Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Problem with current affairs

Options
1131416181947

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 67,496 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Correct.

    I several times offered the mod the freedom of my PM's to 'prove' his allegation.

    And I see now Brucie has also demonstrated to the mod the extent of our communications.

    Also offered him the oppurtunity to prove the other allegation he made against me and others.

    Declined.



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,347 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    I brought up a court analogy to explain about appeals. I didn't say that the court analogy applied to the initial sanction. If a mod or admin had to conform to a criminal level of proof, nobody would ever be sanctioned.

    I really don't see how Brucie or Francie can win an appeal. The particular allegation of being a timesink which relates to the number of times that the admin has had to deal with them is not a new accusation - it has been mentioned previously in another thread. That means they have probably been on borrowed time for quite a while. Their grandstanding responses in this thread will hardly have helped, all indignation with no reflection on how they may have got here. Even when I have pointed out how the OP could have been worded differently and got widespread support, no acknowledgement of that.

    Reading the post, there were multiple aspects of the admin's conclusion, the feeling of collusion was only one small aspect.

    If you want another court analogy, they are like the guy with 200 convictions for burglarly proclaiming his innocence of the 201st accusation and the judge refusing to give him the benefit of the doubt.



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,347 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    I said at the start of my post

    "Everyone agrees that we need more mods"

    You were not clear that you were referencing something else.

    I think everyone did see through it. Whether they were piling in in support of the OP criticising the Admin, or whether they were defending him, they saw clearly what the thread was about, not what it pretended to be about.



  • Registered Users Posts: 67,496 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady




  • Registered Users Posts: 27,347 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    I assume you are appealing the forum ban through the Dispute Resolution Process? The facility is there to appeal. You also won't have anyone else allowed to comment.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 67,496 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady




  • Registered Users Posts: 5,189 ✭✭✭Brucie Bonus


    Who oversees and judges that for CA?....i'll give you a minute.

    He was very elaborate in posting the theory but no sign of acknowledging he was mistaken.



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,347 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    There you go again, telling others not to have an opinion.

    I remain of the opinion that everyone saw through the OP, both those who supported it and those who disagreed with it.



  • Posts: 6,192 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Except of course,this deosnt answer the qs,as to how an admin had knowledge of PMs (or contents of PMs) between 2 posters


    There was some overstep in the content/conclusions of the sockpuppet affair,which was never fully accounted for since either



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,716 ✭✭✭irelandrover


    What are you talking about? I never mentioned timesink, i never mentioned appeal, i referenced no other threads.

    Initially you brought up court, I argued against it based on your analogy, you then dismissed the analogy, talked about something else entirely, and then went back to the court analogy.

    My entire point is, Beasty accused them of collaborating to bring up this thread. You said you believed him as they haven't proved it false. How can they provide it false?

    It would be very easy for boards to put a stop to the discussion. Just answer the question of if they have access to PMs, yes or no.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 6,192 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    It's a pure joke,lads bickering over nonsense,then lining up qs/support an anonymous admin,


    while a absolutely massive issue staring in face, potentially affecting everyone on the site is glossed over



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,189 ✭✭✭Brucie Bonus


    Also he had no business rasing PM's in a public thread in the first place, especially to float a theory.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,319 ✭✭✭Quantum Erasure




  • Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,834 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    The only PMs I can access are in my inbox



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,347 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Eh, the admin never claimed to have knowledge of PMs (or contents of PMs) between 2 posters. This is what he said:

    "It is clear to me that a number of posters have been discussing how to challenge moderation behind the scenes. And yes the prime culprits have already posted in this thread backing each other up. I'm pretty confident the pair of them agreed to start this thread in Feedback"

    "And just to add, whenever either of them do pick up a sanction or even a nil point warning the Pm exchanges are very lengthy. Typically running to over a dozen messages. They are complete timesinks who believe only their views matter."

    "May be unprovable, but when I get a message from one of you confirming they are discussing things with others, and when i look at reports and see the pair of you seem to have similar issues, but never seem to report the same post. Proper little tag team. Of course I would have kept all that to myself but for seeing this thread I am convinced the pair of you cooked up

    And TBH your records in that forum are abysmal. Here you go -I will tell you as a site Admin - each of you are close to permanent site bans with those records. You have had enough rope and I am now of the view the pair of you are such time sinks that I am going to ban you the from the forum. It may well appear as a 6 month ban due to limitations on the process .But you can both take them as permanent

    You have each received way too much leeway in that forum"

    That is what @Beasty said. Nowhere in that does he indicate that he has access to PMs. In fact, he admits that what he says may be unprovable presumably because he doesn't have such access. A whole conspiracy theory has been generated around access to PMs that just isn't there when you read his posts. He formed a reasonable opinion based on the available evidence and acted on it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 67,496 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    No.

    There is no recourse there as the ISSUE pointed out here applies to that process too.

    I opened an appeal there and an admin stated this:

    Mod: Just as a point of advice, you should be aware that the mod you refer to is @Beasty and he is actually a site admin in addition to being a mod for that forum. It is not likely that another site admin will find that he was incorrect. It is also not likely that Beasty will change his mind because, just from observing how admins perform their duties, they tend to put considerable thought into banning users from threads or forums as they know that their decision (as an admin) is final.



    A pointless process.



  • Posts: 6,192 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Aye,


    an admin throwing out grenades of accusations to encourage a pile-on is a poor look for the site,


    Difficult to argue such input was from position of impartiality tbh,


    lads disagree all the time,it's part of life,level of bickering/gloating on this thread is gross and something several posters should reflect upon.....


    but fact that an admin can be free to post such accusations,insight in report patterns and imply X, y and z about ordinary posters (and noone be allowed qs em) stinks like fcuk and is massive overreach tbh



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,347 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Strange, I don't see that thread in Dispute Resolution. Apologies then if you have already used that process.



  • Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,834 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Just to remind you - you got a zero point warning advising you your post had been deleted for referring to Germans as "Krauts"



  • Registered Users Posts: 67,496 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Can I publish your PM to me which made a separate allegation abnout me and others? And ask you for proof of it too?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 67,496 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    It's not in Dispute Resolution, it's here:

    Mod refusing to accept they are wrong as a result of lazy moderation. — boards.ie - Now Ye're Talkin'

    Note how the mod deals with another request of proof.

    P.S. I do not require you to act as barrister for Beasty on that particular appeal to deflect even more. I merely post the link as back-up.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,281 ✭✭✭MrMusician18


    It's not exactly bursting at the edges with mods and admins because of the admins outright refusal to consider appointing more.

    It's a bit mad that you can have an admin telling us how much they do and to effectively be grateful for that when it is up to them to get more help.

    An admins role should be recruiting moderators not acting as one.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,612 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    Think it’s time for a ceasefire here, gents. Everyone needs to take a step back, have a deep breath and “chill out”.

    These anger levels just aren’t healthy, mentally or physically. Especially if some of you are overweight, or have high blood pressure.

    Also, grown men “raging” at each for days on end? It’s not a good look.

    “It is not blood that makes you Irish but a willingness to be part of the Irish nation” - Thomas Davis



  • Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,834 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    And just to add

    A lot of posters in this thread have been on the end of "warnings" from me

    In many cases (actually quite a big majority of warnings I issue) they are nil pointers. Usually explaining to a poster why their post was deleted and with the aim of discouraging them from going down that route again

    Where I have issued a pointed warning in some cases a poster gets back to me with an unprompted apology. In most of those cases I will lift the warning (possibly not if a poster has a habit of doing the same sort of thing)

    In some cases we have a constructive discussion and I agree to lift the warning

    In some cases I admit to being overzealous or simply making a mistake and I lift it

    In the majority of those 1 pointers the poster accepts it with no further query

    In a couple of cases I face a tirade of PMs telling me how wrong I am and hough right they are



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    This thread reminds me of the time my brother got a job as barman in a small town pub, it was in decline and had a few cantankerous regulars sitting at the bar. So he was only there a few nights when a massive row broke out and he barred two lads. The next day the owner called him in: 'are you trying to **** ruin me? You can't be barring our best customers'.

    Boards is a bit like that pub now. This thread is on fire because you guys keep posting and posting and posting away. You're actually the bread and butter of this site. The cantankerous regulours.

    On a side note, Dempo and Graces7 should definitely get together, they love talking in half sentences and riddles and she is looking for a fella at the moment.



  • Registered Users Posts: 67,496 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    You answer PM's with relish with plenty of personal abuse. Will you stop with the 'tirade' 'timesink' stuff.

    I can post some of our exchanges and folk can judge for themselves if you are into the back and forth as much as anyone?

    Sick to death of you making sanctimonious claims about yourself, it amounts to victimhood. Others have had the same experience with you as me. Own it.

    And while you are at it, how about some proof of your allegations.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,244 ✭✭✭mikethecop


    aw now great thread , really shows sf online army policy is a lot like its real life one ,

    make as much noise as possible , shout down anyone who defends themselves or contradicts their version of the truth then try underhanded threats and intimidation with a pile on ,

    any dirty truck will do


    is hard not to imagen a few specific posters here aren't sitting in a some Lilly wearing tds office across from each other believing that they are the reincarnation of Peirce and Wolftone while waiting for instructions from some one a lot more intelligent and who is making a lot more money than them 😀😀


    modern politics sucks



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,319 ✭✭✭Quantum Erasure


    Now I'm imagining Beasty doing a Jack Nicolson in A Few Good Men...

    Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lieutenant Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 14,059 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    Yesterday I sent beasty a screen shot of my post to francie dated August 26th, before the accusation was made, telling him I'd started a thread in feedback and him replying saying he'll have a look. 

    So you admit that you and Francie conspired behind the scenes in regards this thread but then do the 'Woe is me' after you are caught?

    Not the brightest are you?



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement