private continued it would have to be very serious stuff to lead to bans. From reading the various prison threads it looks like a group of them were sharing private information on posters which didnt come from boards. I'd assume someone found out who a poster was, shared it with others and used it to find them and harass them on other sites as well as this one.

Artful_Badger

returnNull wrote: »

There was an opt in/out option for the thunderdome.It was all voluntary.It should of stopped when the people getting hassled opted out.

Thats the problem it was all done behind the scene apparently and some of it off the site. A forum like that which uses everything anyone has posted to get to them will always lead to a few people going way too far. I dont understand how anyone thought hiding it away would be a good idea, the mod of the forum was banned with the rest so making it private just make it harder to handle. Its no surprise it quickly led to bullying.

returnNull

Again it cant of been too serious.People get 1 month bans for sending abusive PM's. Boards.ie admins,cmods and the office staff arent shy to hand out sitebans whether a poster has been a member for 2 days or 8 years.

This thread is probably gonna get locked as they dont discuss peoples bans etc.
If anything it highlights the need for people not to put anything personal in the public domain.

Artful_Badger

returnNull wrote: »

Again it cant of been too serious.People get 1 month bans for sending abusive PM's. Boards.ie admins,cmods and the office staff arent shy to hand out sitebans whether a poster has been a member for 2 days or 8 years.

This thread is probably gonna get locked as they dont discuss peoples bans etc.
If anything it highlights the need for people not to put anything personal in the public domain.

It was serious enough for Dav himself to investigate it and call it bullying and harassment and state it happened on boards as well as other websites. The fact that people get 1 months ban for an abusive pm is re-enforcing my point that if the powers that be see something as bullying yet deal with it in the same vein as an abusive pm then they are underestimating the seriousness of the offence.

Bullying is a big problem on social media and forums and as has been seen in some high profile cases has a huge impact on victims of it. Its not a trivial matter and if boards doesnt see it as one of the most serious offence to be committed on this website then something is seriously wrong.

You cant dismiss it or lay blame at the victims feet for putting information in the public domain either. With enough determination you can find out a lot of information and find someones real identity online, that doesnt mean it should be tolerated in any way shape or form or dealt with leniently when done so by people intent on bullying and harassing others. Everything done on this website falls under the responsibility of boards.ie. Boards allowed the thunderdome and people to do what they do in there. They do not allow people to bully others, so the poster/s are in no way to blame.

The issue here is why was this case of bullying not dealt with to reflect the severity of the offence or why boards.ie doesnt see bullying as the serious offence it is.

returnNull

Artful_Badger wrote: »

The fact that people get 1 months ban for an abusive pm is re-enforcing my point that if the powers that be see something as bullying yet deal with it in the same vein as an abusive pm then they are underestimating the seriousness of the offence.

no it re-enforces the point it was only worthy of a 1 month ban.Its you thats over-estimating the seriousness of the offense.

Artful_Badger

returnNull wrote: »

no it re-enforces the point it was only worthy of a 1 month ban.Its you thats over-estimating the seriousness of the offense.

Thinking a one month ban is a leniant sanction for bullying is over estimating the seriousness of bullying ? You don't see bullying as a worse offence than an abusive pm or insulting a mod or re-regging or anything else that would get you a one month ban ?

degrassinoel

returnNull wrote: »

no it re-enforces the point it was only worthy of a 1 month ban.Its you thats over-estimating the seriousness of the offense.

Actually, while we're all speculating here.. due to the nature of the thunderdome, the offense could have been a lot worse than you're giving it credit for too given it's 'anything goes' charter.

Without the facts we can only speculate as to what happened.
Either way, Bullying is a serious offense. And as people were banned and a private forum closed over it, you and i can safely assume that the matter is being treated seriously.

returnNull

degrassinoel wrote: »

Actually, while we're all speculating here.. due to the nature of the thunderdome, the offense could have been a lot worse than you're giving it credit for too given it's 'anything goes' charter.

Yeah possibly.What ever it was got people a 1 month ban and the forum closed.

Has it ever happened before that the thunderdome spilled over into other forums?

returnNull

Artful_Badger wrote: »

Thinking a one month ban is a leniant sanction for bullying is over estimating the seriousness of bullying ? You don't see bullying as a worse offence than an abusive pm or insulting a mod or re-regging or anything else that would get you a one month ban ?

doesnt really matter what I think,Dav and who ever else looked into it decided it only warranted a 1 month siteban,which would indicate,imho ,it wasn't serious enough to hand out perma bans.

Artful_Badger

returnNull wrote: »

doesnt really matter what I think,Dav and who ever else looked into it decided it only warranted a 1 month siteban,which would indicate,imho ,it wasn't serious enough to hand out perma bans.

You said I was over estimating the seriousness of bullying as i feel it warranted longer. So do you or do you not see it as equal in seriousness than the other offences ?

You are still missing the point I'm making here anyway. My point is that the ban was for bullying and shouldnt bullying be dealt with more strictly. Your argument is "Dav gave 1 month ergo it only deserves 1 month". Thats not playing devils advocate thats just avoiding discussion entirely.

degrassinoel

returnNull wrote: »

Yeah possibly.What ever it was got people a 1 month ban and the forum closed.

Has it ever happened before that the thunderdome spilled over into other forums?

No idea tbh

returnNull

Artful_Badger wrote: »

You said I was over estimating the seriousness of bullying as i feel it warranted longer.

for somebody that doesnt know exactly what happened(like myself)looking for a siteban when the powers that be decideed it only warranted a 1 month ban,yes i would say youre over -estimating the seriousness.They can only action what happened on boards.

So do you or do you not see it as equal in seriousness than the other offences ?

I think each case should be taken on its own.

Steve

I though TD was totally closed down now due to this type of thing. Did I imagine that?

Insect Overlord

Steve wrote: »

I though TD was totally closed down now due to this type of thing. Did I imagine that?

It's closed down because of this specific incident.

P_1

In two minds over that to be honest. Basically the TD was 'opt in' which you can infer that the people on the receiving end of the abuse consented to receive the abuse (say an online verbal version of an S&M club). I'm not all that sure if it is right to punish consenting adults for that kind of thing to be honest

bumper234

Maybe people should wait until the bans are over and let the people who have been banned have their say in here because at the moment you are all getting one side of the story and running away with speculation.

You may find that there will be some surprising revelations about these serious (slanderous?) accusations and not everything is as it seems. As for the creation of a new dome that has no bearing on the accusations that were made.

It will be interesting to see how long this thread is kept open as my understanding was that these subjects were frowned upon on boards. It will also be Interesting to see if admin will leave the DR threads open when the banned people are back.

Gokei

bumper234 wrote: »

It will be interesting to see how long this thread is kept open as my understanding was that these subjects were frowned upon on boards

For clarification, which subjects? Bullying? Or talking about bullying?

bumper234

Gokei wrote: »

For clarification, which subjects? Bullying? Or talking about bullying?

Neither I was on about discussing banned posters and moderation of the site.

Femme_Fatale

returnNull wrote: »

I always enjoyed reading the dome.

I used to, but recently started questioning how much of a "laugh" it really was.

Artful_Badger

returnNull wrote: »

for somebody that doesnt know exactly what happened(like myself)looking for a siteban when the powers that be decideed it only warranted a 1 month ban,yes i would say youre over -estimating the seriousness.They can only action what happened on boards.

I'm not looking for anything just questioning how serious the powers that be can be taking an issue like bullying when the consequences for doing it is a one month ban. I know enough of what happened to comment on it, and even if I didnt I could take Dav at his word and work off the fact posters were banned for bullying. The degree of it shouldnt matter with something as serious as bullying. Did they only bully the guy a little bit making it less of an issue ?

I think each case should be taken on its own.

Which is fine in determining what type of offence it was. But if it constitutes bullying which is a very serious thing then there is no "lot of bullying" "some bullying". To label it as bullying at all shows how serious Dav saw the transgressions, yet to me the sanction doesnt reflect it. He said "You're lucky to only get a month". The posters luck should have ran out the second he was determined to have bullied another member of boards.

Friend Computer

P_1 wrote: »

In two minds over that to be honest. Basically the TD was 'opt in' which you can infer that the people on the receiving end of the abuse consented to receive the abuse (say an online verbal version of an S&M club). I'm not all that sure if it is right to punish consenting adults for that kind of thing to be honest

The 'Dome was a game and like all games it had rules, one of which was that certain things were off-limits (LGBT, Personal Issues, LTI, etc.). I also believe (it's been a while) that basically everything is kept within the 'Dome. Just like S&M, people set their limits beforehand and it doesn't spill out into other activities.

I'd say it's right to punish consenting adults when they don't play by the rules they agreed to.

Tombi!

I agree with what Friend Computer said... you basically jump in and you're gonna get abuse hurled at you. There were a few forums you couldn't drag stuff up from and that 's that.
Inside the Thunderdome you could be the biggest dick that ever walked the face of the Earth and outside it you were just Joe down the street who's a plumber.

If the game is dragged outside the TD then it's not part of the game anymore. It's breaking the rules of the TD and (maybe more importantly since the TD had very little rules from what I understand from lurking) you're ruining the game itself.

As for those that have been sitebanned for a month or whatever, if they tried moving the game outside of TD, I have no pity and don't see much point in their arguments/reasoning.

Insect Overlord

Artful_Badger wrote: »

I'm not looking for anything just questioning how serious the powers that be can be taking an issue like bullying when the consequences for doing it is a one month ban. I know enough of what happened to comment on it, and even if I didnt I could take Dav at his word and work off the fact posters were banned for bullying. The degree of it shouldnt matter with something as serious as bullying. Did they only bully the guy a little bit making it less of an issue ?

Would you also recommend that school bullies should be permanently expelled? Cop on a bit.

Femme_Fatale

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Would you also recommend that school bullies should be permanently expelled?

I don't see anything unusual about the notion of school bullies being permanently expelled, or it happening.

Insect Overlord

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

I don't see anything unusual about the notion of school bullies being permanently expelled, or it happening.

For a first offence? They have to, at the very least, be given a chance to prove that they've learned their lesson.

Artful_Badger

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Would you also recommend that school bullies should be permanently expelled? Cop on a bit.

Permanently expelled ? You think a student would be allowed back into a school after getting expelled for bullying or that they dont get expelled for bullying ? And those are kids with an inherent right to an education, we're talking about adults here on a discussion forum.

bumper234

Artful_Badger wrote: »

I'm not looking for anything just questioning how serious the powers that be can be taking an issue like bullying when the consequences for doing it is a one month ban. I know enough of what happened to comment on it, and even if I didnt I could take Dav at his word and work off the fact posters were banned for bullying. The degree of it shouldnt matter with something as serious as bullying. Did they only bully the guy a little bit making it less of an issue ? [/QUOUTE]

So you get one side of the story, throw in a bit of rumour and conjecture and that's enough for you? Do the accused not get to give their side of the story in your world? Would it surprise you to know that posts have been deleted from prison threads when people have tried to explain what happened?

Which is fine in determining what type of offence it was. But if it constitutes bullying which is a very serious thing then there is no "lot of bullying" "some bullying". To label it as bullying at all shows how serious Dav saw the transgressions, yet to me the sanction doesnt reflect it. He said "You're lucky to only get a month". The posters luck should have ran out the second he was determined to have bullied another member of boards.

And again you take that label and run with it. The month ban is nearly up, do you think the posters who have had these accusations made against them should/will be allowed to create DR threads about this and get THEIR side of the story out? Or do you think the boards admin will shut them down and not allow the threads?

Artful_Badger

bumper234 wrote: »

So you get one side of the story, throw in a bit of rumour and conjecture and that's enough for you? Do the accused not get to give their side of the story in your world? Would it surprise you to know that posts have been deleted from prison threads when people have tried to explain what happened?

I dont need to know any other side of the story. What rumor or conjecture have I been working off? The rest is between admins and the banned posters. All I have to do in relation to discussing sanctions for offences is know what sanctions are being handed down for what offences. In this case its a one month ban for bullying and harassment.

And again you take that label and run with it. The month ban is nearly up, do you think the posters who have had these accusations made against them should/will be allowed to create DR threads about this and get THEIR side of the story out? Or do you think the boards admin will shut them down and not allow the threads?

I take that label because it is the reason given for the ban. I don't know what will or will not be allowed in relation to them telling their story but that's nothing to do with this thread. They were banned for bullying, I'm questioning if a one month ban reflects the seriousness of bullying that's all.

bumper234

Artful_Badger wrote: »

I dont need to know any other side of the story. What rumor or conjecture have I been working off? The rest is between admins and the banned posters. All I have to do in relation to discussing sanctions for offences is know what sanctions are being handed down for what offences. In this case its a one month ban for bullying and harassment.




I take that label because it is the reason given for the ban. I don't know what will or will not be allowed in relation to them telling their story but that's nothing to do with this thread. They were banned for bullying, I'm questioning if a one month ban reflects the seriousness of bullying that's all.

So one side of an accusation is enough for you to make up your mind? Please don't ever do jury service.

Artful_Badger

bumper234 wrote: »

So one side of an accusation is enough for you to make up your mind? Please don't ever do jury service.

You're missing the point I'm making. Dav and the admins are the law on here, there is no jury and any issue about whether or not it was bullying is between those banned and those who banned them.

Its the length of the bans for the type of offence I'm discussing.

bumper234

Artful_Badger wrote: »

You're missing the point I'm making. Dav and the admins are the law on here, there is no jury and any issue about whether or not it was bullying is between those banned and those who banned them.

Its the length of the bans for the type of offence I'm discussing.

Exactly......there is no process per se. Serious accusations have been made against the people who were banned. Some of those are very well known on here and without a single chance to even answer these accusations they have been labled as bullies. And you say you don't care about that you care more that they should have been banned for life? :eek:

Artful_Badger

bumper234 wrote: »

Exactly......there is no process per se. Serious accusations have been made against the people who were banned. Some of those are very well known on here and without a single chance to even answer these accusations they have been labled as bullies. And you say you don't care about that you care more that they should have been banned for life? :eek:

The process was that it was investigated to find out what happened. They were found to have bullied other posters by those charged with investigating and dealing with these things on this site. If you have an issue with that take it up with those people.

But as far as anyone else is concerned the powers that be dealt with an instance of bullying by issuing one month bans. Thats what I'm discussing. The sanction for the offence not bans for just these particular posters.

EoghanIRL

As a member with several hundred posts in the dome I thinks if fair To say that people went too far and they got what they deserved. It was only ever supposed to be a game but towards the end people took it too far.

bumper234

Artful_Badger wrote: »

The process was that it was investigated to find out what happened. They were found to have bullied other posters by those charged with investigating and dealing with these things on this site. If you have an issue with that take it up with those people.

But as far as anyone else is concerned the powers that be dealt with an instance of bullying by issuing one month bans. Thats what I'm discussing. The sanction for the offence not bans for just these particular posters.

A one sided investigation that NEVER asked the other side for their take on events or asked them a single question. Seriously if you were accused of this would you be happy to just accept the ban without a single chance to defend yourself?

Esoteric_

bumper234 wrote: »

A one sided investigation that NEVER asked the other side for their take on events or asked them a single question. Seriously if you were accused of this would you be happy to just accept the ban without a single chance to defend yourself?

Boards Admin don't ban people without evidence, except on the very odd occasion where they make a mistake.

Boards staff don't generally get involved unless it's a serious matter.

Obviously, it's serious to warrant Dav's intervention, and they obviously have the evidence needed if they issued bans.

Boards isn't a court room. Admin and staff decisions are the last word.

The point of the OP was to question the severity (or perceived lack of) of the punishments. Why are you trying to turn it into a vendetta on behalf of the people involved?

bumper234

Esoteric_ wrote: »

Boards Admin don't ban people without evidence, except on the very odd occasion where they make a mistake.

Boards staff don't generally get involved unless it's a serious matter.

Obviously, it's serious to warrant Dav's intervention, and they obviously have the evidence needed if they issued bans.

Boards isn't a court room. Admin and staff decisions are the last word.

The point of the OP was to question the severity (or perceived lack of) of the punishments. Why are you trying to turn it into a vendetta on behalf of the people involved?

No vendetta on behalf of anyone I am just asking why it's ok to label some very well known posters with a sickening label without first giving them a chance to defend themselves. Yes I know boards is a private company and yes I know admin are judge/jury/executioner but by banning and labeling these people cyber bullies without giving a chance to refute the allegations I think boards has left itself open to legal action.

Artful_Badger

bumper234 wrote: »

No vendetta on behalf of anyone I am just asking why it's ok to label some very well known posters with a sickening label without first giving them a chance to defend themselves. Yes I know boards is a private company and yes I know admin are judge/jury/executioner but by banning and labeling these people cyber bullies without giving a chance to refute the allegations I think boards has left itself open to legal action.

The admins not too long ago went to a lot of trouble to define what the users of this website seen as bullying. They wouldnt have banned anyone specifically for bullying if they didnt have evidence to back it up.

Regardless I sincerely doubt they have left themselves open to legal action for banning an anonymous online account for bullying.