Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

When I say that I won't allow any more illegal posts, I mean it.

1…810121314

Comments

  • #272
    B.A._Baracus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,309 ✭✭✭✭B.A._Baracus


    It's funny :pac:
    Alot of people are getting heated on here over this. Some saying it's wrong, some saying it's right (free speech) and others coming out and saying muhammed is a pedo for marrying a 6 year old girl. All in this thread so far.

    But it's funny :pac: ... Who here, in their right minds, would actually walk up to a muslim person and say "muhammed was a pedo, mate" - FUCKING NO ONE! :pac: Because right there you would have started a fight or to bring on such a shit-storm on to yourself.


    So as I say, it's funny. People arguing on the internet, about whats acceptable to say on the internet (an irish website in this case) whilst no-one would dare say it in the real world :pac:


  • #273
    wazky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,516 ✭✭✭wazky


    robindch wrote: »

    I'm broadly aware of the costs of going to the High Court, which is why I'm requesting other posters to step in and match what I've offered here. Or indeed, for anybody else to offer anything else at all.

    I can't offer much in monetary support due to investments in a new line of waterproof sponges but if the above does make it court I can aid in a legal defence in the form of sarcastic remarks?


  • #274
    ColeTrain
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭ColeTrain


    oppenheimer1 wrote: »
    There is almost a zero chance of the DPP bringing a prosecution against boards for blasphemy. And even if they did there would be an almost zero chance of it succeeding. All this is about is playing safe to the extreme. Media organisations can take out insurances against legal action.


    Its times like this that the value of traditional media should be appreciated. In fairness to them they occasionally do take a chance on a story.

    Maybe because their turnover allows them to take that chance?


  • #275
    wendell borton
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,335 ✭✭✭wendell borton


    I seem to have missed all the excitement :rolleyes:. This blasphemy nonsense really peeves me off, to put it mildly. It has no place in the legal system of a democratic state, its utterly illogical to me to give superstition legal protection against reason in law.

    To see this idiotic law being used as a threat against free speech just furthers my suspicions against certain beliefs, what insecurities must they have that they cant abide any scrutiny.

    "Questions are now blasphemy".


  • #276
    oppenheimer1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,733 ✭✭✭oppenheimer1


    Insect Overlord wrote: »
    Ah now, we both know the vast majority of those Closed Accounts are back under new names.

    Some are to be fair, but a lot are not. While the forums may be more popular than ever, the quality of discussion has slipped. Maybe this is the signal to noise ratio, with the newer posters outnumbering the older ones, but I'm not entirely convinced.

    People are turning their back on this place, particularly AH. Some stick around for the specalist forums, but there are big problems in the way the big discussion forums are being run here. Every couple of months there seems to be a another topic thats banned. The list is getting quite long now.

    Now with religion off the discussion menu, there won't be much to talk about, not much of consequence anyway.


  • Advertisement
  • #277
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    B.A._Baracus wrote: »
    It's funny :pac:
    Alot of people are getting heated on here over this. Some saying it's wrong, some saying it's right (free speech) and others coming out and saying muhammed is a pedo for marrying a 6 year old girl. All in this thread so far.

    But it's funny :pac: ... Who here, in their right minds, would actually walk up to a muslim person and say "muhammed was a pedo, mate" - FUCKING NO ONE! :pac: Because right there you would have started a fight or to bring on such a shit-storm on to yourself.


    So as I say, it's funny. People arguing on the internet, about thats accepting to say on Irish internet websites whilst no-one would dare say it in the real world :pac:

    Depends on the person. Certain things can't be said to some people anyway. Some people regard any criticism of their ideas as a criticism of themselves. Some people can't take criticism without seeing it as a means of incitement.


  • #278
    Calhoun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,447 ✭✭✭Calhoun


    B.A._Baracus wrote: »
    It's funny :pac:
    Alot of people are getting heated on here over this. Some saying it's wrong, some saying it's right (free speech) and others coming out and saying muhammed is a pedo for marrying a 6 year old girl. All in this thread so far.

    But it's funny :pac: ... Who here, in their right minds, would actually walk up to a muslim person and say "muhammed was a pedo, mate" - FUCKING NO ONE! :pac: Because right there you would have started a fight or to bring on such a shit-storm on to yourself.


    So as I say, it's funny. People arguing on the internet, about thats accepting to say on Irish internet websites whilst no-one would dare say it in the real world :pac:

    I wouldn't do it in real life or the internet and feel allot on here would be the same, I just feel there should be clarity and a clear approach for all religions. Otherwise we set presence nice that he who shouts and threatens the loudest gets there way, I think allot want to know where the line is.


  • #279
    Ace Attorney
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,320 ✭✭✭Ace Attorney


    oppenheimer1 wrote: »
    I can see where hes coming from too. However he is erring on the side of extreme caution which runs the real risk of harming discussion and most importantly alienating users. Perhaps boards ought to shut AH and the religion forums so? If there can't be a frank discussion about religion in current affairs (often the root of many conflicts and stories) and religion boards what point do they serve??

    No matter the rights or wrongs of a discussion here on boards, the site admins always rush to shut/close/delete it, rather than deal with the issue head on once theres a whiff of the lawyers about it.

    Yea i realize in this situation, there shouldnt be one rule for one religion and another rule for another because it discriminates. The fact is tho boards is a business first and foremost, if something is going to lose you money in your business ie. legal action, you are obviously going to try your best to stop it before it even goes that far, that said i agree with you there shouldnt be double standards


  • #280
    R P McMurphy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭R P McMurphy


    Trouble follows Tommy Robinson around everywhere. Even on a boards thread


  • #281
    Manassas61
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 313 ✭✭Manassas61


    robindch wrote: »
    Because Mohammad set up a religion. And under the blasphemy legislation, somebody can be convicted of an offence if they say something which any itinerant group of religious people can interpret as outrageous.

    In short, it gives religious people an incentive to become upset and outraged, as if an incentive were needed.
    They could see anything which is questioning him as outrageous. The Republic is not Iran.


  • Advertisement
  • #282
    oppenheimer1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,733 ✭✭✭oppenheimer1


    ColeTrain wrote: »
    Maybe because their turnover allows them to take that chance?

    Their confidence and their insurance does. Do you think magazines like the Village and the Phoenix have larger turnovers than Boards.ie?


  • #283
    Insect Overlord
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 31,263 Mod ✭✭✭✭Insect Overlord


    SameoleSameole wrote: »
    Classic deflection.

    Pointing out the preceived stupidty of others does nothing to diminish your own.

    Smooth...

    Anyway! Pot, kettle, *yawns*, etc.


  • #284
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 168 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Jernal wrote: »
    Depends on how you intend to discuss it.
    We sometimes have Catholics and Prods bashing the crap out each other. If the Mohammed remarks counts so do those.
    I just think it's an interesting footnote to the Nativity story, but I can see how it could be used to attack Christianity.


  • #285
    oppenheimer1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,733 ✭✭✭oppenheimer1


    Thatdoesnt looksafe tome AHHHHHHH wrote: »
    Yea i realize in this situation, there shouldnt be one rule for one religion and another rule for another because it discriminates. The fact is tho boards is a business first and foremost, if something is going to lose you money in your business ie. legal action, you are obviously going to try your best to stop it before it even goes that far, that said i agree with you there shouldnt be double standards

    Another thing bound to lose a business based on discussion provided free by contributors is stifling that discussion.

    This new policy might stop the lawyers from coming in one door, but it will push users out the other. At some stage boards has to grow a pair and become part of real media, rather than cower at the shadow of a lawyers finely cut suit.


  • #286
    Ace Attorney
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,320 ✭✭✭Ace Attorney


    oppenheimer1 wrote: »
    Another thing bound to lose a business based on discussion provided free by contributors is stifling that discussion.

    This new policy might stop the lawyers from coming in one door, but it will push users out the other. At some stage boards has to grow a pair and become part of real media, rather than cower at the shadow of a lawyers finely cut suit.

    true enough


  • #287
    ColeTrain
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭ColeTrain


    oppenheimer1 wrote: »
    Their confidence and their insurance does. Do you think magazines like the Village and the Phoenix have larger turnovers than Boards.ie?

    I really have no idea what boards.ie turnover is.
    The point is the magazines that you have mentioned can tightly control what they print, it's obviously much harder for boards to do this.

    Still, it is disappointing to see any religious group been shown this sort of respect. In a perfect world ( or forum ) they would be repeatedly ripped to shreds.
    I'm on the fence with this one.


  • #288
    Cody Pomeray
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,648 ✭✭✭Cody Pomeray


    ColeTrain wrote: »
    Maybe because their turnover allows them to take that chance?

    For what it's worth, the site's parent company, Distilled Media returned a bigger post tax profit than The Irish Times, according to the last accounts filed with the CRO.


  • #289
    Manassas61
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 313 ✭✭Manassas61


    I never knew you could actually make a compliant to the website with such a law. Now everyone knows, threads will constantly get shut down if it's deemed blasphemous and a complaint is made.

    In a way today's news has strengthened the position of Christians on Boards IE.


  • #290
    Jimoslimos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,930 ✭✭✭Jimoslimos


    Thatdoesnt looksafe tome AHHHHHHH wrote: »
    The fact is tho boards is a business first and foremost, if something is going to lose you money in your business ie. legal action, you are obviously going to try your best to stop it before it even goes that far, that said i agree with you there shouldnt be double standards
    That business is discussion. By restricting that you eventually lose users - no users = no revenue.


  • #291
    ColeTrain
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭ColeTrain


    SameoleSameole wrote: »
    A spelling error does not make someone "stupid" - yawn indeed.

    But then, what should we really expect from a moderator who mocks the articulation skills of another in the Feedback forum:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=86303585&postcount=16

    You Sir, need to spend a little more time challenging points put in discussions and a little less time trying to impress those with more stars than you. Might do you some good.


    TBF mate the post that Insect Overlord replied to nearly blew my head off. Still can't understand it.


  • Advertisement
  • #292
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    Yay i live in a democracy i have free speech... we tell you what you can say


  • #293
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    kneemos wrote: »
    Hard to know what blasphemy is.

    Think 'victimless crime'...


  • #294
    oppenheimer1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,733 ✭✭✭oppenheimer1


    kneemos wrote: »
    Hard to know what blasphemy is.

    Seems to be defined by boards.ie as only insulting Islam.


  • #295
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    Thor is a wally. Followers of Thor are also wallies.


  • #296
    Manassas61
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 313 ✭✭Manassas61


    No more Orange Order bashing now. ;)


  • #297
    bizmark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,895 ✭✭✭bizmark


    endacl wrote: »
    Thor is a wally. Followers of Thor are also wallies.

    Shut up the lightening god will strike you down! or marvel will send a cease and disest letter to stop boards discussing the new thor movie before the review embargo ends im not sure which but JUST STOP OK


  • #298
    tosspot15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 175 ✭✭tosspot15


    Insect Overlord wrote: »
    And yet ye all keep coming back. Sad, isn't it?

    You say that as if to mean I left because I was unhappy with the way boards was being run. This is my 4th or 5th account and every time I've almost immediately created a new one after closing my old. I dont close them because I dont want to browse boards anymore.
    Infact, I do want to browse boards!


  • #299
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    bizmark wrote: »
    Shut up the lightening god will strike you down! or marvel will send a cease and disest letter to stop boards discussing the new thor movie before the review embargo ends im not sure which but JUST STOP OK

    I meant 'Thor' Thor. He's a wally. 'Marvel' Thor is not a wally. He's cool. His followers aren't wallies. They're nerds, which admittedly do look like wallies. I can see how some confusion might arise...


  • #300
    tosspot15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 175 ✭✭tosspot15


    Id say theres some shítstorm going on between the mods and admins right now :D


  • Advertisement
  • #301
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    SameoleSameole wrote: »

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=86303585&postcount=16

    .

    Hey, thanks for linking that! I missed it at the time. It is, I must say, a fine example of how to respond to the poster in question. Well done the Overlord. Well done indeed. Keep on doin' whatcha doin'!

    :)


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement