nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Change to charter that is highly offensive and provocative

Panch18

I just want to raise my deep concerns with the charter on the vegan and vegetarian forum.

A couple of weeks ago a new charter was created in the forum – at that time I contacted via PM the Mod (Faith) saying that I thought certain phrases should be banned as they were inflammatory and deliberately antagonistic.
The mod declined saying that they cannot and will not create a list of banned phrases – instead the charter covers the topic of “offensive concepts”.
And that is all fine – no problem with that – and the charter was introduced about 2 weeks ago.

However out of nowhere there was then a subsequent change to the charter 2 days ago where the following paragraph was inserted:
“Living a vegan or vegetarian lifestyle has often evolved from our belief that farming animals for human consumption, or consumption of animal products, has elements of cruelty or does harm to animals. We appreciate that many farmers make every effort to reduce animal suffering, but the practice of farming animals for human consumption, no matter how well cared for the animals are, goes against our fundamental beliefs. This is our belief system and in this forum that belief can be discussed in a respectful and considerate manner from a vegan and vegetarian point of view. This includes the use of the term "cruelty" in relation to animal farming.”

What has transpired from this is that vegan posters are allowed to call vegan copies of animal based foods as “cruelty free”. So for example :

Klopparama 19-11-2020 @ 03.56
It’s just fantastic to see these cruelty free sausages receiving such great reviews.

There’ll soon be more cruelty free sausages than not.

Whats amazing is that a mod noted the posters repeated use of “cruelty free” in the very next post but did nothing about it. Then the other moderator bans a few people when they question how that phrase is allowed to be used on the forum.

How on earth can it be allowed that people posting on a certain forum can call 100 thousand farmers in Ireland cruel – that the products we produce are produced in a cruel manner and that we would somehow be cruel to our animals

If this isn’t provocative and inflammatory I don’t know what is – especially as its clearly not true.

It is unacceptable that this blatant lie can be allowed and actually promoted like this. And if you want proof of it you only have to look at the animal welfare standards that are implemented in this country. Also look at the amount of farmers that are taken to court for cruelty to animals and then consider a) the number of farmers in the country and b) the number of farm animals in the country. The facts simply do not back up anything whatsoever to suggest that there is an animal cruelty problem in Ireland – the exact opposite in fact
I find the phrase “cruelty free production” highly offensive when discussing food production. It is basically saying, by inferring, that I am cruel to my animals – I most certainly am not. And it goes against the very spirit of the new charter.

I would be grateful if this issue could be addressed and look forward to your feedback – which will hopefully include a change to the charter to remove the new tottally unnecessary and highly offensive paragraph in the charter. I don’t know who inserted that paragraph or why it was inserted but it is creating a situation which is highly offensive to many people.

thanks for your time

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Panch18

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Just thought it would be a good idea to repost this for those that haven’t seen it.

’.

What made you think it was a good idea? You’ve posted all that before on this thread

[Deleted User]

Silly Gilly wrote: »

Just to highlight the depth of ill-feeling between the groups here is a quote from the mod of the farming forum after they snipped abuse of vegans.

"Snip again..... We can't leave that WC, but be under no illusions you're in F&F now. We'll take care of our own. Thanks . GC"

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=115392955&postcount=18

Us aginst them. A battle. No compromise.

As in conflict zones a wall needs to be built between the communities or you'll continue to have faction fighting.

Be worth pointing out again the context here, a provocative wording in a charter favouring what one could only call an extreme take on animal farming.

That's the context of this thread.

Haven't seen a defence of that decision that stands up yet, tbh, and whether it strengthens my standing or otherwise I don't hold much of a candle for farmers as a group or lobby, but as a boards user I'm mildly interested in seeing the atomisation of subfora into formally protected extreme views at the very least defended by those responsible.

[Deleted User]

Nody wrote: »

if we had a forum for racial supremacy and the purity of the white race you'd run into problem posting that all are equal in there I'm sure.

Boards would I'm very sure take a political stance on not sheltering any such viewpoints, let alone protecting and privileging them on a hosted forum.

The decision to amend the V&V charter to fairly explicitly exclude certain views is a likewise political decision and it's not at all obvious that it's a step further than "like-minded vegans seek safe chats"- it's clearly a term that one doesn't actually need to think too much about in order to see it as something potentially offensive to a large group

"They don't have to post there" doesn't cut it as a defence of that political decision tbh

anewme

It would be good if the OP could clarify why he sees the use of the term cruelty-free highly offensive in a vegetarian form but has no issue himself trolling people posting harmless photos of their veggie dinners or telling vegetarians to get a burger as Osauran quoted above. To people who have done nothing.

Would you not see this as offensive OP and certainly two faced ?

[Deleted User]

Silly Gilly wrote: »

Just to highlight the depth of ill-feeling between the groups here is a quote from the mod of the farming forum after they snipped abuse of vegans.

"Snip again..... We can't leave that WC, but be under no illusions you're in F&F now. We'll take care of our own. Thanks . GC"

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=115392955&postcount=18

Us aginst them. A battle. No compromise.

As in conflict zones a wall needs to be built between the communities or you'll continue to have faction fighting.

This is a great example of the differences between the forums imo.

I’ve always got the feeling the moderation in the f&f forum is very heavy handed when an ‘outsider’ goes in. They certainly do ‘take care of their own’. It feels that more moderator ‘sniping’ is involved rather than deserved warnings or cards to ‘their own’. Very quick to dish out to visitors though.

Whereas in the V&V forum I’ve felt a lot has been let slide and the moderation has been on the side of giving everyone the benefit of the doubt but, unfortunately, repeatedly. I appreciate there is an effort to address that now but look where a simple turn of phrase (cruelty free) has been taken.

It feels like a ‘give them an inch’ battle is happening right now. A battle that has been started by a tiny few.

If both forums were moderator in similar fashion I don’t think the divide would exist. There would like be less crossover unless it was genuine engagement with an honest intention to learn or understand something.

Thanks Gilly for that post. I think it addresses something that has been missed.

Nody

Deleted User wrote: »

Boards would I'm very sure take a political stance on not sheltering any such viewpoints, let alone protecting and privileging them on a hosted forum.

The decision to amend the V&V charter to fairly explicitly exclude certain views is a likewise political decision and it's not at all obvious that it's a step further than "like-minded vegans seek safe chats"- it's clearly a term that one doesn't actually need to think too much about in order to see it as something potentially offensive to a large group

"They don't have to post there" doesn't cut it as a defence of that political decision tbh

Why not? It's exactly what's implemented in Farming forum; the post has already been quoted before. Heck you've yourself posted in the rallying thread trying to get as many farmers as possible to go over and in essence troll the vegetarian forum when the vegetarians/vegans are not welcome in the farmers forum. If the farmers are to be protected in their own forum (as per the moderator comments and actions on the very thread linked above on multiple occasions) why would the vegans and vegetarians now have the same right in their own forum to be protected from farmers who're out to troll them? And yes; you can see the troll posts already linked above from on this thread and the Farmers thread that they did post in the vegan forum.

White Clover

imokyrok wrote: »

But it is cruel. I'm not a vegan or even a vegetarian but I'm under no illusions that using animals for foodwhdn there are other options is cruel. It's a cruelty I live with because I put my personal pleasure in occasionally eating meat before the more moral action of not enabling cruelty to animals by killjng them for fgood. Vegans are perfectly entitled to highlight thecrealitg of thus cruelty and I have much admiration for their higher moral values.

And btw not all farmers farm animals. Stock free vegan farmers like Iain Tolhurst are an example to how it could be.

This is another example of the underhand farmer bashing that goes on in the forum.
It is probably difficult to deal with. There are so many innacuracies in that post. One could say it is complete ignorance, but as a farmer it would be difficult to gloss over it.
However when the likes of this is challenged using facts, the vegan posters, as a rule gang together and will completely refuse to see the logic that is being explained to them.

It is also an example of the type of source that is used to defend the vegan position. Showing or quoting a vegan farmer or website is not an acceptable defence.

White Clover

Silly Gilly wrote: »

Just to highlight the depth of ill-feeling between the groups here is a quote from the mod of the farming forum after they snipped abuse of vegans.

"Snip again..... We can't leave that WC, but be under no illusions you're in F&F now. We'll take care of our own. Thanks . GC"

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=115392955&postcount=18

Us aginst them. A battle. No compromise.

As in conflict zones a wall needs to be built between the communities or you'll continue to have faction fighting.

It was not abuse of vegans. You're either lying about what you saw before it was snipped or you're making it up. It is one or the other.

Panch18

The issue isn't moderation - the issue is charter

And if people had any idea of the way the Farming Forum mods have been treated in this - it would be an eye opener.

Make no mistake about it - Boards.ie wants a them and us type of argument - as opposed to dealing with the issue in hand of a disgraceful charter modification

Gary kk

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This is a great example of the differences between the forums imo.

I’ve always got the feeling the moderation in the f&f forum is very heavy handed when an ‘outsider’ goes in. They certainly do ‘take care of their own’. It feels that more moderator ‘sniping’ is involved rather than deserved warnings or cards to ‘their own’. Very quick to dish out to visitors though.

Whereas in the V&V forum I’ve felt a lot has been let slide and the moderation has been on the side of giving everyone the benefit of the doubt but, unfortunately, repeatedly. I appreciate there is an effort to address that now but look where a simple turn of phrase (cruelty free) has been taken.

It feels like a ‘give them an inch’ battle is happening right now. A battle that has been started by a tiny few.

If both forums were moderator in similar fashion I don’t think the divide would exist. There would like be less crossover unless it was genuine engagement with an honest intention to learn or understand something.

Thanks Gilly for that post. I think it addresses something that has been missed.

Haha your joking, good man I actually spat out my tea when I read it.

This will keep in good form for the day.

Panch18

So just to summarise.

I have shown that it is a stated aim of many vegans, as stated by the main vegan organisations worldwide, to stop all animals being held in captivity – this includes pets. This is a commonly held “belief system” of the vegan movement worldwide. As mentioned a quick browse of https://www.veganfriendly.org.uk/articles/do-vegans-keep-pets/#:~:text=Keeping%20a%20companion%20animal%20is,from%20other%20shops%20where%20possible will show you this - some snippets include

The fact is that there are millions of animals within the pet “industry” who experience terrible suffering. Even if we leave aside any more philosophical arguments about keeping pets and an animal’s right to liberty, this suffering means many vegans feel the idea of keeping pets is one that needs to be abandoned.

The long term aim for vegans is to end the practice of keeping captive animals

So I have proven that the vegan belief system clearly believes that people having cats or dogs or goldfish or whatever is cruel and want the practice ended.
So the charter on the vegan and vegetarian forum has been amended to support the vegan “belief system” but it is specifically only allowing the demonization of animal farmers – whilst conveniently ignoring that the “vegan belief system” wants an end to all animals in captivity – not just farm animals – and most definitely including pets.

So how can the mods on the vegan forum justify the demonization of 1 sector of Irish (and worldwide) society to uphold the “vegan belief system” by allowing some of the “vegan belief system” to be incorporated into the charter i.e. animal agri is cruel but not allow the full “vegan belief system” to be incorporated whereby they see all animals owners, both pets and farmers, as being cruel and inflicting cruelty on their animals? This is not my opinion, it is the stated position of the main vegan organizations in the world, as above.
This coupled with the fact that when questions were raised on this by farmers they were banned immediately (regardless of content) and all of their posts deleted for those who think looking at my posts in Vegan forum is the total of my posts on that forum – it’s clearly not.

Faith

I've had a lot of conversations with various groups in recent days, and a couple of posters from the Farming forum have been kind enough to indulge my attempts to understand the issues further. What I took from my conversations is that farmers will make every effort to treat their animals as humanely as possible, and that they genuinely care for their animals, but sometimes it's a matter of choosing the least worst option, and that the benefits outweigh the costs in the end. I also understand that farming practices in Ireland are far more humane than in many parts of the world, and that animals are treated at a much higher standard here than elsewhere.

I get that, I really do.

But, to a vegan, that isn't enough. Firstly, veganism isn't a local issue, it's a global one, and no amount of battering them with statistics and information about Irish farming practices will change their mind, because Ireland is just a drop in the ocean of animal farming. Secondly, to a vegan, sending a healthy animal to slaughter, or removing offspring from their mothers, is a cruel act. From their perspective, if we wouldn't do it to another human, why would we do it to a sentient animal?

So how do we manage that? The best that we've got is that we have two forums - one where farming is discussed from a farming perspective, and one where it can be discussed from a vegan perspective. The farming forum has its rules, where they won't tolerate vegans accusing farmers of cruelty, and the vegan forum has its rules, where farming practices are fundamentally believed to be cruel.

It has been said the no other charter defends the use of specific language, but if we didn't specifically include that line about 'cruelty' in the charter, we would be inundated with reported posts about its use from a small handful of posters, so it is easiest to put it in the charter. It's also not entirely true. The Hunting forum, for example, says "Hunting is legal, ethical and morally sound. This is an accepted axiom of this forum and discussions about whether or not hunting itself is an ethical or legal activity are not permissible;
All such discussions will be deleted without exception. However, discussions on the ethics of specific hunting techniques or practices is permitted, but such discussions will be required to adhere to the rules more strictly than most other discussions."

Many would disagree that hunting is ethical and morally sound, but the charter prohibits discussion of that viewpoint. Many would argue that it is offensive and provocative to say that it is ethical and morally sound. We could amend the V&V charter to say "Farming animals is unethical and cruel. This is an accepted axiom of this forum and discussions stating that farming itself is an ethical activity are not permissible; All such discussions will be deleted without exception. However, discussions on the ethics of specific farming techniques or practices is permitted, but such discussions will be required to adhere to the rules more strictly than most other discussions." That would be saying the same thing using the language of another charter.

Finally, I wholeheartedly agree with a point that has been made several times - don't visit forums that wind you up! It's the easiest outcome here. I avoid the Christianity forum because I find certain views expressed relating to abortion and LGBTQ populations offensive and provocative, but I don't wade in there attempting to shut down every poster who says "Abortion is murder". I accept that they hold a viewpoint which I vehemently disagree with, and one that I could use multitudes of sources to disagree with and try to change their mind, but I know that it's pointless, so I stay away for my own sanity.

Having followed this thread throughout, I am only seeing a small handful of posters objecting to the phrases 'cruelty' and 'cruelty free'. The majority of unbiased observers have indicated that they do not see an issue with the language being used on the Vegan & Vegetarian forum, and that they understand why it is permissible. So I'm not seeing any reason to change the charter to suit a small minority with vested interests that go against the fundamental principles that underpin the forum.

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This is a great example of the differences between the forums imo.

I’ve always got the feeling the moderation in the f&f forum is very heavy handed when an ‘outsider’ goes in. They certainly do ‘take care of their own’. It feels that more moderator ‘sniping’ is involved rather than deserved warnings or cards to ‘their own’. Very quick to dish out to visitors though.

Whereas in the V&V forum I’ve felt a lot has been let slide and the moderation has been on the side of giving everyone the benefit of the doubt but, unfortunately, repeatedly. I appreciate there is an effort to address that now but look where a simple turn of phrase (cruelty free) has been taken.

It feels like a ‘give them an inch’ battle is happening right now. A battle that has been started by a tiny few.

If both forums were moderator in similar fashion I don’t think the divide would exist. There would like be less crossover unless it was genuine engagement with an honest intention to learn or understand something.

Thanks Gilly for that post. I think it addresses something that has been missed.

I think its very unfair to attack the moderators tbh. There doing their best in very difficult circumstances.

And if course there may be differences of opinion. But they have a job to do. And they do it freely.

This whole thing has certainly caused lot of ill feeling imo. And its certainly not one sided. Someone asked why anyone would goto v&v and comment something about a new plant burger or whatever.

Tbf that can be pointed out on both sides. Some post because of a interest in the topic, some posts can be flippant some downright stupid etc etc

And its not all one sided There was a notable instance when a poster from v&v turned up on the Farming forum posing as a person wanting to start dog farming. There was another who tried to claim they defiinly weren't vegan in a farming thread even though they had posted that they were.

I'm not saying anyone is bad or attacking anyone - but yes stuff like this does sometimes happened. I think the most important thing is if someone thinks a comment is against the charter or a post breaks a rule then report it.

Anyway I don’t think there's much left to say other than its a great pity its came to this. I do hope something positive comes of it.

Edit. Forgot to mention how I believe this should work out.

Farmers farm
Hunters hunt
Vegans vegan

But no one should get permission to accuse each other of being nuts (or wtte)

Panch18

Also can i ask what the actual procedure is here?

I believe that i put forward a good case for having the charter changed to stop the bullying and demonisation of the farming community, there are certainly plenty that seem to agree with my positon - not all obviously.

How does it work from here? IS there "behind the scenes" discussions happening at boards HQ? is this thread supposed to run with no definitive conclusion?

IF the charter isn't changed will i get a reasoned justification as to why it won't be changed?

[Deleted User]

Nody wrote: »

Why not? It's exactly what's implemented in Farming forum; the post has already been quoted before. Heck you've yourself posted in the rallying thread trying to get as many farmers as possible to go over and in essence troll the vegetarian forum when the vegetarians/vegans are not welcome in the farmers forum. If the farmers are to be protected in their own forum (as per the moderator comments and actions on the very thread linked above on multiple occasions) why would the vegans and vegetarians now have the same right in their own forum to be protected from farmers who're out to troll them? And yes; you can see the troll posts already linked above from on this thread and the Farmers thread that they did post in the vegan forum.

I. Because what you are decrying is moderator action on trolling (or imputed trolling), not crystallized definition of a controversial term in the charter (beyond discuss, sincere or otherwise).

I'd point out for the nth time that this is the actual issue here.

II. I posted in a thread on the farmer's forum, true, I don't think I've said anything there I haven't here- but if the implication is that that thread is out of order then, again, the mods are the port of call. I'm sure that whatever elements you object to haven't been baked into their charter as ok-in-advance.

Panch18

@ Faith and the other mods who conveniently ignored my posts can you please answer my question that i have posted 3 times now and you have all have ignored 3 times.

When the "vegan belief system" is that ALL animals in captivity are subject to cruelty why is it that the charter has been specifically written so that only farmers are being subject to the term cruelty and not the general public - because that is the clear and stated goals of the major vegan organisations.

So why does the charter limit the abuse so that it can be directed at farmers?

El Tarangu

A lot of the posts in this thread are illustrative of the issues facing the V&V forum:

a small number of posters, who don't seem particularly interested in V & V lifestyle themselves, have decided that 'veganism' is whatever it is they have come across in some article online, and discussions on the topic can only take place within this definitive frame of reference that they have decided themselves;
any discussion on anything related to food, land use, or any other topic even remotely related to agriculture (nevermind animal products or animal husbandry) must take place within the framework that they have decided is the definitive one; no other worldview is permitted, even (especially) the one that the V&V forum was set up to engage with

To me it seems bizarre, and the solution seems self-evident: if I was to head over to the Hunting forum or the LGBT forum and insist that these topics could only be discussed under the frame of reference & using terminology that I had selected myself, I think I would be given short shrift by the mods.

[Deleted User]

Faith- that's a fair and comprehensive, thoughtful response. Thank you.

anewme

Panch18 wrote: »

Also can i ask what the actual procedure is here?

I believe that i put forward a good case for having the charter changed to stop the bullying and demonisation of the farming community, there are certainly plenty that seem to agree with my position - not all obviously.

How does it work from here? IS there "behind the scenes" discussions happening at boards HQ? is this thread supposed to run with no definitive conclusion?

IF the charter isn't changed will i get a reasoned justification as to why it won't be changed?

In respect of bullying - have you answered why you deliberately visit the recipe page where you have told people posting their dinners that you'd get better in prison or get a burger. None of the posters you were saying that to had said anything to you that could be deemed aggressive. It was harmless recipe posting.

Do you not see this as bullying or demonisation of people based on nothing more than their food choices?

If you have an issue with someone eating a vegan or vegetarian meal and cant look at them without commenting or bitching, the advice to stay out of the forum is the best option for you to persue.

Gary kk

To be honest I don't think any farmer would be bothered with the v&v forum only for a thread popping up called Milk and Dairy = cruelty. If you wanted to start an argument that would be it.

I think it's called milk and dairy now but even the last few post will show the "vigor " with which it was debated.

What's to stop such a thread from starting with a similar heading in the future.

How did anyone in the v&v think there would not be such a reaction.

Panch18

Faith wrote: »

Having followed this thread throughout, I am only seeing a small handful of posters objecting to the phrases 'cruelty' and 'cruelty free'. The majority of unbiased observers have indicated that they do not see an issue with the language being used on the Vegan & Vegetarian forum, and that they understand why it is permissible. So I'm not seeing any reason to change the charter to suit a small minority with vested interests that go against the fundamental principles that underpin the forum.

@ Faith – are you having a laugh or just seeing what you want to see??

I think you should read the thread again and take note of what people are actually saying because your assertion that the “majority of unbiased observers” is wrong in my view.
I have drawn up a little table of the posters on this thread and where they lie on the subject. Now first up to all posters this is how I have interpreted your post(s) on this thread. If I am misrepresenting you then forgive me and please say so.
If you look at the table you will see the following:
8 “unbiased” people seem to be questioning the charter or believe it should be changed
6 “unbiased” people seem to be happy to leave it as it is
There were 3 unbiased posters that I put as unknown as I didn’t think their posts lay on either side of the fence

That means that there are actually more unbiased people on the side of charter change than not – so your statement regarding the majority of unbiased opinions is simply NOT TRUE

You will note that I have left out farmers, vegans and Mods. The reason I left out Mods is that it is clear from reading all of the Mod posts that impartiality is gone out the window here and you are defending your fellow mods or the charter or Boards.ie – I don’t know which but it is obvious.

It is also obvious that the Farming Mods have not posted on this thread – why is that I wonder? Would they be threatened with bans if they stepped “out of line”?? For the record I’m fairly confident I know which column they would be in.

Also I left farmers out of Unbiased as we obviously have skin in the game – HOWEVER it is farmers that are being subject to the abuse that the charter allows – so we are not simply a member of the public who can just ignore it or who it doesn’t relate to – we are the victims of the bullying and victimisation that the charter not only allows – but actually supports. So our voice should be heard, not as 1 of biased but as 1 of the victim of this charter.

We are not just biased in this argument

For Charter Change Against Charter change Unknown
Snoopsheep Unbiased Osarusan Unbiased ZX7R Unbiased
OscarMIlde Unbiased Dubin Meath Unbiased Weisses Unbiased
Irish Aris Unbiased Silly Gilly Unbiased P.C. Unbiased
Irelandrover Unbiased Dial Hard Unbiased Mickeroo Mod
Hodors Appletart Unbiased Imokyrok Unbiased
PeaderCo Unbiased Neyite Mod
$hifty Unbiased Chips Lovell Mod
Ward J.Litell Unbiased Nody Mod
Panch Farmer Faith MOD Vegan
Gozunda Farmer Dizzy MOD Vegan
NcdJd Farmer TOS MOD Vegan
Gary KK Farmer Klopparama Vegan
Ganmo Farmer Unearthly Vegan
White Clover Farmer anewme Unbiased
El Tarangu Vegan

Changed anewme as requested in both table and overall unbaised number above

Panch18

Gary kk wrote: »

To be honest I don't any farmer would be bothered with the v&v forum only for a thread popping up called Milk and Dairy = cruelty. If you wanted to start an argument that would be it.

I think it's called milk and dairy now but even the last few post will show the "vigor " with which it was debated.

What's to stop such a thread from starting with a similar heading in the future.

How did anyone in the v&v think there would not be such a reaction.

That thread title has changed recently I believe. It certainly wasn’t that friendly before. ah yes the actual thread title before the little recent change was:

MILK and DAIRY = CRUELTY

Perhaps one of the mods can confirm the = Cruelty was taken out of the thread title??

Here is a sample of the abuse that farmers are expected to tolerate - from the one and only Klopperama who post on this thread you wouldn’t think butter would melt in his mouth, either vegan or dairy butter!

Note that farmers are being called Barbaric, rapist etc.

And people wonder why we are on the vegan forum trying to defend ourselves

Quote: klopparama
All these posts are just full of whataboutery and bull****.

Dairy is cruelty in the eyes of people that see it that way.

It is cruel. It involves raping animals. It involves imprisoning animals. It involves slaughtering animals.

They are bred as a commodity. They ‘live’ as a commodity. They are slaughtered as a commodity.

There is nothing natural about their life. Starting with being taken away from their mother when born.

It’s barbaric. And all for what ? A bit of cheese or milk for your pleasure ? And then on to hamburger bun ?

Pretty ****ing disgusting stuff.

That’s the bottom line here. That’s what actually happens.

anewme

Panch, can you please update your table. I clearly said in my posts here and on the Denny Sausages thread that I am not vegan.

Just fed up with not being able to access information or ideas in peace without constant debates about vegetarians or vegans.

Faith

Panch18 wrote: »

@ Faith and the other mods who conveniently ignored my posts can you please answer my question that i have posted 3 times now and you have all have ignored 3 times.

When the "vegan belief system" is that ALL animals in captivity are subject to cruelty why is it that the charter has been specifically written so that only farmers are being subject to the term cruelty and not the general public - because that is the clear and stated goals of the major vegan organisations.

So why does the charter limit the abuse so that it can be directed at farmers?

Because, once again, you're either misrepresenting or misremembering the charter. As a reminder, it states:

Living a vegan or vegetarian lifestyle has often evolved from our belief that farming animals for human consumption, or consumption of animal products, has elements of cruelty or does harm to animals. We appreciate that many farmers make every effort to reduce animal suffering, but the practice of farming animals for human consumption, no matter how well cared for the animals are, goes against our fundamental beliefs. This is our belief system and in this forum that belief can be discussed in a respectful and considerate manner from a vegan and vegetarian point of view. This includes the use of the term "cruelty" in relation to animal farming.

Nowhere does it say "You can't talk about the ethics of pet ownership". Nowhere does it say "Let's all call farmers cruel!" or "Never, ever refer to anyone BUT farmers as cruel". If someone wants to start a thread calling pet owners cruel, let them do so as long as it stays within the charter.

The charter also specifically says "This INCLUDES the use", not "This is limited to the use", so I have literally no idea how you've arrived at the conclusion that "only farmers are being subject to the term cruelty and not the general public".

Faith

Gary kk wrote: »

To be honest I don't think any farmer would be bothered with the v&v forum only for a thread popping up called Milk and Dairy = cruelty. If you wanted to start an argument that would be it.

I think it's called milk and dairy now but even the last few post will show the "vigor " with which it was debated.

What's to stop such a thread from starting with a similar heading in the future.

How did anyone in the v&v think there would not be such a reaction.

That thread was a hot mess, granted. But! It was started in 2011 and mostly laid dormant until a couple of months ago, at which point the forum was essentially modless.

When our attention was drawn to it, the thread title was changed, the thread was locked, the OP was banned and we added the following line into the updated charter:

Offensive suggestions such as comparing artificial insemination to rape, or comparing a vegan lifestyle to an eating disorder are not welcome and will be moderated accordingly. Note: We will not and can not create a list of banned words or phrases.

Hands up, that thread should have had mod intervention well before it did. Maybe we wouldn't be here if it had. That's on us, and we're doing our best to repair those ruptures now.

Panch18 wrote: »

@ Faith – are you having a laugh or just seeing what you want to see??

Honestly, Panch, I could ask you the same thing. You've ignored the majority of posts on this thread that have challenged your position and you're myopically focusing on certain details without any consideration of the bigger picture.

Panch18 wrote: »

The reason I left out Mods is that it is clear from reading all of the Mod posts that impartiality is gone out the window here and you are defending your fellow mods or the charter or Boards.ie – I don’t know which but it is obvious.

It is also obvious that the Farming Mods have not posted on this thread – why is that I wonder? Would they be threatened with bans if they stepped “out of line”?? For the record I’m fairly confident I know which column they would be in.

This is unfair to everyone, Panch. I have devoted literal days of my free time to this issue, trying to see it from every possible angle. I have literally no skin in the game so I'm getting nothing out of doing this. Rather than acknowledge the sheer effort that the mod team is putting in, you've attacked us over and over again and complained about our failings. And then to accuse us of somehow silencing our fellow F&F mods is just the cherry on the cake. Yet you still expect us to go "You know what, you're right, you've shouted us down and we'll change the charter to suit you". We're open to respectful dialogue, not being bullied into doing something.

I've covered the issue in as much detail as I can. I don't think I have anything else to say to you on this matter.

greysides

On a point of information, F&F mods have been discussing this issue with our CMods and Admin behind the scenes where we have made our views known. We have not been stopped posting here in any way.

Unearthly

Can anyone give an example of a social media website that has both vegans and farmers that bans vegans using the word cruel?

Reddit
Twitter
Facebook
Instagram

As far as I know neither of these ban it. Just wondering is there a precedent?

greysides

Unearthly wrote: »

Can anyone give an example of a social media website that has both vegans and farmers that bans vegans using the word cruel?

Reddit
Twitter
Facebook
Instagram

As far as I know neither of these ban it. Just wondering is there a precedent?

Oh dear. I hope you don't compare Boards standards to the standards of some of those sites.

You know who posts on Twitter regularly... US dude, orange complexion... known for his version of events.

NcdJd

Unearthly wrote: »

Can anyone give an example of a social media website that has both vegans and farmers that bans vegans using the word cruel?

Reddit
Twitter
Facebook
Instagram

As far as I know neither of these ban it. Just wondering is there a precedent?

I think boards is different, well I see it that way. Twitter can be such a toxic place and every sort of lunatic can post whatever they want. One thing about boards is that it has moderators and admins who rightly monitor what is being posted. I do not have any social media accounts except boards and that is one of the reasons why. Proper sensible moderation and a bit of a sense of community. That's what makes boards boards.

ohnonotgmail

Unearthly wrote: »

Can anyone give an example of a social media website that has both vegans and farmers that bans vegans using the word cruel?

Reddit
Twitter
Facebook
Instagram

As far as I know neither of these ban it. Just wondering is there a precedent?

it is not even a ban on the word cruel. It is a ban on the use of the phrase "cruelty-free" as some people perceive that as a direct attack on them. It is all most bizarre.