Heavy handed "moderation" on the Immigration Megathread

lumphammer2

It seems to be that there is very heavy handed "moderation" on the immigration megathread here ….. when I suggested that a lot of crime in Ireland ….. which I was a victim of …… was done by domestic Irish people I was accused of providing 'anecdotes' …… 3 things come to mind here ……

1. Since when did Boards.ie become a literature review/findings/discussion dissertation where you have to interview or survey people or review literature to discuss things …..
2. If they are getting all research methodsy about things do they not know observation and personal experience are part of the interpretivism philosophy!!!!!!
3. There seems to be an anti immigration bias in the group and they do not like to hear of experiences that contradict that narrative.

All in all I have always been polite here on this forum …… I do not think I should be banned off of this thread …. people are entitled to give their experiences of what they found ….. I and others have seen a lot of anti social behaviour on public transport in the Dublin area ….. and to put it quite simply it was all done by Irish people on drugs …… not non nationals ……

I therefore suggest moderators allow free polite speech and that a better style of moderation is needed ….. shutting down hate speech and insulting posts is needed yes but not shutting down discussion …..

Necro

Hi lumphammer. It is a rule specific to that thread that anecdotes of any description are not permitted. This is clearly posted in the OP along with other warnings. There's nothing heavy handed about it, it's been in place for years at this stage in relation to that specific topic, and it will not be changing any time soon.

Headshot

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058418599/heavy-handed-moderation-on-the-immigration-megathread

There seems to be an anti immigration bias in the group

You have no idea, its the complete opposite as all you have to look at which posters always get the warnings/bans

The moderation is just gone to the dogs in CA, just forcing posters to stop using CA altogether. Personally i'm currently in the process of finding a new current affairs/Politics form as I can see the writing on the wall for the type of posters they want in CA

lumphammer2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123597876#Comment_123597876

It is a rule that can be interpreted in any way ….. what exactly is an 'anecdote' ??? …. how do you define one ??? …. every poster will use what can be defined as one on such threads ….. only some will be picked out to be banned ….. I see the rules as there to serve a purpose of shutting down discussions when it does not suit the agenda of the bias ….. in other words it is anti free speech …… and an insult to victims of drug related crime ….. I was the victim of a burglary by a burglar who owed a drug debt ….

Necro

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123597886#Comment_123597886

If you don't know the definition of an anecdote then I'm afraid that might be your issue. The rule won't be changing. It was discussed previously at length in another thread so there's no point going over old ground again as far as I'm concerned.

Rocket_GD

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123597885#Comment_123597885

If both "sides" believe that the mods are against their "side" (which can't be the case) then surely that shows an unbiased down the middle stance?

emo72

That's the problem with anecdotes. Anyone can just make them up. They aren't very factual.

Headshot

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123597926#Comment_123597926

Not really, just look at the immigration thread to see the blitz of warnings/bannings for the "anti migration" posters

Even calling them the "anti immigration" posters is an insult in it's self but the modding in CA is leans against posters that voice concerns about immigration, you're constantly on egg shells over there.

lumphammer2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123597902#Comment_123597902

I know the definition of it well ….. and I know that it can be handy to close down discussions when they go against the preferred bias …… let's be honest ….. the rule is there is close down discussion ….. because everyone will use an 'anecdote' at some point in a discussion ……

batman_oh

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123597965#Comment_123597965

I got a week ban for mentioning that the house next door to me was basically rented out like a commune with bunk beds in every room. That's a dangerous anecdote.

Necro

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123597983#Comment_123597983

The rule is there so posters and mods alike don't have to wade through pages of nonsense between both "sides" arguing about something that may or may not have happened. Because that's what used to be the case on previous iterations of that thread. So a decision was made (long before I was modding CA I may add) that anecdotes are not permitted in that thread.

And I fully support it, and have no intention of changing it.

You can post anecdotally to your heart's content in other threads - just not in that one.

csirl

People should be allowed talk about direct personal experiences - things that they saw or did. I understand not allowing "my mate in the pub told me...." stuff, but not direct personal experiences. Boards is supposed to be about people sharing experiences and views.

Allinall

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598010#Comment_123598010

+1.

People's opinions are formed by personal experiences. It makes sense for posters to express how their opinion is formed.

Otherwise, what's the point of the thread (s)?

osarusan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598010#Comment_123598010

But how can the honesty of those direct personal experiences be examined?

I saw a migrant doing X/Irish person saying Y is no more credible than my mate down the pub told me he saw a migrant doing X/Irish person saying Y.

And my time on boards has taught me that some posters have an extraordinary range of often outlandish yet incredibly convenient experiences at their disposal.

csirl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598038#Comment_123598038

Boards is a discussion forum for personal opinions. Its not a legal or academic platform. The "rules" should be more akin to a respectful discussion between friends. We all meet people who say this and that in our daily lives. We form our own opinions as to their reliablity. When is the last time you asked someone for "a link to prove its true" in a day to day conversation.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598038#Comment_123598038

They can't. They're inherently worthless and they led us to the point where they had to be banned.

I tried engaging on that thread a while ago and all most people were interested in was propagating nonsense conspiracy theories about NGOs, the left and the Great Replacement. In that scenario, the same people saying they know of a town that's been overrun but which can't be verified isn't worth much. Pointing this out leads to bickering so it's easier to cut it off at the root.

osarusan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598073#Comment_123598073

CA has rules because without them it would be very very far from a place for respectful discussions (in my opinion, it's still often very far from that, even with the rules).

lumphammer2

It all depends on what the 'anecdote' is for ….. to be clear there is s difference between ……

1. Recalling an experience of anti social behaviour on public transport in the Dublin region ….. something that regularly makes the news and that many bus passengers, bus drivers, train employees and train passengers will back up ….. alcohol is banned on buses and trains for this reason ….. sadly decent people cannot have a drink on a train any longer because of this minority and everyone knows that the overwhelming majority of anti social individuals are Irish people on drugs and/or with too much to drink …..
2. Giving one's opinion on a current court case or an undetermined criminal event ….. e.g. someone mentioned Ian Bailey as an example ….. Ian Bailey was never found guilty in a court and random poster x and Y who were not involved in any way with Sophie Toscan du Plantier commenting about the case is something specific and anecdotal that does cause damage and frankly should not be discussed ……

I clearly state the difference between 1 and 2 ….. and 1 should be allowed but 2 should not as it interferes with the law of the land …… and may cause an innocent person to be viewed as guilty in the eyes of the public …..

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598073#Comment_123598073

I've often heard "you're just making it up" being used in person to person discussions. Or "calling BS" on that. "Never happened". Hard to ask for a link in person but it amounts to the the same thing.

Also, I expect among friends someone might think twice about peddling an invented anecdote. They might remember that last week their cousin worked somewhere else entirely and hang on when were you in X…

You know who is inclined to tall tales and who should be given the benefit of the doubt. Not the same in an online anonymous environment, hence the rules.

Dial Hard

Jesus christ, will we ever get a feedback thread on CA/IMHO that doesn't immediately descend into people just posting the type of rubbish they're not allowed to post in the threads in question???

ferpederine

"No Anecdotes" is one of the most stupid things I've seen posted. On a discussion site. No anecdotes. Christ above.

Ash.J.Williams

If you provide an anecdote you must back it up with a photo ID and a picture of your house

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598271#Comment_123598271

Yep. I've made the point on multiple of these threads, very hard to have a discussion about CA, which is tightly modded, on a forum which seems at times to be wild west and anything goes at times.

And also is this ever enforced from the charter?

Users currently serving a ban from a forum with a duration over 1 month are not allowed to post on feedback threads concerning that forum

kabakuyu

I ggot a warning in the Immigration thread, because I was uncivil in one of my postings,I accept it and move on.At all times the mod was courteous in my correspondence with them.

The mods have a hard job but all I want is consistency and impartiality in the application of the rules for all,that is essential.There can be no room for bias of any sort.

Btw,the no anecdotes rule is usually enforced rigidly but sometimes anecdotes slip through,the OP did post anecdotes which is against the charter.

Dial Hard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598317#Comment_123598317

It's on one thread on the site, because people have repeatedly proved themselves incapable of behaving like adults. Play stupid games, and all that.

CalamariFritti

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598470#Comment_123598470

Mod literally admitted to me in PM that on certain topics boards admin/mods are taking a stance to support xyz. There isnt really much to say about non-bias after that.

Allinall

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598508#Comment_123598508

That would be classed as an anecdote.

CalamariFritti

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598518#Comment_123598518

lol

CalamariFritti

While I dont like it I'll accept it. Boards is privately owned and they can support certain positions as they see fit. There is no obligation to be completely neutral. And if I dont like it I can eff off. No problem. And besides that modding isnt easy anyway.

Only saying lets not be under any illusion there is zero bias.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598508#Comment_123598508

I doubt it. I've seen nothing to indicate the pushing of certain viewpoints. Moderation is about preserving a space for discussion. Nothing more.

CalamariFritti

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598564#Comment_123598564

You think I'm making it up?