Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

Acosta

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Be realistic. If the media has reported on a case of child grooming, named the suspects and those suspects are members of a Muslim community and this kind of thing has happened numerous times what do you expect people to post?

These are the facts of what happened and same has happened before. There was controversy with police not investigating previous now known incidents on a large scale and throughout the UK.

Virtue signalling is just ignoring what happened and being more focused on the language of posters.
People come to discuss what happened and society in general. Society is real life.

What you are on is some sort of side mission.

Virtue signalling? What I can't be disgusted at posts featuring such things as asking why Muslims are even here? Talk of dodgy looking lads outside kebab shops. Or posts from people hoping the accused are refugees. And the usual islamphobic line about them not being fit for our society.

I'm not ignoring what these people have been accused of. If they're found guilty I hope they throw away the key, but these threads are full of hate which nearly always spills over to attempting to demonise entire relgions or cultures based on what? 30 or 40 scumbags.

Gervais08 wrote: »

I wouldn’t agree because you’re posting nonsense here.

How pray tell is it possible to discuss rape grooming gangs comprised of 84% Pakistani and Bangladeshi men without discussing why the percentage is so high??

Percentage of what? There's over a million Pakistani people in the UK and about half a million Bangladeshi.

Gervais08

Acosta wrote: »

Virtue signalling? What I can't be disgusted at posts featuring such things as asking why Muslims are even here? Talk of dodgy looking lads outside kebab shops. Or posts from people hoping the accused are refugees. And the usual islamphobic line about them not being fit for our society.

I'm not ignoring what these people have been accused of. If they're found guilty I hope they throw away the key, but these threads are full of hate which nearly always spills over to attempting to demonise entire relgions or cultures based on what? 30 or 40 scumbags.



Percentage of what? There's over a million Pakistani people in the UK and about half a million Bangladeshi.

Way to misrepresent the point there.

And yeah child rapists aren’t fit for society - you seem to think they are. Disturbing.

EmmetSpiceland

Snake Plisken wrote: »

So are personal attacks allowed on individual posters now? What's the old saying attack the post not the poster?

I brought this up in the ‘Wokeism of the Day’ thread and was, rounded, mocked.

Acosta wrote: »

or when he said I'm Ok with child rapists?

I believe she identifies, or presents, as a womxn online.

Gervais08

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

I brought this up in the ‘Wokeism of the Day’ thread and was, rounded, mocked.



I believe she identifies, or presents, as a womxn online.

I’m a woman. Womxn is not a real word and I don’t “identify” or “present” as anything, online or otherwise.

Gervais08

Acosta wrote: »

Are you referring to my post? or when he said I'm Ok with child rapists?

I implied that because you took offence that a poster said these people aren’t fit for society. They’re organized racist child rapists - they’re not fit for a decent society.

How else can that be inferred ?

Whereas you made a personal attack on me.

Acosta

Gervais08 wrote: »

I implied that because you took offence that a poster said these people aren’t fit for society. They’re organized racist child rapists - they’re not fit for a decent society.

How else can that be inferred ?

Whereas you made a personal attack on me.

All of that post was referring to others on the thread generalising an entire religion based on what this rape gang did. As I'm sure you know. Nice try though.

Beasty

Gervais08 wrote: »

Way to misrepresent the point there.

And yeah child rapists aren’t fit for society - you seem to think they are. Disturbing.

you should not be posting in this thread as your 3 months are not up until tomorrow

I'm extending that though and you are now banned from posting in this thread again

EmmetSpiceland

Gervais08 wrote: »

I’m a woman. Womxn is not a real word and I don’t “identify” or “present” as anything, online or otherwise.

Wait, seriously? I thought that was part of the joke? You’d call yourself “fat” and say “women are all bitches” as a sort of ‘it’s ok, I’m a womxn’ parody. Missed that one completely.

V8 Interceptor

A poster last night said she wanted the grooming thread closed because she disagreed with me and another poster. She then went to the Mods and today both of us have been banned from the thread.

I'm quite stunned at the censorship the authoritarian left can command. This poster clicked her fingers and and her desired action was taken.

These tactics in society at large always backfire yet they don't seem to learn. Brexit, Trump and other Euro Countries. There's no far right or any such thing in Ireland but these people are building up such animosity toward their wokery and "right think" that something like that is bound to foment.

Beasty

V8 Interceptor wrote: »

A poster last night said she wanted the grooming thread closed because she disagreed with me and another poster. She then went to the Mods and today both of us have been banned from the thread.

I'm quite stunned at the censorship the authoritarian left can command. This poster clicked her fingers and and her desired action was taken.

These tactics in society at large always backfire yet they don't seem to learn. Brexit, Trump and other Euro Countries. There's no far right or any such thing in Ireland but these people are building up such animosity toward their wokery and "right think" that something like that is bound to foment.

If you have a problem with mod actions please use the correct process. Complaining or claiming innocence in Feedback is not the right way to go about it

To everyone, there have been prior warnings this thread could be closed. It's for general Feedback on the forum. Specific complaints are dealt with in Help Desk

V8 Interceptor

Okay Beasty.

Snake Plisken

Beasty wrote: »

If you have a problem with mod actions please use the correct process. Complaining or claiming innocence in Feedback is not the right way to go about it

To everyone, there have been prior warnings this thread could be closed. It's for general Feedback on the forum. Specific complaints are dealt with in Help Desk

Well Beasty We are just following Necro's instructions on his post mass banning some of us on the grooming gangs thread he said "if we have a problem with that take it to the feedback thread",.
Also how come bans and cards are handed out to folks on one side of the arguement but when posters on the other side start calling others bigots they get carded but they don't get thread banned? How is that balanced?
Yeah I know I'll be told to go the appeal route but this seems to be a growing issue on CA and it seems the more the left whine about "them right wing posters" the more the CA mods get fed up with the constant whining and thread ban posters.

Beasty

Specific Forum issues like that are dealt with in Help Desk, not Feedback. I am advising you of that as a Site Administrator, not a Forum Moderator

V8 Interceptor

Personally I think its childish in the extreme for grown adults to be running to teacher to get other people done for "wrong think".

I've never reported a poster/post. The thought wouldn't even cross my mind.

Wibbs

V8 Interceptor wrote: »

A poster last night said she wanted the grooming thread closed because she disagreed with me and another poster. She then went to the Mods and today both of us have been banned from the thread.

I'm quite stunned at the censorship the authoritarian left can command. This poster clicked her fingers and and her desired action was taken.

On the other hand in the Multiculturalism thread the list of threadbanned and outright banned posters was overwhelmingly those on the "left" side of things. No doubt they'd claim censorship too. Actually a couple did and how Boards was a disgrace etc. And I'd be fairly confident in saying most of the mods in there would be more on the "left" side of things and they certainly didn't do those posters any favours.

In my experience anyway in the vast majority of cases if posters stay civil and don't get into a sniping back and forth or run to direct insult(or go full on daily mail comments section) then they don't get banned. "Left" or "Right"

My 2 cents anyway and FWIW.

Kivaro

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Well Beasty We are just following Necro's instructions on his post mass banning some of us on the grooming gangs thread he said "if we have a problem with that take it to the feedback thread",.
Also how come bans and cards are handed out to folks on one side of the arguement but when posters on the other side start calling others bigots they get carded but they don't get thread banned? How is that balanced?
Yeah I know I'll be told to go the appeal route but this seems to be a growing issue on CA and it seems the more the left whine about "them right wing posters" the more the CA mods get fed up with the constant whining and thread ban posters.

It is a possibility that it was a deliberate misdirection by Necro. I was surprised by Necro's multiple bannings, as it looked like he woke up with a sick head and went berserk with the ban hammer. I immediately went to the Help Desk and Feedback forum to see if there was anything on these bannings, as a number of them were dubious to say the least.

Unfortunately, I've seen all of this before with the old Politics Cafe forum and the self-destruction that occurred on there by just 2 mods. It was hard work by everyone to finally get the new Current Affairs set up, and it generally seems to be working out well.

But there is a process now, so if any of you want to appeal the bans, the Help Desk is the place to go, and to be fair, that process seems to be impartial and well managed. And yes, follow Wibbs' advice above.

V8 Interceptor

Wibbs wrote: »

On the other hand in the Multiculturalism thread the list of threadbanned and outright banned posters was overwhelmingly those on the "left" side of things. No doubt they'd claim censorship too.

And they'd be right. I don't understand the need to keep banning people, left or right. Its an extremely censorious Site imo.

(Although I do believe the Mods are acting with the best intentions)

Wibbs

Opinion is one thing, insult and attacking other posters another.

Rothko

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Wait, seriously? I thought that was part of the joke? You’d call yourself “fat” and say “women are all bitches” as a sort of ‘it’s ok, I’m a womxn’ parody. Missed that one completely.

What an utterly odd comment.

osarusan

CA has the same problems it always has, two of them.

Firstly, reregs last way too long before they get banned.

Secondly, there is way too much leniency given to posters who just post bad faith nonsense.

It's crazy to see somebody in the prison forum and the mod there listing out how they've had X number of threadbans, x number of forum bans, and x number of site bans in the last 6 months or whatever. It shouldn't need to take that long before a sh!tposter gets booted off the site.

ExMachina1000

Would be nice to hear some mods views and opinions of the thread.
You guys are the ones sifting through reports and witnessing directions threads on CA tend to go.

EmmetSpiceland

Rothko wrote: »

What an utterly odd comment.

How so, R? You don’t believe there are men on this site who are using a female “persona”?

It’s quite common on the internet. Some engage in something called “catfishing”, there’s even a tv show about that, some do it to get points across unchallenged. Sure some, even, create a gay persona so they can get away with “disparaging” remarks about the LGBTQIA+ community.

I, wrongly, assumed that the user in question was, jokingly, “pretending” to be a female user. I mean, it’s not illegal. Just thought they were having a laugh with it.

Discodog

Kivaro wrote: »

It is a possibility that it was a deliberate misdirection by Necro. I was surprised by Necro's multiple bannings, as it looked like he woke up with a sick head and went berserk with the ban hammer. I immediately went to the Help Desk and Feedback forum to see if there was anything on these bannings, as a number of them were dubious to say the least.

Unfortunately, I've seen all of this before with the old Politics Cafe forum and the self-destruction that occurred on there by just 2 mods. It was hard work by everyone to finally get the new Current Affairs set up, and it generally seems to be working out well.

But there is a process now, so if any of you want to appeal the bans, the Help Desk is the place to go, and to be fair, that process seems to be impartial and well managed. And yes, follow Wibbs' advice above.

I was the one that proposed it & I wouldn't never of done so had I envisaged what a Cesspit it would become.

I am no fan of Mods in general or over moderation but CA needs closing not moderating. The only positives seem to be that it concentrates all the undesirables in one place.

TheValeyard

Discodog wrote: »

I was the one that proposed it & I wouldn't never of done so had I envisaged what a Cesspit it would become.

I am no fan of Mods in general or over moderation but CA needs closing not moderating. The only positives seem to be that it concentrates all the undesirables in one place.

What way did yo envisage it would be vs the way it is now?

Discodog

TheValeyard wrote: »

What way did yo envisage it would be vs the way it is now?

I hoped for a light hearted, good natured discussion of current affairs. After Hours for news.

Rothko

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

How so, R? You don’t believe there are men on this site who are using a female “persona”?

It’s quite common on the internet. Some engage in something called “catfishing”, there’s even a tv show about that, some do it to get points across unchallenged. Sure some, even, create a gay persona so they can get away with “disparaging” remarks about the LGBTQIA+ community.

I, wrongly, assumed that the user in question was, jokingly, “pretending” to be a female user. I mean, it’s not illegal. Just thought they were having a laugh with it.

You knew full well that that poster was a woman. Don't pretend otherwise. That's all I'm going to say on it.

EmmetSpiceland

Rothko wrote: »

You knew full well that that poster was a woman. Don't pretend otherwise. That's all I'm going to say on it.

No, I was under the impression they were “pretending”. I thought I made that clear in my, above, post.

Glad that’s all you have to say, it’s taking the thread “off topic” and feedback on the ‘Current Affairs’ forum is more important, and more interesting, that whether a user is a man or, indeed, a womxn.

Beasty

osarusan wrote: »

Firstly, reregs last way too long before they get banned.

On this specific point, there is no rule against re-registering. We see a lot of long-term posters close their accounts and start again. A low post count does not equate to troll, and we will not ban simply because someone thinks a poster is a re-reg

We will of course ban if it's a re-reg of a banned poster. We need evidence of a link though. Often that evidence is already in our hands with some of the tools we have. If we cannot make a link though we need to either wait until one emerges, or treat a poster based on their record under the current account

If someone reports a poster as a re-reg, it would of course be helpful if they give a reason as to why, and indeed who they think it is a re-reg of. That allows us to narrow our investigation as we will not ban on suspicion alone

Wibbs

Discodog wrote: »

I was the one that proposed it & I wouldn't never of done so had I envisaged what a Cesspit it would become.

I am no fan of Mods in general or over moderation but CA needs closing not moderating. The only positives seem to be that it concentrates all the undesirables in one place.

Well just looking at the Currently Active on CA and it has 500 odd, whereas AH has 150. That's quite a bit of popularity and traffic to a forum apparently full of "undesirables".

Does it have issues? Of course, any such forum will have. That doesn't mean it can't be improved.

Wibbs

Beasty wrote: »

If someone reports a poster as a re-reg, it would of course be helpful if they give a reason as to why, and indeed who they think it is a re-reg of. That allows us to narrow our investigation as we will not ban on suspicion alone

+1 Over time I'd get reports of reregs by PM or reported post and a lot of the time someone just says "rereg" and unless it's one of the obvious "Here's a video from 'Merica about how to pickup women/chore sex" type you'd have little to go on.