Clampdown on political discussion

AugustusMinimus

I've noticed in the last few months that there's been a huge clampdown on political debate of any sorts in here even if it involves politics surrounding roads.

Decisions to create, alter, maintain or close roads are almost always political decision. I simply cannot understand the reasoning for this clampdown given that debating politics is central to the whole purpose of this form.

I'd like to think that moderators could take this into consideration as certain points need to be debated but have been censored from the off.

EDIT: I see nothing in the forum charter to warrant this new approach.

KingBrian2

What is wrong with the roads that's needs political discussion?

Sam Russell

I take it that you are referring to me and my moderation. That is not a problem for me and I welcome discussion. Let me try to justify my actions.

From the charter:

If the infrastructure in question isn't the principal focus of a thread you want to create (in other words, the discussion is more about issues related in some way to the infrastructure than the actual infrastructure e.g traffic delays, global warming etc.), then one of these forums may be more suitable:
Commuting & Transport Forum
Politics Forum - (my emphasis)
Green Issues
Tech Forum
History Forum
Consumer Issues
If you're unsure, or if the thread is in a "grey area" where it's not clear whether the discussion belongs here or in another forum, create the thread here and if a mod feels it belongs elsewhere, the thread will be moved without issue.

1. I try to leave my own views on an issue aside when moderating.

2. I do not take any action guided by personal animosity towards posters.

3. I understand that the decision to go ahead or cancel a particular project is, almost by definition, political in nature, however, it should be an aside to discussing the nature of the project and should never be the guiding theme of a thread.

3. Given that there is significant political uncertainty at present, it is natural for posters to speculate on which viewpoint particular political figures or parties might take. That is for the politics forum.

4. Naming politicians or political parties is for the politics forum. They are not here to defend or justify themselves.

5. Threads by their very nature tend to veer off topic and some attempts are unsuccessful at bringing (dragging) them back onto the topic. It is particularly difficult when it gets to be a spat between posters. I hope I do OK on this, but it is difficult to judge when to step in.

However, if anyone has views that go against these precepts, then I am open to discuss them either on this thread or by PM.

L1011

I would consider it wholly impossible to actually have any discussion at all on certain projects without politics coming in to it. The politics forum is not the place for a thread on the M20 or N5; here is. Trying to stamp out political discussion on topic immediately is stifling all discussion.

If the upcoming horse-trading for cabinet seats, supporting votes etc doesn't create/secure/whatever funding for many road projects - as it did when renegotiating the programme for government towards the end of the 07-11 Dail, for instance - I'd be amazed. We may not be able to discuss them either now.

Deedsie

I'd love if we could discourage the "only in Ireland" or "that's very Irish" or "Irish solution to an Irish problem" type comments.

Ireland has one of the most extensive and top class motorway network in Europe. It's not perfect but the constant negativity and borderline self hate from some posters is irritating.

Sam Russell

L1011 wrote: »

I would consider it wholly impossible to actually have any discussion at all on certain projects without politics coming in to it. The politics forum is not the place for a thread on the M20 or N5; here is. Trying to stamp out political discussion on topic immediately is stifling all discussion.

If the upcoming horse-trading for cabinet seats, supporting votes etc doesn't create/secure/whatever funding for many road projects - as it did when renegotiating the programme for government towards the end of the 07-11 Dail, for instance - I'd be amazed. We may not be able to discuss them either now.

Fair points made.

There is a difference between discussing the project and the political decisions that affect it, and the supposed political parties view on that particular project including named politicians.

Where should the distinction be drawn?

guylikeme

Personally am with the op in that politics needs to be allowed a peripheral part in the roads forum.

The other way around doesn't suit. Most political talk doesn't involve infrastructure (unfortunately) so the roads forum is a good place for parties stance on road building or lack thereof.

Sam Russell

OK, I'll ease up on the moderation of politics. I still think that names of politicians should be avoided - in particular independents - as they are unrepresented and their opinions can only be surmised with respect to particular projects.

Politically based comments should not be global - such as xxxx is anti-something.

Let us see how it goes.

marno21

Yes, I'd agree with the sentiments issued here.

The M20 scheme is as political as it gets at the minute so it really does need political based discussion.

spacetweek

Sounds like a reasonable approach to me.

Sam Russell

The mods try to please.

It can be difficult to draw a distinction between heated discussion and abuse or between off topic and a relevant aside.

We do our best.