Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

coinop · 03-01-2021 06:17AM

It never ceases to amaze me to witness users of an internet discussion site begging to be censored, to have their freedom of expression restricted and for threads to be shut down. There must be a sadomasochist aspect in the Irish national psyche where we loved to be bullied and pushed around. First under the British, then the Catholic Church, then our EU overlords. Even on internet fora, posters waste precocious time lobbying mods to shut down discussion. Why do they feel so threatened by ideas that challenge their preconceived notions? I consider myself a well-travelled denizen of the internet, having participated in many different internet communities over the past two decades, but I've never experienced the professional moaning that some Irish users specialize in other than on here. It's understandable that mods eventually become frustrated and capitulate to the perpetually outraged mob but I ask that they consider an alternative view: tell them if they don't like it, fack off.

coinop · 03-01-2021 06:21AM

Discodog wrote: »

If I wanted to show a kid how racist the Irish are there are hundreds of posts to support that opinion.

Oh no! What will the neighbours think (!)

Discodog · 03-01-2021 09:27AM

coinop wrote: »

It never ceases to amaze me to witness users of an internet discussion site begging to be censored, to have their freedom of expression restricted and for threads to be shut down. There must be a sadomasochist aspect in the Irish national psyche where we loved to be bullied and pushed around. First under the British, then the Catholic Church, then our EU overlords. Even on internet fora, posters waste precocious time lobbying mods to shut down discussion. Why do they feel so threatened by ideas that challenge their preconceived notions? I consider myself a well-travelled denizen of the internet, having participated in many different internet communities over the past two decades, but I've never experienced the professional moaning that some Irish users specialize in other than on here. It's understandable that mods eventually become frustrated and capitulate to the perpetually outraged mob but I ask that they consider an alternative view: tell them if they don't like it, fack off.

Where has anyone said that ? Boards has always been censored & every significant discussion site is. You speak of bullying & pushing around yet ignore that much of this can be online by people claiming to just be expressing their opinion.

You are a screen name here. If, for example, your real name was used would you be happy if people said that you had a criminal record, even if you didn't, with no proof to back it up ? Does the truth matter ?

In addition, An Garda Síochána is "very concerned" by "lies" being circulated widely online by "fascists and racists" falsely stating that the dead man, who had mental health problems, had more than 30 criminal convictions.

In fact the 27-year-old had no criminal convictions at all.

"Unfortunately these lies went viral and lots of right-minded people in society think the dead man was a criminal when he was not. All of these things stoke the fires of racial tension."

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/garda-worry-over-nkencho-shooting-lies-39924798.html

Contrary to popular opinion, rather than being known to the Gardai as a criminal, it turns out that he was know because of his mental health condition.

Garda sources have confirmed Mr Nkencho was known to suffer from mental illness and that officers have been called to the house several times to deal with “mental health and domestic issues”.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/george-nkencho-shooting-inquiry-will-look-at-graduated-use-of-force-1.4448355

Davaeo09 · 03-01-2021 10:24AM

Jesus it's a pitty he didn't seek for all of his mental problems isn't it?

Such a pitty.

Discodog · 03-01-2021 11:40AM

Davaeo09 wrote: »

Jesus it's a pitty he didn't seek for all of his mental problems isn't it?

Such a pitty.

So you can prove that he or his family didn't ? Or is this more of the damaging speculation that the Gardai are concerned about ?

03-01-2021 01:43PM

Scene: shop in hartstown

Scenario: you're on the floor getting battered. Audience may or may not know the assailant has a knife, depending on the version of the movie you're seeing

Action: discodog bursts in

discdog: "dont worry! he hasnt any *convictions*"

Nobody owns the truth and nobody owns the angle on a wide reaching current affairs topic mired in controversy and moving quickly.

The type of narrowing and nitpicking parodied above is an attempt at narrative control and protests to allow narrative control only in the direction one would wish (eg question cops, assaulted staff all day without recourse to fairness or logic but the fella with the knife and the past full of troubling episodes is unquestionable as an actor) is absolutely an attempt at censorship

Mods are quite rightly not having that.

The issue raised remains the same- "how dare anyone disagree with me"

If you think that "they may disagree with me but only in the manner and style of which i approve" is a whit different to the above then sorry, you're wrong.

Discodog · 03-01-2021 02:05PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Scene: shop in hartstown

Scenario: you're on the floor getting battered. Audience may or may not know the assailant has a knife, depending on the version of the movie you're seeing

Action: discodog bursts in

discdog: "dont worry! he hasnt any *convictions*"

Nobody owns the truth and nobody owns the angle on a wide reaching current affairs topic mired in controversy and moving quickly.

The type of narrowing and nitpicking parodied above is an attempt at narrative control and protests to allow narrative control only in the direction one would wish (eg question cops, assaulted staff all day without recourse to fairness or logic but the fella with the knife and the past full of troubling episodes is unquestionable as an actor) is absolutely an attempt at censorship

Mods are quite rightly not having that.

The issue raised remains the same- "how dare anyone disagree with me"

If you think that "they may disagree with me but only in the manner and style of which i approve" is a whit different to the above then sorry, you're wrong.

That's the whole point. If you post, saying that he had criminal convictions & it turns out he didn't, you are on very shaky ground & the site that published your comments may be too. Pleading that things were moving fast & you have a right to free speech doesn't made one iota of difference.

It not about disagreeing. It's about an age old principle that, if you state something as a fact, you back it up with evidence.

You clearly support the Guards but ignore the fact that the comments I posted above are from the Guards. They are the one's voicing concerns.

Invidious · 03-01-2021 02:11PM

Beasty wrote: »

However we are not going to censor for the sake of it. We will allow discussion from any end of the political spectrum.

Fair play to the Admins for taking this stance. Tellingly, almost 7 out of 10 Irish people feel that society has become "too politically correct" in recent years (2019 Sign of the Times survey by Behavior & Attitudes). Some threads and posts on Boards might well be "questionable," as nudain puts it ... but so what? In an era of woke censorship and cancel culture, Ireland needs a forum where a multiplicity of views can be debated robustly, frankly, and openly — rather than being preemptively censored, per RTE and the Irish Times. Well done to Boards for reflecting a broader spectrum of opinion than the Dublin 4 liberal-left is prepared to allow.

03-01-2021 02:17PM

Discodog wrote: »

That's the whole point..

For the purposes of clarity, i agree with all of this post

I think it strange to be concerned only with this aspect and not with the speculation or statements made about the gardai or the shop employees

I find it strange to be concerned so much with ensuring one element of this affair gets painted in the most protective possible light (far beyond reason) while everyone else gets thrown overboard in service of this overarching aim.

Its gloves off or it isnt, if gloves are on to the extent you argue then the logical end point is that nobody has any right to assemble in protest and nobody has any right to attack or undermine the gardai

I dont see anyone arguing it that evenly, so I guess we all want our cake and eat it too, but its only a select side that are in here demanding mod satisfaction.

Discodog · 03-01-2021 02:31PM

Deleted User wrote: »

For the purposes of clarity, i agree with all of this post

I think it strange to be concerned only with this aspect and not with the speculation or statements made about the gardai or the shop employees

I find it strange to be concerned so much with ensuring one element of this affair gets painted in the most protective possible light (far beyond reason) while everyone else gets thrown overboard in service of this overarching aim.

Its gloves off or it isnt, if gloves are on to the extent you argue then the logical end point is that nobody has any right to assemble in protest and nobody has any right to attack or undermine the gardai

I dont see anyone arguing it that evenly, so I guess we all want our cake and eat it too, but its only a select side that are in here demanding mod satisfaction.

Who's demanding Mod satisfaction ? I agree that any speculation, posted as fact, is wrong regardless of whom it concerns.

I am not arguing. But there are changes afoot. There will be new laws regarding what can & can't be said. Your objections won't change this.

Sometimes "outrage" threads start with a torrent of thanks & a pile of falsehoods. Then, over time, the untruths are exposed but that's too late for those defamed. Surely the one thing we should all want is the truth or at least that "facts" are supported.

Acosta · 03-01-2021 03:15PM

The mods to a great job from my experience. Sometimes I have been surprised by some of the posts that have been left up, but I also accept others have a right to express their views and in the end this is a private forum and it's not up to me what stays up.

It is unfortunate that there is an element on boards spreading division, racial hate and so many lies around various different incidents. And it's getting worse. The current thread about the incident in Dublin is the worst I've come across in terms of the above problems since I've been posting here.
The spreading of lies in particular is a major issue in that thread. I would like if going forward, when these threads are starting that it is made clear that if people are going to post stuff relating to an incident like the one in Dublin last week, that the poster should be required to post evidence or risk being thread banned. These lies do too much damage in the community to be allowed to spread. Twitter is murder for it and it's a disgrace what is left up there.

Smee_Again · 03-01-2021 03:21PM

Lies are a big issues in the forum.

The charter prohibits posting something that you know or should know to be false yet this is rarely enforced as far as I can see, but I can understand that because often the lies themselves often become part of the discussion. It’s can also be difficult to decide what people should know to be true or false

Discodog · 03-01-2021 03:32PM

Smee_Again wrote: »

Lies are a big issues in the forum.

The charter prohibits posting something that you know or should know to be false yet this is rarely enforced as far as I can see, but I can understand that because often the lies themselves often become part of the discussion. It’s can also be difficult to decide what people should know to be true or false

From the Charter :

Do not post any material that you know or should know is hateful, abusive, harassing, false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, vulgar, obscene, profane, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or illegal.

The charter should follow the long established Boards practice that you must post a link or evidence to support a fact. Telling posters that they shouldn't post lies is pointless - unless it's there to try & absolve Boards of responsibility, especially when it couched in terms like "should know".

The practice of throwing out a "fact" & watching others run with it is as old as the hills. It's a key part of propaganda. After a couple of pages the lie is now spoken of as fact.

Sir Oxman · 03-01-2021 03:34PM

Discodog wrote: »

That's the whole point. If you post, saying that he had criminal convictions & it turns out he didn't, you are on very shaky ground & the site that published your comments may be too. Pleading that things were moving fast & you have a right to free speech doesn't made one iota of difference.

It not about disagreeing. It's about an age old principle that, if you state something as a fact, you back it up with evidence.

You clearly support the Guards but ignore the fact that the comments I posted above are from the Guards. They are the one's voicing concerns.

Jujst a small point.
those comments in that report are not from AGS.
It's from 'a source close to AGS said'.

Discodog · 03-01-2021 03:42PM

Sir Oxman wrote: »

Jujst a small point.
those comments in that report are not from AGS.
It's from 'a source close to AGS said'.

I agree & as usual this will be the case whilst a GSOC hearing is pending. It would be seriously irresponsible to post those remarks unless you were certain of their authenticity.

Kraftwerk · 03-01-2021 04:13PM

Discodog wrote: »

I agree & as usual this will be the case whilst a GSOC hearing is pending. It would be seriously irresponsible to post those remarks unless you were certain of their authenticity.

Yet you posted them and said it was a fact that the Gardai made those comments.

Discodog · 03-01-2021 04:19PM

Kraftwerk wrote: »

Yet you posted them and said it was a fact that the Gardai made those comments.

I quoted a newspaper article as my source. If you think the comments aren't by the Gardai then take it up with the newspaper. Practically every comment made by the Gardai is via a source. I don't recall the Guards denying this.

Do you have a source that says they haven't made those comments because they would be in keeping with this statement from Drew Harris:

“It’s very clear from my interactions with European colleagues, and then also what I see myself, that there is a rise in right-wing extremism right across Europe, ” Mr Harris said after a public meeting of the Policing Authority in Dublin on Wednesday.

“The difficulty with it is that it’s spread through the web and spread through social media. And we just need to be very careful, in terms of some of the things that have happened to date here in Ireland. We now see it starting to arrive on our shores,” he said.

“We’re very acutely aware of it and we’re very acutely aware there’s a policing response, and indeed an intelligence response, that we need to have to thwart that particular threat.

“And it was something I just felt it was important to mention because it is a growing concern right across law enforcement and intelligence agencies across Europe. And we also have to be mindful of that.”

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/right-wing-extremism-arriving-on-our-shores-says-harris-1.4097343

Kraftwerk · 03-01-2021 04:25PM

Discodog wrote: »

I quoted a newspaper article as my source. If you think the comments aren't by the Gardai then take it up with the newspaper. Practically every comment made by the Gardai is via a source. I don't recall the Guards denying this.

"You clearly support the Guards but ignore the fact that the comments I posted above are from the Guards. "

"It would be seriously irresponsible to post those remarks unless you were certain of their authenticity."

How can you possibly be certain of their authenticity? You're assuming the paper is dependable who are assuming their source is dependable who is assuming the person they spoke to is in a position to speak for the entire Gardai.

And if I have to take it up with the newspaper and not you then why is it the mods and posters who should be held accountability when other unverified stuff is posted? Take it up with twitter.

Discodog · 03-01-2021 04:40PM

Kraftwerk wrote: »

"You clearly support the Guards but ignore the fact that the comments I posted above are from the Guards. "

"It would be seriously irresponsible to post those remarks unless you were certain of their authenticity."

How can you possibly be certain of their authenticity? You're assuming the paper is dependable who are assuming their source is dependable who is assuming the person they spoke to is in a position to speak for the entire Gardai.

And if I have to take it up with the newspaper and not you then why is it the mods and posters who should be held accountability when other unverified stuff is posted? Take it up with twitter.

Yes I do trust the comments in the newspaper because they are bound by strict libel laws. But as long as the comments are posted in a public source then they are ok to post here. It's up to you whether you believe the newspaper.

But an ounce of common sense would suggest that the Gardai wouldn't want false rumours being spread neither about the victim or the actions of the Gardai.

The Mods & Posters aren't accountable - they wouldn't face legal action. It's the publisher that takes responsibility.

Kraftwerk · 03-01-2021 04:52PM

Discodog wrote: »

Yes I do trust the comments in the newspaper because they are bound by strict libel laws. But as long as the comments are posted in a public source then they are ok to post here. It's up to you whether you believe the newspaper.

But an ounce of common sense would suggest that the Gardai wouldn't want false rumours being spread neither about the victim or the actions of the Gardai.

The Mods & Posters aren't accountable - they wouldn't face legal action. It's the publisher that takes responsibility.

Newspapers issue retractions all the time. Just because the indo claim someone they spoke to said it doesn't make it a certifiable fact just that they think their source is accurate.

You said it was a fact those comments came from the Gardai. That's a fact you cannot prove. And you're backing it up with "it's common sense anyway. Sounds true so more than likely is".

There's not much difference here with what others posted in that thread. They linked to twitter etc where certain information was put forward and retweeted by seemingly trustworthy accounts and they repeated it.

Neither they or you can be certain it's true. And both resulted in the statements being published on boards as facts without any official statement to verify them.

Discodog · 03-01-2021 05:32PM

Kraftwerk wrote: »

Newspapers issue retractions all the time. Just because the indo claim someone they spoke to said it doesn't make it a certifiable fact just that they think their source is accurate.

You said it was a fact those comments came from the Gardai. That's a fact you cannot prove. And you're backing it up with "it's common sense anyway. Sounds true so more than likely is".

There's not much difference here with what others posted in that thread. They linked to twitter etc where certain information was put forward and retweeted by seemingly trustworthy accounts and they repeated it.

Neither they or you can be certain it's true. And both resulted in the statements being published on boards as facts without any official statement to verify them.

If you are going to quote me then quote what I actually said rather than your interpretation of it. A published newspaper is nothing like Twitter - try suing someone on Twitter & you will soon find out.

It has long been Boards policy to accept a Newspaper, journal etc as a valid source. Not to verify that the claim is true but to indemnify Boards.

Gatling · 03-01-2021 05:39PM

Discodog wrote: »

It’s very clear from my interactions with European colleagues, and then also what I see myself, that there is a rise in right-wing extremism right across Europe,

But no mention of the unidentified gangs running amok across the country all we know they are based on LA and London street gangs .
The far right has been in Europe for decades primarily in eastern Europe but yes it's moving as populations have moved due to open borders policies of the EU and one of the reasons its growing is the alienation of parts of society due to uncontested migration from Africa and the middle East ,
But rather than listen to people's concerns they prefer to label anyone as far right and try to silence them ,

It's eventually going blow up spectacularly in peoples faces

Kraftwerk · 03-01-2021 05:48PM

Discodog wrote: »

It has long been Boards policy to accept a Newspaper, journal etc as a valid source. Not to verify that the claim is true but to indemnify Boards.

This is the point. You said that posters should not claim anything as fact without being able to prove it. You said it was a fact that the Gardai made those comments. You then said it would be irresponsible to post such a statement without being certain of its authenticity. And your proof and certainty are based on you trusting the indo and thinking its common sense that the Gardai would think as is reported in the article.

That indo article is not an official statement from the Gardai. It is not proof that the Gardai made those statements.

You're making the same assumptions as people repeating the conviction stuff. You've seen it from a source you trust, it sounds like it's probably right/suits your narrative and you put it on boards as a fact without any official statement to verify it as fact.

Had you or those other posters put stuff forward as "it's been reported on x, y, z" then a newspaper would be seen as a more trustworthy source for a discussion on the likelihood of something being true. But an article publishing statements from the Gardai based on a source is not proof of the fact that the Gardai made those statements. Only an official Garda statement is fact when it comes Garda statements.

Discodog · 03-01-2021 06:48PM

Kraftwerk wrote: »

This is the point. You said that posters should not claim anything as fact without being able to prove it. You said it was a fact that the Gardai made those comments. You then said it would be irresponsible to post such a statement without being certain of its authenticity. And your proof and certainty are based on you trusting the indo and thinking its common sense that the Gardai would think as is reported in the article.

That indo article is not an official statement from the Gardai. It is not proof that the Gardai made those statements.

You're making the same assumptions as people repeating the conviction stuff. You've seen it from a source you trust, it sounds like it's probably right/suits your narrative and you put it on boards as a fact without any official statement to verify it as fact.

Had you or those other posters put stuff forward as "it's been reported on x, y, z" then a newspaper would be seen as a more trustworthy source for a discussion on the likelihood of something being true. But an article publishing statements from the Gardai based on a source is not proof of the fact that the Gardai made those statements. Only an official Garda statement is fact when it comes Garda statements.

I will repeat there is a world of difference between a newspaper & twitter. I do not wish to derail this thread further with semantics. If that means you win then fine :rolleyes:

Sorry Beastie

Kraftwerk · 03-01-2021 06:49PM

Discodog wrote: »

I will repeat there is a world of difference between a newspaper & twitter. I do not wish to derail this thread further with semantics. If that means you win then fine :rolleyes:

Sorry Beastie

It's not semantics. You said it was a fact that the Gardai made those statements. Its not.

coinop · 03-01-2021 06:49PM

My source = good.
Your source = bad.

:rolleyes:

KyussB · 03-01-2021 07:32PM

Posting links or evidence to back something up is no defence against mod action. It should be, but it isn't.

It can lead to the bizarre situation where a thread can be full of lies, and the evidence/links disproving them receive censure.

KyussB · 03-01-2021 07:35PM

Discodog wrote: »

... But as long as the comments are posted in a public source then they are ok to post here.

Unfortunately, that is not true. It should be true, but it isn't. You can receive censure for that.

EmmetSpiceland · 03-01-2021 08:27PM

KyussB wrote: »

Unfortunately, that is not true. It should be true, but it isn't. You can receive censure for that.

Even from the paper of record, no less.

Annasopra · 03-01-2021 09:10PM

Invidious wrote: »

Fair play to the Admins for taking this stance. Tellingly, almost 7 out of 10 Irish people feel that society has become "too politically correct" in recent years (2019 Sign of the Times survey by Behavior & Attitudes). Some threads and posts on Boards might well be "questionable," as nudain puts it ... but so what? In an era of woke censorship and cancel culture, Ireland needs a forum where a multiplicity of views can be debated robustly, frankly, and openly — rather than being preemptively censored, per RTE and the Irish Times. Well done to Boards for reflecting a broader spectrum of opinion than the Dublin 4 liberal-left is prepared to allow.

Do you honestly think the CA forum is genuinely a place where "a multiplicity of views can be debated robustly, frankly, and openly".

Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

Comments