Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The slow death of forums *see OP for Admin warning and update 28/02/18*

1…7475777980…98

Comments

  • #2282
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    Pepefrogok wrote: »
    Are boards now closing threads relevant to crimes in other countries using the before the courts excuse?

    I was sure it was Ireland only but apparently it's UK too. If that's correct then fair enough.


  • #2283
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 31,118 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    I was sure it was Ireland only but apparently it's UK too. If that's correct then fair enough.
    I think that the legal position is something to do with falsely influencing potential jury members with speculation of what was done by whom, when and when.

    In other words someone reading a boards thread hay be called to jury service in the trial of these people and remember the speculation seen here and may have a false impression of the accused.


  • #2284
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    I think that the legal position is something to do with falsely influencing potential jury members with speculation of what was done by whom, when and when.

    In other words someone reading a boards thread hay be called to jury service in the trial of these people and remember the speculation seen here and may have a false impression of the accused.

    In that case it would be global, no?


  • #2285
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 31,118 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    In that it would be global, no?
    Technically, yes, but I don't see the government of North Korea trying to stop a thread about speculation on criminal cases in their country.

    I seem to remember that a few years ago there was a case in Ireland that Irish media were banned from discussing but the injunction didn't extend to the UK media so anyone with access to the UK media got the full story.
    edit: or was it the other way round?


  • #2286
    pleas advice
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,492 ✭✭✭pleas advice


    I thought it would have rightly applied in relation to the ongoing case in the North, but not for cases in the rest of the UK?


  • Advertisement
  • #2287
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    Technically is good enough for me :)

    Would be good for boards to clear it up, or maybe it already has been!?

    Ireland and UK are no go but everywhere else is fine... Europe is a no but outside is fine... English speaking is a no go but elsewhere is fine...? I dunno.


  • #2288
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Technically, yes, but I don't see the government of North Korea trying to stop a thread about speculation on criminal cases in their country.

    I seem to remember that a few years ago there was a case in Ireland that Irish media were banned from discussing but the injunction didn't extend to the UK media so anyone with access to the UK media got the full story.
    edit: or was it the other way round?

    So only if there's an injunction?


  • #2289
    The Rape of Lucretia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,440 ✭✭✭The Rape of Lucretia


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I think that the legal position is something to do with falsely influencing potential jury members with speculation of what was done by whom, when and when.

    In other words someone reading a boards thread hay be called to jury service in the trial of these people and remember the speculation seen here and may have a false impression of the accused.

    How come its anything goes on politics.ie though ?


  • #2290
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 31,118 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    So only if there's an injunction?
    In this particular case i seem to remember that there was an injunction "gagging" the media as it was a civil as opposed to a criminal case.
    A whose been sleeping in my bed type of a story.


  • #2291
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »
    How come its anything goes on politics.ie though ?

    In fairness, it's for boards mods/admin to worry about boards. Let elsewhere do what they like. I understand your question but I don't think it's a fair question to put to anyone here.


  • Advertisement
  • #2292
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    In this particular case i seem to remember that there was an injunction "gagging" the media as it was a civil as opposed to a criminal case.
    A whose been sleeping in my bed type of a story.

    Ryan Giggs?


  • #2293
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,202 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Any post with a bit of humour should not cause a ban even in serious discussions. I know some posters can take offence but a bit of a laugh can also diffuse situations
    Sometimes the modding and the rules are far too serious.


  • #2294
    The Rape of Lucretia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,440 ✭✭✭The Rape of Lucretia


    KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    In fairness, it's for boards mods/admin to worry about boards. Let elsewhere do what they like. I understand your question but I don't think it's a fair question to put to anyone here.

    True, but I phrased poorly, and didnt mean for boards to justify the decisions of politics.ie.
    But it does suggest the boards wariness is possibly excessive on matters legal foreign, when the rational doesnt really seem stand up given the lack of issues for other media outlets in Eire.


  • #2295
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 31,118 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    Ryan Giggs?
    Possibly..

    I don't remember for sure.


  • #2296
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »
    True, but I phrased poorly, and didnt mean for boards to justify the decisions of politics.ie.
    But it does suggest the boards wariness is possibly excessive on matters legal foreign, when the rational doesnt really seem stand up given the lack of issues for other media outlets in Eire.

    Yep I know what you mean. I'd be of the same opinion as the office though when it comes to legal matters, best stay on the side of caution. One case could shut the site down, win or lose.

    I don't think it's generally a big issue anyway but it would be good to have clarity for future reference.


  • #2297
    Ken.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,898 ✭✭✭✭Ken.


    Hey Ker, Check out Your most recent RP.


  • #2298
    The Rape of Lucretia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,440 ✭✭✭The Rape of Lucretia


    Discodog wrote: »
    Thank you. Hopefully Beasty will accept that I am not a Troll & neither are the others that voice a different opinion. We aren't posting to be arseholes. We are posting because this is our site that we have used for years & want to genuinely improve.

    Some sub forums are far too troll jumpy though - there is a difference between trolling and positing a viewpoint that the majority will likely not agree with. Just because the majority jump on the post - doesnt mean the poster was baiting them.
    The re-reg trolls starting endless garbage threads must be weeded out. Sympathy to the mods tidying those up. Deletion is the only place for them. But just because its is clear a post will get the backs up of some other posters - well that isnt trolling. Thats disagreement and debate (and/or argument).


  • #2299
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    Yep, I have and I'm more confused now than before. Will reply there now


  • #2300
    Pepefrogok
    Site Banned Posts: 406 ✭✭Pepefrogok


    So is the "Breaking - massive explosion in Leicester" going to stay closed and any other threads about crime in the UK at the legal stage i.e as soon as arrests made also closed? I mean it's just this seems new? There are hundreds of threads discussing events in the UK well into the legal stage.


  • #2301
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 31,118 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Pepefrogok wrote: »
    So is the "Breaking - massive explosion in Leicester" going to stay closed and any other threads about crime in the UK at the legal stage i.e as soon as arrests made also closed? I mean it's just this seems new? There are hundreds of threads discussing events in the UK well into the legal stage.
    As has been quoted by police in Leicester, they don't want speculation to prejudice a future trial.
    A spokesperson for Leicestershire Police said: "Throughout this complex investigation we have been urging journalists and members of the public not to speculate about the cause of the explosion.

    "With three people now charged and due in court, it becomes even more important, for legal reasons, that this message is heeded.
    "A continuance of such ill-informed and speculative commentary threatens to jeopardise this investigation and serves only to cause further distress to the families of those killed and injured."

    Speculating about cases like this in the local pub is one thing, speculating on an internet forum that can be accessed globally is another.


  • Advertisement
  • #2302
    Ken.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,898 ✭✭✭✭Ken.


    Pepefrogok wrote: »
    So is the "Breaking - massive explosion in Leicester" going to stay closed and any other threads about crime in the UK at the legal stage i.e as soon as arrests made also closed? I mean it's just this seems new? There are hundreds of threads discussing events in the UK well into the legal stage.

    Hey Pepe, To be honest we are kinda stumped so we've asked the legal people for guidance. As soon as we get an answer we'll post it in the thread.

    After their decision about the rape trial some are seeing their advice as including the whole of the U.K. involving court cases and some aren't.


  • #2303
    Pepefrogok
    Site Banned Posts: 406 ✭✭Pepefrogok


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    As has been quoted by police in Leicester, they don't want speculation to prejudice a future trial.

    The largest UK forum digital spy are discussing it?


  • #2304
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    As has been quoted by police in Leicester, they don't want speculation to prejudice a future trial.

    But surely that is standard for every case? I'm not trying to be argumentative or pedantic, I want to understand my my own sake exactly what is or isn't allowed. It's as clear as mud at the moment!


  • #2305
    Fr_Dougal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,166 ✭✭✭Fr_Dougal


    Deleted User wrote: »
    As has been quoted by police in Leicester, they don't want speculation to prejudice a future trial.

    Surely that only applies to mainland UK? It has never been applied to boards.ie before. Where does it stop? US? All of the EU?


  • #2306
    Ken.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,898 ✭✭✭✭Ken.


    Fr_Dougal wrote: »
    Surely that only applies to mainland UK? It has never been applied to boards.ie before. Where does it stop? US? All of the EU?

    That's what we are going to find out soon (by soon I mean being the weekend it could be Monday)


  • #2307
    Pepefrogok
    Site Banned Posts: 406 ✭✭Pepefrogok


    Very strange.


  • #2308
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 31,118 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    But surely that is standard for every case? I'm not trying to be argumentative or pedantic, I want to understand my my own sake exactly what is or isn't allowed. It's as clear as mud at the moment!
    Clear as mud is probably the best way to describe it, I fear that our freedoms to discuss such topics is being eroded each and every day.

    To be honest I don't know the legal position with these types of discussions, except that they can be open to exploitation by clever lawyers trying to help the defendant get "a fair trial".

    I hate to think that the managers of Boards have to look over their shoulders every time a possibly contentious subject is discussed and fear that they may take the easy way out and shut down these discussions.


  • #2309
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Speculating about cases like this in the local pub is one thing, speculating on an internet forum that can be accessed globally is another.

    That rules out ever speaking about anything from anywhere really then doesn't it?


  • #2310
    boombang
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,107 ✭✭✭boombang


    I think there's a very interesting few speech issue here that I'd love academics to examine. The wholesale shutdown of discussion of major events such as the Lidl riots seems very heavy handed if it's about the desire for completely fair trials. A jury can access speculation in many places, so why particularly censor discussion forums? It costs the many who don't indulge in speculation a considerable amount in terms of freedom of expression. Should the government forbid punters talking about a crime in pubs before it goes to trial due to the that one of them might be called to do jury service? I know it's not a perfect analogy as nobody can go back in time to read over what was said in the pub. However, it would seem fairer for the jury to police themselves than for everybody else to be censored.

    Otherwise I think I'm off to register Contentious.ie and host it in some lax jurisdiction and we can talk about knackers all day long on it.


  • Advertisement
  • #2311
    _Kaiser_
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,256 ✭✭✭✭_Kaiser_


    sdanseo wrote: »
    I continue to think the one single change that would bring the millenials in en masse is a decent and engaging app. The number of times in the last few weeks with the mad weather where I've gone and grabbed my laptop instead of checking boards on my phone has taught me that.

    The rest will follow but bottom line is the young ones have their head in their phones and want ease of use. And frankly if we can get the 15-25's actually discussing things rather than the 200-character smartasery that personifies twitter, then we'll be doing the world a favour!

    Not just the millennials. I'd still prefer browsing on my laptop, but so much is done via phone now it's essential to have a decent app.

    Best example I can use here is Reddit. Via desktop it's borderline unusable without RES and style tweaks (and even then it's still messy), but then I found the Boost app which transforms the whole thing immesurably.

    With Boards we have the opposite problem. Unless you're using a laptop in "legacy" mode (and on that, the shockingly bad, half-finished "responsive" site needs to just go away) it's a very poor experience on mobile. The Touch version is reasonable, but still missing lots of the key functionality and usability.

    On the idea of navigation and streamlining... no harm at all to cut down or merge some of the abandoned forums or that are several layers deep, but the first step has to be addressing the "temporary" nav bar at the top of the screen. Just put it back to the way it was several years ago when forums weren't hidden away from casual viewing and people didn't just stick to their favourites list (a feature I only really started using when the "improvements" came in)


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement