Moderating in Radio.

Gits_bone

There's a massive problem in moderating the radio forum.

I'm a keen supporter of Ray D'arcy. Love his show. His thread is full of people abusing him for his height, giving out about his salary, his button pressing, his interest in running and healthy living.

There is no discussion of his show. It's a Ray D'arcy thread and not a Ray D'arcy Show thread. I was sick of this so I set one up.

Immediately I get a red card and told "DON'T DO THIS TYPE OF THING AGAIN!".

Fast forward to today and "Harry Angstrom" replies to my comment with "Are you Ray D'arcys PR agent or a director of RTE Radio 1?".

In a previous post he said he didn't like the show so I said "You'll have no trouble turning him off so".

In the OP of the thread it reads.

There will be zero tolerance in relation to the following:
1. As per Nody's earlier warning, no one is to suggest that another poster is in any way associated with Ray D'Arcy or the show - this will be a one month ban for first offence, and more severe bans subsequently (there aren't many more before it's permanent);

2. Personal abuse - fairly obvious, don't do it. Don't abuse the presenters, don't abuse each other.

3. No more "if you don't like x, then y". No more. People have to listen to the radio in work, people are entitled to listen to something they don't like. People are entitled to discuss that here. People are entitled to criticise, especially public personas, once this doesn't transcend into abuse.

4. Be civil.

So...I am left with another infraction for trying to make the thread readable.

Harry Angstrom? Well...hullaballoo conveniently deleted "the posts that break the charter" - seemingly forgetting about mine.

So Harry Angstrom doesn't get banned for a month while I am punished. Where is the zero tolerance? And this type of stinkiness goes on all over boards.

The Hill Billy

To be honest, if you wish to appeal your infraction you should do this in the Dispute Resolution forum, but only after discussing it with the mod who gave you the card. (See Step 1 in the process at the top of the page in the DR forum.)

Gits_bone

The Hill Billy wrote: »

To be honest, if you wish to appeal your infraction you should do this in the Dispute Resolution forum, but only after discussing it with the mod who gave you the card. (See Step 1 in the process at the top of the page in the DR forum.)

No I want to discuss in general how this is allowed happen.

Gits_bone

The Hill Billy wrote: »

To be honest, if you wish to appeal your infraction you should do this in the Dispute Resolution forum, but only after discussing it with the mod who gave you the card. (See Step 1 in the process at the top of the page in the DR forum.)

Also there's no point discussing with that mod when I get threats in reply such as "I'd be very slow to reply if I was you".

I had asked was the other person banned for the month because they broke the zero tolerance policy or did he just delete his post and let him away.

Orion

Gits_bone wrote: »

Also there's no point discussing with that mod when I get threats in reply such as "I'd be very slow to reply if I was you".

I had asked was the other person banned for the month because they broke the zero tolerance policy or did he just delete his post and let him away.

And if you get that type of response then you move on to Stage 2 and a CMod looks at it. That's how DRP works. The CMods are independent. Then if you're still unhappy you can ask an Admin to look it. Three levels of appeal.

As for asking if the other person was banned - tbh it's none of your business. If I talk to someone in PM or ban them it's nobody's business bar that person and the other mods of the forum. You won't get an answer to that question - and rightly so.

Gits_bone

Orion wrote: »

And if you get that type of response then you move on to Stage 2 and a CMod looks at it. That's how DRP works. The CMods are independent. Then if you're still unhappy you can ask an Admin to look it. Three levels of appeal.

As for asking if the other person was banned - tbh it's none of your business. If I talk to someone in PM or ban them it's nobody's business bar that person and the other mods of the forum. You won't get an answer to that question - and rightly so.

Yes, but then the person posted in the thread so they clearly weren't banned so that's why I set this thread up.

This thread is not about me trying to get my infraction rescinded. This is about mods deleting posts of posters who break the charter.

Lovely Bloke

Mod who's posted in this thread with stock "it's none of your business what happened to other posters" type posts, it's abundantly clear that the mod in question has moderated in a biased fashion by not implementing a rule for a poster under what is supposedly a "zero tolerance" rule break, and simply deleting the posts, brushing them under the carpet - this is a legitimate Feedback thread subject.

Why, exactly, is the poster getting what looks like special treatment? Is it tenure? Is it because the mod likes the cut of his jib, but doesn't like the cut of another poster's?

The OP here is not appealing his infraction, he just wants to give feedback on what is very, very clearly moderation that warrants feedback being given.

degrassinoel

It's not abundantly clear at all, you are making assumptions.

Gits_bone

degrassinoel wrote: »

It's not abundantly clear at all, you are making assumptions.

It's 100% like how Baldy describes it. There's no missing parts of the story or anything. That is it. It's undefendable actions from a moderator.

The Hill Billy

I agree that it warrants looking at based on the OP's version of events. It would be poor form if a zero tolerance policy was implemented selectively. But I feel that this would be better dealt with by a PM to the CMods as Orion advised earlier.

This thread is about a single incident - not a pattern of behaviour. Not site feedback IMO.

Gits_bone

The Hill Billy wrote: »

I agree that it warrants looking at based on the OP's version of events. It would be poor form if a zero tolerance policy was implemented selectively. But I feel that this would be better dealt with by a PM to the CMods as Orion advised earlier.

This thread is about a single incident - not a pattern of behaviour. Not site feedback IMO.

It's a pattern in radio from what I've seen. One mod seems to be doing it all which leaves no room for other interpretations or views.

Orion

Gits_bone wrote: »

Yes, but then the person posted in the thread so they clearly weren't banned so that's why I set this thread up.

This thread is not about me trying to get my infraction rescinded. This is about mods deleting posts of posters who break the charter.

Deleting posts that break the charter is not uncommon. You don't know what was done behind the scenes. And if something was you won't be privy to it. If you feel it's selective modding to borrow tHB's words then PM the CMods. Modding should be fair and objective - if it isn't there are avenues to follow - site Feedback isn't it.

@Baldy - "Mod who's posted in this thread with stock "it's none of your business what happened to other posters" type posts" - that's not a stock answer - it's fact. Just a few days ago I refused to engage with a poster who wanted to know about something involving another poster. It is not your business what happens with somebody else. Take the example to the workplace - if you were disciplined by your boss (written warning, docked pay, whatever) would you like the boss to tell your colleagues what he'd done? No you wouldn't. Same principle applies. I will not discuss discussions, warning, infractions, etc with anyone bar the poster concerned and the other mods of the forum.

Gits_bone

Orion wrote: »

Deleting posts that break the charter is not uncommon. You don't know what was done behind the scenes. And if something was you won't be privy to it. If you feel it's selective modding to borrow tHB's words then PM the CMods. Modding should be fair and objective - if it isn't there are avenues to follow - site Feedback isn't it.

@Baldy - "Mod who's posted in this thread with stock "it's none of your business what happened to other posters" type posts" - that's not a stock answer - it's fact. Just a few days ago I refused to engage with a poster who wanted to know about something involving another poster. It is not your business what happens with somebody else. Take the example to the workplace - if you were disciplined by your boss (written warning, docked pay, whatever) would you like the boss to tell your colleagues what he'd done? No you wouldn't. Same principle applies. I will not discuss discussions, warning, infractions, etc with anyone bar the poster concerned and the other mods of the forum.

If I went to my workplace and I did something and my co worker did something else I'd be well entitled to ask if the other person was punished or if they got away scot free.

degrassinoel

Gits_bone wrote: »

It's 100% like how Baldy describes it. There's no missing parts of the story or anything. That is it. It's undefendable actions from a moderator.

That's your side, not the moderators side and not the other party's side. you have at most 33% of the story there regardless of how it looks, it's incomplete and you can only make assumptions based on that.

I don't know what happened either, other than what you've said but even with that, i'd be making a pretty big assumption by slating the moderator/s of radio as being onesided/biased against yourself or a group of people that regularly post there.

Gits_bone

degrassinoel wrote: »

That's your side, not the moderators side and not the other party's side. you have at most 33% of the story there regardless of how it looks, it's incomplete and you can only make assumptions based on that.

I don't know what happened either, other than what you've said but even with that, i'd be making a pretty big assumption by slating the moderator/s of radio as being onesided against yourself or a group of people that regularly post there.

The facts are there. Why was his post of him breaking the charter deleted yet mine was left there to get a red card?

Same moderator gave me a red card for setting up a seperate ray d'arcy show thread. Look at the thread, it's a trainwreck. Read it and you will struggle to make out who was on the show today. It's Ray D'arcy bashing.

Moderator is just jumping at the chance to give me as many cards as quick as he can so he can ban me as I am in the minority of liking the Ray D'arcy show.

degrassinoel

Gits_bone wrote: »

The facts are there. Why was his post of him breaking the charter deleted yet mine was left there to get a red card?

No idea, and wouldnt care to speculate because i dont have all the facts from all the parties.

Gits_bone wrote: »

Same moderator gave me a red card for setting up a seperate ray d'arcy show thread. Look at the thread, it's a trainwreck. Read it and you will struggle to make out who was on the show today. It's Ray D'arcy bashing.

Fair enough, Did ye report the posts that were offtopic or in breach of the charter?

Gits_bone wrote: »

Moderator is just jumping at the chance to give me as many cards as quick as he can so he can ban me as I am in the minority of liking the Ray D'arcy show.

If that's how you see your last infraction, you should really open a DRP and have it investigated.

weisses

degrassinoel wrote: »

That's your side, not the moderators side and not the other party's side. you have at most 33% of the story there regardless of how it looks, it's incomplete and you can only make assumptions based on that.

I don't know what happened either, other than what you've said but even with that, i'd be making a pretty big assumption by slating the moderator/s of radio as being onesided/biased against yourself or a group of people that regularly post there.

What is the problem with mentioning on thread/affected post the action taken by a mod ?

Post deleted 1 month ban issued as per charter (took me 5 seconds to type)

kneemos

Gits_bone wrote: »

The facts are there. Why was his post of him breaking the charter deleted yet mine was left there to get a red card?

Same moderator gave me a red card for setting up a seperate ray d'arcy show thread. Look at the thread, it's a trainwreck. Read it and you will struggle to make out who was on the show today. It's Ray D'arcy bashing.

Moderator is just jumping at the chance to give me as many cards as quick as he can so he can ban me as I am in the minority of liking the Ray D'arcy show.

The whole forum exists for the sole purpose of bashing presenters as far as I can see.
Make any sort of positive comment and you'll be shot down.
Left it ages ago,literally couldn't take the negativity.

Gits_bone

degrassinoel wrote: »

Fair enough, Did ye report the posts that were offtopic or in breach of the charter?

Yes I did. I quote his post too and the quoted post also got deleted.

I asked the mod "Did you delete some posts?"

He said "Yes. I deleted some posts that broke the charter".

degrassinoel

weisses wrote: »

What is the problem with mentioning on thread/affected post the action taken by a mod ?

Post deleted 1 month ban issued as per charter (took me 5 seconds to type)

I occasionally do that when a topic is getting out of hand, but afaik it's at the mod's discretion and situational.

Gits_bone

degrassinoel wrote: »

I occasionally do that when a topic is getting out of hand, but afaik it's at the mod's discretion and situational.

There was just myself and himself and one or two other posters posting at the time. Wasn't a peak time.

Why is it discretional when my post got left there to be carded while his post (which according to the OP of a zero tolerance policy) was deleted? That's the problem I can see.

degrassinoel

Gits_bone wrote: »

There was just myself and himself and one or two other posters posting at the time. Wasn't a peak time.

Why is it discretional when my post got left there to be carded while his post (which according to the OP of a zero tolerance policy) was deleted? That's the problem I can see.

No idea, but i'd recommend a DRP if you feel you were right and the infraction was wrong.

weisses

degrassinoel wrote: »

I occasionally do that when a topic is getting out of hand, but afaik it's at the mod's discretion and situational.

I know its at the mods discretion .. and exactly that inconsistency creates friction

If the mod was clear about his actions in this case there wouldn't be a discussion

If someone gets infracted ..reports posts and only sees other forum charter breaking posts deleted you get this kind of perfectly legit questions/discussion imo

Gits_bone

degrassinoel wrote: »

No idea, but i'd recommend a DRP if you feel you were right and the infraction was wrong.

Once again, this is not about my infraction. This is about mods not moderating properly.

degrassinoel

weisses wrote: »

I know its at the mods discretion .. and exactly that inconsistency creates friction

If the mod was clear about his actions in this case there wouldn't be a discussion

If someone gets infracted ..reports posts and only sees other forum charter breaking posts deleted you get this kind of perfectly legit questions/discussion

One person breaks the rules, gets an infraction, nothing said on thread, leaves the thread potentially open for more of the same, yeah i get that alright but sometimes the kids that ratted you out to your mother just want to see you get a clip around the ear too.

Calhoun

So let me get this straight, you have a bug bear with the moderation of a thread in a forum and rather than speaking with the mod team you take it upon yourself to do some backseat modding and create a thread of your own.

You then baited a response from another user (from what i can see), it wasn't just the post that allude to above. Post 528 your response to was fairly antagonistic, you then follow up with the why don't you switch off and then i assume Harry's post happened. It actually looks like you have it in for Harry as you came back to one of his earlier posts twice.

Finally we then have the tone of this thread where you advise you were trying to clean up the thread. That is not your job, its the moderator teams job and they deem if the thread has gone to far and should be the first point of call for any queries.

Something tells me though anything but a blanket ban on criticism of Ray will only be accepted.

My advice is quit while you are ahead, raise a DRP if you think you have been wronged but dont go head to head with volunteers on a site doing a thankless job.

Gits_bone

Calhoun wrote: »

So let me get this straight, you have a bug bear with the moderation of a thread in a forum and rather than speaking with the mod team you take it upon yourself to do some backseat modding and create a thread of your own.

You then baited a response from another user (from what i can see), it wasn't just the post that allude to above. Post 528 your response to was fairly antagonistic, you then follow up with the why don't you switch off and then i assume Harry's post happened. It actually looks like you have it in for Harry as you came back to one of his earlier posts twice.

Finally we then have the tone of this thread where you advise you were trying to clean up the thread. That is not your job, its the moderator teams job and they deem if the thread has gone to far and should be the first point of call for any queries.

Something tells me though anything but a blanket ban on criticism of Ray will only be accepted.

My advice is quit while you are ahead, raise a DRP if you think you have been wronged but dont go head to head with volunteers on a site doing a thankless job.

My reply to that post was anything but antagonistic. But even if it was, is that an excuse for getting away with breaking the charter?

And no, the thread is full of criticism of Ray. The problem here is a difference in moderation towards one poster than another.

Orion

Gits_bone wrote: »

If I went to my workplace and I did something and my co worker did something else I'd be well entitled to ask if the other person was punished or if they got away scot free.

Correct - you're entitled to ask. But that's all your entitled to. The most any boss would (or should) tell you it's being dealt with. Anything else is none of your business.

You've been told what you need to do a few times now. If you're unhappy with the mods and feel that they are being unfair then PM the CMods. I don't know what else it is you're looking for.

Calhoun

I assume as a moderator its a sum of the individual parts they look at and not one incident in isolation. As far as i can see from looking at it from the outside you were baiting, maybe not intentionally but the language on your first post was off.

Its your opinion that it is full of criticism but what do the mods think?

Gits_bone

Calhoun wrote: »

I assume as a moderator its a sum of the individual parts they look at and not one incident in isolation. As far as i can see from looking at it from the outside you were baiting, maybe not intentionally but the language on your first post was off.

Its your opinion that it is full of criticism but what do the mods think?

You see that's the problem. The moderator is always right. How can this be? They can't always be right.

You're not seeing the facts - you're seeing the moderator doing the right thing.

Harry Angstrom

Wow, talk about a one-sided argument here. I made a comment regarding the Ray D'Arcy show, which I am perfectly entitled to do, and which had nothing to do with the OP. This Gits person then proceeded to give a response (directed at me) akin to the "if you don't like it, don't listen to it" variety, which, funnily enough is also a matter which will be treated with zero tolerance:

3. No more "if you don't like x, then y". No more. People have to listen to the radio in work, people are entitled to listen to something they don't like. People are entitled to discuss that here. People are entitled to criticise, especially public personas, once this doesn't transcend into abuse.

After I responded, this guy Gits, replied "Bad Move", a bit of back-seat modding there, which is also not allowed. It was obvious that this guy was going to report my post in order to see that I would be banned.

This Gits person doesn't seem to realise that the Ray D'Arcy thread is not a hagiographical piece. People are fully entitled to give their opinion of the show - be it positive or negative feedback.

weisses

Orion wrote: »

Correct - you're entitled to ask. But that's all your entitled to. The most any boss would (or should) tell you it's being dealt with. Anything else is none of your business.

Boy ohh Boy look at the attitude

I suggest you ask your BOSS to remove the "report post" function.

At this stage it seems better to have a go at another poster and take the red or yellow .... For some just to piss of the boss.

You want me to salute you as well when i sign out ?

Calhoun

Gits_bone wrote: »

You see that's the problem. The moderator is always right. How can this be? They can't always be right.

You're not seeing the facts - you're seeing the moderator doing the right thing.

Not true at all but if you are publicly having a go at a moderator you expect to take a little bit of push back.

In this instance you are far from the wounded innocent, you have a hand in how this played out but you dont want to talk about that. You only want the action of others to be under scrutiny.

Gits_bone

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

Wow, talk about a one-sided argument here. I made a comment regarding the Ray D'Arcy show, which I am perfectly entitled to do, and which had nothing to do with the OP. This Gits person then proceeded to give a response (directed at me) akin to the "if you don't like it, don't listen to it" variety, which, funnily enough is also a matter which will be treated with zero tolerance:

3. No more "if you don't like x, then y". No more. People have to listen to the radio in work, people are entitled to listen to something they don't like. People are entitled to discuss that here. People are entitled to criticise, especially public personas, once this doesn't transcend into abuse.

After I responded, this guy Gits, replied "Bad Move", a bit of back-seat modding there, which is also not allowed. It was obvious that this guy was going to report my post in order to see that I would be banned.

This Gits person doesn't seem to realise that the Ray D'Arcy thread is not a hagiographical piece. People are fully entitled to give their opinion of the show - be it positive or negative feedback.

Don't comment on the deleted post then?

Explain how your post got deleted?

I'm also allowed to defend ray D'arcy.

Gits_bone

Calhoun wrote: »

Not true at all but if you are publicly having a go at a moderator you expect to take a little bit of push back.

In this instance you are far from the wounded innocent, you have a hand in how this played out but you dont want to talk about that. You only want the action of others to be under scrutiny.

He told me "reply very slowly". A threat that he'd ban me. He probably won't even comment on the thread without consulting with an admin first.

Harry Angstrom

Gits_bone wrote: »

I'm also allowed to defend ray D'arcy.

And I'm also allowed to criticise his show without you butting in with a "If you don't like it, don't listen to it"-type reply.

Gits_bone

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

And I'm also allowed to criticise his show without you butting in with a "If you don't like it, don't listen to it"-type reply.

Of which I got infracted for yes? You see where I'm going with this?

Harry Angstrom

Gits_bone wrote: »

Of which I got infracted for yes? You see where I'm going with this?

And I also got infracted, so what's your problem?

Gits_bone

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

And I also got infracted, so what's your problem?

Read the OP of the thread again.

Harry Angstrom

Gits_bone wrote: »

Read the OP of the thread again.

I don't need to.

Orion

weisses wrote: »

Boy ohh Boy look at the attitude

I suggest you ask your BOSS to remove the "report post" function.

At this stage it seems better to have a go at another poster and take the red or yellow .... For some just to piss of the boss.

You want me to salute you as well when i sign out ?

What attitude exactly? If you report a post you also don't get a summary of what action was taken as a result of the report. The report post button is there for posters to flag posts that may be actionable. Why would we remove it? I'm not trying to be antagonistic despite what you think. The OP has been given valid advice and is ignoring it in favour of stirring the pot. I don't know the details of this issue apart from this thread - nor do I need to. I don't know if the mod is singling him out or not (I do doubt he is but whatever). His problem is about a card he got and he wants to ensure that somebody else is equally punished. Apart from that alone being juvenile if he doesn't take it to a CMod we're just going around in circles here.

darced

This post has been deleted.

Gits_bone

Orion wrote: »

What attitude exactly? If you report a post you also don't get a summary of what action was taken as a result of the report. The report post button is there for posters to flag posts that may be actionable. Why would we remove it? I'm not trying to be antagonistic despite what you think. The OP has been given valid advice and is ignoring it in favour of stirring the pot. I don't know the details of this issue apart from this thread - nor do I need to. I don't know if the mod is singling him out or not (I do doubt he is but whatever). His problem is about a card he got and he wants to ensure that somebody else is equally punished. Apart from that alone being juvenile if he doesn't take it to a CMod we're just going around in circles here.

Yes. Wanting fair treatment is juvenile.

Sounds like you're advocating deleting posts of favoured posters to ensure they are not banned?

There is no valid reason why my post was left there when the other post - deserving of a one month ban - was deleted.

What explanation do you have?

It drags the thread off topic leaving it there? Does leaving mine there not also drag it off topic?

It's pretty clear what is happening here. Other posters are favoured.

Also why do "doubt" he is singling me out? Do you believe all mods are fair on the site? No matter what it is there's always bad eggs.

And it seems to be like this singling out posters for differential treatment isn't something that is frowned upon.

The Hill Billy

I think that it is unfair to imply that the mod is a "bad egg" based on the single incident that you mention. I would, again, encourage you to discuss this with a CMod & ask that they look into this matter for you & give you their feedback.

Gits_bone

This is not a single incident, it happens often. This is just so clear cut it's a good example. That's why I posted here. Also going to a CMod runs the risk of them defending a mod. People need to be made aware of this type of behaviour.

Lovely Bloke

If there is a "Zero Tolerance" piece in the charter, that really removes the "Mod Discretion" thing, otherwise what's the point of stating that something has a "Zero Tolerance" stance, when the reality is "Zero Tolerance for some, miniature american flags for others"?

A post that fell afoul of the stated "Zero Tolerance" rule was deleted, presumably by a mod, then that same poster was free to post later in the thread.

That is not "Zero Tolerance" by any stretch, so either the charter should be amended, or everyone should be treated equally.

The Hill Billy

Gits_bone wrote: »

This is not a single incident, it happens often. This is just so clear cut it's a good example. That's why I posted here. Also going to a CMod runs the risk of them defending a mod. People need to be made aware of this type of behaviour.

If this is an ongoing issue - you should try to provide examples to support your case.

Sure, the CMod will defend the mod if they acted appropriately. However, they will also discuss the matter with the mod & work with them to resolve any issues if & when they come to light.

With regards to your comment "People need to be made aware of this type of behaviour" - I really feel that discussing this directly with a CMod would get you better results & direct action being taken. Posting here as a 'heads-up' to other posters can descend into tit-for-tat nit-picking on minutae, & loses focus on the crux of the matter which would be best dealt with by a direct approach to the people who can take direct action to resolve this.

@BC - I agree. Either it is Zero Tolerance or it is not.

Harry Angstrom

Gits_bone wrote: »

This is not a single incident, it happens often. This is just so clear cut it's a good example. That's why I posted here.

You really are playing the martyr here. You didn't like it that people were criticising the Ray D'Arcy Show so you set up your own Ray D'Arcy appreciation thread, and you didn't expect it to be deleted???
By the way, if D'Arcy talks about exercise, healthy eating, his kids etc on his show, then ipso facto, these topics ARE fair game for discussion and it's not up to you to decide that they're not. You seem to go out of your way to antagonise anybody who comes on the thread and posts anything any way negative about the show and let's face it, he gave his critics plenty of ammunition after his first week on air. I would refer you again to this:

3. No more "if you don't like x, then y". No more. People have to listen to the radio in work, people are entitled to listen to something they don't like. People are entitled to discuss that here. People are entitled to criticise, especially public personas, once this doesn't transcend into abuse.

Gits_bone

EDIT: Can't discuss.

Gits_bone

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

You really are playing the martyr here. You didn't like it that people were criticising the Ray D'Arcy Show so you set up your own Ray D'Arcy appreciation thread, and you didn't expect it to be deleted???
By the way, if D'Arcy talks about exercise, healthy eating, his kids etc on his show, then ipso facto, these topics ARE fair game for discussion and it's not up to you to decide that they're not. You seem to go out of your way to antagonise anybody who comes on the thread and posts anything any way negative about the show and let's face it, he gave his critics plenty of ammunition after his first week on air. I would refer you again to this:

3. No more "if you don't like x, then y". No more. People have to listen to the radio in work, people are entitled to listen to something they don't like. People are entitled to discuss that here. People are entitled to criticise, especially public personas, once this doesn't transcend into abuse.

No I can accept criticism of his show but what is not acceptable is a thread of ray d'arcy bashing. Are these examples criticism of his show or a mob of people with a plain dislike for d'arcy? It's the same thing every day - running - buttons - sugar - mammies around the kitchen - sigh. Repetitive nonsense that adds nothing to the thread and ensures topics of the show can't be discussed.

Has rays 50 shades obsession been reignited yet?

Ray is obsessed with the health of the nation of the nation so he will prescribe plenty of running for the child, ending up with a half marathon for fun for the child when he reaches Rays target weight.

Tbh, Ray has a number of recurring themes which will be aired at length.

It's safe to assume that Ray's kids will never be of the "round" variety. His idea of a treat for them is probably giving them an extra spoon of porridge for breakfast or an extra lettuce leaf for lunch.

And that ladies and gentleman is Ray Darcy's core demographic.
Judgemental, pontificating idealists.

How long before he mentions the war..

Well, no opening lecture or speel today - so Ray must be learning on the job Haven't heard Jenny since either, which is grand. Maybe though she needs to get him to do 500 lines each evening -

'My email is ray@rte.ie'
'My email is ray@rte.ie'
'My email is ray@rte.ie'
'My email is ray@rte.ie'
'My email is ray@rte.ie'
'My email is ray@rte.ie'

"Tears are streaming down my face" - Check.

Just waiting on the "dancing around the kitchen with my 3 year old" for the full house.

January was spent getting used to the buttons and new text number & email address

Okay then, well in the ad Ray is portrayed as being clinical at using the controls and moves swiftly between callers without making a mistake... So instead of me giving out about the false and disingenuous content used for the ad, how about I change my complaint to false advertising instead...

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=94212353&postcount=482

How can this one be explained? A poster admits to posting comments to get a reaction out of me and I'm the one infractioned? Fair treatment?

Harry Angstrom

I'm done with this. You're banned from the Soccer forum for 3 months. You come on to the Radio forum and you're trying to get people banned. That tells me all I need to know. Cheerio.