Banned from AH.

Donald Trump

Hi,


I was banned from AH. I was told it was a permanent ban.


My feeling is that this stems from some trouble surrounding those Pope's threads months back. After being told not to post on one thread, I was infracted for posting on a different thread. I did not appeal that at the time because the mod, freshpopcorn, appeared to be a sound fella/girl and I got the impression that he had to do it because of the others. But that did happen - I was told not to post in thread A and when I posted a few days later in thread B I was told I had ignored moderator instructions. The reason I had been told not to post in the first one is that I reacted to to posters who were making fun of, and sneering at, an aunt of mine who had recently finished a round of chemo.



A few days ago, they gave me a card for referring to Peter Casey as a cunt. I received the card hours, if not days, after the thread had already been locked and sunk off the front page as part of a general clean up of multiple election threads. My reason for calling him that was justified on thread as he was on RTE radio moaning about the HSE being underfunded and then immediately bragging how he keeps his tax residency in the US (obviously in order to avoid paying tax to the Irish state). He threw in that he pays 1% towards their medicaid on his first 110k for good measure





Now, I don't know why that is verboten whereas there is a long running thread with the title "John Connors is a wanker". In it, that man gets called all the names under the sun.




The post I got banned for was a strange one. It had also sunk well off the front page at that stage. It was a thread about John Reynolds. Someone had made a snide remark about him fathering a child with Sinead O'Connor. Another poster responded to that that he was Albert Reynolds nephew. What has that got to do with the man dying? It was completely irrelevant. So I made an equally irrelevant post questioning whether they were implying that Albert had rode Sinead. This was a ridiculous post but it's purpose was only to underscore the ridiculousness of the previous posts.


So I was banned for trolling. I do not know whom I am supposed to be trolling. I did not mention the dead man at all. Albert Reynolds is dead, but it was not a serious statement and anyone who would think that could not be the full shilling. Could Sinead O'Connor be offended? Possibly. but she'd probably be more offended by the recent thread in AH dedicated to taking the piss out of her for announcing her conversion to Islam.


If the recently deceased's family were likely to be offended at something on the thread it would more likely be the snide gossipy remarks identifying him as fathering a child with Sinead O'Connor. Why would that be the most discerning and identifying thing you would think of to explain who the man was?




Anyway, when I queried it, I think the moderator went back and re-read it but was too stubborn to change his decision. When I asked him what was the rule I broke he said it was for "being a dick".



I've been a member of that forum for years. I have a lot of posts. I should not be permanently banned. I will probably avoid it anyway until those moderators are changed but a permanent ban is just a power trip by the moderator

Tokyo

Morning DT,

I have made the Cmods aware of this thread - one should be along shortly.

LEIN

Hello Donald, I will look into this.

May I please see the pm's where you tried to resolve with the Mod before coming here?

Cheers,

L

Donald Trump

LEIN wrote: »

Hello Donald, I will look into this.

May I please see the pm's where you tried to resolve with the Mod before coming here?

Cheers,

L

Grand. Thanks. I will forward them to you now. I won't have great internet access during the day

LEIN

Donald Trump wrote: »

Grand. Thanks. I will forward them to you now. I won't have great internet access during the day

No problem.

Post them here if you can, please.

LEIN

Donald Trump wrote:

Donald Trump wrote:

Well I think you know you're wrong. Just too stubborn to admit it.



Either way it's not the end of the world.

Putinbot wrote:

Breach of forum charter (being a dick)

Donald Trump wrote:

Who was I trolling?
People who love Albert Reynolds and Sinead O'Connor?


If I was connected to the man who died I'd be more upset at people gossiping about rumours he fathered children than by someone making a joke about his uncle.



If Sinead O'Connor is going to be upset, she'd probably be more upset by the thread dedicated to taking the piss out of her



Bit harsh to receive a ban for that in fairness. Given all the other stuff you see being let slide on that forum.



I got a card recently for calling Peter Casey a **** for bragging about how he avoids paying Irish tax literally right after pontificating about the HSE being underfunded. Yet there is a massive thread entitled "John Connors is a wanker". And if you read through it you see plenty of people calling him a scumbag etc.



So you guys need to figure out some kind of consistent system.



Do you need to give me a specific rule that I broke in order for me to appeal it? I know I'll probably be wasting my time anyway, but I might go ahead and do it. I didn't bother appealing a few months ago when I got a card because I posted in one thread after being told not to post in a different thread! But that was stupid too.

Putinbot wrote:

Read it. Still think your post is a dick post that was just trolling. I'm not lifting the ban.

Donald Trump wrote:

You'd want to read the thread. I can't see it anymore but one poster asked a gossipy question/made an insinuation that the man who died fathered a child with sinead o'connor by asking something like "did he father a child with sinead O'Connor". And a poster replied "he was albert reynolds nephew" I replied to that.




So what has gossiping about whether he fathered a child with Sinead O'connor got to do with respect whereas me making fun of them for gossiping and talking about irrelevant things is somehow disrespectful?

Putinbot wrote:

He was Albert's nephew not son so your post is a dick post aimed to troll and annoy.

Donald Trump wrote:

So did you ban the person who was gossiping whether the man who died was the father of someone's child???


I'd bet my life you didn't.


I never remarked on the man who died. Or how he died.

Putinbot wrote:

Dear Donald Trump,

You have been permanently banned from After Hours for a breach of the forum charter.

Every forum on Boards.ie has a charter which lists any specific rules that forum may have and it is really important that you read this as it'll help you familiarise yourself with how that forum works. You should also understand that every forum is different and that charters are how you learn the differences.

Please see the Boards.ie FAQ for more details.

If you wish to appeal this ban you can see details on how to do so here.

Putinbot

Moderator Note

What a horrible post in such a thread. You were warned. Your time here is done.

Your post:

Donald Trump wrote: »

freespace9 wrote: »

He was Albert Reynolds' nephew.

So you're implying that Albert Reynolds rode Sinead?




Hup ya boya ya oul' dog

Thanks Donald, I will review later today.

Donald Trump

LEIN wrote: »

No problem.

Post them here if you can, please.

I sent them. I will post here as well though seeing as how you requested. If you don't need or want them publicly, you can just delete the post below.



Not that there is anything in them. I just don't like posting something someone else sent to me in a PM as a point of principle.


Edit: Just saw that you posted them yourself. Thanks

LEIN

Donald Trump wrote: »

I sent them. I will post here as well though seeing as how you requested. If you don't need or want them publicly, you can just delete the post below.



Not that there is anything in them. I just don't like posting something someone else sent to me in a PM as a point of principle.


Edit: Just saw that you posted them yourself. Thanks

No bother and thanks. We post them here for transparency.
Hope to get to this in the morning.

L

LEIN

Sorry for the delay, I am reviewing.

Donald Trump

LEIN wrote: »

Sorry for the delay, I am reviewing.

No rush. Take your time

LEIN

Many thanks for waiting here.

First up I note that you were warned that the next Mod action would be permanent.

The red card you received was a bullet dodged. Anyway, we're not here to talk about that.

May I ask why you thought this was appropriate in a sensitive thread where family and friends may read?
Can you see how it may have caused upset and therefore a comment that is classed as trolling?

Donald Trump wrote: »

So you're implying that Albert Reynolds rode Sinead?




Hup ya boya ya oul' dog

Donald Trump

LEIN wrote: »

Many thanks for waiting here.

First up I note that you were warned that the next Mod action would be permanent.

The red card you received was a bullet dodged. Anyway, we're not here to talk about that.

May I ask why you thought this was appropriate in a sensitive thread where family and friends may read?
Can you see how it may have caused upset and therefore a comment that is classed as trolling?

It was a satirical piss-take of the people gossiping.


If I was a friend or family member I'd be more upset at his life being reduced to a soundbite about a sneer/scandal about fathering a child with someone or else reduced to a side-note as being someone's nephew.





To be honest, what is the point of those threads being allowed on AH then? Unless people are allowed to discuss the death, how it occurred and what can be done about it?



Reading the charter, it says that AH is "light hearted" discussion forum for "having a bit of a laugh". It also says things should not be posted there if there is a more appropriate forum.





There were a heap of disgraceful anti-Catholic threads a few months back about the Papal visit. The same few posters were allowed goad and sneer. Anyone who took them on was banned. Someone would come in reasonable, be sneered at and trolled and eventually get banned. I had mentioned an Aunt of mine who was recovering for cancer and she got sneered at repeatedly. And I was told repeatedly that she was "makey-uppy". I hadn't even made a point of it, just saying she missed out on ordering tickets originally due to her treatment but that we had been able to get her tickets. I wasn't even saying that she had to miss out on the event. And yes, before you ask, I reported the posts. But no, they weren't warned.

LEIN

If you are unhappy with a report not being actioned, we have a feedback forum, I suggest that any issues you have, be taken up there.

In any normal circumstance, the post in which you received a ban for would probably only carry a minor yellow card.
However, your record in AH over the past 6 months is shocking.

4 Bans in the last 5 months. 6 Infractions in the last 12. 5 of which were in the last 5 months. 2 Thread bans in the past 5 months.

Because of this record and the note left on your ban prior to this ban, that the next action would be permanent, I am left with no other choice but to uphold this action.

The AH Mods are the busiest on Boards.ie, they are volunteers who work hard to keep AH a good happy place. They do not need posters of your style making it more difficult.

My advice would be, move on, keep your nose clean in other parts of Boards.ie and after 12 months, if you wish, I am sure the AH Mods will listen to your case to be granted access back to the forum.

If you are not happy with my conclusion, I will ask an Admin to review this.

Many thanks for your patience here.

L

Donald Trump

As I referred to above, it started with the Pope threads.

Unfortunately there was a considerable bias from the moderators on this topic. And many multiples of people who had a certain reasonable opinion were baited and trolled until they were banned. It was allowed to continue. There was a feedback forum on it from what I can remember.

Two thread bans + one card = I was told not to post on one thread any more. I did not. I then posted on a different thread. Received a card for "ignoring moderator instruction". In the subsequent PMs I was asked not to post any more in the second thread even though it had nothing to do with my actual post there. If both threads were to be considered the same, then why not merge them? Or at least say when I was being told not to post again, that I was being banned from multiple threads.


As you say yourself, the post in question this time is "minor". I would still argue that it is perfectly fine post , especially in the context of that forum. It was just the moderator bias looking for something. If you are looking for something, you can read it out of anything. If you even read his response - "He was Albert's nephew not son so your post is a dick post aimed to troll and annoy. " , it is clear that he did not even read the thread. That response makes no sense. It appears he thought something like I was saying that Sinead O'Connor was his mother. Note that the dismissive description of him being "one of Sinead's (sorry, Shuhada's) baby daddies", that I was responding to, is still there. Unwarned and un-redacted.


Here are my bans:
1) On a thread about abortion, I made a pun/joke about a pro-abortion poster's use of the word terminate (in the context of them asking me to "terminate" my interactions with them). As you know, if I was anti-abortion, their use of that word could have offended. I t was obviously chosen to do so and should have been considered trolling. However I did not take the bait, was not offended, and just used it again and made a reference to the Arnold Schwarzenegger Terminator travelling back in time. I was banned for one day
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=107477571#post107477571

2) On the thread about the Pope, I was banned for a week for saying "LoL" in response to a trolling poster
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=107774229#post107774229

3) After receiving the card (for posting on one thread after being told not to post on a different one), I posted this one and was banned for a month. I still justify it.
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=107902924#post107902924


4) Last one was the one here, which has been deleted on the site but is in the PM's above
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=108476322#post108476322


Of course, you can look at these and say "oh those 4 posts are terrible. He's always at it". But there are 3250 posts that nobody had any issue with

Donald Trump

Just to add, to put into context, here is a feedback thread about the Pope threads

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057905107

LEIN

Donald Trump wrote: »

Just to add, to put into context, here is a feedback thread about the Pope threads

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057905107

I am not here to deal with that.

Admin required.

Thank you, Donald Trump.

Beasty

I'll have a look at this

It may take me a while, as it looks like there is quite a history to consider

Donald Trump

Beasty wrote: »

I'll have a look at this

It may take me a while, as it looks like there is quite a history to consider

Thanks,


But no need to go to too much bother. Once the ball starts rolling on something like that, it doesn't usually stop. No worries. It's not going to be the end of the world. If it's easier for you just to leave it, or take only a min to look at it, no need to spend time on it.

Beasty

OK, I have had a quick look and would comment as follows:

In AH you've picked up 4 yellows, 3 reds and 5 bans before the current permanent ban was applied

3 of the yellows, 2 of the reds and 3 of the bans have been issued since 10 June

You picked up a 1 month ban from AH on 28 August, and were told then "the next one will be permanent"

You then (picked up another yellow on 27 October and the permanent ban (for a different post) 2 days later

Your permanent ban is based on an accumulation of sanctions, and you were duly warned ahead of

In summary, even looking at this in overview, you have had plenty of warnings which you have chosen not to heed, and the accumulation of sanctions justifies the permanent ban

What I would suggest is that you continue posting elsewhere on the site and show significant improvement in your behaviour. The mods may be prepared to reconsider your ban, but I would not expect them to allow you to regain access to AH unless you show you are capable of staying out of trouble for an extended period (and I would not be asking the AH mods to even think about letting you back in for a minimum 6 months)

Donald Trump

Beasty wrote: »

OK, I have had a quick look and would comment as follows:

In AH you've picked up 4 yellows, 3 reds and 5 bans before the current permanent ban was applied

3 of the yellows, 2 of the reds and 3 of the bans have been issued since 10 June

You picked up a 1 month ban from AH on 28 August, and were told then "the next one will be permanent"

You then (picked up another yellow on 27 October and the permanent ban (for a different post) 2 days later

Your permanent ban is based on an accumulation of sanctions, and you were duly warned ahead of

In summary, even looking at this in overview, you have had plenty of warnings which you have chosen not to heed, and the accumulation of sanctions justifies the permanent ban

What I would suggest is that you continue posting elsewhere on the site and show significant improvement in your behaviour. The mods may be prepared to reconsider your ban, but I would not expect them to allow you to regain access to AH unless you show you are capable of staying out of trouble for an extended period (and I would not be asking the AH mods to even think about letting you back in for a minimum 6 months)

Thanks,



It's ok. I am not that interested in going back to that forum.


I've posted on other forums and not gotten into any trouble (apart from receiving a yellow card for suggesting that someone could rent their empty apartment to their family member for cash.....which apparently would somehow be illegal)


And I have been a member for 3 years. The standard on that forum has significantly deteriorated, particularly within the last 6 months.




Regardless, the last ban was wrong. It's just a case of moderator taking a dislike or bias against a poster.

But look, that's going to happen. Let him have his little bit of "power". If that's what they have to keep them happy, who am I to want to take it away from them?


Anyway, no worries. It's not the end of the world, and I'm definitely not going to beg. It is their loss if I can't post so I'm happy enough to leave them to it.


FYI, 4 (not 3) bans in AH in the last 4 months or so. Since start of July and Pope/anti-Catholic threads

One prior to that. And the mod told me at that time that they would have rescinded it but by the time they looked at it, it had expired. They had been busy and hadn't checked their messages. I had forgotten that but went back to look at the messages just now as I couldn't remember why I had been banned before