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
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

The "we don't discuss things before the courts" thing

24

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,069 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    When has boards been in that position though? MCD aside

    Glazers Out!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 1,098 ✭✭✭Dan Steely


    The rule was introduced 14 years ago by previous owners. I'd say the current owner hasn't given the rule any consideration.



  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 11,040 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    If you are name in a case you still have to go through the process of instructing a legal team etc…. It's clear from the comments have not got clue of the legal implications and finances involved in this stuff. Now if you have 2 potential cases every week that's a 100 case you potentially have to defend. The best outcome would be that the complaint goes away after YOU pay a solicitor to exchange a couple of letters, next best outcome is you instructed a barrister go to court and you are removed from the proceeds, next you win and are awarded costs, worst you loose.

    You can't just point to someone else and walk away if you are a party to the case.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,069 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    It's reasonably straightforward.

    Can anyone cite an example of where this has happened to boards.ie?

    Even to say "yes this has happened X amount of times", without any specifics.

    Thus far all we've gotten is a mix of "thems the rules" and now your contribution which tells us how stupid we are to even be raising the issue.

    As mentioned before, this is not how you create any type of community.

    Many of us have stepped up to the plate to help keep this site running, we're asking one reasonable question and being treated like naughty children by the moderation team for having had the cheek to do so.

    We've gone beyond a situation where a trial is set and boards.ie says it's now time to cease discussion. As soon as an incident occurs the discussion is shut down.

    We don't need to throw the baby out with the bath water, but the above added to discussions being locked about situations outside of Ireland is going over the top with the implementation of the rule. Some changes are needed and can be actioned.

    There's really no need to get so sore about users asking a question.

    Glazers Out!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 18,364 ✭✭✭✭fritzelly


    Seems a few people should read up on the sub justice rule and hence why anyone associated with Boards should take all opportunity to halt the conversation immediately

    Why anyone feels the need to discuss the fate of someone accused or the victim when no decision has been made is beyond me - there's enough examples of falsely accused being demonised in society to be ultimately found not guilty but social media pro's know better

    As for non Irish cases - yeah free for all, unless asked to remove it



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 517 ✭✭✭tawnyowl


    Forums in Ireland would be the relevant comparison, not globally, as this refers to matters before Irish courts.

    I think the concern is that boards could be found in contempt of court if someone posted about a case before courts. It wouldn't just be the person who posted who could be sued.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 517 ✭✭✭tawnyowl


    Firstly, which competitors are you talking about allowing these discussions? Sites based outside Ireland would be in a different jurisdiction, where different laws apply.

    Secondly, Boards probably does not want to leave themselves open to being charged with contempt of court. Comments about a case before the courts could affect the trial, or it could defy a court order - both of which can lead to charges of contempt.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 898 ✭✭✭Avatar in the Post


    “Can anyone cite an example of where this has happened to boards.ie?

    Since they introduced the no discussion rule? 🤦


    🤣



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 15,127 ✭✭✭✭Dial Hard


    I've no issue with the rule about closing threads once the case is before the courts. But we've had examples recently where mods closed threads as soon as someone was arrested - not charged. I did query it in Feedback and never got any actual answer, so it's probably not surprising that people are a bit "Wtf?" about the whole thing.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,893 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    I'm on my second three month ban from CA for discussing issues around media coverage of cases, not discussing the actual cases themselves. It's just a silly overreaction.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 37,024 ✭✭✭✭o1s1n
    Master of the Universe


    'Give me an example when something happened, aside from the biggest example of when it happened'

    Why would they want risk going through that twice?

    I completely get their take on this. It's not a multi million euro organisation like other media outlets that can risk it. If the likes of the Times or something similar had legal proceedings brought against them they could fund a defence.

    Boards.ie barely have the money to keep the lights on, let alone deal with legal proceeding being brought against them (again).

    I think a lot of folks with absolutely no financial skin in this game have some pretty big ideas on how other folks should potentially put themselves at risk.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2 Robert_V


    It's important to respect the presumption of innocence — no argument there. But there’s a big difference between discussing an ongoing legal case and talking about the broader situation or public context around it. Maybe instead of a blanket ban, the mods could consider more flexible guidelines that allow for reasonable, respectful discussion.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 15,127 ✭✭✭✭Dial Hard


    Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the MCD thing a threat of legal action against the site because people were complaining about MCD in general, it had nothing to do with an actual case before the courts, no?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,069 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    The rule is being implemented in situations where it doesn't need to be.

    Spare me the condescending waffle.

    We're all entitled to question things that aren't working properly.

    Glazers Out!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 898 ✭✭✭Avatar in the Post


    And who do you think should be appointed to ascertain when the situation reaches a certain threshold? Practicing solicitors or mods with no training. Is this expertise to be paid or free gratis ?


    or they could simply avoid any risk… and do as they currently do.

    Perhaps post similar on politics.ie or Ask About Money in their misc. thread.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,069 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    At the very least closing down conversations about issues before the courts in other countries should be on the table.

    Glazers Out!



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,158 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    This, there is a legal obligation on boards to take down such posts as quickly as is reasonable.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,158 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    I would say both morally and legally it is the right thing to do. Morally you run the risk of unconfirmed information leaking into the public psyche and biasing a trial. Legally, while we may not always like it, everyone has the right to a) a presumption of innocence and b) until sentencing, for that sentence to be based on the facts, not the opinion of the masses.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,069 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Well, there are places where discussions around ongoing cases does happen.

    Anything that is too close to the bone is removed. On boards anything and everything is closed down immediately.

    There has to be some comprise here because without one people will go elsewhere and this site will close down.

    Glazers Out!



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,158 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    It was mentioned by I think Dev many years ago that there were letters sent about specific posts, but I could be wrong. With such a tight margin in running the place, and a tendency of some to shoot from the hip, and the fact that the moderators are volunteers, I can see the rationale.

    Personally the main benefit is that it has saved Boards from being a cesspool. I disagree with lots of mods on here, lots of the time but unlike other platforms where a counter point is met with enough word vomit to drown a person, here it, for the most part seems to be taken and for the most part, only points against the post rather than the poster are tolerated.

    I'd go as far as to say moves to let it turn into a journal style comments section would lose quite a substantial part of the base and all many of would then have is Google Geminis opinion presented as indisputable fact.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 17,682 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    Since this thread started nobody has come up with a reason why discussing cases is something that is actually useful in and of itself.

    When you read these discussions elsewhere do you think the participants find them helpful in understanding the cases ?

    What do you think can be gained from such discussions that is not covered by court reporting ?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 882 ✭✭✭Dublin Calling


    It generates clicks, which displays advertising and advertisement views turns in to cash. The underlying issue is a buggy site, moderators driving users (the product) away and a change in Google has resulted in less users and owner is not interested in running the site at a loss.

    Post edited by Dublin Calling on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,069 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Why discuss anything online?

    This platform is on its knees. Like it or not, people like to talk about these issues.

    It's not to say I'm always interested in it myself, but seeing EVERYTHING being shut down on this basis must be doing something to discourage people from being a part of this supposed community.

    Glazers Out!



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,158 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Possibly, but the fair point should be asked, who decides, what is the time limit for them to decide.

    I think there is a solid cohort who won't go elsewhere due to the sh1tshow other sites are. I certainly couldn't think of anywhere id post.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 17,682 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    So, correct me if I've taken you up wrong, both of you don't see any intrinsic value in discussing cases while they are before the courts.

    You seem to see it as a tactic to draw more clicks and funds to the site in order to save it from closure.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,069 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    I think there's value in discussing cases in a reasonable, rational manner.

    In sensitive cases I'd have no issue with the discussion being closed down for the duration, but most discussions that are closed down don't fall into that category.

    And yes, this site needs to do more to be an online town square setting for Ireland.

    Glazers Out!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 15,498 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    I completely understand why boards takes no chances when it comes to Irish cases. The chances are small, but one case taken against the site has the potential to shutter it given the tiny margins it operates under. So, I have no issue with that. Comparing boards to other sites which aren't Irish and have deep pockets - and who do snip and censor plenty too - isn't comparing like with like.

    Though it would be good to have some clarity over what the position is regarding cases outside of Ireland.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 17,682 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    But you're still not saying what that value is even if a reasonable rational manner could be ensured.

    A court case is a strictly regulated process within our legal system. The rules are laid out based on the constitution. The defendant is both prosecuted and defended. The end result has to be accepted by both the accused and the injured party. A citizen may be deprived of their liberty, face severe financial penalties or other sanctions by order of the court.

    It's a serious business with serious real life consequences.

    What is the value of a parallel discussion online carried out by people most of whom will have no first hand knowledge of the case or legal procedure ?

    As for "sensitive cases" who gets to decide which cases fall into that category ?

    Boards isn't town square and can never be.

    It's a discussion forum publishing online the opinions of people who use the site and it can be held to account for same.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 882 ✭✭✭Dublin Calling


    There is value in discussing cases before the courts, when appropriate. However, threads are being shut/deleted before anyone is even charged, let alone the court case commencing. The excuse given is 'it is before the court'.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 59,242 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Surely boards should only close down discussion(s) if a judge puts out restrictions on broadcasting/disseminating discussion on a case? Why the immediate rush to shut down postings on every case that comes to public attention?

    Why the big panic? X and other far bigger platforms with far more unfiltered discussion keeps on going. You don’t see them bringing in censoring and filtering of every case before our courts..



Leave a Comment

Rich Text Editor. To edit a paragraph's style, hit tab to get to the paragraph menu. From there you will be able to pick one style. Nothing defaults to paragraph. An inline formatting menu will show up when you select text. Hit tab to get into that menu. Some elements, such as rich link embeds, images, loading indicators, and error messages may get inserted into the editor. You may navigate to these using the arrow keys inside of the editor and delete them with the delete or backspace key.

Advertisement