Banned'ed from politics?

Gir

i asked why and have had no reply. I was not told via the PM. Just that I was banned

Banned from Politics

---

Gir you are banned from Politics for that last post of yours for 2 weeks.

PM me when the ban period is up,

cc'ed to other Politics mods.

---

I know the mod is still online. I have waited. Perhaps he is busy.. or feels I am scum not worth rpleying too :?(
There has nee enough time for him to respond!

I feel oppressed.

It seems it is not a crime to point out the failings of other posters.. but to do so in a mod... Banned...

For Shame...

It appears questioning the politics of a politics mod is..well a banning offence. I know I was a smart ass but thats just my way. Others are smart asses against the likes of Arcadegame etc. No action is taken against them.

I for one would like to see Gandalfs reasoning behind this if its not for personal or political reasons.


Luck sands aint a mod is all I am thinking.

Gir

Sorry meant that for the help board. could it be moved? thanks.

I only wish to speak to the admins.

billy the squid

Now you are not very clever are you?

could be for this line in your post in politics.

could be wrong though.

gandalf

You have been banned for personal abuse and a smart ass attitude.

Oh and if I didn't get you sceptre was about to ban you as well.

Have a nice day.

Gir

gandalf wrote:

You have been banned for personal abuse and a smart ass attitude.

Oh and if I didn't get you sceptre was about to ban you as well.

Have a nice day.

glad you found time to respond here and not by PM. :rolleyes:

Nice modding.

Nice to add sceptre would have banned me too. Got each others backs? He didnt ban me. You did. There is no evidence he would have bar your world. I thin he wubs me!

Sorry for questioning your motives or brain power..or even the brain power of the friends you mentioned on that thread. I never meant an insult to you by calling them retards. I hope you didnt think I was insinuating you were a retard too? Like on some bus full of retard people on a day trip to de Zoo discussing NI politics?

Jaysus..maybe you did think that! God I am very sorry!

BuffyBot

Smellls like troll spirit. An account which made two pointless spam posts back in 2004 suddenly pops up again in 2005 on a highly contentious politics thread and posts a lot. Once can't help but wonder who it belongs to...

Gir

BuffyBot wrote:

Smellls like troll spirit. An account which made two pointless spam posts back in 2004 suddenly pops up again in 2005 on a highly contentious politics thread and posts a lot. Once can't help but wonder who it belongs to...

Sorry?

gandalf

Sceptre stated he was about to on the mod forum.

Well you posted in public I only thought it would be fair on the viewers out there that they here my side.

You were banned for your attitude more than the personal insults.

Also strange that you decide to start posting tonight after such a long break :rolleyes:

BuffyBot

Gir wrote:

Sorry?

You can't help but wonder

Gir

gandalf wrote:

Sceptre stated he was about to on the mod forum.

Well you posted in public I only thought it would be fair on the viewers out there that they here my side.

You were banned for your attitude more than the personal insults.

Also strange that you decide to start posting tonight after such a long break :rolleyes:

You had 30 mins to reply to my PM .. you chose not to. You made it public by default. I even said so in the PM.

Nice you can reply here so fast.

:rolleyes:

mad m

"Me/rubs testicles".Yup loads of balls&attitude ,well you were warned..

Gir wrote:

Now you are not very clever are you?

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.)

Giblet

It's great you have time to take apart the inner workings of boards.ie with your 21 post history. Thanks for stopping by.

You were lucky even to get a PM.

ozt9vdujny3srf

Well aren't we patient.

Gir

mad m wrote:

"Me/rubs testicles".Yup loads of balls&attitude ,well you were warned..

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.)

I had itchy nuts. That a crime?????!!!?????!!!

Nor did I call anyone an idiot. :eek:

Marianna Colossal Villa wrote:

Well aren't we patient.

I like to think so.
I held my tongue long enough on the politics board. More of a lurker it'h I. Tend to read the Science boards.
I am allowed to hold my tongue I hope. I shall however from now on stay away from holding my balls.

It seems clear that Boards.ie Ltd is a left wing junta with right wing enforcement methodology!!

Beruthiel

Gir wrote:

glad you found time to respond here and not by PM. :rolleyes:

once you have been informed that you have been banned by a Mod, they are not oblidged to answer every PM that is sent their way afterwards, due to them having work/lives, more important things to be doing with their time.
I suggest you get over it and take your ban

WhiteWashMan

gandalf wrote:

You were banned for your attitude more than the personal insults.
:

you cant ban someone for having an attitude.
otherwise, you would have been banned long ago.

get over this ego trip your on at the moment paul.

its getting really fúcking boring.

joe.

You guys crack me up

Hobbes

Lol WWM banned from politics for questioning the mods.

Gir

WhiteWashMan wrote:

you cant ban someone for having an attitude.
otherwise, you would have been banned long ago.

get over this ego trip your on at the moment paul.

Assuming Paul = Gandalf? Well said that man!!

Beruthiel wrote:

once you have been informed that you have been banned by a Mod, they are not oblidged to answer every PM that is sent their way afterwards, due to them having work/lives, more important things to be doing with their time.
I suggest you get over it and take your ban

Thank you for that valuable input :rolleyes:

amp

WhiteWashMan wrote:

you cant ban someone for having an attitude.
otherwise, you would have been banned long ago.

get over this ego trip your on at the moment paul.

its getting really fúcking boring.

What's really boring is you attacking someone merely doing their work in a forum where personal insults are not only stupid but unconstructive. I would think that given your many years on boards you would support the "attack the argument not the poster" philosophy. It's one of those things that makes boards a place I continue to love despite my fickle nature.

I regulary ban people for having an attitude. That attitude is different to keeping the forums I mod pleasant places to visit. But you've never seemed to have been able understand the word "impartiallity" when it comes to tilts frequent bannings so I'm at loss to explain why I'm posting. Maybe it's because I'm still drunk from last night. Maybe it's because history hates me in a special way that I don't understand but recognise.

Boston

You're not fit to be a moderator amp, and the last one to talk about the rights and wrongs of banning someone. What was it you banned me for, o yes using the report a post thing, and my general attitude of contempt towards yourself. Why should WWM have to tow the party line just because he's been here awhile.

WhiteWashMan

amp wrote:

I would think that given your many years on boards you would support the "attack the argument not the poster" philosophy.

thats all nice and good, but i think you have the wrong end of the stick.

it seems you are still learning grasshopper.

WhiteWashMan

Boston wrote:

Why should WWM have to tow the party line just because he's been here awhile.

because ive been here longer

Boston

Old man.

RuggieBear

Beruthiel wrote:

once you have been informed that you have been banned by a Mod, they are not oblidged to answer every PM that is sent their way afterwards, due to them having work/lives, more important things to be doing with their time.
I suggest you get over it and take your ban

But still it would be nice to be told the reason why you were banned in the original pm. I know usually it's obvious but sometimes especially for newbies it's not so and just getting a pm saying "Banned" with no explaination riles people up. Just my huimble opinion.

tbh, Gir is a troll.

The Muppet

I'm surprised at established users slating the mod's for banning a user that is obviously using a second account set up for the purpose of trolling. To coin a phrase (once used about a different forum) Politics is a pile of Sh*te at the moment with troll accounts and constant hassle. To a degree that's the nature of politics in this country but would it not be better if the debate could be conducted in a civilised manner. If that doesn't happen we know from precedent what will happen and that would be a shame because politics can be a good read.

I'm not pointing the finger at any side in particular , I'm just noting the similarities with the problems on the other forum and now as then there was wrong on both sides. The mods are being caught in the middle and taking flak from both sides. Cop on guys and respect the tough task they have in "hot" fora like politics.

joe.

How about a Politics Access Requests system?

amp

WhiteWashMan wrote:

thats all nice and good, but i think you have the wrong end of the stick.

it seems you are still learning grasshopper.

Care to enlighten me what the right end of the stick looks like?

As for learning, it's plainly obvious that certain people are cursed of being addicted to seeking new information about the universe.

billy the squid

joe. wrote:

How about a Politics Access Requests system?

would be a step in the wrong direction in my opinion. you would have people refusing to sponsor those with opposing political views. thus leaving one plitical viewpoint free to post in the forum. and even if this didnt happen, there would always be accusations that it was happening.

The Muppet

billy the squid wrote:

would be a step in the wrong direction in my opinion. you would have people refusing to sponsor those with opposing political views. thus leaving one plitical viewpoint free to post in the forum. and even if this didnt happen, there would always be accusations that it was happening.

I wouldn't like to see politics take that route either but if it did I don't see that as an issue. there would be no need to declare your political views when requiring access. There is no evidence from the soccer access forum that people are sponsored solely because they support x or y club. I don't see politics being any different.

Goodshape

billy the squid wrote:

thus leaving one plitical viewpoint free to post in the forum. and even if this didnt happen, there would always be accusations that it was happening.

Just what I was thinking. I don't post there often (erm, at all really) but politics isn't like Soccer.. it effects everyone and anyone should be able to have a say.

That said, some folk really need to get over themselves and their own boxed-in view of the world.

Victor

amp wrote:

Care to enlighten me what the right end of the stick looks like?

Typically people don't like the pointy / icky end.

WhiteWashMan

amp wrote:

Care to enlighten me what the right end of the stick looks like?

As for learning, it's plainly obvious that certain people are cursed of being addicted to seeking new information about the universe.

and some still make the same mistakes over and over again

Boston

I argee with WWm, there is no stick.

billy the squid

The Muppet wrote:

I wouldn't like to see politics take that route either but if it did I don't see that as an issue. there would be no need to declare your political views when requiring access. There is no evidence from the soccer access forum that people are sponsored solely because they support x or y club. I don't see politics being any different.

while this might be true for new members to boards.ie it would not be the case for the existing members.

you would only have had to have read their previous posts to figure out their political allegiances

Gir

I dont think there is a stick either. Being banned is one thing. Rudeness is another.

What is really upsetting is that I would loved to have entered into a discussion of the following news article this morning
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4381205.stm

It seems that while all sides are being asked to seek peaceful means of moving forward that the powers that be are still stocking up on weapons of not so mass destruction but quite sore. Sometimes lethal if you get hit in the right or wrong place.
It would have been interesting to see what views people from this site would have felt on the move.

But I cant post it.

That is what is sad about this whole affair.

WhiteWashMan

make a new account :P

Boston

Gir wrote:

I dont think there is a stick either. Being banned is one thing. Rudeness is another.

bla bla bla..


But I cant post it.

That is what is sad about this whole affair.

Quiet you, can't you see your just a pawn in this game of cat and mouse between various people on this board. ever switching allegences and enemies, the big boys are playing, go away you've served your purpose.

uberwolf

Gir wrote:

What is really upsetting is that I would loved to have entered into a discussion

there are rules governing the discussion on the politics forum. You broke one of those rules, got a warning, broke it again and were banned. You had demonstrated you weren't capable of following the rules required for discussion on the politics forum. Sad for you perhaps, better for the forum.

WWM wrote:

make a new account :P

then leave it dormant for a few months, so if you get banned again you can use it. No wait, hold on a second...

The Muppet

billy the squid wrote:

while this might be true for new members to boards.ie it would not be the case for the existing members.

you would only have had to have read their previous posts to figure out their political allegiances

Existing members who post on politics would have access from the outset. Thats what happened on Soccer anyway with 10 or so notable exceptions. . I really dont see bias being an issue .

That said it would be a shame to see politics go that way but if the alternative is to have second account holders baiting other users I can only see the problems on politics getting worse. The access model is a proven way to counter that problem if this is a problem and not just an isolated case.

billy the squid

The Muppet wrote:

Existing members who post on politics would have access from the outset. Thats what happened on Soccer anyway with 10 or so notable exceptions. . I really dont see bias being an issue .

and who decides who is a regular poster? politics is different to soccer in that it affects everybody which soccer does not. there might be certain issues which I would post about in politics, and others I would just read. people who post perfectly valid and interesting posts, but not very often would be left out looking for a sponsor.

That said it would be a shame to see politics go that way but if the alternative is to have second account holders baiting other users I can only see the problems on politics getting worse.

this can happen in all of the forums. when it comes to bating, it takes two to tango in my opinion. it is down to the individual to be able to tell the difference between a bate and a valid point.

The access model is a proven way to counter that problem if this is a problem and not just an isolated case.

I am unfamiliar with the history behind the introduction of the soccer forum's acces requests board. but seeing the way that the sponsor also gets banned I dont think I would be willing to sponsor anybody if this were done with the politics board. especially when you have users coming over to this site from more extremist websites, how do you tell the difference between a genuine newbie and some muppet from stormfront or naFianna/IRBB? whose sole intention is to spout bigotry, racism or hatred.

Sangre

Attitude should hardly mean a ban. But if that attitude involves insults etc., well thats another matter.
Of course, Gandalf stated it was for attitude.
Thats like totally uncool dude.

billy the squid

he did insult gandalf though, and was about to be banned by another moderator anyway.

uberwolf

Sangre wrote:

Attitude should hardly mean a ban. But if that attitude involves insults etc., well thats another matter.
Of course, Gandalf stated it was for attitude.
Thats like totally uncool dude.

of course having studied the thread in question you know what happened? :rolleyes:
didn't think so.

DapperGent

Gir wrote:

I hope you didnt think I was insinuating you were a retard too? Like on some bus full of retard people on a day trip to de Zoo discussing NI politics?

Sangre

gandalf wrote:

You were banned for your attitude more than the personal insults.

Whats a newbie to think?

Anyway, I was speaking in general terms with the first line.

DapperGent

The Muppet wrote:

The mods are being caught in the middle and taking flak from both sides. Cop on guys and respect the tough task they have in "hot" fora like politics.

I think it's very important for moderation to be questioned and criticised at times, the fact that the politics mods have a really hard job is neither here nor there.

I do think it's important to be polite when you're being critical if only becuase it increases the chances of what you're saying not being lost in the noise.

Gir

billy the squid wrote:

he did insult gandalf though, and was about to be banned by another moderator anyway.

Two wrongs do not make a right.

Did your mother never tell you that? I apologise for an offence caused if you are an orphan or test tube kiddie. Its not like test tubes go around enlightening people. They cant speak for a start!

The Muppet

DapperGent wrote:

I think it's very important for moderation to be questioned and criticised at times, the fact that the politics mods have a really hard job is neither here nor there.

I do think it's important to be polite when you're being critical if only becuase it increases the chances of what you're saying not being lost in the noise.

I agree but it is impossible for the Mods function if when they Ban a user he just turns up under a different username and continues from where he left off as is obviously the case here.

billy the squid

The Muppet wrote:

I agree but it is impossible for the Mods function if when they Ban a user he just turns up under a different username and continues from where he left off as is obviously the case here.

but that happens on this forum too. remember bananayoghurt?

amp

WhiteWashMan wrote:

and some still make the same mistakes over and over again

Taking the mystery wrapped in a enigma, wrapped in a puzzle approach?