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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

1…34689…48

Comments

  • #252
    circadian
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,036 ✭✭✭circadian


    mad muffin wrote: »
    Yeah.its a back handed insult. It’s weaseling and it’s plain to see.

    No its not.


  • #253
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,051 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    mad muffin wrote: »
    Why are posting it out of context?

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=110822073&postcount=479

    Because it conveys exactly my earlier position that was quoted and refuted. I gave irrefutable evidence. Can’t get more irrefutable than that video. Now can you. There is now desire for discussion. There is just a desire to prove what I’m saying is false. I use the videos as irrefutable evidence. Notice they don’t continue the discussion after that just report my video. Censoring me because they can’t show my position is wrong.

    So again. BULL****.
    The irony of someone who spams youtube and random article links without comment complaining to anyone else about the importance of context...


  • #254
    mad muffin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,034 ✭✭✭mad muffin


    Overheal wrote: »
    The irony of someone who spams youtube and random article links without comment complaining to anyone else about the importance of context...

    Quick. I think there’s a thread you need to post a pic of a dog whistle in…


  • #255
    dudara
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,518 ✭✭✭✭dudara


    @mad muffin - that’s enough.you had a DR thread on this matter which you declined to persue.

    This thread is for Feedback. Unless you have some valid feedback to share, please don’t post.

    And before you say anything, this is not stifling or censoring you. It’s asking you to post on topic.

    dudara


  • #256
    batgoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,423 ✭✭✭batgoat


    A mod warning has been issued on a thread about speculating about the ethnicity of a criminal... Thing is, how did the thread manage to run for 40 pages before there was any crack down? It genuinely seems like the very worst of viewpoints are given free reign.


  • #257
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    batgoat wrote: »
    A mod warning has been issued on a thread about speculating about the ethnicity of a criminal... Thing is, how did the thread manage to run for 40 pages before there was any crack down? It genuinely seems like the very worst of viewpoints are given free reign.

    alternate view is you got what you wanted?


  • #258
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    That thread isn't even about the girls anymore. It's turned into an immigrant/travelled/asylum seeker bashing sh*tshow.

    However, mods are happy to keep it open. It's an absolute joke.


  • #259
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,533 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Faugheen wrote: »
    That thread isn't even about the girls anymore. It's turned into an immigrant/travelled/asylum seeker bashing sh*tshow.

    However, mods are happy to keep it open. It's an absolute joke.
    Unfortunately it's been pretty much about the perpetrators throughout

    Just on the point of moderation though, I know I was firefighting when the thread started. I also know there have been numerous cards and bans (forum and site) issued, various in-thread warnings given, and around 150 posts deleted. I can assure you I am not "happy" to keep it open. It has taken up a hell of a lot of my time over the past few days and I would certainly like to avoid the hassle if I could

    While it's still newsworthy I would prefer discussion remaining in that thread where it's easier to keep an eye on things. If we close that one we'll no doubt get posters trying to drag it into other threads

    As it is though there are a number of posters who are on final warnings, and will find themselves either banned from the forum and/or the site if they continue to spout racist or xenophobic crap, or indeed try and bring religion into it.

    I know some have been trying to tread a fine line, but you may also note a number of the worst "culprits" are no longer posting in the thread. I am sure more will follow the way the thread has gone and continues to go. I'm also hoping some of the relevant posters read this as we are very serious over stopping some of their extremist behaviour and hopefully they will rein things in a bit


  • #260
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    I'm going to have to say it's the same people again. Post reported but the quality of posting in this forum is going downhill despite repeated warnings to the same effect.
    mad muffin wrote: »
    Haha haha.



    Hahahahahahaaa


    Hahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaa


    Oh sorry. I need to catch my breath.


    Hahahahahhaaaaaa

    Haaaaaaassahahahaaaaaaa

    Oh god. Oh. Oh.

    Hahahhahahaaaaaaaaa hahahahaaaaa


  • #261
    Tokyo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,655 ✭✭✭✭Tokyo


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    I'm going to have to say it's the same people again. Post reported but the quality of posting in this forum is going downhill despite repeated warnings to the same effect.


    You reported it at 15:01. I threadbanned the poster at 15:11, just before I spotted this post. What kind of turnaround times are you expecting exactly?


  • Advertisement
  • #262
    mad muffin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,034 ✭✭✭mad muffin


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    I'm going to have to say it's the same people again. Post reported but the quality of posting in this forum is going downhill despite repeated warnings to the same effect.

    Haha. Your a funny fellow. Why didn’t you go put up the half dozen posts before that of what you had posted?


  • #263
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    Beasty wrote: »
    Unfortunately it's been pretty much about the perpetrators throughout

    Just on the point of moderation though, I know I was firefighting when the thread started. I also know there have been numerous cards and bans (forum and site) issued, various in-thread warnings given, and around 150 posts deleted. I can assure you I am not "happy" to keep it open. It has taken up a hell of a lot of my time over the past few days and I would certainly like to avoid the hassle if I could

    While it's still newsworthy I would prefer discussion remaining in that thread where it's easier to keep an eye on things. If we close that one we'll no doubt get posters trying to drag it into other threads

    As it is though there are a number of posters who are on final warnings, and will find themselves either banned from the forum and/or the site if they continue to spout racist or xenophobic crap, or indeed try and bring religion into it.

    I know some have been trying to tread a fine line, but you may also note a number of the worst "culprits" are no longer posting in the thread. I am sure more will follow the way the thread has gone and continues to go. I'm also hoping some of the relevant posters read this as we are very serious over stopping some of their extremist behaviour and hopefully they will rein things in a bit

    This is nice and all but the thread is in no way on topic anymore. It's people talking about immigrants and travellers and arguing over how it may or may not have been them.

    It's another thread for the dogwhistlers to spew their ****e and it's the same people over and over again.

    You can claim you're not happy to leave it open, but there's been little to stop the thread becoming the cesspit that it is, and you've still left it open.


  • #264
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    mike_ie wrote: »
    You reported it at 15:01. I threadbanned the poster at 15:11, just before I spotted this post. What kind of turnaround times are you expecting exactly?

    I'm not complaining about the modding. I'm complaining about posters ignoring it.


  • #265
    MrFresh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    Seems like the CA Forum is just going to take a little time to balance out. It does seem to be weeding out the worst of them bit by bit.


  • #266
    Tokyo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,655 ✭✭✭✭Tokyo


    MrFresh wrote: »
    Seems like the CA Forum is just going to take a little time to balance out. It does seem to be weeding out the worst of them bit by bit.

    ^^This, pretty much. I appreciate that people are frustrated at certain posters, and are looking for an instant fix, but it's not going to work like that - not if we do it fairly at least. It takes time for people to work their way through the warning > infraction > ban system - some people wind their necks in pretty quickly, others take a little longer to see sense. The serial offenders do finally get to that point though where they have exhausted all chances and end up banned for the forum, or breaching probation and banned from the site entirely. It may not always seem that way from the outside, but take my word for it, we have removed quite a few posters already, with others walking a fine line.


  • #267
    batgoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,423 ✭✭✭batgoat


    mike_ie wrote: »
    ^^This, pretty much. I appreciate that people are frustrated at certain posters, and are looking for an instant fix, but it's not going to work like that - not if we do it fairly at least. It takes time for people to work their way through the warning > infraction > ban system - some people wind their necks in pretty quickly, others take a little longer to see sense. The serial offenders do finally get to that point though where they have exhausted all chances and end up banned for the forum, or breaching probation and banned from the site entirely. It may not always seem that way from the outside, but take my word for it, we have removed quite a few posters already, with others walking a fine line.

    I do appreciate that there's effort being made but it does seem like posters have been given significant leeway which includes them ignoring mod warnings repeatedly. I genuinely can't fathom how the assault thread managed to amass so many posts. And threads that are absolute dog whistles seem more regular or just more obvious than before.


    I am glad to see bans are flowing through but I'm not really sure if that fully deals with how these threads are allowed to freely run for so long.


  • #268
    Sweetemotion
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,511 ✭✭✭Sweetemotion


    batgoat wrote: »
    I am glad to see bans are flowing through but I'm not really sure if that fully deals with how these threads are allowed to freely run for so long.

    What else would you like done?


  • #269
    This is it
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,688 ✭✭✭This is it


    I think the new forum is going well, modding in particular has been good in my opinion.

    I don't think AH will survive, or at least the traffic will drop so much that'll it'll be like any of the other hundreds that don't have much happening, but considering how it was going before, that's not such a bad thing.


  • #270
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    I wouldn't want to be a mod. Work is hard enough without doing it for free. I can appreciate it's a lot of work, especially for a voluntary job. I think the lack of action is often bandwidth in terms of time, rather than lack of will. I wasn't having a go.

    I do think this forum is unique in that there's a lot of posters who've been here for yonks that seem to change their style when they post here. Some of it feels more like an outraged Twitter feed than Boards.


  • Advertisement
  • #271
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,646 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    I wouldn't want to be a mod. Work is hard enough without doing it for free. I can appreciate it's a lot of work, especially for a voluntary job. I think the lack of action is often bandwidth in terms of time, rather than lack of will. I wasn't having a go.

    I do think this forum is unique in that there's a lot of posters who've been here for yonks that seem to change their style when they post here. Some of it feels more like an outraged Twitter feed than Boards.


    Damned if they do, Damned if they don't.


  • #272
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Sweetemotion wrote: »
    What else would you like done?

    I think posters who differ in view point shouldn't characterise those they disagree with as "the rabid left or right". It serves no purpose. Posters, maybe on both sides could do more to engage with the points made rather than slate the poster or source continuously.


  • #273
    Sweetemotion
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,511 ✭✭✭Sweetemotion


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    I think posters who differ in view point shouldn't characterise those they disagree with as "the rabid left or right". It serves no purpose. Posters, maybe on both sides could do more to engage with the points made rather than slate the poster or source continuously.


    Good point and I agree, but I only see one side trying to silence the other.


  • #274
    batgoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,423 ✭✭✭batgoat


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    I think posters who differ in view point shouldn't characterise those they disagree with as "the rabid left or right". It serves no purpose. Posters, maybe on both sides could do more to engage with the points made rather than slate the poster or source continuously.

    Also think it's entirely unacceptable for ongoing speculation about serious local crimes by posters, particularly when it's to push particularly bigoted views.


  • #275
    Sweetemotion
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,511 ✭✭✭Sweetemotion


    batgoat wrote: »
    Also think it's entirely unacceptable for ongoing speculation about serious local crimes by posters, particularly when it's to push particularly bigoted views.

    Like this for example. Have you ever heard anyone from the other side post in feedback that they think it is entirely unacceptable to appose different views?


  • #276
    batgoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,423 ✭✭✭batgoat


    Sweetemotion wrote: »
    Like this for example. Have you ever heard anyone from the other side post in feedback that they think it is entirely unacceptable to appose different views?

    That's not simply different views which is the thing, it's baseless speculation with added racism.


  • Advertisement
  • #277
    Sweetemotion
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,511 ✭✭✭Sweetemotion


    batgoat wrote: »
    That's not simply different views which is the thing, it's baseless speculation with added racism.


    That is simply your view.


  • #278
    circadian
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,036 ✭✭✭circadian


    Sweetemotion wrote: »
    That is simply your view.

    So you're saying it's not baseless speculation? Has information from official sources been released that corroborates this speculation?

    I think it's more than just their "view" to be fair.


  • #279
    Sweetemotion
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,511 ✭✭✭Sweetemotion


    circadian wrote: »
    So you're saying it's not baseless speculation? Has information from official sources been released that corroborates this speculation?

    I think it's more than just their "view" to be fair.

    Thanks for that Cathy.

    You think it's more than just their “view".

    Is simply you expressing your view.

    To be fair, I think you are allowed to express that view and I shall not report this post or try to shut it down by calling you a racist or bigoted.


  • #280
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,051 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    mike_ie wrote: »
    You reported it at 15:01. I threadbanned the poster at 15:11, just before I spotted this post. What kind of turnaround times are you expecting exactly?

    Amazon would have already shipped my package, just saying.


  • #281
    Harry Palmr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 40,061 ✭✭✭✭Harry Palmr


    Sweetemotion wrote: »
    Thanks for that Cathy.

    You think it's more than just their “view".

    Is simply you expressing your view.

    To be fair, I think you are allowed to express that view and I shall not report this post or try to shut it down by calling you a racist or bigoted.

    You'd look like an idiot if you tried so it's best you don't issue any more non-threat threatening posts!


  • Advertisement
  • #282
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Sweetemotion wrote: »
    Like this for example. Have you ever heard anyone from the other side post in feedback that they think it is entirely unacceptable to appose different views?

    I agree but are people trying to silence different views? I don't complain about the posts I disagree with, I complain with the substance of the post not the views expressed in them. I like to debate and challenge views and this is why Current Affairs is already a good forum.

    My problem is with the posts I quoted here. They lack little in the way of content and detract from the debate and the quality of the forum. I'll give you an example of comments I disagree with in terms of view and those I have a problem with in terms of context:
    Black people are oppressed by the Democrats more than republicans

    Different view to mine and I would welcome a debate on it.

    Here's the type of posts I don't think belong in civilised debating:
    HA HA HA HA HA
    SUCK IT
    LEFTIST AGENDA
    RABID LEFT
    RIGHT WING NUTTERS.

    I think that some posters have been resorting to these sort of comments when they don't know how to formulate a response to an opposing view.

    Then you have the people who are trolling IMHO. Either doing it out contempt for those of opposing viewpoints or to just get a rise out of people.

    For example:
    Trump advocates no black people policy in his apartments

    Then the next post:
    I don't think Trump is racist.


  • #283
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Here's the type of posts I don't think belong in civilised debating:
    RIGHT WING NUTTERS.

    But yet......
    steddyeddy wrote: »
    I mostly hear about her from right wing nut jobs. They do a great job of advertising her policies.

    I really hope admin aren't falling for what is going on here. I have already shown where this user suggested in a CA thread post (by means of a nonsense story about their employer) that Trump voters have a low IQ ( / 'have trouble accepting facts') and now you can see that in CA they use the exact insulting terms which they pretending here in Feedback that they are against, in the hope they will be seen as being all about "civilised debate" of course.

    Nah, they're not. I'll say it again, there are a cohort of users that are clearly trying to pull the wool over Admin's eyes and their objective is clear: they want admin/mods to act so that it will no longer be okay in CA for someone to accuse a user of having a leftist agenda. That's their aim, don't be fooled. Note how they compare someone being called a 'Right wing nutter' (to give the appearance of non-bias) to someone being told they have a 'Leftist agenda', as if these two things are in any way comparable.

    The only thing comparable to a user being told they have a leftist agenda is a user being told they have a right wing one. Would you want admin to action anyone saying the latter? No you wouldn't but yet here you are doing your utmost to see they action the former. Please.


  • #284
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    But yet......



    I really hope admin aren't falling for what is going on here. I have already shown where this user suggested in a CA thread post (by means of a nonsense story about their employer) that Trump voters have a low IQ ( / 'have trouble accepting facts') and now you can see that in CA they use the exact insulting terms which they pretending here in Feedback that they are against, in the hope they will be seen as being all about "civilised debate" of course.

    Nah, they're not. I'll say it again, there are a cohort of users that are clearly trying to pull the wool over Admin's eyes and their objective is clear: they want admin/mods to act so that it will no longer be okay in CA for someone to accuse a user of having a leftist agenda. That's their aim, don't be fooled. Note how they compare someone being called a 'Right wing nutter' (to give the appearance of non-bias) to someone being told they have a 'Leftist agenda', as if these two things are in any way comparable.

    The only thing comparable to a user being told they have a leftist agenda is a user being told they have a right wing one. Would you want admin to action anyone saying the latter? No you wouldn't but yet here you are doing your utmost to see they action the former. Please.

    In both instances of left and right wing nutters I was referring to people directing that label at the poster. Either way you're right that it's a low brow term to use and I shouldn't.

    Sorry Pete but my employer's do indeed limit the use in official documents, grants or press releases based on the level of understanding Trump, his administration and supporters have of the science. For instance it's well publicised that he doesn't want the climate change to appear on our grants.


  • #285
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    But yet......
    The only thing comparable to a user being told they have a leftist agenda is a user being told they have a right wing one. Would you want admin to action anyone saying the latter? No you wouldn't but yet here you are doing your utmost to see they action the former. Please.

    The only problem with anyone being labelled as leftist is that it's meaningless. Trust me when I say that compared to American politics all of us are on the left.


  • #286
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Sorry Pete but my employer's do indeed limit the use in official documents, grants or press releases based on the level of understanding Trump, his administration and supporters have of the science.

    I don't believe a research facility thinks 62 million people have a poor understanding of science based purely on how they voted in an election and I'd would suggest that if you saw their press releases before Trump was elected, there would be little differences in how they are today. Sounds to me like the employee(s) you cite were just being smartarses.

    Either way though, it's neither here nor there, as you said it on the thread in order to have a sly dig at the user you were engaging with.
    steddyeddy wrote: »
    The only problem with anyone being labelled as leftist is that it's meaningless. Trust me when I say that compared to American politics all of us are on the left.

    Fine, but you're not in Feedback arguing about the legitimacy of the term though are you. You're here saying it doesn't belong in a civilized debate, which is a much different thing entirely.


  • #287
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    Nothing on the instances of promoting harm towards a child that has been highlighted umpteen times?


  • #288
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Faugheen wrote: »
    Nothing on the instances of promoting harm towards a child that has been highlighted umpteen times?

    oh pleeeease tell me this is about criticising greta

    amazing


  • #289
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    oh pleeeease tell me this is about criticising greta

    amazing

    Not at all, it's about people wishing for a second Titanic. That goes far beyond the criticism she gets.

    Also about people making excuses for the girl who was attacked for wearing a hijab in the Gemma thread too.


  • #290
    Mr E
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 55,534 ✭✭✭✭Mr E


    Faugheen wrote: »
    Nothing on the instances of promoting harm towards a child that has been highlighted umpteen times?

    The reason all 12 mods of the Current Affairs/IMHO forum didn't action your reported post (all 3 reports of the same post) was because it's not actionable.

    In a thread that started with lots of tongue-in-cheek remarks, it's another tongue-in-cheek remark.
    It was an attempt at a humourous comment that fell a little bit flat (or dare I say, sank).

    Nobody is wishing actual harm to Greta, her dad or anyone else on the boat.


  • #291
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    Mr E wrote: »
    The reason all 12 mods of the Current Affairs/IMHO forum didn't action your reported post (all 3 reports of the same post) was because it's not actionable.

    In a thread that started with lots of tongue-in-cheek remarks, it's another tongue-in-cheek remark.
    It was an attempt at a humourous comment that fell a little bit flat (or dare I say, sank).

    Nobody is wishing actual harm to Greta, her dad or anyone else on the boat.

    Clearly didn't see the post by the same poster later on talking about how the waters will be getting a little bit choppy.

    You can call if humour if you want, but you've just said that 'jokes' in relation to harm of a child are fair game.

    Would you accept it if I made a comment about wishing harm on another member then followed it up with 'lol jk'? I don't think so.

    It's bang out of order, and previous admin wouldn't have stood for that. You're absolutely pandering to the trolls now.


  • Advertisement
  • #292
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,533 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Do you genuinely think they were being serious?


  • #293
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    Beasty wrote: »
    Do you genuinely think they were being serious?

    Considering they follow up with another 'joke' about the waters getting choppy, I personally think they were.

    Do you honestly think 'jokes' that wish harm on children are acceptable? Can I make similar 'jokes' about who I want on here then?


  • #294
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    the absolute state of this level of sensitivity


    gwan, say 'cesspit' you know you want to


  • #295
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,533 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Faugheen wrote: »
    Considering they follow up with another 'joke' about the waters getting choppy, I personally think they were.

    Do you honestly think 'jokes' that wish harm on children are acceptable? Can I make similar 'jokes' about who I want on here then?
    I have absolutely no problem with posters trying to bring some levity into certain threads

    You clearly do have an issue with it. That does not make it actionable (and yes others reported the post, but it's well buries in the thread now and all I think you are doing now is drawing more attention to the post rather than the moderation. Of course I accept others may think differently


  • #296
    Mr E
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 55,534 ✭✭✭✭Mr E


    Faugheen wrote: »
    ... and previous admin wouldn't have stood for that.

    I've been an admin for 5 years and I can comfortably say that none of my peers during that time (or before that time) would have been heavy handed with that post.

    The faux outrage is withering.


  • #297
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,104 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    I see a moderator of CA/IMHO posted a thread in CA/IMHO indirectly encouraging traveller bashing. It's pretty disgusting that there is so much traveller bashing on this site but it is disgraceful that a mod is taking actions to indirectly encourage it.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #298
    batgoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,423 ✭✭✭batgoat


    I was pretty depressed by that thread, the OP(the mod) seemed to be pretty positive about the idea out of rejecting people from hotels because they're travelers. Basically racially profiling people. Whatever about representing another forum, a mod of the very forum they're moderating contributing to a problem of threads that target minority groups is ****e.


  • #299
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    i too have seen mods post items i personally disagree with, id like to lend my weight to this class action


  • #300
    Tikki Wang Wang
    Closed Accounts Posts: 332 ✭✭Tikki Wang Wang


    To balance this I support the mod.


  • Advertisement
  • #301
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,533 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    It's not a thread I would intend posting in. It is a thread we may well see some problems with. However we do not dictate to mods what they can or cannot post. they are as free to start a thread as anyone else. In this particular case I think there's a fair chance someone else would have started a thread on this topic anyway


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement