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

A discussion on the rules.

1…2526283031…89

Comments

  • #812
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #813
    benway
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,061 ✭✭✭benway


    Nesf wrote:
    This post had been deleted.

    Funny you should mention that, it does bear closer examination, doesn't it. Some might regard the consistent, one-note, strident free marketeering, where all other answers are patently false, and a little simple-minded, as pretty disruptive as well, ever thought about that?

    Sorry, but I don't see how I've been disruptive or uncivil at any point, I've made as substantive contribution the whole way through.

    If libertarianism is going to become viable as a mass movement, you're going to need to be able to deal with the difficult questions, particularly those to do with inequality and rights.

    If serious questioning is your idea of "thread wrecking", then I suggest you set up a members only libertarian forum or sub forum. If you post in general "Political Theory", there are no sacred cows. It's not trolling, it's legitimate political debate. It's soapboxing to reduce every topic to "the market is the answer to everything, literally everything, and anyone who thinks otherwise is 'uninformed', 'out of their depth', 'myopic', 'populist', 'Marxist' and 'laughable'".
    Permabear wrote:
    This post has been deleted.

    That's a total misrepresentation. It's the views that have been discussed, rather than the adherents - and I have asked, umpteen times, to be corrected if I'm in error on libertarian stances. I rarely have been, though.
    Permabear wrote:
    This post has been deleted.

    So, obviously, I strongly object to being tacitly accused of trolling. I expect a retraction. And I do see a certain irony in how keen you are to encourage more robust 'state' intervention in that forum, also.


  • #814
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #815
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    If you're going to malign my posts (it seems in the very manner I posted to this thread complaining about), back it up with quotes.

    There was nothing wrong with my posts in that thread; I express skepticism towards private education in its current form (without any heated nature to my posts or those replying to me), and speak in favour of the potential for private education to take over when (or if) online learning becomes normal.

    That is an exact example of the kind of maligning of my posts I encounter in these threads, which drags down the discussion; it's a form of (low level) personal attack.

    Quote and point out the parts of my posts that are in any way unreasonable or combative or otherwise not conducive to a reasoned debate.

    Don't just ignore this either; what often happens, is an accusation like above is thrown out, the person defends themselves which the accuser never acknowledges, and then the accuser goes on to make the same accusation/personal-attack again.
    Permabear wrote: »
    Nesf's definition of "soapboxing" above makes reference to "only ever coming onto to threads to ridicule and mildly insult people disagreeing with [your political position]" and "constantly dragging threads off-topic so they can be about your hobby horse."
    Again, if you accuse me of this, back it up with quotes. I have not ridiculed or insulted anybody in the course of my arguments, and in most cases I have kept on-topic
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Well I agree with this at least; particularly, I think the mods should come down on some of the more common low-level personal attacks in these threads, which breach the "attack the post not the poster" rule, but are low-level enough not to receive a warning.

    I don't advocate excessive moderation to the point of stifling argument, but this (and other stuff I describe in my earlier posts) is part of the pattern I notice that is easy to stamp down on, and which most often brings down these threads.


  • #816
    gaffer91
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,351 ✭✭✭gaffer91


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    I never contribute to libertarian threads so I'd consider myself fairly neutral on this particular issue and I really don't think you've a good case to make for that particular thread. Having read it, with the possible exception of one comment about "criminals" (and I personally don't think it was trolling), there was nothing in it that made for soapboxing or thread wrecking or anything like that. The anti-libertarian posters were combative sure, but that is not a bad thing, and they were putting forward coherent and interesting arguments(as was suryavarman on the opposite side). No-one was being insulting, and it was making for quite a good thread.

    Tbh, I think you are just complaining about it because the thread was not going the way you would have liked i.e a good libertarian back-slapping session, and are simply trying to stifle debate (which is a very un-libertarian thing to do!).

    I think you should just accept that libertarianism is widely viewed as a 'fringe' ideology, and like any ideology there will be numerous people who will view it disdainfully. This will obviously translate into a lot of opposition on threads on boards.


  • Advertisement
  • #817
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    ^^ Ya I guess one thing I aught to retract a bit with my previous post, is that I can sometimes be combative (often without realizing it), but I'm quite sure it remains within the bounds of reasoned/fair debate (of a level you'd normally expect in any thread on Politics), and never is insulting or personal.

    I think the primary times I've gotten personal, are in response to much of the low-level attacks/misrepresentation of the type I mention in this thread; and in those cases, it was to call that out i.e. expose it, I try to never get personal as a method of argument.


  • #818
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #819
    benway
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,061 ✭✭✭benway


    Seeing as you want to be like that, selected highlights from one thread, I didn't feel need to go trawling around the forum.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    benway wrote: »
    Jesus, you must be really stuck. Lamest of the lame arguments, right here.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    benway wrote: »
    Well, if that is the case, you'd be much better advised to explain these nuances rather than trying to shout people down.
    And in your very next post:
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    benway wrote:
    Listen, I made a post here, similar to the sketch in the above paragraph, and specifically asked for people to clarify if I was in error:

    I stand uncorrected.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    benway wrote: »
    Not hyperbole, I'm afraid. Your typical Westlands, Nairobi abode combines mock-tudor elegance with a ten foot wall, topped by electric fences and/or barbed wire, probably an alsatian and two or three askaris behind the wall. Surprised they didn't go for a moat while they were at it. You stay classy, Westlands. I probably would have spent longer living there if it hadn't been for that - it felt like living in a war zone.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    benway wrote: »
    And having spent a couple of years actually working in development, in the developing world, it's me who can't even grasp the problem?

    ...Trying to put me in a box isn't helping your argument here. In fact, it smacks of desperation.

    Apologies to anyone who's waded through that, just wanted to put it out there.

    Also, from the first page of that thread:
    benway wrote:
    Yes, it would [be nice if we could move beyond petty bickering]. But I don't see how else this thread is going to go. It's premised on "sticking it to the anti-libertarians".

    I don't see that many of the so-called "anti libertarian" posters are necessarily set against libertarian ideals. It's just a question of their practical application.

    It seems to me that there's a bunch of people with varying outlooks, who like to explore ideas, who are all being lumped together as the "usual suspects", out to get the libertarians. Speaking for myself, that simply isn't the case.

    The biggest problem is that these threads tend to get quite frustrating, because it seems that certain topics are out of bounds - by engaging with them, you can improve your own understandings, as well as ours.

    It's not about "winning" or "losing", it's about learning. Some of you seem to have lost sight of that.

    If it's a case that I am "trolling" I'd have to suggest that maybe it's a case of athníonn ciaróg ciaróg eile, as they say in the old country. At the very least, you'll have to concede that it takes two to tango.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    That's all it's about, is it? That's why I repeatedly asked you to better explain your position, or to correct me if I was in error?
    gaffer91 wrote:
    Tbh, I think you are just complaining about it because the thread was not going the way you would have liked i.e a good libertarian back-slapping session, and are simply trying to stifle debate (which is a very un-libertarian thing to do!).
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    I think the issue here is that you're dismissing serious, reasoned debate as "heckling", as evidenced above. Not going to win many new converts that way.

    I think that anyone who's interested should read this thread and make up their own minds on it.


  • #820
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Any acknowledgment of my previous two posts, or do you still apply those accusations to me? (if so, please back them up with quotes; it's a reasonable request)


  • #821
    benway
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,061 ✭✭✭benway


    gaffer91 wrote: »
    Having read it, with the possible exception of one comment about "criminals" (and I personally don't think it was trolling), there was nothing in it that made for soapboxing or thread wrecking or anything like that.

    I didn't even spot this the first time around, just by way of illustration:
    Suryavarman wrote:
    benway wrote:
    The logical conclusion of a private schooling system, combined with the lack of a right to education, is that educational status will become a function of wealth, rather than ability. The bright kid in the charity school isn't likely to take a PhD, is he/she? He might end up becoming an accomplished criminal, though.
    No it isn't the logical conclusion. There's plenty of reason to believe that charity can help the most disadvantaged.

    No the child isn't likely take a PHD. Either are most children because it's generally a waste of time unless you really love the subject you are learning. Your references to the child becoming a criminal are both pathetic and insulting. Anymore tripe like that and I don't see how a civilised discussion can continue.
    benway wrote:
    I missed this the first time around. I have a postgrad in criminology, one of the canonical theories is Robert K. Merton's development of Durkheim's theory of anomie, which, simply put, posits that where legitimate opportunities for advancement are closed off, children tend to become alienated from the mainstream and pursue illegitimate avenues, particularly crime. It's a social capital type argument, developed in Messner and Rosenfeld's "Crime and the American Dream". Chapter length overview on google books. Please don't be so dismissive.
    Again, not pointing fingers, I think that Suryavarman is a good poster, and more patient and methodical than most in explaining his/her point of view. But I think the implication is clear that people need to start respecting that there's a basis to these criticisms aside from some irrational "dislike of libertarianism", or "anti-libertarian bias" ... and that if the mods start applying zero tolerance, they will be overworked until it reaches the point of being a dead forum.


  • Advertisement
  • #822
    beeftotheheels
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,675 ✭✭✭beeftotheheels


    I've asked before, I'll ask again.

    Is there anything that can be done about repeated low level posting in the politics forum?

    People repeating tired, and potentially dangerous memes, ignoring evidence that points in the opposite direction and not actually engaging in the discussion, just repeating what they want to be true.

    I know that there's a lot of strong views on the Stability treaty at the moment, but referenda always throw up huge amounts of incorrect/ partial data which I guess makes modding the forum particularly difficult.


  • #823
    K-9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,313 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    beeftotheheels wrote: »
    I've asked before, I'll ask again.

    Is there anything that can be done about repeated low level posting in the politics forum?

    People repeating tired, and potentially dangerous memes, ignoring evidence that points in the opposite direction and not actually engaging in the discussion, just repeating what they want to be true.

    I know that there's a lot of strong views on the Stability treaty at the moment, but referenda always throw up huge amounts of incorrect/ partial data which I guess makes modding the forum particularly difficult.

    Stating opinions as facts is specifically mentioned in the charter and posters have been warned, infracted and banned for this before. Some cases mightn't be as clearcut but if it is happening repeatedly, report the posts.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • #824
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,396 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    There is an issue, especially in the referendum thread, where posters have come in and said why they will be voting a certain way, that rationale has been totally refuted logically and then they ignore it and say the same thing again.... it's head-wrecking.

    I don't really care if you vote no or yes once you're doing it for a logical reason... but if your reason for voting one way or another is insane and you're called out, at least stop posting the same nonsense.


  • #825
    southsiderosie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    Re: the Libertarian thread issues...

    The basic problem in these threads as I see it is that one side makes positivist arguments, while the other side makes normative arguments, i.e. one is interested in the world 'as is' (as filtered through a very specific lens) while the other side is interested in the 'as it should be' - also via a very specific lens. Both groups are operating under completely different underlying assumptions, so there is little reason to think that either will come to agreement.

    If people are going to disagree, that is ok - certainly there would not be much to discuss here if we always agreed on everything! But I do think that a significant part of the problem is that neither side is willing to engage with the points that the other side raised. Dismissing a poster as a "neo-con monster" or some other such nonsense for focusing on economic arguments is just as problematic as dismissing another poster as "Pollyanna-ish" for raising the social implications of libertarian/free market economic policy.

    Frankly, the libertarian threads are turning into the 'new' Northern Ireland threads in this forum: they will involve the same ten posters who take utterly predictable positions on issues and then while engaged in the usual trench warfare, drive any reasonably sane person who might have a passing interest in the topic at hand out screaming from the thread. That is exactly what is happening in this thread (and I will not even start on the head-wrecking child labor thread).

    The long and short of it is, if people who are opposed to libertarianism are only going to engage in those threads to bash libertarians as heartless monsters, well, that is pretty useless. But conversely, if libertarians are only going to dismiss posters who raise questions about some of the non-economic implications of libertarian economic policies as economically illiterate or "Pollyannas", well frankly that is not very useful either. There are too many threads in this forum that seem explicitly set up to be circle jerks - and that goes for both sides. So if people are tired of derailment, then they need to be more mindful of their posting as well because I've seen little evidence in the last few weeks that people are really interested in an open discussion of these issues that isn't entirely consistent with their world views and beliefs - and that is not what this forum is (ostensibly) about.


  • #826
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #827
    southsiderosie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    I don't want to turn this thread into a debate about development economics. But given that the sweatshop model has worked quite well in parts of Asia, and less well in parts of Latin America suggests that there may be other factors worth considering beyond market-friendly policies, including rule of law, democratic freedoms, and income inequality.

    If you want to dismiss other posters, it is less insulting to them, and less inflammatory for everyone to do it with data, rather than just dismissing them outright. If we expected everyone here to be an expert on what they were talking about, there would probably be ten people left in the forum. There are actually people here who do have experience in a number of areas (teaching, development work, etc), but they get marginalized in a lot of these debates because everyone is on their ideological high horse, and I think that is unfortunate. So, yes, I do have a problem with these labels as they are being used in the forum. It is unfortunate that you find it to be mind-boggling, but this is not a private debate club and people should not feel belittled or unwelcome for disagreeing with other posters; rather the fact should simply speak for themselves.

    If people continue to bang on the same drum time and time again even though those issues have been addressed, or are continually causing problems in the same kinds of threads - well then let the moderators take care of it. But this is much harder to do when everyone is sniping at each other - when the same scrum is involved all of the time, one begins to wonder if individual posters are the problem, or if the pack itself is the issue.


  • #828
    benway
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,061 ✭✭✭benway


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Biting my tongue here. That is all.


  • #829
    southsiderosie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,565 ✭✭✭southsiderosie


    benway wrote: »
    Biting my tongue here. That is all.

    benway, these kinds of comments aren't useful and don't contribute to the discussion at all. It is just this kind of crap that we could do with less of in the forum.


  • #830
    K-9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,313 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    I was going to issue a mod instruction on this thread a couple of days ago but let it go to show the problems. The "us vs. them" theme has continued from that thread to this feedback one and both sides are at it. I'll probably get posts saying "but we don't do it as much" or"he said it first", exactly!

    There was a ton of posts reported, if I was being consistent on all those posts, several reds would have been issued to several posters on both sides of the debate. Another mod has given her opinion and another mod posted an excellent mod warning today.

    Lads, "it isn't us, it's you!".

    Either posters harden up a bit, take it as much as they give it, or mods can apply the letter of the charter, which posters will not take on the chin and point to "them".

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • #831
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • #832
    benway
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,061 ✭✭✭benway


    southsiderosie wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    I was trying not to say - "from your extensive knowledge of which which development economists exactly? People like Amartya Sen?", but that is liable to kick off a new argument here, as you said, and it's obviously not what this thread is for. Hard to let something like that go, though, and I wasn't a big enough man to just let it slide. Will try counting to ten in future.

    Seeing as i'm here, I've said all I'm going to on the moderation side of things, think the balance is more or less right.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    Posters who disagree with you are the problem, you mean? But posters who agree with you are just fine? Dear God.


  • #833
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #834
    K-9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,313 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Naming posters is getting a little personal. Most of those posters have been sanctioned which is public record on the threads.
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Which is your personal opinion and you're entitled to it. It doesn't seem to be a problem for most.

    Dr. Galens posts sums it up, plus my "us vs. them" opinion. Everything is "us vs. them", the threads, the reported posts, the feedback threads. And this isn't picking on Libertarian threads, its the exact same in N.I. and M.E. threads.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • #835
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #836
    K-9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,313 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Indeed. SSR has said so, not an issue. (well it is an issue, you know it, she knows it, I know it, other posters know it}
    A couple of posts ago you were warbling on about posters "hardening up a bit" and "taking it as much as they give it" — and now it's "a little personal" to name names?

    This is a feedback thread, not a Libertarian one. Exactly my point!

    Most of which posters, pray tell? Most in the pro-libertarian or anti-libertarian group? Because it's quite evident to anyone who cares to look who has been sanctioned and who hasn't, which again provides objective evidence against these absurd everyone-is-equally-to-blame statements.

    Awh. Look, I'm a mod, I don't care who is pro or anti-libertarian, it's irrelevant to me when I'm modding. I really can't make much sense of what you are saying.

    It's not just a "personal opinion" that your mod posts frequently don't make any sense, and that they often create more confusion than they resolve. The laws of English grammar and semantics back me up there.

    All I know is you are the first poster to raise this issue. So, put your personal feelings and your Oxford-English dictionary and thesaurus aside, the rest of the forum doesn't seem to have a problem. If it's such an issue, raise it with the admins.You seem to manage fine generally in the forum!

    I believe that another Politics mod summed it up equally well when she acknowledged that "most libertarian threads get trolled into oblivion until they have to be locked." So, there's another "us vs. them" here, i.e., those who are attempting to have a legitimate discussion vs. those who are merely trolling in an effort to prevent any discussion from happening.

    And those who see hard questioning as trolling.

    Look, maybe posters from both sides can come up with standards you agree on? Put down the pitchforks and see what posting standards do you agree on. Might be a good group think exercise! ;)

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • #837
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    (picking on specific point, rather than reaching into the wider argument)
    Permabear wrote:
    This post had been deleted.
    I don't acknowledge the anti-Libertarian side of it much, as I'm not subject to it (and well, there's admittedly an inherent bias of discomfort pointing fault with those who agree with me and I them), but ya the problems (jabbbing etc.) happen on the anti-Libertarian side too.

    The mods seem to note this well, so they aren't ganging up against any particular side or anything.


    Following from K-9's post:
    I think one of the general standards people can probably agree on, is that the threads are better if personal attacks (of any scale, including small/subtle stuff and jabs etc.) are left out.

    Next to that (though idk how agreeable, is a personal thing), if someone is on the receiving end of attacks/jabbing etc. (which probably will happen sooner or later on any heated thread), better not to respond in kind, and to openly point it out instead, otherwise it goes into the downward spiral, and then other posters not involved get pulled in too.

    There's plenty more to suggest after that, but will leave it at those two basic points.


  • #838
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #839
    K-9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,313 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    "Us vs. Them" again.

    As a mod yourself you should know a ban or card tally doesn't tell the full story. 50% of them could be by a couple of posters. Tone and context as Dr. Galen posted also is very important.
    There are two evident solutions. The first is that libertarian posters don't start libertarian threads or make any effort to discuss libertarian ideas on the forums (that's the "heckler's veto" solution). The second is that mods actually do some modding and stop these threads from being "trolled into oblivion." For some reason, however, the mods seem unwilling to pursue the latter route.

    Going on the rap sheet you've compiled lack of modding isn't the problem, not enough to your liking, is.
    What are you talking about now? Seriously? Hard questioning is and should be a staple of the Politics forum; it is not "trolling."

    Exactly.

    K-9, please try to think rationally here. It's not up to posters to devise or enforce posting standards. That's the job of the mods. Trying to fob this off on posters is just another sad cop-out.

    I'm asking for feedback and suggestions, if you want to call that fobbing off, fair enough. Positive, relatively neutral and civilly worded feedback is always welcome.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • #840
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • #841
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Excuse me mods for getting a bit personal:
    While there are a lot of fair warnings and infractions on anti-Libertarian posters, you toe the line yourself quite regularly Permabear, just haven't been deemed as stepping over yet (which in a lot of cases I find quite surprising, and tbh, I felt caused an imbalance that either they weren't dealt with, or worrying I might get warned pointing them out and/or questioning motive).

    I could provide a litany of quotes to back this up if you wish.


    The "Us vs Them" issue is not that there are two opposing sides, it's that many posters enforce a black and white picture in their posts; people often get portrayed as 100% statist, marxist, pro-regulation etc. without any room for grey areas (or in this case, pushing fault on anti-Libertarians in an "Us vs Them" dichotomy, while ignoring the bigger issue of the problems themselves, which is how "Us vs Them" is often used to deflect issues/arguments in the threads).

    It is routine for peoples views to be taken to an extreme, or to be warped to fit an opposing ideology which can then be bashed to try and dismiss posters arguments or lend emotional weight against their arguments; that is "Us vs Them", enforcing a false dichotomy.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement