Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

Muahahaha

end of the road wrote: »

reregs would likely just post inoffensively until they reach the quota and then get in and do their thing.
i believe the soccerforum has always had that system but it is a specialised forum, so would attract the usage dispite it.

whether it would be a mess without that system or not i couldn't say either way.
.

Id imagine the soccer forum couldnt operate properly at all without the access system. Youd have supporters of one team signing up and going straight into the Superthread of another team to wind them up. Even with the system access this still happens but nowhere near on the level of what it would be like with free access. Thankfully mike_ie did a clean up of that forum a few weeks back and it seems to be working pretty well so far. Its a great forum but it can suffer from schoolyard arguments by a small minority at times.

Tokyo

Muahahaha wrote: »

As for those staying underneath the radar what happens in terms of threadbans, like can a poster get threadbanned numerous times but still have access to the forum? Or is there a totting up process like the Soccer forum.

Unless someone is being a straight up dick, my modding style tends towards giving people rope, and seeing how good they are at noose-tying.

Despite the claims of some posters, we do not sit around hoping to ban people. Sometimes a poster has trouble figuring our how to fit in. Sometimes a poster goes through a spell of contrary attitude and works his or her way out of it.

If the only reason he or she posts is to troll, then they should be banned. If they can work their way out of it and become decent posters, I am not eager to shut them off before that can happen. This is where threadbans are useful. The poster doesn't have access to the thread that was getting him/her into trouble. But they don't have anything on their record yet and still have access to the rest of the forum. So they are faced with two choices - they can either take a step back and realize they went too far and readjust for next time, or they can jump into another thread and do the same thing all over again.

But it's an escalating degree of sanctions and we keep a record of threadbans just for that purpose. If I see a poster simply got too invested in an argument, then I'm more likely to give them a threadban. If however, I see that they have been given multiple chances and haven't copped on, then they've escalated themselves into card territory.

Muahahaha

mike_ie wrote: »

But it's an escalating degree of sanctions and we keep a record of threadbans just for that purpose.

yeah thats what I was wondering about. You have a record so fair enough because it would be difficult to keep track otherwise

markodaly

What are the current rules, if any on describing or calling public figures names based on their appearances?
It is a trend I have noticed emerging.

Allowed or not?

Tokyo

markodaly wrote: »

What are the current rules, if any on describing or calling public figures names based on their appearances?
It is a trend I have noticed emerging.

Allowed or not?

Official rule? No.

Likely to end up on my list of stupid and irrelevant posts that are too dumb to action and it's easier to just delete? Yes.

Muahahaha

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Good question. Donald Trump is slated and abused around the clock by dozens of posters .

Thats because Donald Trump is an idiot and fair game for being called out as one.

Timberrrrrrrr

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Good question. Donald Trump is slated and abused around the clock by dozens of posters .

Donald Trump


The man who came up with

Pocahontas

Sleepy Joe

Crazy Bernie

Crooked Hillary

Alfred E. Neuman

Crazy Maxine Waters

Crazy Jim Acosta

Crazy Bernie

SleepyCreepy Joe

Nervous Nancy

And many many more.

Beasty

A reminder - 3 months on the site and a minimum 100 posts before you can post in Feedback

strikingly clean example there of exactly what the vocal side of the "ban things we disagree with" are often countered with and deny doing-

"this is wrong and terrible. except when we do it because we are right."

Rodney Bathgate

I can’t understand how a thread like this is not considered trolling?

“To the Anti-Immigration Protect the Irish crowd- Why so Silent on American Tourists?”

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2058096482/1

I don't hear our basement dwelling far righters making noise about this, why?

Tokyo

Deleted User wrote: »

strikingly clean example there of exactly what the vocal side of the "ban things we disagree with" are often countered with and deny doing-

"this is wrong and terrible. except when we do it because we are right."

I'm not sure if you are referring to my response there, or to the posters who support/decry name calling but If my response is a "strikingly clean example?" I would say, not particularly.

"Mehole.... hurrrrr"

- adds nothing to the overall conversation and yes, I'd likely remove it.

"I'm not a fan of Mehole's politics but I agree with his point of view in this particular instance."

I'd leave it alone, as if you ignore the silly name calling, there is a point in the post. Repeat offenders may get called out on it in the thread and told to cop on.

With respect to name calling like this overall, honestly, it falls into the category of "too dumb to action" in my view. Any time I read it on the forum, the only thing I feel is that it undermines the posters point, however valid, and makes them look petty, because they felt they need they had to lower themselves to the level of an 8 year old in a school playground in order to get that point across.

Tokyo

Rodney Bathgate wrote: »

I can’t understand how a thread like this is not considered trolling?

“To the Anti-Immigration Protect the Irish crowd- Why so Silent on American Tourists?”

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2058096482/1

I took a look at the Reported Posts forum just now, and the one and only reported post for that thread came in at 22:35 yesterday evening. At 01:09, already you are in feedback, outraged that this particular thread hasn't been stomped upon by the mod team. That's a 2h 34m window you've given to mods, coming on bedtime for anyone in Ireland, and 5am for me here.

It's now 09:08 here as I reply to your post.

Ask yourself this - is your outrage at "mod inaction" warranted in this case? And which one of us has unreasonable expectations here?

The world hasn't imploded bcause the thread you highlighted wasn't looked over in the small hours of the morning. The mods on the site are not here to provide your expected level of customer service, 'or else'. They are here to keep conversation on the site flowing smoothly, and to clean up messes where necessary.

Rodney Bathgate

mike_ie wrote: »

I took a look at the Reported Posts forum just now, and the one and only reported post for that thread came in at 22:35 yesterday evening. At 01:09, already you are in feedback, outraged that this particular thread hasn't been stomped upon by the mod team. That's a 2h 34m window you've given to mods, coming on bedtime for anyone in Ireland, and 5am for me here.

It's now 09:08 here as I reply to your post.

Ask yourself this - is your outrage at "mod inaction" warranted in this case? And which one of us has unreasonable expectations here?

The world hasn't imploded bcause the thread you highlighted wasn't looked over in the small hours of the morning. The mods on the site are not here to provide your expected level of customer service, 'or else'. They are here to keep conversation on the site flowing smoothly, and to clean up messes where necessary.

Who is ‘outraged’?

The thread is still open so I assume it wasn’t deemed trolling.

Tokyo

Rodney, it's 8am.

I have a job - every now and again I am expected to do it. I gave the thread a once over earlier and I didn't see an issue - certainly nothing that was going to cause CA to be overrun between 04:00 - 08:00 Irish time.

Looking at the thread in more detail though, other than the slightly loaded final sentence, I'm not seeing how you consider this to be trolling. The question itself is a very legitimate one - the focus on certain cultures and countries being perceived as a greater risk over western countries, where the numbers may not agree with that. It's asked in good faith from what I can see, and the responses are measured opinions.

mike_ie

mike_ie wrote: »

I'm not sure if you are referring to my response there, or to the posters who support/decry name calling but If my response is a "strikingly clean example?" I would say, not particularly.

- adds nothing to the overall conversation and yes, I'd likely remove it.



I'd leave it alone, as if you ignore the silly name calling, there is a point in the post. Repeat offenders may get called out on it in the thread and told to cop on.

With respect to name calling like this overall, honestly, it falls into the category of "too dumb to action" in my view. Any time I read it on the forum, the only thing I feel is that it undermines the posters point, however valid, and makes them look petty, because they felt they need they had to lower themselves to the level of an 8 year old in a school playground in order to get that point across.

not your responses mike, no. the calls that prompted it and the reactions after it!

agreed re namecalling. unless its particularly offensive or unaligned with a point i feel its a petty enough thing to be calling to be actioned

Rodney Bathgate

mike_ie wrote: »

Rodney, it's 8am.

I have a job - every now and again I am expected to do it. I gave the thread a once over earlier and I didn't see an issue - certainly nothing that was going to cause CA to be overrun between 04:00 - 08:00 Irish time.

Looking at the thread in more detail though, other than the slightly loaded final sentence, I'm not seeing how you consider this to be trolling. The question itself is a very legitimate one - the focus on certain cultures and countries being perceived as a greater risk over western countries, where the numbers may not agree with that. It's asked in good faith from what I can see, and the responses are measured opinions.

I don’t see how a post like that is considered asking in ‘good faith’.

“A troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.”

I would consider it ‘inflammatory’ and it’s primary intent was ‘provoking other users into an emotional response’. The subject and body reference ‘anti-immigration’ and ‘basement dwelling far righters’ respectively.

Aside from obvious different between tourism and immigration which the poster is intentionally ignoring, in my opinion it was posted to get a rise out of other posters.

Fair enough if that isn’t considered trolling.

Tokyo

Rodney Bathgate wrote: »

I don’t see how a post like that is considered asking in ‘good faith’.

I would consider it ‘inflammatory’ and it’s primary intent was ‘provoking other users into an emotional response’. The subject and body reference ‘anti-immigration’ and ‘basement dwelling far righters’ respectively.

I see you've found Emmet's secret stash of quotation marks :P

Rodney Bathgate wrote: »

Aside from obvious different between tourism and immigration which the poster is intentionally ignoring, in my opinion it was posted to get a rise out of other posters.

On a more serious note, that's your opinion and you are entitled to it. The fundamental point the thread is addressing is the possibility of people bringing a potentially fatal pathogen into the country, and the distinction between tourism and immigration doesn't really apply in that scenario.

I don't believe it was a bad faith argument, or at least I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt that it's not, but even if it were true, the thread itself explores some very interesting points, and you yourself stated in the thread that:

Rodney Bathgate wrote: »

Thread hasn’t gone the way the OP expected...

...which would lead me to believe that you agree with me on that point. So now your argument boils down to whether an opening post posted in bad faith outweighs an entire thread that explores the issue in good faith.

circadian

I demand a 99.99% SLA on a forum that I use for free that is moderated by unpaid members of the community!!

Rodney Bathgate

circadian wrote: »

I demand a 99.99% SLA on a forum that I use for free that is moderated by unpaid members of the community!!

Who demanded that?

Overheal

I mean as a Yank who has never been shy about pointing out bigotry or reporting objectionable/questionable content on-site I didn't see anything to wrong with the thread. The OP has a contemporary for 2020 way of phrasing his argument sure but a valid question on why Irish xenophobia gives a pass to Americans especially under Covid, and seemed pretty reasonable for what CA/IMHO is as explained better in this feedback thread (something of a tolerating conflux for heated exchanges). Kind of a case of actually agreeing with the point the OP made though not quite the way they made it, (particularly "I don't hear our basement dwelling far righters making noise about this, why?"). I might have had half a thought to suspect it might turn into a trainwreck but frankly within a couple posts it turned out to be a fairly constructive thread.

TheValeyard

Rodney Bathgate wrote: »

Who demanded that?

circadian

ExMachina1000

Overheal wrote: »

I mean as a Yank who has never been shy about pointing out bigotry or reporting objectionable/questionable content on-site I didn't see anything to wrong with the thread. The OP has a contemporary for 2020 way of phrasing his argument sure but a valid question on why Irish xenophobia gives a pass to Americans especially under Covid, and seemed pretty reasonable for what CA/IMHO is as explained better in this feedback thread (something of a tolerating conflux for heated exchanges). Kind of a case of actually agreeing with the point the OP made though not quite the way they made it, (particularly "I don't hear our basement dwelling far righters making noise about this, why?"). I might have had half a thought to suspect it might turn into a trainwreck but frankly within a couple posts it turned out to be a fairly constructive thread.

<snip>

Admin note - you do not qualify for posting in Feedback - you need to be on the site 3 months

It seems like each week the forum is either people ranting about trans people (often just randomly dragging the topic in). Or people who act like hyenas around any story surrounding migrants. Eg there's a thread about a gang rape about Syrian men raping a woman in Germany. The thread started by a brand new user and it includes branding all Syrians as savages. And the rest of the thread is literally the usual suspects using the same rhetoric. There's no genuine concern.

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It seems like each week the forum is either people ranting about trans people (often just randomly dragging the topic in). Or people who act like hyenas around any story surrounding migrants. Eg there's a thread about a gang rape about Syrian men raping a woman in Germany. The thread started by a brand new user and it includes branding all Syrians as savages. And the rest of the thread is literally the usual suspects using the same rhetoric. There's no genuine concern.

Opened that thread earlier, seen who the first few posters were and knew there wasn't a chance of discussion in there.

Quantum Erasure

wall to wall racists and transphobes...

Beasty

I've been away all day and only seeing these comments and that thread now

It's one of our regular re-reg trolls who is allowed minimal oxygen, so the thread is now deleted along with all their posts across the site

Tokyo

Also, to point out, due to a spammer signing up 4,000 accounts and spamming users with PMs, all active admin were involved in the cleanup of that situation. As a result, yesterday was one of the very few days where reported posts went unactioned for more than a few hours.

TheValeyard

mike_ie wrote: »

Also, to point out, due to a spammer signing up 4,000 accounts and spamming users with PMs, all active admin were involved in the cleanup of that situation. As a result, yesterday was one of the very few days where reported posts went unactioned for more than a few hours.

Why would someone bother signing up 4000 accounts?

Tokyo

TheValeyard wrote: »

Why would someone bother signing up 4000 accounts?

bot, linkdumping, someone with way too much free time.

This is it

That's nearly as many accounts as Scanlas