Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

Ban RIP threads in Politics

  • #2
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 Laminations


    Are they not against forum charter anyway? There is no point of discussion and no opinion usually given in the OP. They more likely stem from a twitter like post announcing a death, followed by pages of posters parroting RIP. There are better ways to show your condolences and certainly more appropriate ways - like signing the book of condolences for example.

    I'm an ardent anti FF poster, I think they've been disastrous for this country but I can still obviously see the sadness in a death. Brian Lenihan was a nice guy, personally and politically, but his decisions within government and the FF party have been detrimental to our sovereign and economic standing. I would however NEVER welcome his death - he is not in the same league or even the same game as Osama bin Laden. It is sad for his family and friends and anyone who knows what a bastard cancer is.

    But RIP threads serve little purpose on a politics forum. Even a deaths and notices stick thread where people can thank an announcement to share their condolences would seem more appropriate, and I often think people rush to announce deaths on here to morbidly 'collect' thanks.

    Previously other types of monotone threads have been started by posters on a topic and periodically supported by mods. An example being the 'positive things FF has done'. I can remember being warned when actually debating these positives by introducing counteracting negative policies which outweigh those positives. Threads need to allow for debate, so in the FF example it's better to debate all of the actions of The party (on a particular topic) and then weigh up the positives and negatives.

    I don't really agree with cutting critical threads the very minute someone dies but on this forum it seems more appropriate to discuss a politicians legacy / their constituency work / their agreements and disagreements with party line etc.. and in the case of Brian Lenihan, the state of cancer care and the funding of cancer research in this country would be a nice topic. So by all means say 'RIP', acknowledge the human side to political life but please add some content to your post and not revise the past political careers of now dead politicians to paint them as great thinkers and patriots.

    Discuss.


«1345

Comments

  • #2


    Are they not against forum charter anyway? There is no point of discussion and no opinion usually given in the OP. They more likely stem from a twitter like post announcing a death, followed by pages of posters parroting RIP. There are better ways to show your condolences and certainly more appropriate ways - like signing the book of condolences for example.

    I'm an ardent anti FF poster, I think they've been disastrous for this country but I can still obviously see the sadness in a death. Brian Lenihan was a nice guy, personally and politically, but his decisions within government and the FF party have been detrimental to our sovereign and economic standing. I would however NEVER welcome his death - he is not in the same league or even the same game as Osama bin Laden. It is sad for his family and friends and anyone who knows what a bastard cancer is.

    But RIP threads serve little purpose on a politics forum. Even a deaths and notices stick thread where people can thank an announcement to share their condolences would seem more appropriate, and I often think people rush to announce deaths on here to morbidly 'collect' thanks.

    Previously other types of monotone threads have been started by posters on a topic and periodically supported by mods. An example being the 'positive things FF has done'. I can remember being warned when actually debating these positives by introducing counteracting negative policies which outweigh those positives. Threads need to allow for debate, so in the FF example it's better to debate all of the actions of The party (on a particular topic) and then weigh up the positives and negatives.

    I don't really agree with cutting critical threads the very minute someone dies but on this forum it seems more appropriate to discuss a politicians legacy / their constituency work / their agreements and disagreements with party line etc.. and in the case of Brian Lenihan, the state of cancer care and the funding of cancer research in this country would be a nice topic. So by all means say 'RIP', acknowledge the human side to political life but please add some content to your post and not revise the past political careers of now dead politicians to paint them as great thinkers and patriots.

    Discuss. :rolleyes:

    The above should really be posted in feedback/ site suggestions i fail to see how the banning of rip threads is in anyway political.


  • #2


    If we ban them can we open up an RIP thread for RIP threads?


  • #2


    racso1975 wrote: »
    The above should really be posted in feedback/ site suggestions i fail to see how the banning of rip threads is in anyway political.

    Good point


  • #2


    Good post Laminations. +1


  • #2


    +1
    RIP threads on controversial figures such as BL cause a lot of work for the mods for a start.

    If they are to continue then Laminations idea of a sticky with the option to thank only should be considered, I'd extend that to places like AH as well.
    The current RIP thead for BL was a classic example of RIPs being accompanied by complete hyperbole and exaggeration of BL's abilities and past actions which in turn, bait another group of members who, already being assaulted by non-stop tv/radio/newspapers about the greatness of the deceased, feel the need to balance the hyperbole resulting in bans/disruption etc and that old favourite 'have some respect' charge being thrown around.
    Quite a large amount of RIP'ers actually ruined that RIP thread by bringing in exultant praise for BL's political decisions based solely on the fact the poor man was suffering with a terminal illness - why they weren't brought to task for that I don't know.

    A closed thanks only sticky until the burial of whoever it is that has passed away followed by a legacy thread could be a solution.

    I know I felt I had to bite my lip quite a lot since Friday.
    Maybe, feedback is the correct place for this thread.


  • #2


    I agree totally.

    Rip threads should not be in a politics debating forum.

    Otherwise people will debate politics on the man's grave.


  • #2
  • #2


    Completely agree, posted last March in the thread Nodin indicated and didn't get a single reply
    I'm just wondering, where do the RIP threads really fit in the politics forum? the one currently active does not meat any of the posting a new thread guidelines.

    Not meaning to be insensitive but perhaps there would be a more appropriate forum for them?


  • #2


    Well said, Laminations!

    Listening to the radio yesterday made me puke...."he was very straight" - yeah luv, let's ignore the claims about Lehmans, cheapest bailouts and the IMF.

    I actually posted on FB to counter this somehow, but I merely posted "they say not to speak ill of the dead so I'll say nothing", which, given my opinion of the man's politics, was a mark of respect in itself.

    I was flamed by a couple of known supporters, despite my implied restraint.

    But the politics forum is meant to be about debate and challenges; and as Laminations said above a simple RIP as a man shouldn't go astray, the delusion cannot go unchallenged, meaning that they create a catch 22.

    RIP the man, but his decisions and policies and legacy should not be allowed to be swept under the carpet.


  • #2


    I dont know. I have always thought that death was just something we do extremely well in Ireland. And perhaps there was more respect for Lenihan as a public figure than you might have imagined, certainly judging by the condolences thread a lot of people respected his commitment to staying on even in ill health, even if they disagreed with his policy.

    I do not see why anybody would have a problem with condolences threads. From what I see of my limited time on boards.ie, they are part of the culture here and I cant see why someone would feel such a thread detracts from a forum. I suspect it has a little more to do with not liking the man as opposed to not liking the thread.

    Why not just say so?


  • #2


    Thread smacks of 'im not racist but'


    either way, its not for this forum and would have thought feedback was the appropriate place as stated above.


  • #2


    later10 wrote: »
    I dont know. I have always thought that death was just something we do extremely well in Ireland. And perhaps there was more respect for Lenihan as a public figure than you might have imagined, certainly judging by the condolences thread a lot of people respected his commitment to staying on even in ill health, even if they disagreed with his policy.

    I do not see why anybody would have a problem with condolences threads. From what I see of my limited time on boards.ie, they are part of the culture here and I cant see why someone would feel such a thread detracts from a forum. I suspect it has a little more to do with not liking the man as opposed to not liking the thread.

    Why not just say so?

    That's a bit unfair, later10.....you're projecting a supposition / assumption that isn't there.

    When supporters wax lyrical about non-existent attributes, THEN the thread gets hated, not before.

    So it might make sense for the RIPs for the man to be in Humanities or somewhere, excluding all aspects - positive and negative - of the profession and performance.


  • #2


    They probably are a bit pointless but still how hard is it to respect the fact it's a condolence thread.

    There have been thousands of threads to lambast him while he was alive and no doubt thousands in the future.

    Is it too much to ask for one just to post condolences? So what if a few went overboard with praise? Is it that hard not to get in a last word?

    Best approach I think is a RIP and a legacy thread, same happened with Garret.


  • #2


    Liam Byrne wrote: »

    When supporters wax lyrical about non-existent attributes, THEN the thread gets hated, not before.
    Exactly - so it is about the indivdual, not the actual fact of having an RIP thread, perhaps.
    So it might make sense for the RIPs for the man to be in Humanities or somewhere, excluding all aspects - positive and negative - of the profession and performance.
    Why humanities? Humanities is designed just as much for debate as politics, I would have thought.

    For a man who has probably got a mention every day since the crisis deepened here on the politics forum, and whose policies have received so much indepth analysis (nd some not so indepth), I think it is appropriate that those people who have paid so much attention to Brian Lenihan throughout the crisis have some sort of opportunity to offer regret at his death - even if these people were not on Lenihans side of the political fence. Personally I like the fact that the forum offers this opportunity, I do not think politics always has to be about debate and point scoring.

    Who really gets offended, or put out, by RIP threads? It isnt as though they clog up the forum.


  • #2


    I'd be interested in hearing why there wasn't a similar Feedback thread over Garret Fitzgerald's RIP thread. Like later10, I have my suspicions that the political figure involved here is as much the issue as RIP threads themselves.

    I think the solution that eventually came about is the best one: a condolences thread for those (numerous posters) who wish to express them, and a legacy thread for those who wish to discuss his legacy. Having one single condolences thread doesn't clog up the forum, it doesn't bring the standard of the forum down by any means, and it is clearly something posters want.
    gambiaman wrote: »
    The current RIP thead for BL was a classic example of RIPs being accompanied by complete hyperbole and exaggeration of BL's abilities and past actions which in turn, bait another group of members who, already being assaulted by non-stop tv/radio/newspapers about the greatness of the deceased, feel the need to balance the hyperbole resulting in bans/disruption etc and that old favourite 'have some respect' charge being thrown around.

    It's not baiting because there's no intent to get a response out of anyone. The people who posted in the the thread merely wanted to offer condolences. I think any suggestion to the contrary is just a symptom of this annoying "FF are the devils of everything" perpetual-outrage culture that has unfortunately plagued Irish political discussion for the past year or two. A bit of context wouldn't go astray. A human being has died, after all. It's very natural for people to offer condolences.


  • #2


    later10 wrote: »
    I suspect it has a little more to do with not liking the man as opposed to not liking the thread.

    Why not just say so?

    Because it's not about not liking the person and phrasing the accusation as a 'suspicion' doesn't stop it being ad hominem. Debate the post and not the poster. I feel the same way about any RIP thread. This particular RIP thread moved me to post, not because of the person who was being remembered but because of the content - but generally RIP threads are contentless and therefore unsuitable for the politics forum. You can acknowledge the sadness of a persons passing without reverting to revisionism of their career and the decisions that they made. If people insist on having RIP threads then like I suggested a thanks system on a specified sticky would avoid comments whether they be political revisionism or crass remarks bordering on celebration.

    My point is all of these RIP threads breach the forum charter. My thread was inappropriate for the forum and was moved - there is either consistency in the modding or there isn't.

    On the thread Nodin linked to a mod defended these threads because there is 'demand for them'. I've seen plenty of hot or lengthy threads being closed regardless of the obvious demand because they were breaching forum rules. Citing populism as the reason for their acceptance on the forum is quite plainly inconsistent.


  • #2


    K-9 wrote: »
    They probably are a bit pointless but still how hard is it to respect the fact it's a condolence thread.

    Im not sure - why do people not restrain themselves to merely posting condolences?

    Like others Ive had to bite my tongue when people cant post condolences without posting nonsense that so and so was a great statesman, a shining beacon of truth and justice, a terrible loss to the Irish people, courageous in representing Ireland and so on. Those are all political statements, but its only when people are provoked into disagreeing with them that its suddenly objectionable to bring politics onto the thread.

    People dont seem to mind people discussing politics on condolence threads. What they mind is people passing negative political judgements on condolence threads.

    If a condolence thread is to have a charmed life where it is immune to the normal rule of only posting positions that you are willing to defend, then it needs to be a proper condolence thread without any political judgements, positive or negative.

    After all, how hard is it to post "RIP, thinking of his family" and leave an individuals public record to another thread?

    @Elliot Rosewater
    I'd be interested in hearing why there wasn't a similar Feedback thread over Garret Fitzgerald's RIP thread.

    I dont know about that - given his record in office and recent interventions to try undermine criticism of Lenihans disastrous policies Id say more than a few posts were drafted, then reconsidered.

    As RDM pointed out, this issue was raised last year. The recent death of Fitzgerald, followed swiftly by the death of Lenihan might have meant that what might have been dismissed as a one off breakout of dellusion has been raised again in short succession. Hence the rising prominence of the issue.


  • #2


    I'd be interested in hearing why there wasn't a similar Feedback thread over Garret Fitzgerald's RIP thread. Like later10, I have my suspicions that the political figure involved here is as much the issue as RIP threads themselves.

    I think the solution that eventually came about is the best one: a condolences thread for those (numerous posters) who wish to express them, and a legacy thread for those who wish to discuss his legacy. Having one single condolences thread doesn't clog up the forum, it doesn't bring the standard of the forum down by any means, and it is clearly something posters want.



    It's not baiting because there's no intent to get a response out of anyone. The people who posted in the the thread merely wanted to offer condolences. I think any suggestion to the contrary is just a symptom of this annoying "FF are the devils of everything" perpetual-outrage culture that has unfortunately plagued Irish political discussion for the past year or two. A bit of context wouldn't go astray. A human being has died, after all. It's very natural for people to offer condolences.


    But a condolence thread should be just that, a place to pay condolences and not a sanctuary for one side of a debate over the deceased's public legacy whether the intent to bait is there or not.
    This was clearly not observed in the BL RIP thread.

    I see Sand posted a very good argument in the politics discussion of rules thread about this issue.


  • #2


    Because it's not about not liking the person and phrasing the accusation as a 'suspicion' doesn't stop it being ad hominem. Debate the post and not the poster.
    Notify a moderator, not me. I am saying that I would suspect (adj: suspicious; or to be suspicious of sth.) that sudden condemnation of RIP threads actually relate to dislike of Brian Lenihan as opposed to dislike of RIP threads in the politics forum. I think that's a reasonable suggestion, not an attack on you or any other poster.
    I feel the same way about any RIP thread. This particular RIP thread moved me to post, not because of the person who was being remembered but because of the content - but generally RIP threads are contentless and therefore unsuitable for the politics forum.
    I guess I just don't see the harm. Typically threads without any material content are there to lower the tone or create a hullabaloo about some controversy without any factual basis. I don't think a simple RIP thread needs to get lumped in with those. I think it's reasonable that people who spend days and weeks and months debating a man's policies and measures get to express some regret at his death.


  • #2


    I'd be interested in hearing why there wasn't a similar Feedback thread over Garret Fitzgerald's RIP thread.
    Well there was a now locked thread started by someone who took issue with Brian Lenihan - it was a "It's a terrible tragedy, and condolences to his loved ones, but let's be honest" kinda thing. A RIP forum, which by its nature would not facilitate discussion, would eliminate problematic stuff like that.


  • #2


    Sand wrote: »
    Im not sure - why do people not restrain themselves to merely posting condolences?

    Some of the praise was a bit OTT but that tends to happen when politicians pass away, seen it with Garret too.

    Plenty of posters respectfully said they didn't agree with his decisions but could add their condolences. I don't really see the need to train wreck condolence threads, it's a bit attention seeking and thanks whoring to me tbh.


  • #2


    I'd be interested in hearing why there wasn't a similar Feedback thread over Garret Fitzgerald's RIP thread.

    Well i for one was busy. If you cannot see that this is an issue about modding (consistency of applying forum rules and allowing a situation where one sided positive (and untruthful) comments go unchallenged) and not about Brian Lenihan then you cannot see my point.
    Like later10, I have my suspicions that the political figure involved here is as much the issue as RIP threads themselves.

    Your suspicion is wrong. The issue is solely with the manner in which condolences are shown, which just happened to show itself as wholly inappropriate for the recently bereaved but is open to abuse for any RIP. Ive already suggested an alternative way to do condolence threads (via thanks with no superfluous positive or negative comment) and I'd add my RIP for Brian Lenihan. Your 'suspicions' are a low blow. Like painting a poster who suggests the welfare system is broken as a racist because the case that highlighted the faults in the system involved an immigrant.
    later10 wrote: »
    Notify a moderator, not me.
    As you can see a mod has also played the player and not the ball. My post was not a threat of reporting you, I was highlighting the incorrect target in the sights of your reply. Take BL out of this and simply defend RIP threads (which allow all positive comment however fanciful and no means for challenging untruths)


  • #2


    later10 wrote: »
    Who really gets offended, or put out, by RIP threads? It isnt as though they clog up the forum.

    Personally I think they are stupid, particularly in the Politics forum. But if we are going to have them, then they need to be open for discussion like any other thread in politics, or they need to be totally closed to discussion of someone's political legacy. As it stands right now - i.e., with only positive comments on political legacies deemed appropriate - they are little more than an institutionalized circle jerk.
    Sand wrote: »
    People dont seem to mind people discussing politics on condolence threads. What they mind is people passing negative political judgements on condolence threads.

    If a condolence thread is to have a charmed life where it is immune to the normal rule of only posting positions that you are willing to defend, then it needs to be a proper condolence thread without any political judgements, positive or negative.

    After all, how hard is it to post "RIP, thinking of his family" and leave an individuals public record to another thread?

    Amen.


  • #2


    The only real solution to the problem is to have an RIP/ Condolences forum. In Politics, the debate is cut in the RIP forums & in After Hours, you're not allowed have any craic in the RIP forums... and to me debate in Politics & craic in After Hours is the basis for each forum. It's their whole raison d'être.
    However, you can't ignore the fact that when someone dies, people wish to express their condolences - so let it be done in a forum set up for that purpose & where there are strict ground rules in regards to what people can & cannot post.That way, you kill two birds with one stone.

    Now, where do I start a condolences thread for two dead birds?


  • #2


    Ban all RIP threads because in these threads I am not allowed to bash the recently deceased with impunity.

    Bit sick innit?


  • #2


    Not really.

    Imagine creating a thread where you were only allowed bash a highly contentious figure - and that's just it, these people are not "Joe Soaps" they're figures where discussion is often highly polarised. Wouldn't it just be a troll-fest?

    It's basically giving one side carte blanche to rile up the other side, knowing if they step out of line they'll be banned.

    At least, that's the problem I see with it.


  • #2


    Ban all RIP threads because in these threads I am not allowed to bash the recently deceased with impunity.

    Bit sick innit?

    We now have a busy legacy thread with plenty of bashing and the OP still feels the need to post in the RIP thread to make a point.

    Plenty of posters were able to criticise him on the RIP thread but still be respectful. I don't really see the need to knock him when there already is a thread to do it and it's pretty obvious he made massive mistakes, popular and thanks gathering that they maybe.


  • #2


    K-9 wrote: »
    We now have a busy legacy thread with plenty of bashing ...

    We do. And it's remarkably unpleasant, with a number of people rejoicing his death. The thread was created by the mods, who seem to have put their hands in their pockets and walked off whistling, pretending that the ensuing nastiness had nothing to do with them.


  • #2


    Repetition, deviation but unfortunately no hesitation. Yes, let this thread be the death knell for political RIPs.


  • #2


    We do. And it's remarkably unpleasant, with a number of people rejoicing his death. The thread was created by the mods, who seem to have put their hands in their pockets and walked off whistling, pretending that the ensuing nastiness had nothing to do with them.

    Oooh jaysus. I got through 4 posts and:

    "I only wish he didn't die and he continued on and suffer and suffer badly."
    and similar.

    His funeral is tomorrow and people are actually arguing for the right to post drivel like that before his body is even in the ground?


Sign In or Register to comment.