Dravokivich wrote: » If it's not hard see the bias, can you please present it? We are not in a position to work on perception here. Smacl's actions that I've seen are very much focused on the viewpoint of the forum they are moderating within. The feedback forum is for sitewide issues/improvements identified by members of boards. It is not to take up grievances one member has with another. One does not have to respond to a post one does not like. The ignore feature allows one to skip posts from members one does not wish to read. The report feature is a means to notify moderators of contentious issues one sees within a thread. You weren't carded for responding to them, you were carded because you assumed a position of authority within that thread. This is referred to as back seat moderation.
CountNjord wrote: » The A+A forum was always a total mess, now the Christianity forum is getting that way too. It's not hard to see that Smacl is bias in all this. But dealing with a moderator who's on both forums and running with the fox and running with the hound's isn't fair moderation. Christians should be running the show here, it's a Christian forum.
theological wrote: » I will raise a thread in the Feedback forum on this tomorrow. Your post was intended to inflame and we got carded for pointing it out. It was completely off the topic of vaccinations and what is used to produce them. That's actually an interesting question from a Christian perspective, yet you chose to troll instead of engaging with it.
Bannasidhe wrote: » I did no such thing. I clearly said I, personally, found the life is a precious gift from God argument against the vaccine to be ironic given how many lives have been taken by religious people in the name of God. And no juncture did I claim anyone commenting in the thread or in the Christianity forum was in favour of such atrocities. I merely said they happened. I also clearly said all religions (with the caveat that sects such as the Quakers are blameless) have at times indulges in 'cleansing heresies' - all religions, not just Christianity. I did give an example relevant to when Christians killed fellow Christians as I felt Muslims killing Muslims wouldn't be pertinent. I am entitled to voice my opinion without being called a troll simply because you do not like what I have to say. That thread was not marked as for Christians only, so it is open to non-Christians to voice their opinion. You have ignored the opening, and main point, I made which is that I can understand how someone genuinely anti-abortion would have serious moral concerns with taking a vaccine that apparently used cells gained during an abortion - and I respect those concerns. Furthermore, I also stated that I could see vegans having ethical issues with a vaccine tested on animals. The thread was dragged off topic when you and a few others attempted a pile on to shut up the person commenting on a historical irony. And now the pile on has moved here where I am being accused of all sort of things. And used as a weapon against the forum mod. I did not breach the charter. I did not insult any religion. I did not accuse anyone of anything. I stated that I , personally, found something ironic and explained why. May I ask? Did even one of you hit the report button if I was 'obviously trolling' or would that have not suited the obvious agenda at play here?
CountNjord wrote: » I got carded myself and I am aware that a lot of people get carded while discussing anything with her, she seems to be able to say what she likes and able to turn it back to make it look like she's done nothing wrong. She wasn't following the forum charter, and it's easy to see that smacl is between a rock and a hard place. But it's plain to see that when said member responsible for a lot of people getting infractions and bans on board's hasn't exactly been kind about her views on religion. I don't think there should be the same moderator on two opposing forums. It isn't right.
theological wrote: » The truth is never disrespectful. I personally would have been OK with Bannasidhe's remarks provided that we were entitled to criticise and point them out for what they were. Very obvious trolling. Atrocities carried out for political ends in the name of Christianity were obviously irrelevant to the topic of the thread. She pointed them out as if we were OK with them. We need proper moderation. It looks like your judgement was biased on that thread, and it looks like we need to raise this further because you're obviously unwilling to accept you made the wrong call.
smacl wrote: » Firstly, let me just say that I find your repeated references to superior nature of conversations that you're having on reddit both blatently disrespectful of posters and mods here and highly condescending. You might want to rethink that line of conversation. With respect to Bannasidhe's post, I felt that while it was critical of atrocities carried out in the name of Christianity, it did not constitute an attack on the Christian faith per se. Your own subsequent posts underpinned this position with statements such as 'It is obvious that people have manipulated Christianity to suit political ends in the past' and 'I can happily criticise the Inquisition, or anything else, precisely because they are not Christian in any meaningful sense'. If you are allowed such criticism then so is any other poster. Bannasidhe's post was also in response to the OP stating that they considered the issue to be 'an anthropological problem', which could also be claimed of many atrocities committed in the name Christianity throughout history.
theological wrote: » The forum is a mess smacl. I personally don't mind if you choose not to call out Bannasidhe for off-topic trolling (which her post was), but choosing to basically gag people who point it out is precisely the reason why I think I'll be spending more time discussing with people who are much more informed on Reddit instead. Edit: It is also noticeable that Bannasidhe is also a moderator on the A&A forum, like you yourself are. Are you suggesting that there was no element of bias in this decision?
smacl wrote: » You're not the only one who has been carded for back seat moderation either. I would also point out that while complaining about posts being off topic you are also making off topic posts yourself. My point stands that I consider accusing anyone of being a troll constitutes back seat modding and will be dealt with on that basis. The same goes for posts which attempt to state what any other poster is or is not allowed to post. All of these thing should be dealt with using the report post function and not by starting a spat on-thread which basically attracts retaliation and derails the conversation for other posters. I have consciously being moderating this forum rather strictly specifically to eliminate this kind of behaviour which has been noted as a problem by the regulars here.
theological wrote: » I think in a personal capacity I'm entitled to state that I feel that a user is trolling when they make inflammatory remarks that have no relevance to the thread. I'm not the only one that observed this on the thread. I think you should engage with the criticism.
theological wrote: » The point is that I can happily criticise the Inquisition, or anything else, precisely because they are not Christian in any meaningful sense. All of these things are wholly irrelevant to the topic raised in the OP however which is an interesting one that deserves real discussion.
smacl wrote: » Accusing another poster of trolling is most definitely back seat moderation and also constitutes a personal attack. If you think someone is trolling, report their post. The same applies to telling someone that they're off topic or that they are being inflammatory. With respect to getting new moderators or replacing existing ones, I would suggest you contact a CMod or Admin.
theological wrote: » How this isn't regarded as trolling is beyond me. I would personally disagree with the Inquisition for 2 reasons. Firstly, because this definitely isn't encouraged by the Christian gospel, and second because many people with similar convictions to mine were killed during it. So even if particular people in particular institutions may justify such behaviour, it's rather obvious that Christianity as it is revealed to us Scripturally doesn't. The insinuation that I am responsible some how for any of the things you mentioned by following Jesus is an absurdity. When I am referring to Biblical Christianity I'm referring to people this side of the cross who follow Jesus Christ. I'm happy to deal with the other questions about the OT, which I think are valid, but I don't want to take this thread off its original topic.
Deleted User wrote: » Are you openly admitting to breaking Boards.ie rules and having multiple accounts? That's second time you've mentioned in a few posts that you've been here a few years. You're only allowed to set up a second account so that you can post anonymously in the Personal Issues forum etc.
SouthWesterly wrote: » Glad to see new profiles are actually that It is as I said and has been shown from the above posts. A&A members it seems are quiet happy to break the charter here that they insist is kept on their own forum. Aristotle, I don't have to explain to you a conversation I had with a mod in PM. I'm glad there's an ignore button. Been a few years since I've had to use it.
And, as I've mentioned, you have broken the charter many times in the A&A forum. Unlike you, however, I am self aware enough to not request that people don't do likewise in my preferred forum as I am aware that some of my posts in this forum are not liked by all. Perhaps you should do likewise and leave the preaching to those who actually have a good standard on Boards.
SouthWesterly wrote: » It is as I said and has been shown from the above posts. A&A members it seems are quiet happy to break the charter here that they insist is kept on their own forum.
SouthWesterly wrote: » Aristotle, I don't have to explain to you a conversation I had with a mod in PM. I'm glad there's an ignore button. Been a few years since I've had to use it.
smacl wrote: » I'm seeing 7 months and slightly over a thousand posts in your current profile. Can I humbly ask that rather than saying why things won't work based on your extensive experience, you consider making a few suggestions to improve this forum such that they will work going forward.
SouthWesterly wrote: » Can't see the tags helping. Atheists showing common courtesy would but can't see that happening. After 10 years and 20,000 posts I've seen too much to believe that will happen.
Deleted User wrote: » And does explaining it mean that the various things that you said in that thread didn't break the charter?
Deleted User wrote: » Is that your response? Or are you going to explain how you're not a hypocrite?
SouthWesterly wrote: » I explained that to the mod in question. Case closed
[Deleted User] wrote: » Is that your response? Or are you going to explain how you're not a hypocrite?
SouthWesterly wrote: » So you've proven you can use the search function. Congratulations
[Deleted User] wrote: » As I've mentioned already, you've shown a lack of respect and courtesy many times on the A&A forum in the past, e.g. here. Trying to act all high and mighty by suggesting that it's only atheists that act in the ways you suggest isn't going solve any problems, only worsen them.
SouthWesterly wrote: » I agree but sadly the atheists who come on here don't show any respect for those who are Christian on this forum. I've no problems with it in A&A but this forum was always meant to be a safe space. I've seen the atheist telegraph at work over the years. None come near the forum for ages and then suddenly there's a post and they descend like a plague of locusts to denigrate Christianity. Isn't that what the 'funny things about religion' thread is meant to be about. Can't see the tags helping. Atheists showing common courtesy would but can't see that happening. After 10 years and 20,000 posts I've seen too much to believe that will happen.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Rather than create christian-only threads I'd have thought a reiteration that the Christian forum was a space for those of that faith. In the same way that it is poor form- and against charter- for theists to post in A&A as if their beliefs were to be respected as they would sometimes wish, surely there was room for atheists/agnostics to give the same courtesy (enforced by mods as required) to not turn up in a Christian space in full pugnacity? Time and a place, and all that. Disappointing to see this, personally- don't see it solving anything and disappointing that it was seen as required.
nthclare wrote: » You're the one who made the observation And brought up the subject of other forums. Then you give me a warning about responding to your good self. That's kind of what this forum is about. One rule for the mods another for the lay person. Come on now smacl I am not stupid, we're not in school.
smacl wrote: » Mod warning: As previously, please restrict your comments to feedback on this forum. Discussions on the frequency and forums where you've been banned is off topic as is using the thread to complain about moderation elsewhere.
Hotblack Desiato wrote: » Fine but the charter already states this. I think excluding people en bloc from threads sets a very bad precedent for Boards in general.
Fanny Cradock wrote: » The purpose of this forum is to discuss Christian belief in general, and specific elements of it, between Christians and non-Christians alike. This forum has the additional purpose of being a point on Boards.ie where Christians may ask other Christians questions about their shared faith. In this regard, Christians should not have to defend their faith from overt or subtle attack.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/d78fd5f5292e11c2974bcd779ad2a2f0.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/0e54e8024b002427df3ce2953d22b721.svg)
