Fine Gael bots on Boards

McMurphy

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

And what of the ubiquitous “shinnerbots”, M? Will you be looking to purge them from the system too?

As for trolling, your username is trolling, and a rather creepy one at that, and you repeatedly call the electorate “idiots”, or at least you imply that they are, because they don’t see things as narrow-mindedly, or as simplistically, as you, yourself, do.

As for getting a, somewhat, “popular” thread shutdown, something I, myself, was accused of having a hand in, you, and your group, were posting round the clock to keep the thread on the first page of the forum. When the story dried up you then posted links to any old insurance story and even resorted to moaning about car insurance renewals.

People aren’t always going to agree with you, M, even if you think you’re right. I don’t know if you indulge in smoking of those marijuana “cigarettes” but, if you do, I would suggest you lay off them for awhile. This thread smacks of paranoid delusions and “jumping” at shadows.

Also, I should add, people aren’t always going to like you but when you’re starting out using the “username” you have you’re already starting inciting others against you.

But you already know that.

Funny you should say that.

What was the point in you posting stuff like this ?

Gotta ask.

Jinglejangle69

Bots?

I thought shinnerbots is a term banned in boards yet the OP is allowed start a thread titled FG bots?

If anyone thinks FG have people working in the current affairs well they would want to get their money back as It’s not working.

All it is is about 10 people rounding up on anyone who dares put an argument forward for FG.

Ready4Boarding

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

If anyone thinks FG have people working in the current affairs well they would want to get their money back as It’s not working.

Same applies to FG’s supposed “spin unit”. What you see from religiously on-message Conservatives in the UK puts paid to any idea that FG are master practitioners in the art of spin.

blanch152

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

And what of the ubiquitous “shinnerbots”, M? Will you be looking to purge them from the system too?

As for trolling, your username is trolling, and a rather creepy one at that, and you repeatedly call the electorate “idiots”, or at least you imply that they are, because they don’t see things as narrow-mindedly, or as simplistically, as you, yourself, do.

As for getting a, somewhat, “popular” thread shutdown, something I, myself, was accused of having a hand in, you, and your group, were posting round the clock to keep the thread on the first page of the forum. When the story dried up you then posted links to any old insurance story and even resorted to moaning about car insurance renewals.

People aren’t always going to agree with you, M, even if you think you’re right. I don’t know if you indulge in smoking of those marijuana “cigarettes” but, if you do, I would suggest you lay off them for awhile. This thread smacks of paranoid delusions and “jumping” at shadows.

Also, I should add, people aren’t always going to like you but when you’re starting out using the “username” you have you’re already starting inciting others against you.

But you already know that.

His username is more than a little creepy. In my opinion, it is borderline homophobic.

Why would a poster adopt the username of the Taoiseach's partner and then spend their time with every second post having a go at "Leo" or "Eoghan" other than to be drawing attention to the Taoiseach's sexuality? And for what reason?

Colonel Claptrap

Hands down most entertaining thread of 2019.

I'd love to see the list.

Has the FG-bot HQ photo been posted yet? I haven't seen it in a while.

Raconteuse

osarusan wrote: »

I don't see much difference between those stridently defending them and those stridently attacking them.

Exactly. Is the OP an oppositionbot? By their own logic they are.

Any time there's a cycling or religion or abortion discussion on e.g. After Hours, the same heads appear, and aren't anywhere as involved on other threads. It's just that they're extremely defensive about the matter in question (just like those with an opposing view).

Some of the anti FG folk get bizarrely enraged over a fairly moderate, mediocre party. I don't think Varadkar is an effective leader but the problems were around long before him, and even before Enda Kenny. And often the best they can come up with to explain their rage is mentioning a group of people in the 1930s.

James Brown

Raconteuse wrote: »

It used to be believed that there were Sinn Fein bots/shills too.

I don't get it - why must "They're supportive of a party I personally could never support" automatically = "bot"?

Yeah, if that were the OP, but it's not.
Folk who attack and generally have no alternative opinion and often preempt the official FG party line the day before the media report it, that's the issue. There are many FG supporters who will debate with you.

James Brown

Raconteuse wrote: »

That was just someone messing. See Prison.

If you believe him.

James Brown

Deleted User wrote: »

wouldnt like to speculate as to whether im one of our boy's bots, but if i may quote my own goodself (which absolutely ought be a yellow card, admittedly) on what would appear to be a relevant train of thought:

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2058035734/29/#post111934493


OP thinks that anyone who takes issue with constant govt-bashing is therefore a govt bot, i think.

id suggest this shows a fairly limited perspective.

as pointed out, the govt is actually representative of yknow quite a few ppl.

and furthermore, quite a few others do react to the same logins posting, dare i say it, what could just as easily be portrayed as party political statements and coordinated attacks on any and every action of govt.

if one behaviour is evidence of bots........then surely so is the other?

anyway, thread is ... amusing, if its not out of line to say so.

If people only come in to attack and cite the FG party line, I'd be suspicious.
If certain folk never offer an opinion but attack and divert off topic while citing FG party line, I'd be more suspicious.

James Brown

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

And what of the ubiquitous “shinnerbots”, M? Will you be looking to purge them from the system too?

As for trolling, your username is trolling, and a rather creepy one at that, and you repeatedly call the electorate “idiots”, or at least you imply that they are, because they don’t see things as narrow-mindedly, or as simplistically, as you, yourself, do.

As for getting a, somewhat, “popular” thread shutdown, something I, myself, was accused of having a hand in, you, and your group, were posting round the clock to keep the thread on the first page of the forum. When the story dried up you then posted links to any old insurance story and even resorted to moaning about car insurance renewals.

People aren’t always going to agree with you, M, even if you think you’re right. I don’t know if you indulge in smoking of those marijuana “cigarettes” but, if you do, I would suggest you lay off them for awhile. This thread smacks of paranoid delusions and “jumping” at shadows.

Also, I should add, people aren’t always going to like you but when you’re starting out using the “username” you have you’re already starting inciting others against you.

But you already know that.

Why don't you start your own thread rather than, see OP.

James Brown

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Bots?

I thought shinnerbots is a term banned in boards yet the OP is allowed start a thread titled FG bots?

If anyone thinks FG have people working in the current affairs well they would want to get their money back as It’s not working.

All it is is about 10 people rounding up on anyone who dares put an argument forward for FG.

You're new, maybe over time you'll change your tune, but re-read the op.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

His username is more than a little creepy. In my opinion, it is borderline homophobic.

Why would a poster adopt the username of the Taoiseach's partner and then spend their time with every second post having a go at "Leo" or "Eoghan" other than to be drawing attention to the Taoiseach's sexuality? And for what reason?

I wouldn't rate a personal attack as an opinion myself Blanch.
See this would be trolling, personal attack, diverting off topic and offering no opinion on topic, to me. Not saying you fit the op perfectly by any means. Go Greens!

FYI: 2 months and 3 weeks since I used 'Eoghan'

Matt Barrett

Matt Barrett wrote: »

If people only come in to attack and cite the FG party line, I'd be suspicious.
If certain folk never offer an opinion but attack and divert off topic while citing FG party line, I'd be more suspicious.

its been pointed out throughout that you- and many more like ya- are exactly the same or worse in your one-eyedness of analysis and one-notedness of message.

if one group is allowed to hold beliefs and have their own set of triggers, irritants or crank issues, then so are the other.

behoves no individual amongst either group, and look i think its fair comment to note that many would peg your goodself as such, to demand that mods declare that one behaviour is a conspiracy (remember: majority party of government, not some noise-above-impact rowdy set) and one behaviour is matt and the biyiz just having a completely normal one.

it wont wash.

JohnnyFlash

6 posts in a row isn’t a good look.

JohnnyFlash

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

6 posts in a row isn’t a good look.

7 if you know that im one of his logins

NOTE: not a serious post

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I wouldn't rate a personal attack as an opinion myself Blanch.
See this would be trolling, personal attack, diverting off topic and offering no opinion on topic, to me. Not saying you fit the op perfectly by any means. Go Greens!

FYI: 2 months and 3 weeks since I used 'Eoghan'

An opinion that a particular username is borderline homophobic is an opinion.

You might take that personally, but that doesn't make it a personal attack, neither does it detract from it being an opinion. If someone had the username "Kill all gays", I would hold the opinion that that would definitely be a homophobic username and again, that is not a personal attack on the poster.

James Brown

Deleted User wrote: »

its been pointed out throughout that you- and many more like ya- are exactly the same or worse in your one-eyedness of analysis and one-notedness of message.

if one group is allowed to hold beliefs and have their own set of triggers, irritants or crank issues, then so are the other.

behoves no individual amongst either group, and look i think its fair comment to note that many would peg your goodself as such, to demand that mods declare that one behaviour is a conspiracy (remember: majority party of government, not some noise-above-impact rowdy set) and one behaviour is matt and the biyiz just having a completely normal one.

it wont wash.

It's about discussion and trying to close down discussion often with personal attack. Varied opinions are welcomed by me.

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

6 posts in a row isn’t a good look.

What's your problem, why feel the need to post that?
Is it worst than your nothing contribution?

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Yeah, if that were the OP, but it's not.
Folk who attack and generally have no alternative opinion and often preempt the official FG party line the day before the media report it, that's the issue. There are many FG supporters who will debate with you.

I happen to see it a bit differently.

Say, a poster happens along and starts a thread saying that Fine Gael are wasting €1 billion a year on TD's pay and expenses and it's a disgrace.

I might come along and say, well actually, it's more like €20-25m for TD's pay and post a link to back up my statement. OP counters that I am only attacking him and not offering an opinion and what's my opinion on the crazy waste of money on TD's pay.

[Note: these are not real figures, just for illustrative purposes]

Now, I am under no obligation to offer an opinion on the OP's crazy conspiracy theory other than to point out the absurd factual basis of the OP. I might well share the OP's opinion, or I might not, but in my view, if people are going around posting unsubstantiated facts such as €1bn is wasted on TD's pay or "Nobody has owned a free/subsidised house ever in the history of the state", then I do feel, that for the debate to at least be based on facts, the record needs to be corrected.

It is not possible for the mods to clamp down on every factual misstatement, and there are many, but there is nothing wrong with other posters pointing out where a poster has got their facts completely wrong, especially when those other posters provide links to back up their statements. That doesn't require them to subsequently post an opinion on the subject, all they are doing is correcting the record.

PeadarCo

Matt Barrett wrote: »

It's about discussion and trying to close down discussion often with personal attack. Varied opinions are welcomed by me.

If varied opinions are welcomed why the thread?

As others have mentioned if FG are employing people they are doing a terrible job given the number of threads criticising them on both CA and politics. That's to a large degree that's expected given they are the party in government and have held that position for a long time.

Calling people who support/defend FG policies bots is asking for an echo chamber. Remember they even now based on opinion polls attract a substantial amount of support. You would expect a considerable amount of poster's posting in their defence as a result.

As I mentioned in a previous post one of the achievements of the mods in politics that they have created an environment where pro brexit posters can still post. It would be very easy for pro brexit posters to be hounded out of the threads.

What you seem to be calling for is FG supporters to be banned from the various threads. I would be fairly confident that any genuine bots of any party/belief would be picked up by mods and actioned.

Chips Lovell

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I challenge you to find one opinion ever from contestant number one. Seriously one opinion ever on any politics or current affairs thread.

The final late entrant is a troll of the highest order.

Anyway, thanks again.

At the risk of repeating myself, I see no evidence whatsoever that any of those three people are FG bots.

If you don't agree with me, MR. E has also offered to review the list. As an Admin, he can overrule any assessment I make as a Politics mod and can also look at posters site wide.

mods, release the list!!!

Mortelaro

Back in the day in a previous life,when I used mod politics, the OP would have had a heart attack as they were very popular despite Enda
Bonkey used to say when you're getting it in the neck from all sides nodding you're probably getting the balance right

Post in a public forum and you will get opposing opinions
That's what discussion is
Some people are more thick skinned than others and will post their opinions regardless of what comes back
That's fine
If any poster is losing sleep at night over all this,they need a break from boards,Twitter, journal etc

*Disclaimer I'm FG friendly myself and make no apologies
I do think they're a bit amateurish at times though

James Brown

PeadarCo wrote: »

If varied opinions are welcomed why the thread?

As others have mentioned if FG are employing people they are doing a terrible job given the number of threads criticising them on both CA and politics. That's to a large degree that's expected given they are the party in government and have held that position for a long time.

Calling people who support/defend FG policies bots is asking for an echo chamber. Remember they even now based on opinion polls attract a substantial amount of support. You would expect a considerable amount of poster's posting in their defence as a result.

As I mentioned in a previous post one of the achievements of the mods in politics that they have created an environment where pro brexit posters can still post. It would be very easy for pro brexit posters to be hounded out of the threads.

What you seem to be calling for is FG supporters to be banned from the various threads. I would be fairly confident that any genuine bots of any party/belief would be picked up by mods and actioned.

Read the OP.

James Brown

Chips Lovell wrote: »

At the risk of repeating myself, I see no evidence whatsoever that any of those three people are FG bots.

If you don't agree with me, MR. E has also offered to review the list. As an Admin, he can overrule any assessment I make as a Politics mod and can also look at posters site wide.

No worries. I appreciate the time taken.

James Brown

Mortelaro wrote: »

Back in the day in a previous life,when I used mod politics, the OP would have had a heart attack as they were very popular despite Enda
Bonkey used to say when you're getting it in the neck from all sides nodding you're probably getting the balance right

Post in a public forum and you will get opposing opinions
That's what discussion is
Some people are more thick skinned than others and will post their opinions regardless of what comes back
That's fine
If any poster is losing sleep at night over all this,they need a break from boards,Twitter, journal etc

*Disclaimer I'm FG friendly myself and make no apologies
I do think they're a bit amateurish at times though

You didn't read or understand the OP obviously.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

I happen to see it a bit differently.

Say, a poster happens along and starts a thread saying that Fine Gael are wasting €1 billion a year on TD's pay and expenses and it's a disgrace.

I might come along and say, well actually, it's more like €20-25m for TD's pay and post a link to back up my statement. OP counters that I am only attacking him and not offering an opinion and what's my opinion on the crazy waste of money on TD's pay.

[Note: these are not real figures, just for illustrative purposes]

Now, I am under no obligation to offer an opinion on the OP's crazy conspiracy theory other than to point out the absurd factual basis of the OP. I might well share the OP's opinion, or I might not, but in my view, if people are going around posting unsubstantiated facts such as €1bn is wasted on TD's pay or "Nobody has owned a free/subsidised house ever in the history of the state", then I do feel, that for the debate to at least be based on facts, the record needs to be corrected.

It is not possible for the mods to clamp down on every factual misstatement, and there are many, but there is nothing wrong with other posters pointing out where a poster has got their facts completely wrong, especially when those other posters provide links to back up their statements. That doesn't require them to subsequently post an opinion on the subject, all they are doing is correcting the record.

Have you ever started a comment with an opinion of your own, ever?
Aside from refuting any negative FG news items, you add nothing. Even then you post false dishonest tripe. I caught you out on the 'Eoghan' claim of your last comment to me. Now it's like you never made that lie.
You posted in the Maria Bailey threads yet never gave an opinion on it. In this 24 hour old thread you've inferred I'm homophobic and sexist.
So cut the baloney. Maybe you have Russian Pee tapes on some high up folk but you get away with murder on a daily basis none the less. Nobody buys the happy go luck social commentator with a Green Party vent. We may disagree, (I don't know your opinion on anything TBF) but I'm honest.

Mortelaro

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You didn't read or understand the OP obviously.

Oh I did
I fully understand your tone in this thread which is why I offered some standard advice

PeadarCo

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Read the OP.

As I mentioned in a previous post I did and the meaning I took from was that you think anyone who defends/supports FG is a bot.

That's obviously crazy. Even accounting for how long FG have been in power based on opinion polls they are the best supported party in Ireland. If boards is anyway representative of the Irish public(it never will completely representative and will be biased towards certain demographics) you will naturally have people defending not just FG but all major political parties in Ireland.

If we were to use the same measures you mentioned in your OP it would be equally fair to accuse you of being a bot for some opposition party. Obviously I don't think you are a bot. However just because you end up in trench warefare with other posters doesn't mean those posters are any more a bot than you are.

I appreciate you don't like FG it's a position that you are entitled to hold and based on opinion polls isn't uncommon. However FG obviously have supporters and on a discussion site like boards you will naturally encounter them. That's life you can't go around trying to silence opinions you disagree with.

Beasty

Deleted User wrote: »

mods, release the list!!!

never realised he was in Prison.....

Beasty

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Have you ever started a comment with an opinion of your own, ever?
Aside from refuting any negative FG news items, you add nothing. Even then you post false dishonest tripe. I caught you out on the 'Eoghan' claim of your last comment to me. Now it's like you never made that lie.
You posted in the Maria Bailey threads yet never gave an opinion on it. In this 24 hour old thread you've inferred I'm homophobic and sexist.
So cut the baloney. Maybe you have Russian Pee tapes on some high up folk but you get away with murder on a daily basis none the less. Nobody buys the happy go luck social commentator with a Green Party vent. We may disagree, (I don't know your opinion on anything TBF) but I'm honest.

Give it a rest Matt - you can give as good as you get in some of these areas

Any questions, PM me - do not respond to this post in-thread