Politics forum

A Dub in Glasgo

Should someone who posted the following in a thread result in a banning from a forum which states that it is unacceptable?

Enough!! Name and shame [Entry #154]
28-02-2005 - 14:48
User Mood ****ing pissed off
Now Playing Thin Lizzy: Blackmail (oh how appropriate)

35 odd long years of nothing but murder and mayhem.

What have the IRA & SF brought this island besides the above? Really? What good have they done. I sit here and I look at all the apologists for these ****ing murders and I feel sick reading each single mother****ing scumsucking line of their pathetic ****ing apologist arguments.

F*CK YOU!

You're as bad as the scum who murder, bomb, knee cap, beat to within an inch of life, terrorise, drug deal, and generally carry out all manner of criminal activities. You defend them with this sickening display of how much the sun shines out of their arseholes and how you love to lick at it on an hourly basis.

You are everything that is wrong with this country and should be ashamed to call yourselves human.

So here's the current list (in evolution - there are a few posters I'm not so sure about yet) of those who have spouted terrorist-apologising rhetoric:

irish1
A Dub in Glasgo
FTA69
cdebru
[ Daithí ]
BCB
AmenToThat
SpabSFW
Squaletto
Mad Cyril
Poblachtach

Civility
Every poster is entitled to their opinion - whether it is ill-informed or not.

Never attack a poster. Attack the content of their post. (You can tell someone that their opinion is based on incomplete or incorrect information, but do not call them an idiot.)

Humour is not unreasonable, but please bear in mind that the written word conveys less information than the spoken. What you mean in jest may be taken seriously.

Also, bear in mind that this is not a comedy forum - so keep it to a reasonable and relevant amount.

Putting a smiley at the end of an insult does not make it ok.

Keep your language civil, particularly when referring to other posters.

While good-natured abuse will be tolerated to a certain level, it is ultimately the moderator's decision as to when abuse steps over the line. Please bear this in mind.

If you are going to level allegations of lying at another poster, please be willing to prove that they are lying - that they deliberately intend to deceive.

Allegations of trollery will not be accepted in-thread - they will be viewed as simply another form of personal attack, and dealt with accordingly. If you believe someone is trolling, and object, then report them as per "Reporting & Moderating" above.

My personal opinion is the poster who posted the above was abusive to a number of people who are members of boards.ie. Should the fact that the post was linked to a journal entry mean that the poster should not be banned?

WhiteWashMan

if tis in a thread, i would edit the post.

Sangre

Lifetime ban.

WhiteWashMan

i shouldnt think so.

its a link to a journal. no one said they had to look at it.

all it is is white noise in a thread, so edit it out.

Nuttzz

its a journal entry, so no I dont think it should be a ban

RuggieBear

I think it's uncivil but it is in a journal so i don't think it is technically against da_rules. (maybe evading them tho...coz i vaguely remeber a mod saying they would't allow links to questionable jornal entry)

Have you mentioned it to a mod?

RuggieBear

RuggieBear wrote:

I think it's uncivil but it is in a journal so i don't think it is technically against da_rules.

Have you mentioned it to a mod?

I was not a mod of the forum at the time that link to a journal was first posted over 3 weeks ago.
My information is that the post in question was never reported.
It appears to have flown under the radar of Gandalf and Sceptre although Bonkey closed the thread.

Most of those now complaining about it, contributed to the thread, yet never reported the post at the time.

It has came to the attention of the mods arising out of Sceptres reply to Irish1 here where he hinted that a way around the rules against personal abuse had been found.I had also noticed the post and all the mods of the board discussed it, the decision arising out of our discussion was to close the loop hole immediately.
Sceptre informed Irish1 (who by coincidence that very day had just become a subscriber with the ability to create a new journal) that linking to it as a way of circumventing the ban on personal abuse items or other things that are in contravention of the politics board charter would be a non runner.

It's only now 3 weeks after the fact that some people who oppose the views in the journal that was linked are looking for that user to be banned.
It's blatantly obvious that this is being suggested because the loophole allowing links to journals regardless of content has been closed.

The matter has been dealt with by the mods of politics and they are in full agreement that there should be no retrospective ban.

RuggieBear

Things appear to be getting a bit nasty over on politics...imo. I suppose SF/IRA/Republican/loyalist threads are always goin to raise blood.... But vendettas are forming...

Suppose there is no point asking for a Sinn Fein/ Norn Iron politics sub forum....i know it's been brought up before....maybe a special section within the thunderdome

The Muppet

No I wouldn't ban anyone for expressing that opinion. Some of the language could be edited to tone it down if it were posted in the forum but as it's a link to a Journal entry it's ok IMO. If you can't handle your political beliefs being challenged, politics is not the forum for you..

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

gandalf

Actually to clear things up here I was aware of Lemmings Journal entry from day 1. I like others I felt that journals are peoples own business and if they stepped over the line it was for the admins to correct them. Linking to their journals in threads was a grey area and one initially I was prepared to let go until it became apparent that it was going to turn into a little green guerrila war.

At the moment Politics is a complete and utter pain in the ar$e to mod with people complaining about other peoples views, people saying their is bias that more of "their" side is being banned that others, telling the mods who to ban (I liken them to the tossers on the football field that make a card gesture to the ref to try and get an opposing player booked). This is specific to the Republican supporters, but hey I have news for you, this is a mainstream forum not some green tinted one that you are used to standing around having mutual masturbation sessions about how wonderful Gerry Adams is or how the 'RA never surrendered. You are going to be challanged on your views and alot of people find the fact you support Sinn Fein, pIRA, whatever other important titled organisations that believe in murder.

A Dub in Glasgo thanks for starting this thread at least you had the balls to bring it out into the open rather than some others sculking around in pm's.

RuggieBear

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

i'm such a newbie tbh....

Villain

gandalf wrote:

A Dub in Glasgo thanks for starting this thread at least you had the balls to bring it out into the open rather than some others sculking around in pm's.

Oh and for those not aware that was pointed at me, sad Gandalf very sad. BTW whats sculking?

FYI Earthman I paid my subscription Tuesday so I had plenty of time to create a journal entry and link to it, but I didn't because I prefer to discuss the issues in the forum rather than post up personal insults and link to them.

So Gandalf was aware of this post and done nothing until I suggested that others might do the same, thats very good Gandalf :rolleyes:

mycroft

irish1 wrote:

Oh and for those not aware that was pointed at me, sad Gandalf very sad. BTW whats sculking?

FYI Earthman I paid my subscription Tuesday so I had plenty of time to create a journal entry and link to it, but I didn't because I prefer to discuss the issues in the forum rather than post up personal insults and link to them.

So Gandalf was aware of this post and done nothing until I suggested that others might do the same, thats very good Gandalf :rolleyes:

Come and watch the oppressing of the masses.........

The Muppet

irish1 wrote:

Oh and for those not aware that was pointed at me, sad Gandalf very sad. BTW whats sculking?

He can speak for himself but I would imagine Gandalf meant to say skulking. TBH using the Spelling/Typo Police defence is sad Irish1 and unlike you. It does nothing to support your argument.

Do you not see the hypocracy of the chuckies looking for a user to be banned for a Journal entry. What's wrong with their concept of freedom of speech? Is that right selective to those that follow the party line? It's not like Lemmings expressed opinions are all that obscure in mainstream society.

BuffyBot

Most of those now complaining about it, contributed to the thread, yet never reported the post at the time.

Hmmm...geee...now isn't that strange...

uberwolf

irish1 wrote:

BTW whats sculking?

and done nothing

have you nothing else to do but comment on typo's? if so clean your nose first.

It's this simple. It was a new scenario - and ergo not against the rules. It clearly contravened the spirit of the rules though. As no rule was broken no ban will result.

From now on though, we will ban for links to material against the spirit of the rules. So context will become important - the reason for the link will have to be considered. - something racist gets posted - it's a ban. If something racist gets posted in a OMFG look at these loonies way then it's ok.

But as this all means more time and work for the politics mods will have to err on the side of caution. Which means oppression no doubt.



But the spirit of the politics forum has waned recently. Whilst disagreement is encouraged - for debates perspective, recently posters clearly take no time to consider the opposing perspective. A snap response begets another snap response and useful threads disappear into vitriol.

The popularity and appeal of the forum is it's generalist outlook. There's something there for everyone, it's not intended to be apologist propoganda for anyone. A lot of posters simply close there eyes and start swinging - so intent on defending their opinions that they don't respond to very reasonable probings. But they're smaller people for it. The number of reported posts relating to blubbering idiot posts is alarming. Just ignore idiots instead of responding to them - hopefully they'll piss off. The workload is simply too great to act as a chairman of a debate - we simply have to rely on the posters to act in good will in that respect. And if we tried to act on this we'd be in danger of acting on our own beliefs rather than what was best for the forum and open debate

Villain

FYI I wasn't trying to slag Gandalfs spelling off god knows mine is worst that most peoples, I just wasn't sure what that word was.

Uberwolf, I don't think anyone has a problem with these links been banned in future I think the issue that a user was allowed to have a post containing such a link for 3 weeks without anyone doing anything about it.

I think people have a right to write whatever they like in their journals but I think when somebody posts in politics saying "I have an opinion on this HERE" (here being a link to abuse in a journal) they are blatently doing so to avoid been banned, now you tell me why it took 3 weeks of his post to be edited when Gandalf said he knew about it and Bonkey locked the thread?

Would it be because I (a SF supporter) said maybe somebody else could do the same and I recently got my own Journal??

I think most people can see what went on here.

Nuttzz

do you or anyone else report the post that linked to the journal?

Rock Climber

irish1 wrote:

I think most people can see what went on here.

Yes i can see that 3 weeks ago, you didnt according to the mods report a post that now 3 weeks later you are wailing on about because the mods have taken away the right to link to a journal with stuff against the charter ...

And they did so only after you drew attention to the fact that such charter evasion was possible.
It looks to me that your hint with a wink in the post linked above coinciding so soon with your subscribing suggests very clearly that you probably had a journal link in mind when the opportunity would arise.
I'd expect in the light of what has happened that you would deny that now of course
It seems then that you scored an own goal because drawing attention to it in the way that you did made the mods close the loophole and rightly so.

Mercury_Tilt

This post has been deleted.

Villain

Rock Climber, Bonkey closed the thread and Gandalf says he say the post, and I'm pretty sure I did report it but can't be certain. But IMO somebody doesn't have to report a post for action to be taken. Its obvious that when Lemming posted what he did the mods didn't have a problem with it. The problem only arose when I suggested others could do the same.

Except for one post recently I have always discussed politics within the rules, Lemming hadn't posted in politics for quite a while then he posted that link and no mod saw a problem with it for 3 weeks!.

Villain

The Muppet wrote:

Do you not see the hypocracy of the chuckies looking for a user to be banned for a Journal entry. What's wrong with their concept of freedom of speech? Is that right selective to those that follow the party line? It's not like Lemmings expressed opinions are all that obscure in mainstream society.

The Muppet, the issue isn't what he wrote in his journal, its the fact he linked to it in a thread, to avoid breaking the forum rules.

irish1

irish1 wrote:

But IMO somebody doesn't have to report a post for action to be taken.

You are around politics long enough to know how busy it is.
Since I've joined the team I've looked at most reported posts and I'm pretty sure the others do too.We do have lives outside this voluntary job you know

Its obvious that when Lemming posted what he did the mods didn't have a problem with it. The problem only arose when I suggested others could do the same.

I would say that it is obvious that the mods didn't realise what a problem, linking to charter contravening material in a journal would be untill you drew attention to it in your post Irish1.
In addition to that I would like to thank you for raising the problem as it has enabled us to draw a line in the sand nipping potential future hassle like this in the bud.

The Muppet

Mercury_Tilt wrote:

This post has been deleted.

My Intial thinking was that the shinners are very vocal when they are being censored[section 31 broadcasting Act] but dont mind calling for censure when they are the target of criticism. On reflection you are right, there is nothing hypocritical or new in Sinn Fein/IRA punishing people for speaking their mind.

irish1 wrote:

The Muppet, the issue isn't what he wrote in his journal, its the fact he linked to it in a thread, to avoid breaking the forum rules.

Exactly he avoided breaking the rules so why should he have been puinished. Rules evolve as loopholes are found and that's what happened here,The loophole is now closed so I just don't see the problem.

As for the timing of the rule change perhaps the mods hoped common sense would prevail and the tit for tat sniping would not come to fruition. You're threat to start your own journal and registration prompted them to act as they did for the good of the forum. Politics now sometimes reminds me of what soccer was this time last year. It would be a pity to see it go the same way[invite only] because of an unwillingness by a minority of users to accept differing opinions and debate them in a civilised way.

Villain

The Muppet wrote:

My Intial thinking was that the shinners are very vocal when they are being censored[section 31 broadcasting Act] but dont mind calling for censure when they are the target of criticism. On reflection you are right, there is nothing hypocritical or new in Sinn Fein/IRA punishing people for speaking their mind.



Exactly he avoided breaking the rules so why should he have been puinished. Rules evolve as loopholes are found and that's what happened here,The loophole is now closed so I just don't see the problem.

As for the timing of the rule change perhaps the mods hoped common sense would prevail and the tit for tat sniping would not come to fruition. You're threat to start your own journal and registration prompted them to act as they did for the good of the forum. Politics now sometimes reminds me of what soccer was this time last year. It would be a pity to see it go the same way[invite only] because of an unwillingness by a minority of users to accept differing opinions and debate them in a civilised way.

FYI I never threatened to start my own journal, I think you should have a look at what I actually posted.

BuffyBot

But IMO somebody doesn't have to report a post for action to be taken

Well, sort of. Is a problem a problem before someone has mentioned it to someone as being a problem. Conundrums, eh!

cdebru

gandalf wrote:

Actually to clear things up here I was aware of Lemmings Journal entry from day 1. I like others I felt that journals are peoples own business and if they stepped over the line it was for the admins to correct them. Linking to their journals in threads was a grey area and one initially I was prepared to let go until it became apparent that it was going to turn into a little green guerrila war.

At the moment Politics is a complete and utter pain in the ar$e to mod with people complaining about other peoples views, people saying their is bias that more of "their" side is being banned that others, telling the mods who to ban (I liken them to the tossers on the football field that make a card gesture to the ref to try and get an opposing player booked). This is specific to the Republican supporters, but hey I have news for you, this is a mainstream forum not some green tinted one that you are used to standing around having mutual masturbation sessions about how wonderful Gerry Adams is or how the 'RA never surrendered. You are going to be challanged on your views and alot of people find the fact you support Sinn Fein, pIRA, whatever other important titled organisations that believe in murder.

A Dub in Glasgo thanks for starting this thread at least you had the balls to bring it out into the open rather than some others sculking around in pm's.

journals are peoples own business if anyone wants to go and read what lemming thinks about the world then that is their choice
the problem is that he linked to his abuse from a post in the politics forum

I would like to know did lemming ask the mods before he posted if this would be ok as in his follow up post

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=2435595&postcount=18

Oh ... I will be challenging you and your ilk Dub. I just wanted to show the rest of the world what you are and call you for what you are. And there's nothing you can do about it .....

he seems very confident that no action will be taken

the main problem I see is that the there is an anti republican bias amonst the current and former mods on the politics forum which they allow into their decisions as regards thread closing bannings etc
the proof of this is that gandalph admits he knew about this from day 1 but only acted when faced by the possiblity that someone else who was a republican might be in a position to do the same thing.
i have no desire to stand around with anyone masturbating over adams or anyone else in sinn fein what i would like is the rules of the forum applied evenly and fairly across the board not in a slanted anti republican way

i have no problem with anyone attacking my views that is the purpose of the forum however when people go over the line and attack the poster i would expect them to be dealt with the same way irrespective of what their political beliefs are

cdebru

cdebru wrote:

the main problem I see is that the there is an anti republican bias amonst the current and former mods on the politics forum which they allow into their decisions as regards thread closing bannings etc
the proof of this is that gandalph admits he knew about this from day 1 but only acted when faced by the possiblity that someone else who was a republican might be in a position to do the same thing.

Did you read my contribution...I'll repost it for you
As I am one of the current mods,I'd say I'm privy to the politics mods thinking on this issue.

I would say that it is obvious that the mods didn't realise what a problem, linking to charter contravening material in a journal would be untill you drew attention to it in your post Irish1.
In addition to that I would like to thank you for raising the problem as it has enabled us to draw a line in the sand nipping potential future hassle like this in the bud.

Villain

Good post cdebru, but I don't think anything will change Lemming seemed to know that he could do this and get away with it. In a PM to me after he posted his link he said

I think you'll find the manner in which I approached voicing my opinion was quite deliberate and calculated irish1

sad thing is Lemming only started to post regualry in politics again after I questioned him on why he hadn't been discussing the topics instead of posting insults. IMO if any SF supporter had done what Lemming did they would have been banned and rightly so.

Gordon

My current thinkings on this thread are all written here.

Villain

Gordon wrote:

My current thinkings on this thread are all written here.

Who Suck's what Gordon??

LOL

pwd

I don't think the post/journal entry was offensive. I find the posts that defend the IRA and Sinn Fein highly offensive on the other hand. It is not ok to post a joke about a dead baby, but it is ok to glorify baby killers? Senseless. The sorts of posters he criticises infuriate me and I loathe them.

cdebru

Earthman wrote:

Did you read my contribution...I'll repost it for you
As I am one of the current mods,I'd say I'm privy to the politics mods thinking on this issue.

that really does not answer anything earthman

surely when gandalph alllowed lemming to link to an abusive journal entry it at some stage must have crossed his mind that others could follow suit and that the problems were obvious from the first day not just now 3 weeks later

i realise that you were not a mod then and are in no way responsible for the non action 3 weeks ago

the fact that the post was or was not reported is irrelevant gandalph has admitted he was fully aware of it and took no action untill a republican was in a position to do something similar( not that i think irish1 had any intention of doing this)
if this does not suggest an anti republican bias ie abuse is ok in as long as it is directed at republicans then i don't know what is

cdebru

pwd wrote:

I don't think the post/journal entry was offensive. I find the posts that defend the IRA and Sinn Fein highly offensive on the other hand. It is not ok to post a joke about a dead baby, but it is ok to glorify baby killers? Senseless. The sorts of posters he criticises infuriate me and I loathe them.

loathe away i don't have a problem with you loathing anyone it was the abusive nature of the journal entry that i have a problem with

btw i have never glorified anyone that killed babies i dont think anyone else on lemmings list did either

cdebru

irish1 wrote:

Good post cdebru, but I don't think anything will change Lemming seemed to know that he could do this and get away with it. In a PM to me after he posted his link he said sad thing is Lemming only started to post regualry in politics again after I questioned him on why he hadn't been discussing the topics instead of posting insults. IMO if any SF supporter had done what Lemming did they would have been banned and rightly so.

which of course begs the question did lemming clear the post with mods or admin before posting it would at least appear that he did

pwd

It was not directed at republicans. It was directed at apologists for the IRA. There is a difference.

cdebru

pwd wrote:

It was not directed at republicans. It was directed at apologists for the IRA. There is a difference.

it was aimed at me iam not an apologist for anyone or anything if the IRA need to apologise they can do it themselves

i have never apologised for the IRA

cdebru

cdebru wrote:

surely when gandalph alllowed lemming to link to an abusive journal entry it at some stage must have crossed his mind that others could follow suit and that the problems were obvious from the first day not just now 3 weeks later

Well it was Bonkey that actually moderated on the situation here
The Key point of the post being in bold

You are supposed to be discussing a topic, not making judgements on each other's beliefs or engaging in other forms of personal "clashing of antlers". If you're unable to make that distinction, the moderators will now summarily do so for you.

If you asked Gandalf today or yesterday and brought up the subject of the journal and that is what was done by Irish1-well then of course you are going to remind him and of course when reminded the mods will take action.


I dont for the life of me see where anti republicanism of any shape or form is involved in tightening up the implimenting of the charter.
Posters if convinced enough of the weight of their argument should continue to discuss it civilly rather than anything else.

With reference to Lemming V Irish1, thats a matter for themselves.
Personal insults,jibes,taunting between them or anyone else will not be allowed on the forum-take that as read.
Both of them may discuss civilly their political differences on the board in political threads as is the norm as long as it is a discussion on politics and is kept within the rules.

RuggieBear

this is becomming more and more like a typical IRA/SF politics thread....

cdebru

Earthman wrote:

Well it was Bonkey that actually moderated on the situation here
The Key point of the post being in bold

If you asked Gandalf today or yesterday and brought up the subject of the journal and that is what was done by Irish1-well then of course you are going to remind him and of course when reminded the mods will take action.


I dont for the life of me see where anti republicanism of any shape or form is involved in tightening up the implimenting of the charter.
Posters if convinced enough of the weight of their argument should continue to discuss it civilly rather than anything else.

With reference to Lemming V Irish1, thats a matter for themselves.
Personal insults,jibes,taunting between them or anyone else will not be allowed on the forum-take that as read.
Both of them may discuss civilly their political differences on the board in political threads as is the norm as long as it is a discussion on politics and is kept within the rules.

Bonkey was the one that stepped in

however from gandalphs post on this forum

Actually to clear things up here I was aware of Lemmings Journal entry from day 1. I like others I felt that journals are peoples own business and if they stepped over the line it was for the admins to correct them. Linking to their journals in threads was a grey area and one initially I was prepared to let go until it became apparent that it was going to turn into a little green guerrila war.

now what i take from that is that in particular the reference green guerilla war was that it was ok as long as it was aimed at republicans when the possibility that irish1 could fire back action was taken

i can not see how linking to journals could be a grey area when the aim was to subvent the rules and fire abuse at other posters

the last paragraph lemming versus irish 1 is fine that is how it should be that is not how it is or was

The Muppet

irish1 wrote:

FYI I never threatened to start my own journal, I think you should have a look at what I actually posted.

Apologies on that Point Irish1, I have read the thread again and you are right you never threatened to start your own Journal .

pwd

cdebru wrote:

it was aimed at me iam not an apologist for anyone or anything if the IRA need to apologise they can do it themselves

i have never apologised for the IRA

You're right to be offended by the suggestion you have then.

cdebru

cdebru wrote:

now what i take from that is that in particular the reference green guerilla war was that it was ok as long as it was aimed at republicans when the possibility that irish1 could fire back action was taken

Thats your subjective opinion,however I can tell you what is actually the case.
I have said three times already (and I am privy to the discussions between the moderators on this subject) that the loophole was closed when Irish1 reminded us it was there.
This was not done specifically to prevent one side or the other of any discussion from breaking the boards charter, it was done to prevent both.
Basically it was prudent.

gandalf

Jesus talk about Martyr syndrome in the extreme. The reason I left it there was because at the time I taught it was a storm in a teacup. Irish1 said he had taken it to DeVore so I decided to leave the call to him. DeVore obviously decided there was nothing out of order with it so it stayed and so I decided to leave it there in a closed thread :rolleyes: which would have sunk into nothingness if it wasn't for the wannabe crucifix rider brigade.

When it became obvious that Irish1 had instructed everyone on the forum in an open thread that could insult people willy nilly we then decided to take action as a fair few of the politics regulars have journals not just the ones with a green hue. Again I suppose we should let one link to their own insults just so they can satisfy their inbred sense of "tit for tat" that has effected these islands for years.

cdebru

gandalf wrote:

Jesus talk about Martyr syndrome in the extreme. The reason I left it there was because at the time I taught it was a storm in a teacup. Irish1 said he had taken it to DeVore so I decided to leave the call to him. DeVore obviously decided there was nothing out of order with it so it stayed and so I decided to leave it there in a closed thread :rolleyes: which would have sunk into nothingness if it wasn't for the wannabe crucifix rider brigade.

When it became obvious that Irish1 had instructed everyone on the forum in an open thread that could insult people willy nilly we then decided to take action as a fair few of the politics regulars have journals not just the ones with a green hue. Again I suppose we should let one link to their own insults just so they can satisfy their inbred sense of "tit for tat" that has effected these islands for years.

i dont feel like a martyr or that i have a martyr syndrome
i' am posting on a thread about what i and many others believe tro be an unfair bias
while you can say it is a storm in a teacup i can absolutely gaurantee that if i or any one of a green hue had posted that kind of nonsense then we would have been banned straight away

the story that you only realised that this could be a problem when irish 1 raised the issue is nonsensical surely the mods on the politics forum are not so shortsighted that they did not see the possibilty of people insulting anyone they liked via a link to their journal

can i ask you if the insult had been directed at you gandalph would you have taken such a light view of it

I have no desire for tit for tat just that you and the other mods at least try and have a sembleance of fairness
your dismissive and insulting atitude of the people who have complained and your failure to even try and see it from the point of view of the people who were named in the journal entry is further evidence of your ploitical bias if any were needed

ecksor

Can we leave out the snipes at people of various political persuasions and stay on the topic of the particular rule/judgement in question.

cdebru

Earthman wrote:

Thats your subjective opinion,however I can tell you what is actually the case.
I have said three times already (and I am privy to the discussions between the moderators on this subject) that the loophole was closed when Irish1 reminded us it was there.
This was not done specifically to prevent one side or the other of any discussion from breaking the boards charter, it was done to prevent both.
Basically it was prudent.

prudent would have been to take the action when the orignal incident happened
to suggest that the mods needed to be reminded that lemming had been allowed to openly abuse and insult other posters is frankly absurd

btw earthman i accept that the decision that you were involved in was not done to prevent one side or the other from doing what lemming had been allowed to do

and i have no problem with the new decision to prevent anyone else from doing this again

i do not accept that the orignal decision to allow lemming to do this was not motivated by political bias

cdebru

ecksor wrote:

Can we leave out the snipes at people of various political persuasions and stay on the topic of the particular rule/judgement in question.

an excellent suggestion

perhaps you might find the time to mod the politics forum

DeVore

I'm getting well fnckin' unhappy about this and I'm about 1 post short of banning about a dozen people and banning discussion on the north.

Alternatively I'll make Politics like Football.


Personally I am not in favour of banning links. If thats a link to a journal, so be it. Will we ban links to Geocities pages now? Yahoo? Who will judge this? You? Me? Gandalf?
When will a link be deleted? How nasty does it have to be?

Silencing anyones honestly held opinion isnt what we are here for. I wouldnt allow that to be posted on Boards because I dont want to run the site that says it. On the other hand, Lemming has paid for his space and is entitled to say more there then we'd tolerate in public.

If Irish1's objection is to being named in a list of apologists then he should ask Lemming to take it down, or ask me to ask lemming. Thats not what I'm hearing.

I'm hearing "shut him up" and I'm not going to do that.

This has already taken up a dispropotionately large amount of my time.
DeV.

gandalf

Yes but it is a private journal entry which I have no control over and I am not going to ban someone based on their journal when at the time it was not understood to be part of the rules.

As for being shortsighted not at all no one had done it before, so hats off to Lemming on finding that loophole. He does it again and he will be banned as will anyone else. Again it would not have been an issues if you all didn't keep rabbiting on about it and Irish1 had not posted his recommendation that everyone could get around the rules by posting in there journals.

If anyone named me in a journal I would take it directly to the admins of the site and not whinge like a little bitch, badger mods to ban someone all the time when the offending text is not directly on the forum and the link was not covered by the rules at the time of posting.

Sorry but I disagree you want your pound of flesh as does irish1 and because DeVore didn't ban Lemming you expect us to repair your damaged ego's.

As for my political bias, its well known its in any threads I replied to in politics and my only public entry on my journal. Normally my bias does not effect how I mod, its only when people annoy me then I let loose.

BTW just for your interest one of the most recent bannings on politics was a user who making continued protest postings over the fact NI/IRA/SF threads seem to have taken over the forum. My god it stinks of bias that we actually banned him eh :rolleyes:

(Posted before I saw ecksors or DeVores posts!)