Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

1…1920222425…77

Comments

  • #632
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,904 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    the site is what the users make it though, the admins can't do everything, the users will have to do their bit and play their part.
    if people want sensible discussion then have it and ignore whether it be racists or whoever else by not responding to them, some will want to challenge them and that's fine as well.
    the admins can bann the racists and eventually they do but they come back anyway, so the userbase will have to debunk the nonsense as that does have some success in getting rid of racists and similar as they eventually go off in a strop that way.
    or, there is a recycle bin forum on here somewhere as i saw it before, perhapse that could be repurposed and stick the trolls, racists and similar in there and leave them at it?

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #633
    EmmetSpiceland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,977 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    Better Than Christ wrote: »
    It's not a loaded question. It has become a racist cesspit. And the admins have allowed that to happen. I'd genuinely like to know whether they're happy or ashamed of what their inaction has led to.

    What’s the alternative? Have these threads in After Hours? Would be a disaster.

    You’d have the mods working “round the clock” locking threads and handing out bans. Then you’d just have users re-regging to “attack” the site, itself.

    The normal users would probably just leave due to how bad it would have gotten.

    I’m not saying it’s ideal but giving these lads their own little “play pen” to spout all their hate and anger benefits the site, as a whole.

    “It matters not what someone is born, but what they grow to be” - A. Dumbledore

    “It is not blood that makes you Irish but a willingness to be part of the Irish nation” - Thomas Davis



  • #634
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 11,195 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    i think ye should do up a list of what people should be allowed say

    ye could follow it up with a list of what people should be allowed think

    i mean nobody would ever be under any onus to pay your lists the slightest bit of attention but sweet christ it might keep ye busy from running in here with the same shrill objection every ten bloody minutes when ye read something ye didnt personally endorse


  • #635
    Better Than Christ
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,135 ✭✭✭Better Than Christ


    EmmetSpiceland wrote: »
    What’s the alternative? Have these threads in After Hours? Would be a disaster.

    You’d have the mods working “round the clock” locking threads and handing out bans. Then you’d just have users re-regging to “attack” the site, itself.

    The normal users would probably just leave due to how bad it would have gotten.

    I’m not saying it’s ideal but giving these lads their own little “play pen” to spout all their hate and anger benefits the site, as a whole.

    I'm not sure it's a good idea, letting them carry on posting racist bile because you're afraid they'll re-reg and 'attack' the site. There are plenty of alternative play pens out there. Just because they can't hack it on far-right sites, doesn't mean Boards should provide the scum with a play pen.


  • #636
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 11,195 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    serious proposal

    boards high level come up with a hard and fast definition of racist views

    and every other -ist that is held to be bannable

    and they ban based on that

    and they ban equally quickly and diligently for every instance of anyone calling out an -ism frivolously where the declared definition is decided not to be held

    because this latter behaviour is as much a problem with the site as anything else


  • Advertisement
  • #637
    Rodney Bathgate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,440 ✭✭✭Rodney Bathgate


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    May as well just pull the plug now then instead of the slow death fest sure to follow if the above was implemented.

    The plug should have been pulled when a moderator was allowed start a thread ranting and lecturing about why ‘all lives matter’ is racist.


  • #638
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Better Than Christ wrote: »
    I'm not sure it's a good idea, letting them carry on posting racist bile because you're afraid they'll re-reg and 'attack' the site. There are plenty of alternative play pens out there. Just because they can't hack it on far-right sites, doesn't mean Boards should provide the scum with a play pen.

    Not doubting your experiences but would you be able to throw up a quote or two of far-right racist bile posted by scum that was left up and not actioned?


  • #639
    Better Than Christ
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,135 ✭✭✭Better Than Christ


    Rodney Bathgate wrote: »
    The plug should have been pulled when a moderator was allowed start a thread ranting and lecturing about why ‘all lives matter’ is racist.

    All the racists should have responded by deleting their accounts in protest.
    Omackeral wrote: »
    Not doubting your experiences but would you be able to throw up a quote or two of far-right racist bile posted by scum that was left up and not actioned?

    I won't be singling anyone out. You'll find what you're looking for in Current Affairs.


  • #640
    Rodney Bathgate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,440 ✭✭✭Rodney Bathgate


    Better Than Christ wrote: »
    All the racists should have responded by deleting their accounts in protest.



    I won't be singling anyone out. You'll find what you're looking for in Current Affairs.

    If we use your definition of racism that would probably leave a few dozen posters.


  • #641
    Better Than Christ
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,135 ✭✭✭Better Than Christ


    Rodney Bathgate wrote: »
    If we use your definition of racism that would probably leave a few dozen posters.

    Honestly, to eradicate the worst of the far-right nonsense, less than a dozen would have to leave.


  • Advertisement
  • #642
    KiKi III
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,653 ✭✭✭KiKi III


    I know this is regularly suggested jokingly, but for issues that come up all the time could we not have megathreads?

    For example, right now we have two nearly identical threads about prominent figures who are anti-trans, one for J K Rowling and one for Graham Linehan. It’s the same posters posting the same opinions and in a month it’ll be the same again on someone else.

    Right now there’s a main thread on the new government, but there are also at least three other threads in the forum about individual ministers and another about gender balance in the cabinet.

    Why do we need all these threads on the same topics?


  • #643
    Rodney Bathgate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,440 ✭✭✭Rodney Bathgate


    Better Than Christ wrote: »
    Honestly, to eradicate the worst of the far-right nonsense, less than a dozen would have to leave.

    Then you would move onto getting the next set of remaining users you consider ‘the worst’ banned. Then the next etc.


  • #644
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Better Than Christ wrote: »
    I won't be singling anyone out. You'll find what you're looking for in Current Affairs.

    Cut their username off. All I'm asking for is an example of your claims. If it's that prevalent, shouldn't be tough to throw a quote or two up? It's you makin the claim, only fair to back it up.

    PS Even if the posts are identifiable, who cares if you're exposing an anonymous racist?


  • #645
    Baggly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,024 ✭✭✭✭Baggly


    We don't moderate opinions - we moderate discussion within the framework of the rules. And the CA charter is clear and very easy to follow in this regard.

    People are allowed hold opinions that may be unpalatable or that we may disagree with - if they do so within the rules, thats all anyone can ask of anyone else on the site. There are lots of reports that come in on posts that i might find objectionable from a personal beliefs POV, but if they are expressed civilly and dont break any other site rules, then as a mod im going to leave the post there, even if i disagree with it. And if the post doesnt break the rules, its there to be debated or ignored. Thats how discussion sites should work, imo. I wouldn't want to be involved in a site or forum that bans people for their viewpoint alone.

    Just my 2c as a CA mod of course.


  • #646
    Baggly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,024 ✭✭✭✭Baggly


    KiKi III wrote: »
    I know this is regularly suggested jokingly, but for issues that come up all the time could we not have megathreads?

    For example, right now we have two nearly identical threads about prominent figures who are anti-trans, one for J K Rowling and one for Graham Linehan. It’s the same posters posting the same opinions and in a month it’ll be the same again on someone else.

    Right now there’s a main thread on the new government, but there are also at least three other threads in the forum about individual ministers and another about gender balance in the cabinet.

    Why do we need all these threads on the same topics?

    You can PM me the details or report the threads in question and ill take a look, if you like.


  • #647
    Buford T. Justice XIX
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,621 ✭✭✭✭Buford T. Justice XIX


    Rodney Bathgate wrote: »
    The plug should have been pulled when a moderator was allowed start a thread ranting and lecturing about why ‘all lives matter’ is racist.

    As long as he wan't a mod of the particular forum, he would and should be treated as a normal non mod poster. And if a mod of that particular forum, would it not be beneficial to show that opinion and examine the consequences of holding that belief?

    It's a matter of opinion as to whether we shouldn't hear opinions we disagree with and ban based on that alone or allow that opinion to be aired and discussed and shine a sometimes harsh light on it to expose the more unpalatable sides to it that the original poster might not have considered when expressing that opinion first day. One will lead to posters examining their beliefs and evaluating them in relation to opinions never before seen by them, the other will lead to an echo chamber.

    I know which one I would prefer, anyway.


  • #648
    Rodney Bathgate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,440 ✭✭✭Rodney Bathgate


    I’d like to understand why the opening post in the thread “‘Europol: Ireland hit by surge of ‘right-wing extremism’” is not deemed trolling.

    The definition that boards uses:

    “A troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.”

    The opening post content:

    “Maybe we could avoid ten pages of "yeah but these days you get called far-right just for saying Jews are plotting to destroy the West and immigrants are invading our pure white lands" and talk about the serious issue this raises?

    At the very least, I'd love to hear the arguments as to why bloody Europol is wrong about this or how they might have some kind of "leftist agenda".“

    I would consider this ‘inflammatory’ and the intent was clearly ‘to provoke other users into an emotional response’.

    But it wasn’t deemed to be trolling when it was reported.


  • #649
    EmmetSpiceland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,977 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    Rodney Bathgate wrote: »
    But it wasn’t deemed to be trolling when it was reported.

    Did you, yourself, report this post, R?

    “It matters not what someone is born, but what they grow to be” - A. Dumbledore

    “It is not blood that makes you Irish but a willingness to be part of the Irish nation” - Thomas Davis



  • #650
    Rodney Bathgate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,440 ✭✭✭Rodney Bathgate


    EmmetSpiceland wrote: »
    Did you, yourself, report this post, R?

    Yes, I did, E, so I know it was reported.


  • #651
    EmmetSpiceland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,977 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    Rodney Bathgate wrote: »
    Yes, I did, E, so I know it was reported.

    Have you been doing that a lot? I’ve heard that the mods get annoyed at what can be perceived as “abusing the report function”.

    I, personally, choose to confront any “issues” head on myself. I’ve reported one post early on in my tenure here, after being encouraged to by the poster I had a beef with. Nothing came of it, which I’m glad of now as the guy is a good skin.

    Did you try to address your “concerns”, or put forward any counter-argument in the thread you mentioned before running to the mods?

    To be honest, I’d like to see the report function removed from “Current Affairs”. Just let the place flow.

    “It matters not what someone is born, but what they grow to be” - A. Dumbledore

    “It is not blood that makes you Irish but a willingness to be part of the Irish nation” - Thomas Davis



  • Advertisement
  • #652
    Baggly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,024 ✭✭✭✭Baggly


    EmmetSpiceland wrote:
    Have you been doing that a lot? I’ve heard that the mods get annoyed at what can be perceived as “abusing the report functionâ€.

    Where did you hear that Emmet? It's not true BTW. The people who are helping the site the most are the ones using the report function imo.


  • #653
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    It's extremely difficult to take your points seriously when you insist on using needless inverted commas, especially in a feedback forum.


  • #654
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,235 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Baggly wrote: »
    We don't moderate opinions - we moderate discussion within the framework of the rules. And the CA charter is clear and very easy to follow in this regard.

    People are allowed hold opinions that may be unpalatable or that we may disagree with - if they do so within the rules, thats all anyone can ask of anyone else on the site. There are lots of reports that come in on posts that i might find objectionable from a personal beliefs POV, but if they are expressed civilly and dont break any other site rules, then as a mod im going to leave the post there, even if i disagree with it. And if the post doesnt break the rules, its there to be debated or ignored. Thats how discussion sites should work, imo. I wouldn't want to be involved in a site or forum that bans people for their viewpoint alone.

    Just my 2c as a CA mod of course.

    It seems to be subjective though. A lot of posters in the past have been sanctioned for saying trans people are mentally ill yet recently this is no longer the case. It seems like moderation now allows abuse of trans people where it didn't before. And if someone said gay people were mentally ill it would be sanctioned. So it seems abuse of trans people is now allowed on CA when posts saying trans people are mentally ill do not get sanctioned.

    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



  • #655
    Rodney Bathgate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,440 ✭✭✭Rodney Bathgate


    EmmetSpiceland wrote: »
    Have you been doing that a lot? I’ve heard that the mods get annoyed at what can be perceived as “abusing the report function”.

    I, personally, choose to confront any “issues” head on myself. I’ve reported one post early on in my tenure here, after being encouraged to by the poster I had a beef with. Nothing came of it, which I’m glad of now as the guy is a good skin.

    Did you try to address your “concerns”, or put forward any counter-argument in the thread you mentioned before running to the mods?

    To be honest, I’d like to see the report function removed from “Current Affairs”. Just let the place flow.

    I report personal abuse, of me or others regularly. Having been on the receiving end of being reported a few times, I figured I may as well play the same game.


  • #656
    Baggly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,024 ✭✭✭✭Baggly


    Abuse of anyone isn't permitted joey. Doesn't matter what subset they identify within, abuse isn't allowed.

    Don't confuse this with people holding subjectively wrong opinions or misinformed opinions as you may see them. But as a mod its not my job to change their mind. Its up to other users to discuss it and perhaps change their mind.

    You might find people holding opinions that are transphobic. That is their right. They are allowed to hold opinions you don't agree with or might not be the most PC. It's there to be debated or ignored. Same options they might have if you post an opinion they don't like.

    I didn't agree to become mod to subjectively decide what is and isn't a valid point of view. I moderate discussion by applying the rules. I've no interest in moderating opinions. And I shouldn't be doing so, whether I agree with a point of view or not.


  • #657
    Baggly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,024 ✭✭✭✭Baggly


    I'd also like to see where people were being sanctioned for that specific reason vs being sanctioned for rule breakages like trolling, being uncivil or being a dick. There is a distinction between a sanction for these and a sanction for someone holding what you may classify as a wrong opinion.


  • #658
    EmmetSpiceland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,977 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    Rodney Bathgate wrote: »
    I report personal abuse, of me or others regularly. Having been on the receiving end of being reported a few times, I figured I may as well play the same game.

    That’s fair enough. But, tell me, do you report yourself when you’re “at it”?

    “It matters not what someone is born, but what they grow to be” - A. Dumbledore

    “It is not blood that makes you Irish but a willingness to be part of the Irish nation” - Thomas Davis



  • #659
    Rodney Bathgate
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,440 ✭✭✭Rodney Bathgate


    EmmetSpiceland wrote: »
    That’s fair enough. But, tell me, do you report yourself when you’re “at it”?

    Not possible unfortunately. You cannot report your own posts. I don’t think I have ever reported you either.


  • #660
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,235 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Baggly wrote: »
    Abuse of anyone isn't permitted joey. Doesn't matter what subset they identify within, abuse isn't allowed.

    Don't confuse this with people holding subjectively wrong opinions or misinformed opinions as you may see them. But as a mod its not my job to change their mind. Its up to other users to discuss it and perhaps change their mind.

    You might find people holding opinions that are transphobic. That is their right. They are allowed to hold opinions you don't agree with or might not be the most PC. It's there to be debated or ignored. Same options they might have if you post an opinion they don't like.

    I didn't agree to become mod to subjectively decide what is and isn't a valid point of view. I moderate discussion by applying the rules. I've no interest in moderating opinions. And I shouldn't be doing so, whether I agree with a point of view or not.

    Why are mod warnings put in then that get ignored?

    A mod warning that posts "labelling trans people as having mental issues / are paedophiles etc, or any other attempts at being blatantly offensive will earn a threadban" - but this hasnt been followed through in every case

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=112062597&postcount=1

    I cant find posts offhand that have been moderator sanctioned in the past for this transphobic abuse but it is common knowledge

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=113783000&postcount=2423
    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=113783284&postcount=2426

    Why is there a change of policy that abusive transphobic posts saying trans people are mentally ill are now allowed.

    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



  • Advertisement
  • #661
    Baggly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,024 ✭✭✭✭Baggly


    I don't think there has been a Change in policy Joey.... To be honest if I punished those two posts you gave as an example I think it would be very harsh given they are reinforcing what the mod note says, albeit poorly.

    Ill have to defer to the mod who saw those reports as I haven't seen them before and don't know the context around them.

    What I will say is that your question is, I believe, asked in bad faith. Instead of asking if there has been a Change in policy, you assumed there is one. I don't feel you are coming into this discussion with your mind open on this one.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement