Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Unfair infraction.

  • 26-09-2014 10:47AM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 723 ✭✭✭


    I got an infraction off a mod. I think its uncalled for. It was on this thread http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057295711/1

    Could someone review it please?


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Luke92 wrote: »
    I got an infraction off a mod. I think its uncalled for. It was on this thread http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057295711/1

    Could someone review it please?

    Hi Luke,

    I'll have a look into this for you.

    moderately,
    Scofflaw


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    I've had a look at this. I can see how the mod judgement was arrived at, in that they were dealing with a contentious thread with a number of flaming posts already there, and they took the view that you were comparing the OP's daughter to the Bolger killers.

    My own view would be that while bringing up the Bolger case is never going to be something people are happy with, it does make the point that children can be evil. More to the point, it's one of the few open and shut cases where the fact has been effectively demonstrated in law.

    So I would agree that you were being supportive of the OP, against a thread in which most people were flatly contradicting her view that her child was evil, or indeed even the possibility of children being evil.

    I don't see, therefore, that you were contravening the mod warning about flaming the OP. I think you had a valid point, and used a well-known case to make that point in an entirely valid manner. The Bolger case is, however, a sufficiently emotive subject that you need to be very careful using it even in a valid way!

    As such, I agree that the infraction should be reversed.

    moderately,
    Scofflaw


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 723 ✭✭✭Luke92


    I know its a touchy subject and should thread very carefully with it. But thanks for being able to see that I was agreeing with the op and not attacking her in any way. And that my point, however emotive of a subject, was valid.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    No problem.

    moderately,
    Scofflaw


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,924 ✭✭✭✭BuffyBot


    Marked as resolved.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement