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…5253555758…77

Comments

  • #1622
    EmmetSpiceland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,977 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    sorry emmet, not a single solid point scored there for me

    i. nothing to do with id politics or sensitivities. irish political threads are unusable due to the rotating-shift partisan hack attacks

    ii. "all these threads are good containers so that the threads i like are kept clear" isnt actually any defence at all, and i wish you'd stop saying it as if it were an excuse for not moderating these behaviours

    iii. moderation of current affairs discussion should be consistent across current affairs, politics forum and the approach taken there has been done to death but seems largely irrelevant to the point here imo

    iv. the irish politics threads arent really populated by anyone BUT crackpots and loons, or those who i sincerely hope actually are getting paid to be there. pop in sometime, its three shins and a little lady and everyone else has just bailed because of the tiresome rote nature of how every issue is discussed.

    its a real issue but *shrug*

    Not trying to “score points”, pal, but if you take a look in ‘Helpdesk’ or ‘Dispute Resolution’ you’ll see users from “the other side” complaining, almost daily, about the moderation, just as you are.

    Granted, it does appear to have gotten much stricter in there the last while. This may be down to new faces moderating that haven’t quite grasped the “tone” of the place or maybe there’s been a conscious decision to force a change.

    I completely disagree with you when you say it should be moderated the same as the ‘Politics Forum’. It shouldn’t. If you want to discuss serious politics then head over to that forum, if you want some lighthearted, or informative, discussion go to ‘After Hours’ but if you want more contentious “debate” then that’s where ‘Current Affairs’ fits in.

    Yes, threads do get “taken over” by a group of posters from time to time but they tend to die off unless someone posts in them. The TERF one is a prime example of that, the anti-trans crowd turn it into an “echo chamber” until some brave soul decides to post something compassionate and that sets them off again.

    You can’t censor their opinion, as long as it’s delivered within the site “rules”, just because you don’t like or you think they’re working in shifts.

    Stricter moderation of the forum just makes it redundant when ‘Politics’ and ‘After Hours’ are there. I’m on record as saying that I, personally, think the “report button” should be removed from ‘Current Affairs’, or at least reported posts should be ignored as I’d imagine it would require too much effort to remove the button.

    “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



  • #1623
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    EmmetSpiceland wrote: »
    The TERF one is a prime example of that, the anti-trans crowd turn it into an “echo chamber”

    You mean the thread where one person attacks and labels anyone who doesn't agree with their ideology as a terf and cis despite people asking not to be called by either , pretty much an one person echo chamber
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #1624
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 11,195 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    you seem to have honestly misinterpreted what i said about current affairs/politics- which may have been unclear in my post. im saying that modding has to be consistent across current affairs.

    the rest of your post either misrepresents my points or doesnt really address anything i said

    apart from your characterisation of the rowling thread, which tbh is laughable- as anyone who had read that thread would see.

    no talk from me of censorship but clearly you have yr own items where opinions are verböten eh


  • #1625
    EmmetSpiceland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,977 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    you seem to have honestly misinterpreted what i said about current affairs/politics- which may have been unclear in my post. im saying that modding has to be consistent across current affairs.
    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    iii. moderation of current affairs discussion should be consistent across current affairs, politics forum and the approach taken there...

    Apologies, I took the point above to mean you were looking for consistency with the ‘Politics Forum’.
    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    no talk from me of censorship but clearly you have yr own items where opinions are verböten eh

    Nonsense, I think all “topics” should be up for discussion with minimal mod intervention. The forum, as it is, must be a nightmare to moderate with a constant flow of whinging and reported posts.

    “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



  • #1626
    Rothko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,998 ✭✭✭✭Rothko


    EmmetSpiceland wrote: »
    Yes, threads do get “taken over” by a group of posters from time to time but they tend to die off unless someone posts in them. The TERF one is a prime example of that, the anti-trans crowd turn it into an “echo chamber” until some brave soul decides to post something compassionate and that sets them off again.

    Anti-trans crowd? I haven't seen a single anti-trans poster on that thread.


  • Advertisement
  • #1627
    TomTomTim
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,841 ✭✭✭TomTomTim


    EmmetSpiceland wrote: »
    Not trying to “score points”, pal, but if you take a look in ‘Helpdesk’ or ‘Dispute Resolution’ you’ll see users from “the other side” complaining, almost daily, about the moderation, just as you are.

    Granted, it does appear to have gotten much stricter in there the last while. This may be down to new faces moderating that haven’t quite grasped the “tone” of the place or maybe there’s been a conscious decision to force a change.

    I completely disagree with you when you say it should be moderated the same as the ‘Politics Forum’. It shouldn’t. If you want to discuss serious politics then head over to that forum, if you want some lighthearted, or informative, discussion go to ‘After Hours’ but if you want more contentious “debate” then that’s where ‘Current Affairs’ fits in.

    Yes, threads do get “taken over” by a group of posters from time to time but they tend to die off unless someone posts in them. The TERF one is a prime example of that, the anti-trans crowd turn it into an “echo chamber” until some brave soul decides to post something compassionate and that sets them off again.

    You can’t censor their opinion, as long as it’s delivered within the site “rules”, just because you don’t like or you think they’re working in shifts.

    Stricter moderation of the forum just makes it redundant when ‘Politics’ and ‘After Hours’ are there. I’m on record as saying that I, personally, think the “report button” should be removed from ‘Current Affairs’, or at least reported posts should be ignored as I’d imagine it would require too much effort to remove the button.

    You know you can just not view CA, seeing as you hate it so much? I've never seen a poster on here before with such an obsession with a sub forum as you. No matter how much you try and frame it as being against hate or whatever, the reality is you want no dissent. The politics subs is far worse when it comes to being an echo chamber, yet you never mention it because it's an echo chamber you agree with. Not everyone agrees with your views, and they never will, so you better get used to it.

    “The man who lies to himself can be more easily offended than anyone else. You know it is sometimes very pleasant to take offense, isn't it? A man may know that nobody has insulted him, but that he has invented the insult for himself, has lied and exaggerated to make it picturesque, has caught at a word and made a mountain out of a molehill--he knows that himself, yet he will be the first to take offense, and will revel in his resentment till he feels great pleasure in it.”- ― Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov




  • #1628
    Baggly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,024 ✭✭✭✭Baggly


    I know its not the point and i dont mean to derail the feedback being provided, but this came up last week as well in another thread....

    Current Affairs isn't a subforum of After Hours or vice versa. There is overlap on the mod team for the two fora, but they are separate fora with separate remits and different charters.

    There is a link to CA at the top of AH, which is there from when CA was created and took the majority of AH's current affair topics; but the two fora arent linked beyond that.


  • #1629
    Sir Oxman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,490 ✭✭✭Sir Oxman


    Any update on the temporary closing of the JK Rowling thread in CA?


  • #1630
    Baggly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,024 ✭✭✭✭Baggly


    Not yet. The mods are discussing next steps.


  • #1631
    Baggly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,024 ✭✭✭✭Baggly


    A new thread has been opened on the topic of gender identity in modern ireland. Id suggest if anyone wishes to discuss the topic, they do so there rather than in the JK Rowling thread, which was in no way near to the topic of the original OP, nor was it a current issue (and so will be remaining closed).

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=115310653#post115310653


  • Advertisement
  • #1632
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Total cop out .

    Let's ignore and start a thread steered in one direction
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #1633
    EmmetSpiceland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,977 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    TomTomTim wrote: »
    You know you can just not view CA, seeing as you hate it so much? I've never seen a poster on here before with such an obsession with a sub forum as you. No matter how much you try and frame it as being against hate or whatever, the reality is you want no dissent. The politics subs is far worse when it comes to being an echo chamber, yet you never mention it because it's an echo chamber you agree with. Not everyone agrees with your views, and they never will, so you better get used to it.

    Think you have me confused with someone else there, chief. I’ve been a big “fan” of the forum since its inception.

    My only “gripe” is that I’d like the moderation to be more relaxed but I understand that this isn’t an option for the mods. I should point out that I’ve also said on a number of occasions that the mods do a great job in there.

    I never mention the ‘Politics Forum’ as I don’t post in there so I don’t know how much of an “echo chamber” it is.

    I’m not sure how you got anything about me not “accepting” other views, I literally said I’d like all topics to be discussed. Anything that keeps all that dross out of ‘After Hours’.

    It would be terrible for the site if ‘Current Affairs’ was shutdown. Disastrous.

    “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



  • #1634
    Sir Oxman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,490 ✭✭✭Sir Oxman


    Gatling wrote: »
    Total cop out .

    Let's ignore and start a thread steered in one direction

    I don't know if that is the intent by boards.ie but Ireland and the UK and the rest of the Western World are inextricably linked by this subject and theory (ie Irish youth are referred to England for assessments/services) and what happens here may affect there and vice versa (ie puberty blockers being reclassified in UK, self-id legislation here) so the thread shouldnt IMO be seen as limiting it to to events only occurring in Ireland.
    I do find it sort of copping out that the bullet pointed list of rules don't include a warning on finger pointing by anyone posting - this should be applied across all threads IMO as it devalues the accusation of -ist and -phobia to the point of uselessness (and therefore makes it harder to recognise and call out actual -ist's and -phobia's) and stokes up nothing 'circular' posts which appears to be the main reason in closing the long running thread in the first place.


  • #1635
    Gervais08
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭Gervais08


    Can I assume that rules will be fairly applied and if a word is felt to be offensive and a poster gleefully denies polite requests to stop - they will be warned ?


  • #1636
    Baggly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,024 ✭✭✭✭Baggly


    Felt to be offensive by whom?

    If the mods deem action is needed and warranted it will be taken. This does not vary from thread to thread in the forum.


  • #1637
    Baggly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,024 ✭✭✭✭Baggly


    Sir Oxman wrote: »
    I don't know if that is the intent by boards.ie but Ireland and the UK and the rest of the Western World are inextricably linked by this subject and theory (ie Irish youth are referred to England for assessments/services) and what happens here may affect there and vice versa (ie puberty blockers being reclassified in UK, self-id legislation here) so the thread shouldnt IMO be seen as limiting it to to events only occurring in Ireland.
    I do find it sort of copping out that the bullet pointed list of rules don't include a warning on finger pointing by anyone posting - this should be applied across all threads IMO as it devalues the accusation of -ist and -phobia to the point of uselessness (and therefore makes it harder to recognise and call out actual -ist's and -phobia's) and stokes up nothing 'circular' posts which appears to be the main reason in closing the long running thread in the first place.

    The forum rules and the rules outlined in the OP cover this. I would be all day listing out specific issues by name - what is there will cover all the issues the mods saw in previous threads around this topic.

    Also worth noting that this is an Irish website - so asking about the opinions of the topic in Ireland does not preclude us from looking at other countries to shape our opinions. Indeed, someone has done just that in the first few posts. If the wording is a bit clunky then apologies for that.


  • #1638
    excludedbin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 241 ✭✭excludedbin


    Gervais08 wrote: »
    Can I assume that rules will be fairly applied and if a word is felt to be offensive and a poster gleefully denies polite requests to stop - they will be warned ?
    And will you be happy for that to apply to both sides of the debate?


  • #1639
    Gervais08
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭Gervais08


    excludedbin wrote: »
    And will you be happy for that to apply to both sides of the debate?

    Absolutely - I have never used a transgender slur and have zero intention of doing so.

    The same cannot be said of the other side.


  • #1640
    LLMMLL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,593 ✭✭✭LLMMLL


    Gervais08 wrote: »
    You actually just answered my question - I vehemently object to the word “cis” as it demeans women in the sense one posters uses it, they have been asked to stop and refuse.

    I think it's time to accept that nobody is going to fall for this debating trick of claiming an inoffensive word is offensive and just move on.


  • #1641
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Gervais08 wrote: »
    You actually just answered my question - I vehemently object to the word “cis” as it demeans women in the sense one posters uses it, they have been asked to stop and refuse.

    Repeatedly calling people terfs as well ,

    Guarantee called the person a slur and there would be bans handed out,let's all be afraid of the twitter dwellers or is it Mumsnet or both
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • Advertisement
  • #1642
    excludedbin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 241 ✭✭excludedbin


    Gatling wrote: »
    Repeatedly calling people terfs as well ,

    Guarantee called the person a slur and there would be bans handed out,let's all be afraid of the twitter dwellers or is it Mumsnet or both
    Setting aside that the term "terf" was coined by a self described "trans exclusionary radical feminist", I find your objections just a little hollow when there's multiple instances of "grooming" accusations by transphobes and no action taken against them so spare us the crocodile tears.

    I'll say again that if you said that, for example, about gay men, it'd be rightly carded. But it seems that trans people are fair game for that sort of abuse under the guise of "discussion" and "opinions". Lots of opinions on the site would have you banned, I don't see why trans people should be treated as a special case.


  • #1643
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    excludedbin wrote: »
    Setting aside that the term "terf" was coined by a self described "trans exclusionary radical feminist", I find your objections just a little hollow when there's multiple instances of "grooming" accusations by transphobes and no action taken against them.

    Bull****
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #1644
    excludedbin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 241 ✭✭excludedbin


    Well I must hold my hands up, I must've misheard someone. It was coined by a radical feminist, to distinguish those that're 'trans exclusionary'.

    However, as to my other claim: "grooming", "groomed", "groomed", "grooming", "grooming"

    Now as far as I can see, there's been no mod action about any of that. And now they've been given another thread to continue that kind of vile abuse against trans people. Face facts: abuse of trans people and anyone who isn't sufficiently critical of them is absolutely fine on CA/IMHO. It's nothing short of astounding, in the most shameful way, that this is having to be discussed at all. What other minority group would you be allowed, on Boards, to make such accusations about? Why is it that threads are made to single out trans people for that kind of vituperation?

    I don't want the mods to hide behind the cowardly excuses of "discussion" or "opinions" because that **** wouldn't fly with racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. so why should this be any different? You already accept that some "discussion" and some "opinions" shouldn't be allowed because they're abusive towards those groups. That's a line you've decided to draw and most people would say it's a reasonable one. All I'm saying is that it should be applied fairly and equally.
    You are free to express your views in a forceful manner provided you remain civil. Hate speech, insults, and purposely inflammatory remarks (i.e., trolling) will not be tolerated.

    That's from the charter. Now I don't know about any of you (the mods, not the users here who definitely do think it's okay) but I'd say accusing a minority group of "grooming" children is pretty damn hateful, especially given the absolute and utter lack of evidence for it. There's being "forceful" and then there's being downright abusive and hateful. If you can't see how that crosses the line then frankly you shouldn't bother having it in the charter because it's nothing more than a sop.

    And that's not to get into the rest of the crap that flew around on that thread and will no doubt continue into the new one. You can either have a thread where abuse of trans people is allowed or a charter that forbids it, not both.


  • #1645
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    excludedbin wrote: »
    Well I must hold my hands up,

    Lol
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #1646
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,235 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    excludedbin wrote: »
    Well I must hold my hands up, I must've misheard someone. It was coined by a radical feminist, to distinguish those that're 'trans exclusionary'.

    However, as to my other claim: "grooming", "groomed", "groomed", "grooming", "grooming"

    Now as far as I can see, there's been no mod action about any of that. And now they've been given another thread to continue that kind of vile abuse against trans people. Face facts: abuse of trans people and anyone who isn't sufficiently critical of them is absolutely fine on CA/IMHO. It's nothing short of astounding, in the most shameful way, that this is having to be discussed at all. What other minority group would you be allowed, on Boards, to make such accusations about? Why is it that threads are made to single out trans people for that kind of vituperation?

    I don't want the mods to hide behind the cowardly excuses of "discussion" or "opinions" because that **** wouldn't fly with racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. so why should this be any different? You already accept that some "discussion" and some "opinions" shouldn't be allowed because they're abusive towards those groups. That's a line you've decided to draw and most people would say it's a reasonable one. All I'm saying is that it should be applied fairly and equally.



    That's from the charter. Now I don't know about any of you (the mods, not the users here who definitely do think it's okay) but I'd say accusing a minority group of "grooming" children is pretty damn hateful, especially given the absolute and utter lack of evidence for it. There's being "forceful" and then there's being downright abusive and hateful. If you can't see how that crosses the line then frankly you shouldn't bother having it in the charter because it's nothing more than a sop.

    And that's not to get into the rest of the crap that flew around on that thread and will no doubt continue into the new one. You can either have a thread where abuse of trans people is allowed or a charter that forbids it, not both.

    Its also says an awful lot that pretty much no openly out trans people post on this site anymore.

    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



  • #1647
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Its also says an awful lot that pretty much no openly out trans people post on this site anymore.

    Plenty of people don't post here anymore ,it's got nothing to do with lifestyle choices ,

    Some of the greatest and down right funniest people don't post any more , life goes on and you can only speak for yourself nobody else
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #1648
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Actually can mods be stripped of their title ,
    Is there rules or a code of conduct all mods must follow,
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #1649
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    This is it wrote: »
    Mods have been stripped of their title though I can only think of two, and they caused a lot of hassle. Nothing serious but creating a lot of work for mods of other forums. Lots of cards, etc. I'm not going to name them before anyone asks.

    Definitely not looking for names just something propped up ,I know they have their private forum ,I don't think I've actually ive heard anything about a mod been stripped ,I remember calls for various people calling for mods to be appointed based off liking something more than someone else.
    Boards wouldn't post about it ? Like if say I was a mod and was removed there wouldn't be a Gatling removed as a mod of insert forum here because
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #1650
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 11,195 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    i checked, out of interest, the first few links to the grooming complaints and one referred to what looked at first glance a textbook use of the word, the next referred to grown adults

    i didn't see much point in clicking in to all the rest, given that start, if thats the kind of evidence thrown up to get threads locked.


  • Advertisement
  • #1651
    chopperbyrne
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,141 ✭✭✭✭chopperbyrne


    I was threadbanned for saying the thread might as well be immediately locked, as it would be exactly the same.

    Eleven hours to be proved right.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement