Boards' traveller problem

Pelvis Parsley wrote: »

Anyone hand wringing on behalf of a dead traveller and the “labelling” of him should probably look him up before they defend him too strenuously.

No doubt he was another of the minority that make the majority look bad.

These particular stereotypes exist for a reason.

Stick up a photo of your house and see how you like it when people label you a thief then.

anewme wrote: »

Stick up a photo of your house and see how you like it when people label you a thief then.

There was one comment made in jest, this is you taking a comment and running with it to suit your argument again.

You won't "educate" people to align their views to your own sensibilities, we are all individuals.

anewme wrote: »

I'd say that posting photos of someone's home without their knowledge and making insinuations about them is dickish behaviour.

There are numerous comments about that home and its owners, horse, caravans, boss, stuff falling off the back of a lorry. No one has any idea who these people are, so it's all based on their home. It's not one comment.

All the stereotyoes people are talking about here.

I note you claimed here in this thread that you commented on another traveller home before seeing the RIP notice, when in fact, that's not true and you should clarify that in the interest of transparency in a feedback thread.

My comment about the poster WAS before the RIP notice, so no clarification needed. It's still there I think, my comment was one of the first, the RIP notice came later.

Comments are made about other demographics too if you actually read the thread. There was one "back of a lorry" comment and most of us saw that as a joke.

As I've said in an earlier post, we're all aware our own homes would attract comments if posted. Asking someone to put up pictures themselves though isn't a fair comparison, because if anyone they knew saw the post they would be identifiable. This is an anonymous forum so people are entitled to not reveal their identity.

Again, you do not get to decide the opinions or views of others. We do not have to get offended at everything you personally find offensive. We are not a hivemind or The Borg.

Leg End Reject wrote: »

My comment about the poster WAS before the RIP notice, so no clarification needed. It's still there I think, my comment was one of the first, the RIP notice came later.

You made more than one comment about that home.

The first one did come before the RIP Notice.

Leg End Reject wrote: »

Yes and they're still there after a mod deleted the RIP notice.

I've just checked, one was asking what another poster had noticed about the bathroom, the other a response to a comment by another poster. Neither were specific to travellers.

They offended you, and you alone.

Did you not laugh at their dishes as well?

As an aside and I know humour is subjective, do you not think that commenting on dead peoples homes is poor form.

Not specific to travellers and not aimed at you, another poster said that many of the Homes are Executor sales. I'd go mad if for example trawling through Boards, I saw my family home being slagged off after burying my Mum.

Is that not dickish behaviour?

Signore Fancy Pants wrote: »

Yep, transparency.

I'd be interested in this too.

anewme wrote: »

Yeah and that's fair enough in respect of your own house.

however I also believe the people putting their home up for sale could be identified by the photos and address.

I'm not sure why you keep saying that I'm deciding others opinions?

In this instance, an example was given and identified as racist on the radio forum where a hit and run was labelled a traveller with no info to say it was. In this instance, I believe saying stuff fell off the back of a lorry is the same.

This is a feedback thread, and it's an example I'm giving to Mods.

But if you put your house up for sale and allow the estate agent to advertise it you are voluntarily given up that anonymity. Do you not see that?

I can't comment on the radio forum because I don't read it. I have addressed the comments in the house thread before.

You have asked in another thread how people can be educated, called for mod training, calibration of mod actions across all fora and repeatedly insisted that your opinion of what constitutes misogyny, sexism and racism is correct, often by quoting a few examples ad nauseum. You are looking for anything you find offensive to be actionable. We've all seen it.

Now, in the interests of transparency are you going to address the post quoted by Signore Fancy Pants?

knucklehead6 wrote: »

Again with the disingenuous comment. The photos being posted are lifted from MyHome and Daft. They are in the public domain and on those sites with the vendors knowledge. Stop making it out as if it’s anything different.

I’m not sure what you are getting at. I’ve clearly said the photos come from daft.ie or the likes.

Something that is in the public domain for the purpose of selling their home.

I doubt very much that any of the owners are aware of how their photos are being used here on Boards.ie.

Do you think they would be ok with that?

Buddy Bubs wrote: »

But as far as I can tell, Asians, blacks, women, gays don't have the negative effect on irish society that travelers have. I'm engaged to a woman. I work with a gay. My neighbours are black. One of my suppliers in work is Chinese. No problem with any of them.

If a man came from rank outsider to coming second in the presidential election of Ireland because he spoke out against travelers and their behaviour on national TV, I'm not going to be shy about it on an anonymous forum. I know the vast majority of people agree with me too so I'm not in a minority stance or anything even remotely close to it. A poll if filled out on boards or indeed anywhere about what people think about travelers it would be overwhelmingly negative about travelers. The garda did one actually it was published in newspapers.

If boards allows discussion on travelers, it's going to lead to negative comments. Every single time.
Only solution to that is to make them a taboo subject and forbidden to discuss.

the vast majority possibly agreeing with something doesn't make that something correct across the board.
the fact is, if you label a whole group of people on the basis of the actions of some, whether that some be a big number or a small one, you are a bigot at least and a racist at worst and you need to get over it.
and by the way, the more extreme racists would claim that blacks and all else have a negative effect on irish society. nonsense of course but they claim it.
look, we all know there are problem elements in the traveler community, it has never been denied apart from in the heads of some, but if you were to behave the same way to muslims who do have an extreme element which are a problem, the same way people behave in relation to travelers, it would rightly not be allowed and if and when such nonsense is expressed here it is generally dealt with.
negative comments about individuals who have been proven to have done something wrong is perfectly fine and justifiable given they have committed a crime or whatever, calling a whole group all sorts because of the actions of some of that group, on the other hand isn't fine.
discuss actual actions by individual travelers away, just leave the bigoted nonsense out, or if you do express it then expect to be challenged and called out on it.

Pelvis Parsley wrote: »

Anyone hand wringing on behalf of a dead traveller and the “labelling” of him should probably look him up before they defend him too strenuously.

No doubt he was another of the minority that make the majority look bad.

These particular stereotypes exist for a reason.

every stereo type exists for a reason in the minds of those engaging in stereo types.
the fact they exist for a "reason" is not an argument for them being correct, incorrect, or for their validity, at least across the board in terms of a whole group of people.

Overheal wrote: »

That should be progress to celebrate then.

I used to used the word “retarded” a lot back in the day too. Then there was a push by someone similar to Dulpit, asking the bigger question in feedback: “why are we okay with this” and in short order the phrase pretty much evaporated from the site lexicon with more conscientiousness about who that term hurt.

Trying to invalidate progress now because of lack of progress before hardly seems like anything less than base deflection.

If only that were true.

Boards explicit policy is to enable wholesale denigration of people with intellectual disabilities.
https://touch.boards.ie/search/?q=Retarded+&sort=newest

Signore Fancy Pants wrote: »

It appears that the discourse on the 'sexism' thread from this poster has overflowed here.

At a lower level, this thread is just being used to grandstand against "ists" and "isms" to support the 'sexism' thread by proxy.

At a medium level, it is being used to stifle reasonable debate and shout down other posters with opposing opinions.

At a higher level, it is being used as a weapon to pressure Mods/Admins.

There's no other explanation.

I agree with you wholeheartedly.
The 2 threads have been co-opted in an effort to browbeat mods and admins.
Ironically and quite poetically by someone who by their own proposed "standards" should be banned from posting here in the 1st place.

If the high horse had a name, it would be virtue signal and the jockey has not just fallen off...
But face planted into a shíte pile.

Hypocrisy of a huge scale IMO and a total time sink for Admin, staff and mods.

anewme wrote: »

With all respect, what you and others are attempting to do here is a personal attack and vendetta and is 100 percent against the charter.

The feedback thread is in respect of the past couple of months as it’s mentioned clearly in the first page.so not sure what your angle.

Through one of those posts, I’ve engaged personally with the travelling community and work with them regularly.

But that’s not really any of your business.

I’ve seen some fantastic and not so fantastic travellers. What I have done is see how the negative stereotyping as alluded in in the opening post only succeeds in alienating the people who will help me.

So while I acknowledge that people still have negative experiences with travellers, there are many others to help.

So quit the personal attacks. It only reflects on you.

I got off my ass and worked to change a cause I personally believe in.

What did you do?

You have used posts against us, often by quoting excerpts to twist the meaning, so it's ironic you hide behind the charter now.

nullzero wrote: »

"Do as I say, not as I do".

They're attempting to weild a sword that cuts both ways.

You'd swear this site was morphing into stormfront the way some people going on.

Yes, it's ok for one poster to make negative comments that reinforce a stereotype, but others are bigots and racists if they do the same.

end of the road wrote: »

realistically the majority of those posts are very low level stuff, could be perhapse phrased better but seems to mostly be able to express an opinion on specific individuals rather then a group as a whole.
the last 1 i would disagree with as it was obvious what casey was at and that would be a problematic post.
either way it doesn't invalidate her points about generalisations against travelers as a whole and the fact that is an issue and is causing more issues.

Low level stuff? Seriously?

And all from a poster up in arms about an "off the back of a lorry" comment.

Pelvis Parsley wrote: »

I wasn't involved in criminality, so I can't imagine why people would call me a thief.

If and when I decide to sell this house, you can fill your boots.

But neither was the person who’s house was put up?

Leg End Reject wrote: »

Low level stuff? Seriously?

And all from a poster up in arms about an "off the back of a lorry" comment.

yes ultimately low level stuff.


i do get where she is coming in terms of the house thread that the insinuations about the particular house owner being discussed is quite possibly unfair, now whether it's enough to be a moderator issue or concern for the site i don't know but i understand what she is getting at.

I, personally, think it’s fair to say that there is a vocal majority of boards users who are anti-traveller. This really came to the fore in the poll for voting in the last presidential election, where Peter Casey ran on an anti-traveller “ticket” and the users here had him as the clear winner.

I’m not sure there’s much the mods can do when a large number of posters, most from “down the country”, have this traveller hate.

One “suggestion”, I would have, is to punish the more blatant transgression in AH and, maybe, allow the more casual anti-traveller posts. It’s not great but maybe leave the serious hate for the “Current Affairs” forum. It wouldn’t be out of place in there.

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

I, personally, think it’s fair to say that there is a vocal majority of boards users who are anti-traveller. This really came to the fore in the poll for voting in the last presidential election, where Peter Casey ran on an anti-traveller “ticket” and the users here had him as the clear winner.

I’m not sure there’s much the mods can do when a large number of posters, most from “down the country”, have this traveller hate.

One “suggestion”, I would have, is to punish the more blatant transgression in AH and, maybe, allow the more casual anti-traveller posts. It’s not great but maybe leave the serious hate for the “Current Affairs” forum. It wouldn’t be out of place in there.

The charters on most boards forums already cover this. Overt xenophobia has never been tolerated. Makes you wonder what this thread is hoping to achieve beyond creating a situation where only one view point is tolerated. Like I said before, people can start blogs if that's what they want.

nullzero wrote: »

The charters on most boards forums already cover this. Overt xenophobia has never been tolerated. Makes you wonder what this thread is hoping to achieve beyond creating a situation where only one view point is tolerated. Like I said before, people can start blogs if that's what they want.

Yeah but, come on, the anti-traveller stuff is fairly ubiquitous and seems to just get a “bye”. Maybe there could be greater “sanctions” than just a post deletion when it’s spotted but it would be nice to see it confined to the “Current Affairs” forum, where it wouldn’t be out of place.

I’m not from the country, myself, so I wouldn’t have had too many, direct, “dealings” with travellers but, I have to say, I find the whole generalising thing a bit reductive.

The closet Dublin “version” would be like saying everyone from Ballymun is a drug dealer or thinking everyone from Limerick carries a knife.

Yes, there are a lot of “issues” with travellers and these tend to stem from one section of society being forced into the margins and any “push back”, or transgression, is jumped on.

Overheal wrote: »

Those posts are years old. Individual viewpoints never evolve? It would seem 'retarded' to think that... [case and point]. Took some effort to go digging up dirt on a user, rather than address the substance of what they are saying in the here and now. Is that how we should have talks here?

Dated February last year to 2018, hardly historic now.

Deleted User wrote: »

On what planet is this low level stuff.....seems pretty clear and unambigious to me??

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=108467630&postcount=6819


Alot of folks (including myself)were caught hook,line and sinker here

i did address that post in my point.

I think the problem is that I can safely say every person who lives out in the countryside has had some sort of run in with a member of said community. Be it big or small.

I myself was hit by a van as I was confronting a group trying to rob my sister's house. Have the knee pain to prove it ever since.

And no I don't have a history of anti traveller sentiment on boards.

Overheal wrote: »

Those posts are years old. Individual viewpoints never evolve? It would seem 'retarded' to think that... [case and point]. Took some effort to go digging up dirt on a user, rather than address the substance of what they are saying in the here and now. Is that how we should have talks here? A 2018 account going after a 2009 account pretending they never said anything indefensible in their adult life, with the benefit of an extra decade of anonymity.

Let's not, please.

Age has no relevance....it was "ok" for that poster to have those views in the past...but it's not "ok" for anyone else to have those views now? Is that your argument?

Not sure why you keep stating "retard", are you looking for some reaction or a bite from someone?

It took less than 5 minutes, it's very simple. It takes me far longer to try to understand any of your posts here, not because I'm a "retard" but because they are barely relevant.

It's also not "dirt", it's their own words. They are a legitimate reflection of their (supposed) past views of the travelling community. They are very relevant to the discussion.

I'm also "not going after" the poster, merely highlighting the blatant hypocrisy, nothing more and nothing less.

You also have some nerve to query "is that how we talk here".

I am originally a 2007 account and I'm sure I have said stuff that may be indefensible. However, if I had changed my views, I would not demand the whole site subscribe to my views and pressure Mods/Admins to gatekeep.

You may need to lay off the coffee or something.