Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

batgoat · 24-08-2019 02:41PM

Sonny noggs wrote: »

How does Joey feel about the Gemma ‘bashing thread’?

A public figure engaging in hate speech is pretty different to justifying refusing rooms to travellers.

Sonny noggs · 24-08-2019 02:53PM

batgoat wrote: »

A public figure engaging in hate speech is pretty different to justifying refusing rooms to travellers.

The Gemma thread was also started by a moderator, it wasn’t started to compliment her, so a clear double standard there, regardless of her being a public figure or not. Joey has posted in that thread, it would be interesting to see his thought process on what he deems an acceptable or unacceptable thread and how it ties into his politics. I’d hazard a guess that it would be something along the lines of right of center or conservative BAD, anything attacking them GOOD.

Sonny noggs · 24-08-2019 02:56PM

Sickening that this thread hasn’t been nuked yet:

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2058009191

TheValeyard · 24-08-2019 02:59PM

I think the split between AH and current affairs is working very well and a vast improvement on the previous system. Well done those involved.

Outlaw Pete · 24-08-2019 03:16PM

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Mods posting in order to "debate" an issue but really in an underhand manner encouraging numerous ways in which the forum charter can be breached through hate speech, insults, derogatory abusive posting shouldnt be encouraged.

Your comments are ridiculous.

The mod in no way encouraged (indirectly or otherwise) the things you keep suggesting they did.

This is a discussion forum and I think it's not mods like the one you're chastising that are a detriment to healthy debate here, it's mods like you, who would no doubt turn Boards into one giant leftist echo chamber if you had your way.

You are free to reply to the posts you don't agree with are you not and so why not focus on doing that. If someone's opinion has no merit and is borne of hate then you should have little trouble posting a solid rebuttal making them look like the bigot you imply them to be.

Odhinn · 24-08-2019 03:59PM

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Your comments are ridiculous.

The mod in no way encouraged (indirectly or otherwise) the things you keep suggesting they did.

This is a discussion forum and I think it's not mods like the one you're chastising that are a detriment to healthy debate here, it's mods like you, who would no doubt turn Boards into one giant leftist echo chamber if you had your way.

You are free to reply to the posts you don't agree with are you not and so why not focus on doing that. If someone's opinion has no merit and is borne of hate then you should have little trouble posting a solid rebuttal making them look like the bigot you imply them to be.

The post in question is its own condemnation. A lone traveller woman is not the equivalent to an invasion by Genghis Khan.

24-08-2019 04:07PM

bringing every little thing in here to litigate it is in the top three irritating behaviours from the brigade who seem astonished that it is permitted to disagree with them

Sonny noggs · 24-08-2019 04:49PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

bringing every little thing in here to litigate it is in the top three irritating behaviours from the brigade who seem astonished that it is permitted to disagree with them

Yes, when Joey deems something is racist the wheels should be put in motion forthwith (if not sooner) to purge the site of the offending material. Forget due process or moderation. His word should be final.

Odhinn · 24-08-2019 04:51PM

Sonny noggs wrote: »

Yes, when Joey deems something is racist the wheels should be put in motion forthwith (if not sooner) to purge the site of the offending material. Forget due process or moderation. His word should be final.

He's not the subject of the complaint, however. What is, is a thread that implies discrimination against a lone traveller woman was some great victory, despite a court finding that she was discriminated against.

Faugheen · 24-08-2019 04:58PM

So traveller bashing and encouraging ‘jokes’ that wish harm on children are fair game.

Right so.

Sonny noggs · 24-08-2019 05:11PM

Odhinn wrote: »

He's not the subject of the complaint, however. What is, is a thread that implies discrimination against a lone traveller woman was some great victory, despite a court finding that she was discriminated against.

He is actually the subject of a complaint. The complaint being that he is attempting to over step the mark regarding moderation.

KyussB · 30-08-2019 10:39AM

TheValeyard wrote: »

I think the split between AH and current affairs is working very well and a vast improvement on the previous system. Well done those involved.

From the little I've seen of it (I have not bothered to look far tbh), CA seems like the lack of rules from AH - but without any of the cop-on from AH, that was capable of counteracting the lack of rules.

Great success for people who view political stuff in general as 'boring', and have wanted it excised from AH, though (the pub with the 'no politics' sign hung over the bar...).

KyussB · 31-08-2019 12:52PM

Is red-baiting - i.e. everything being constantly reduced to equating it with Communism - considered a form of trolling?

That's pretty much the level of discussion.

Look at this shite:
https://twitter.com/GrrrGraphics/status/1167127261377548288

Efforts to fight climate change are a Communist conspiracy don't you know!

I don't actually want any mod intervention - that's a rube goldberg machine of bullshit to come - but I am curious if this is viewed as trolling.

31-08-2019 10:09PM

its surely, and in total sincerity, no different to everything a certain dedicated cohort doesnt like being equated with racism, trumpism, fascism, sexism? that's absolutely rampant across the boards, and the posters exhibiting these behaviours furthermore demand banning.

"oh but we're right!" is no defence. everyone thinks they're right. the mods action behaviours not opinions, and this behaviour is prevalent across the spectrum.

KyussB · 31-08-2019 10:42PM

The difference is when it becomes evident that posters aren't being serious when making tenuous/farcical comparisons to an '-ism' (be that communism, racism etc.) - the are just shitting out the comparisons because they know it blocks discussion, to backslap/circlejerk with other posters at obstructing a discussion - i.e. basically just to troll.

When the comparisons become evidently, deliberately farcical like that - that's just trolling at best - and worse than trolling, when posters mix up stuff like that, with the pretence of putting forward genuine arguments as well.

31-08-2019 11:14PM

sorry, i dont agree

to project that the posters you disagree with are acting in bad faith is precisely equivalent to saying "but when we do it its ok because we're right"

the tendency for many high-volume posters (whose view would appear to align broadly with the classic internet left set of views) to jump to allegations of -isms at the first whiff of an opportunity is totally open to the criticism you're making- that it's a bad faith move to exert control over debate.

gozunda · 01-09-2019 12:14AM

KyussB wrote: »

The difference is when it becomes evident that posters aren't being serious when making tenuous/farcical comparisons to an '-ism' (be that communism, racism etc.) - the are just shitting out the comparisons because they know it blocks discussion, to backslap/circlejerk with other posters at obstructing a discussion - i.e. basically just to troll.When the comparisons become evidently, deliberately farcical like that - that's just trolling at best - and worse than trolling, when posters mix up stuff like that, with the pretence of putting forward genuine arguments as well.

Because you may disagree with someone does not make them a 'troll', or mean they are 'not being serious', making 'tenous / farcical comparisons' blocking / backslaping / circke-jerkng / trolling / obstructing. To disagree with something is a normal part of discussion as is holding comments up to scrutiny or asking for clarification and further detail. Just the way it is and shouldn't involve getting personel about any of it eitherway.

KyussB · 01-09-2019 12:46AM

Here is - literally - the list of things that are considered Communist:
- Any significant increase in government spending
- The term 'mobilizing workers' - i.e. any increase in government employment of workers
- The word 'resources'
- The entirety of environmentalism
- The entirety of the movement against climate change

I'm not even joking - these are the things that have illicited branding of views, as Communist - by like, at least 4-5 posters. It's fucking bizarre.

When the brush is cast that ridiculously wide, it's just trolling - the posters spouting that absolutely are acting in bad faith, because it's just not credible that they actually believe it is Communism - especially when that keeps getting put forward on a sustained basis.

It's just a form of dog-whistling - labelling certain views as 'unacceptable', deeming them troll-worthy to block debate.

gozunda · 01-09-2019 12:51AM

KyussB wrote: »

Here is - literally - the list of things that are considered Communist:
- Any significant increase in government spending
- The term 'mobilizing workers' - i.e. any increase in government employment of workers
- The word 'resources'
- The entirety of environmentalism
- The entirety of the movement against climate changeI'm not even joking - these are the things that have illicited branding of views, as Communist - by like, at least 4-5 posters. It's fucking bizarre.When the brush is cast that ridiculously wide, it's just trolling - the posters spouting that absolutely are acting in bad faith, because it's just not credible that they actually believe it is Communism - especially when that keeps getting put forward on a sustained basis.It's just a form of dog-whistling - labelling certain views as 'unacceptable', deeming them troll-worthy to block debate.

So do you believe everyone who you disagree with is trolling? Interesting viewpoint...

01-09-2019 01:03AM

jesus ppl really love trying to relitigate in full in these threads dont they.

kyuss, the individual instance that irked you is rather beside the point.

for any instance of nonsense statement (a) that you feel is a troll, an example of statement (b) will be found as ridiculous but crucially *on your side of the argument*

you will, miraculously (and "you" here isnt personal, most everyone is guilty as far as i can see) will only complain about the instance that you disagree with.

team x will say all of team z said (a), team z will say that all of team x said (b)

mods are being asked to rule on these gotcha-fests and hey ive got my problems with modding but its a totally unfair and unrealistic demand to ask them to get involved, because across the board its posters behaving like this and then pointing at anyone but themselves and their side.

ive no idea how it could be resolved as a set of behaviours tbh, but modding aint it imo

KyussB · 01-09-2019 01:05AM

That's just whatabouery, snoop. The behaviour I describe, is trolling no matter what '-ism' is deployed - and no matter what 'side' it comes from. It's based on the deployment of an '-ism' being so farcical, that it's just not credible that the poster believes it themselves - which is the type of bad faith posting at the core of trolling.

I'm not even asking mods to get involved - because I know that would turn into a shitshow - I'm asking is there a point when that behaviour is considered trolling, by mods - not to get involved actioning anything.

01-09-2019 01:11AM

i mean look yes in a sense its fair to call it whataboutery

in another, its the actual context, custom/practice, whatever you want to call it and in that sense it's relevant imo to look beyond that instance and ask that if the complaint was to be thrown out against all such behaviours, what are we looking at?

tbh i cant see much use in bringing one instance of a complaint up in a thread like this *without* looking at it in a more complete way.

KyussB · 01-09-2019 01:22AM

Ok, but can you show me another '-ism' consistently being deployed in a farcical way, where it's not credible that a poster believes what they're saying (and obviously, where it's not just satire) - and this being sustained on/off over many pages? (rather than the comparison just being made e.g. once)

Not saying it doesn't happen, but I don't think it'll be comparing like-with-like.

Outlaw Pete · 01-09-2019 03:16AM

KyussB wrote: »

Here is - literally - the list of things that are considered Communist:

I'm not even joking - these are the things that have illicited branding of views, as Communist - by like, at least 4-5 posters. It's fucking bizarre.

And the list of things which often result in a user being labelled a racist or a fascist is equally as long, if not longer, and I can assure you that those who have these labels foisted upon them find them equally as infuriating as those who are unjustifiably called commies. Only recently in the Politics forum I was told that my not accepting that Donald Trump is a racist means I am a racist too. It's not one way traffic.

These lazy labels are being flung left and right (literally, as well as figuratively) all over Boards and for sure mostly they are lazy and nonsensical as rarely will a user have said anything which will have justified such a scurrilous claim. It is, of course, generally though just a last ditch attempt at discrediting a user as more often than not they're indulged in by those who have very little else to say in the way of a retort.

The way I look at it is this: as long as mods are being even handed, well then that is the most important thing. Where mods draw the line is not nearly as important (imo) as them subjecting all users to the same standard of posting. You suggest that you want mods to action someone that implies a user is a communist. Fine, but then mods will have to action all suggestions that a user is a fascist / racist too. You can't action one and not the other. If you do, then you will be subjected one side to rules which the other side is not and that just results in animosity.

Personally I think the more left leaning users should just learn to take it on the chin a bit more. The rest of us have had to grow accustomed to the regular character assassination attempts over the years. What makes you lot so special. If nothing else, actioning such claims would make moderaton a hell of a lot harder as mods would have to scroll back through multiple posts on a regular basis to see if a user has said anything to have warranted them being labelled a commie or a fascist.

Personally, I kinda like that users can claim I'm a racist or a fascist without it resulting in them being actioned, as making such unwarranted claims make them look irrational and so again I say what I said to the mod before: if users make ridiculous claims (as you're alleging such claims to be) then it shouldn't be too hard to make short work of them and show that what they've suggested is utterly preposterous and totally without grounds.

KyussB · 01-09-2019 04:03AM

I mean, it's whataboutery again - the things which trigger red-baiting, are not comparable to things which trigger branding of other '-isms' (in the former, the level of farcical comparisons, to the point that it is not credible that the poster believes what they are saying, is notably different) - and the branding of other '-isms', isn't usually used to encourage mobbing/backslapping and obstruction of debate in the way that red-baiting is.

Again, I don't want mod intervention - I'd report posts if I did - but I do want to know when something is considered as crossing over into trolling. Big difference between the occasional once-off throwing around of an '-ism' (who cares...) - and it becoming a consistent, near-endlessly-repeated response, in lieu of actual arguments, and combined with mobbing (starting to get a lot closer to trolling).

01-09-2019 04:36AM

KyussB wrote: »

I mean, it's whataboutery again - the things which trigger red-baiting, are not comparable to things which trigger branding of other '-isms'

your opinion

(in the former, the level of farcical comparisons, to the point that it is not credible that the poster believes what they are saying, is notably different)

projection, opinion

- and the branding of other '-isms', isn't usually used to encourage mobbing/backslapping and obstruction of debate in the way that red-baiting is.

yes it is. constantly.

Outlaw Pete · 01-09-2019 06:23AM

KyussB wrote: »

I mean, it's whataboutery again - the things which trigger red-baiting, are not comparable to things which trigger branding of other '-isms'

Of course they're bloody comparable. What are you on about.

At the end of the day a user being called a commie (or similar) because of the views they've expressed is no different than a user being labelled a racist or a fascist because of the views they have expressed.

Those that throw out these unjust labels will both use the same excuse too: that they were justified in doing so based on the content of the user's posts.

And those labelled either a commie or a racist will also question the sincerity of the accusation in the same way, making the call that it is clear trolling given that they will feel they have not posted anything which warranted the accusation that they're a commie or a racist.

It's absurd that you would suggest your grievance should be discussed in isolation when the commonalities with what others so similarly have to deal with whilst posting is crystal clear. You just don't want to be associated with those complaining about being called a racist.

Tough, they're both sides of the one coin.

gozunda · 01-09-2019 07:28AM

KyussB wrote: »

I mean, it's whataboutery again - the things which trigger red-baiting, are not comparable to things which trigger branding of other '-isms' (in the former, the level of farcical comparisons, to the point that it is not credible that the poster believes what they are saying, is notably different) - and the branding of other '-isms', isn't usually used to encourage mobbing/backslapping and obstruction of debate in the way that red-baiting is. Again, I don't want mod intervention - I'd report posts if I did - but I do want to know when something is considered as crossing over into trolling. Big difference between the occasional once-off throwing around of an '-ism' (who cares...) - and it becoming a consistent, near-endlessly-repeated response, in lieu of actual arguments, and combined with mobbing (starting to get a lot closer to trolling).

You are so hung up on your theme of 'isms' you have become completely blind to the fact that in the discussions to which you refer to - you have l laid out a centrally controlled collective labour political state system.

No one is calling you a 'communist' btw - from what I have seen in the threads to which you refer posters are saying that the political system you are advocating as an alleged solution to climate change is. Do you understand that?

If the political system closest to what you are proposing is in fact 'communism' - then that is not the fault of those who point those similarities out. That you do not like people highlighting this is the case is immaterial and irrelevant.

If you really want to show that your ideas are not a form of 'communism' (for want of a better word) - then set out your stall and show how the political / state system you are proposing is not a form of communism. So far you have completely failed to do so - as far as I can see.

How can you seriously continue to accuse posters of being mean to you and being trolls" when your grievance in reality lies in a failure to defend your argument in any shape or form? And that's the issue in a nutshell.

As for the repeated denial of any wish for mod action, then it has to be asked - then why the constant repetition of the same again and again and asking it to be labelled trolling and therefore actionable? Tbh the contant whinging is little more than ridiculous at this point.

Sonny noggs · 01-09-2019 07:34AM

KyussB wrote: »

Is red-baiting - i.e. everything being constantly reduced to equating it with Communism - considered a form of trolling?

That's pretty much the level of discussion.

Look at this shite:
https://twitter.com/GrrrGraphics/status/1167127261377548288

Efforts to fight climate change are a Communist conspiracy don't you know!

I don't actually want any mod intervention - that's a rube goldberg machine of bullshit to come - but I am curious if this is viewed as trolling.

How is this different to accusing anyone right of centre of being alt right or far-right or worse still fascist or racist?

KyussB · 01-09-2019 08:53AM

gozunda wrote: »

You are so hung up on your theme of 'isms' you have become completely blind to the fact that in the discussions to which you refer to - you have l laid out a centrally controlled collective labour political state system.

No one is calling you a 'communist' btw - from what I have seen in the threads to which you refer posters are saying that the political system you are advocating as an alleged solution to climate change is. Do you understand that?

If the political system closest to what you are proposing is in fact 'communism' - then that is not the fault of those who point those similarities out. That you do not like people highlighting this is the case is immaterial and irrelevant.

If you really want to show that your ideas are not a form of 'communism' (for want of a better word) - then set out your stall and show how the political / state system you are proposing is not a form of communism. So far you have completely failed to do so - as far as I can see.

How can you seriously continue to accuse posters of being mean to you and being trolls" when your grievance in reality lies in a failure to defend your argument in any shape or form? And that's the issue in a nutshell.

As for the repeated denial of any wish for mod action, then it has to be asked - then why the constant repetition of the same again and again and asking it to be labelled trolling and therefore actionable? Tbh the contant whinging is little more than ridiculous at this point.

The fuck...it even follows into this thread - zero argument, just a statement that I expressed views of a "centrally controlled collective labour political state system" that this poster themselves knows full well that I did not express - they know that not a single part of any of my posts referred to collective labour, nor central control.

It's precisely the same as accusing a person of advocating e.g. eugenics, when they never said anything like that in their posts, and therefore they are racist/fascist.

Not only that, but this statement made without any attempt at backing it up, then has the burden of proof flipped completely 180 - so that I'm supposed to prove a negative - that I didn't say that...

That's not a valid "difference of opinion" - that is flat out making shit up, that the poster 100% knows is untrue, with no evidence/backup, then saying the burden of proof is on the accused to disprove it - and that is what sets it apart from every other example of accusation of an '-ism' thrown around.

Show me anything remotely comparable to that. Tell me how that is not tantamount to trolling...

Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

Comments