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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

1…4244464748

Comments

  • #2152
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Discodog wrote: »
    I haven't seen anyone ask for it's closure. But why is it the only place where one can discuss current affairs ? I am sure that there are plenty on Boards that would welcome a normally moderated forum for such discussion. Good luck with debunking that Ireland has too many immigrants or people on welfare are scroungers or even that a "scumbag" with a knife deserves to be shot dead.

    Some topics can't have an alternative view because the mob will shout it down & so you end up with the "echo chamber" that everyone says they don't want.

    I don’t know, call me crazy but I’d say a forum entitled ‘Current Affairs’ is the perfect place to discuss... current affairs. I don’t know what you mean by ‘normally moderated forum’. What is abnormal about the moderation of ‘Current Affairs’?


  • #2153
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,693 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Well, snoopsheep is conversing with Joeytheparrot there who is notorious for NOT doing the bolded. He runs when challenged. If Joeytheparrot wants other to back up what they say in the interest of a robust and open discussion, he should be prepared to do the same himself.


    There are plenty of posters who are all for backing up claims when somebody else is making them, but not when they make them themselves. This hypocrisy (in every aspect of debate, not just that one) is a hallmark of CA.


    Every poster should be prepared to back up what they say when making such claims. I think it would improve the quality of debate significantly, by removing the bottom layer of baseless claims and resulting pointless back and forth.


  • #2154
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Its really not in any way possible to debunk in a mature way when the level of debate is that left wing people are resentful, self loathing, have no purpose in life, make no contribution to society, are miserable, are mentally ill and destroy peoples lives. That isnt in anyway whatsoever a mature discussion.
    In the multiculturalism thread as an example the number of "left wing" people who were threadbanned, or banned from the forum itself absolutely dwarfed the number of "right wing" people who were. The examples of insult you give were all present and with some extra spice on top. Indeed the consistent MO for the vast majority of such posters was to come in, respond to a post, when they felt their arguments were debunked or disrespected, or they were running out of steam to call racism or some other ism, then in short order run to insult, then leave, or get banned.

    Now I can certainly see and can happily acknowledge examples of what you mention towards the "left" and that's not on, but the fact you seem blind to it going the other way when there are more than plenty of examples says more about your baseline position than the realities involved.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • #2155
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    osarusan wrote: »
    There are plenty of posters who are all for backing up claims when somebody else is making them, but not when they make them themselves. This hypocrisy (in every aspect of debate, not just that one) is a hallmark of CA.


    Every poster should be prepared to back up what they say when making such claims. I think it would improve the quality of debate significantly, by removing the bottom layer of baseless claims and resulting pointless back and forth.

    Right... but if somebody comes to Feedback to complain about people not backing up their claims and cites it as a reason for not getting more involved in CA and pontificates about the need for robust, evidenced debate, they better be damn sure they are not guilty of same. That’s hypocritical and should be flagged.

    And I’d disagree that it’s a hallmark of CA. I have a few threads I contribute to and people are pretty darn good at backing up what they say because the most regular contributors really give a shit about the topics and have given them a lot of thought. So I can’t even really relate to your point here. People might not like the evidence provided but that’s different.


  • #2156
    SchrodingersCat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 941 ✭✭✭SchrodingersCat


    Wibbs wrote: »
    In the multiculturalism thread as an example the number of "left wing" people who were threadbanned, or banned from the forum itself absolutely dwarfed the number of "right wing" people who were.

    Where are you getting these numbers to compare from?


  • #2157
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    From reading and posting in the thread. It was extremely obvious to anyone doing the same. The pattern outlined above was with a couple of welcome exceptions remarkably similar.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • #2158
    TheValeyard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,733 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    Can I complain about the complainers?

    All eyes on Kursk. Slava Ukraini.



  • #2159
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,693 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Right... but if somebody comes to Feedback to complain about people not backing up their claims and cites it as a reason for not getting more involved in CA and pontificates about the need for robust, evidenced debate, they better be damn sure they are not guilty of same. That’s hypocritical and should be flagged.
    No issue with any of that.
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    And I’d disagree that it’s a hallmark of CA. I have a few threads I contribute to and people are pretty darn good at backing up what they say because the most regular contributors really give a shit about the topics and have given them a lot of thought. So I can’t even really relate to your point here. People might not like the evidence provided but that’s different.
    There are indeed loads of posters who make great contributions and do offer robust debate, and that's great.

    Unfortunately there are also posters who absolutely stink the place up with bad faith hypocritical sh!tposting. It's the apparent need to cater to this kind of poster that I don't understand.


  • #2160
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    osarusan wrote: »
    No issue with any of that.


    There are indeed loads of posters who make great contributions and do offer robust debate, and that's great.

    Unfortunately there are also posters who absolutely stink the place up with bad faith hypocritical sh!tposting. It's the apparent need to cater to this kind of poster that I don't understand.

    I’ve used a few different forums and messageboards over the years and still do and shitposters were and are present on all of them. They’ll never be completely eradicated from a site and boards probably does a better job than most at moderating them. But yeah, they’ll always be there so we need to move around them and reply to the people who interest us.


  • Advertisement
  • #2161
    SchrodingersCat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 941 ✭✭✭SchrodingersCat


    Wibbs wrote: »
    From reading and posting in the thread. It was extremely obvious to anyone doing the same. The pattern outlined above was with a couple of welcome exceptions remarkably similar.

    Ah right. I thought you might have had actual, not anecdotal evidence.


  • #2162
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    SchrodingersCat wrote: »
    Ah right. I thought you might have had actual, not anecdotal evidence.

    There’s hardly going to be a peer-reviewed study about the thread. See who has been threadbanned. If they are a regular user and you are a regular user, you will have a good idea of their political allegiances.


  • #2163
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Is there any good reason to keep on going with the George thread - other than clicks?

    This was my last post on it;

    "Ugh, here I go with my post to the ether.

    The guy is dead. The investigation is presumably ongoing.

    The family of the dead guy can read all this.

    The family of the Guards involved can read all this.

    Does it need to go on?"

    But now people are making rap jokes on the thread. Nice look for the site.

    It shouldn't be about reporting posters, it should be about shutting down sh*tty threads.


  • #2164
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,693 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Deleted User wrote: »
    It shouldn't be about reporting posters, it should be about shutting down sh*tty threads.
    I think exactly the opposite.


    Shutting down threads seems to be the less troublesome thing to do, rather than take action against individual posters who may head to DRP.


    Leave threads open for people who want to discuss the topic, get rid of those who just want to act the dick.


  • #2165
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Do you see any value in keeping the George thread open? What new insights are going to be shared there?


  • #2166
    Omackeral
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    I notice a post of mine was deleted on a CA thread without comment. That's bad form. Nothing via PM or on thread. Don't know who to even say it to as nobody cared to leave a name on their action. It was probably because I called out a user for their continued bad faith posting on a thread. If that's it, then but why not say it? But why are some posters allowed to make all the claims in the world they want without proof and disappear when asked to back them up and then have the neck to ask others for proof in the exact same thread for something to suit their narrative?


  • Advertisement
  • #2167
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,053 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Omackeral wrote: »
    I notice a post of mine was deleted on a CA thread without comment. That's bad form. Nothing via PM or on thread. Don't know who to even say it to as nobody cared to leave a name on their action. It was probably because I called out a user for their continued bad faith posting on a thread. If that's it, then but why not say it? But why are some posters allowed to make all the claims in the world they want without proof and disappear when asked to back them up and then have the neck to ask others for proof in the exact same thread for something to suit their narrative?

    If it was backseat moderating that could have been why


  • #2168
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,693 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Do you see any value in keeping the George thread open? What new insights are going to be shared there?


    If posters are filling it with shyte, do something about the posts and posters, clean the thread up, then leave it alone.


    When people get tired of talking about it, it will drop away naturally. Just let that happen.


  • #2169
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Posts outright accusing people of being "resident racists" are deemed as yellow cards.

    These are the same arseholes that claim that "rightwing" people have free reign.

    Laughable.


  • #2170
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    osarusan wrote: »
    If posters are filling it with shyte, do something about the posts and posters, clean the thread up, then leave it alone.


    When people get tired of talking about it, it will drop away naturally. Just let that happen.

    I guess we'll have to disagree. I think it's a sh*t look to keep a thread going about someone who has died under whatever circumstances. It's not dropping away and it won't unless Boards.ie decide to take a stance on stuff like this.

    I fail to see what benefit there is to keep that particular thread running, other than for clicks. It's certainly not for any new information that the posters are going to add to the thread.

    Anyway, I've probably got through my righteous indignation for the night. Good luck.


  • #2171
    Kraftwerk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 472 ✭✭Kraftwerk


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    I guess we'll have to disagree. I think it's a sh*t look to keep a thread going about someone who has died under whatever circumstances. It's not dropping away and it won't unless Boards.ie decide to take a stance on stuff like this.

    There's obviously more details to come when the investigation is complete. There's still crowds of idiots breaching Covid restrictions over it daily. Its an ongoing story so it makes no sense to close the thread to keep a handful of whingers happy.


  • Advertisement
  • #2172
    Omackeral
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    Overheal wrote: »
    If it was backseat moderating that could have been why

    It was not back seat moderating at all. It was asking a question directly to a poster why they demand proof and evidence yet never give it themselves. Even if it was considered backseat modding in the opinion of the bosses, why not say it instead of deleting stuff without a note. It’s not a great precedent imo.


  • #2173
    Kraftwerk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 472 ✭✭Kraftwerk


    Omackeral wrote: »
    It was not back seat moderating at all. It was asking a question directly to a poster why they demand proof and evidence yet never give it themselves. Even if it was considered backseat modding in the opinion of the bosses, why not say it instead of deleting stuff without a note. It’s not a great precedent imo.

    Mods routinely delete stuff without saying anything. Seems to be mostly cleaning up off topic stuff.


  • #2174
    Omackeral
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    Kraftwerk wrote: »
    Mods routinely delete stuff without saying anything. Seems to be mostly cleaning up off topic stuff.

    Fair enough. I just think the poster deserves to be called on their bad faith posts and it was in keeping with the topic imo


  • #2175
    SchrodingersCat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 941 ✭✭✭SchrodingersCat


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    There’s hardly going to be a peer-reviewed study about the thread. See who has been threadbanned. If they are a regular user and you are a regular user, you will have a good idea of their political allegiances.


    Here, i'm not looking for a peer reviewed study, I'm wondering if there is a way to see the threadbanned users and to figure out their allegiances rather than going off someones recollection.

    Back to the original question, how do you see who is threadbanned? Typically there is a list at the start of the thread, but there doesn't appear to be one in this, nor can i find it mentioned in the thread.


  • #2176
    Invidious
    Closed Accounts Posts: 528 ✭✭✭Invidious


    osarusan wrote: »
    Shutting down threads seems to be the less troublesome thing to do...
    Deleted User wrote: »
    Do you see any value in keeping the George thread open?

    It's clear that some posters want to use the Feedback forum to campaign endlessly against threads/forums/posters they don't like. Is that the purpose of Feedback?

    The very nature of a large discussion forum means that not every thread will be to everyone's taste ... but this increasing spirit of censoriousness, and these ceaseless calls to lock threads, ban posters, etc., seem to me entirely contrary to the spirit of open debate that Boards should be seeking to foster.


  • #2177
    frozenfrozen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,882 ✭✭✭frozenfrozen


    Omackeral wrote: »
    I notice a post of mine was deleted on a CA thread without comment. That's bad form. Nothing via PM or on thread. Don't know who to even say it to as nobody cared to leave a name on their action. It was probably because I called out a user for their continued bad faith posting on a thread. If that's it, then but why not say it? But why are some posters allowed to make all the claims in the world they want without proof and disappear when asked to back them up and then have the neck to ask others for proof in the exact same thread for something to suit their narrative?

    Same as me yesterday evening and I only found out as he had given me a card for a separate post so I got a PM. Cleaned up all my posts calling out someone for just dodging questions and left the posts I replied to

    No on thread warning about why it was cleaned up either. I pmed the mod who said I was off topic. I'm one of the few on there who refuses for the topic to be immediately changed so others can roll off the questions they never answer...

    Usually don't have an issue with boards modding but it was very odd that only my stuff was removed. The mod in pm who had deleted my posts several minutes before also asked to be reminded which posts were deleted and they said they hadn't been reading earlier so weren't sure what we were talking about. So how they could be sure it was just me being off topic is questionable.

    You have people coming out with statements which if you tried to question them they roll it off and if you push them for an answer you are deleted for being off topic without warning or a mod summary on thread of why it happened.

    My feedback is just are all of the mods aware of the level of silent deleting going on? It seems 1 sided so I wonder if its just one mod with some bias


  • #2178
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    frozenfrozen wrote: »

    Usually don't have an issue with boards modding but it was very odd that only my stuff was removed. The mod in pm who had deleted my posts several minutes before also asked to be reminded which posts were deleted and they said they hadn't been reading earlier so weren't sure what we were talking about. So how they could be sure it was just me being off topic is questionable.
    The mod removed a number of posts in a chain of correspondence that were not discussing the underlying topic. In some cases users deleted their own posts (although some remain in quotes)

    The post you picked a card up for was very clearly attacking another poster - that post is fully visible with the yellow card showing. The deleted posts were made about 2 and a half hours later in the thread

    Either way it's a specific issue in a specific thread - the deleted stuff is not for further discussion here


  • #2179
    frozenfrozen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,882 ✭✭✭frozenfrozen


    Beasty wrote: »
    The mod removed a number of posts in a chain of correspondence that were not discussing the underlying topic. In some cases users deleted their own posts (although some remain in quotes)

    The post you picked a card up for was very clearly attacking another poster - that post is fully visible with the yellow card showing. The deleted posts were made about 2 and a half hours later in the thread

    Either way it's a specific issue in a specific thread - the deleted stuff is not for further discussion here

    I didn't for a second question the card. Thanks for the clarification that the poster I was calling out for selectively deleting their own posts was in fact doing it.

    I won't bring it up again


  • #2180
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    SchrodingersCat wrote: »
    Here, i'm not looking for a peer reviewed study, I'm wondering if there is a way to see the threadbanned users and to figure out their allegiances rather than going off someones recollection.

    Back to the original question, how do you see who is threadbanned? Typically there is a list at the start of the thread, but there doesn't appear to be one in this, nor can i find it mentioned in the thread.

    An announcement is made on-thread so that people know to stop replying to a forum member who can’t reply back. I guess a search of posts by forum mods made in the thread would be the most expedient way to find those posts.


  • #2181
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    SchrodingersCat wrote: »
    Ah right. I thought you might have had actual, not anecdotal evidence.
    Any poster who engaged in that particular thread for any length of time, no matter their allegiance to one side or the other would agree with me. It was pretty obvious SchrodingersCat. Even a few of those who thanked my post on the matter could be hardly described as "right wing" or anti the thread topic. I could delve into that thread and link posts and posters you could follow through the next few pages and you'd see the same pattern, but that's not really cricket in the feedback forum to single out posters like that.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • #2182
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Omackeral wrote: »
    Fair enough. I just think the poster deserves to be called on their bad faith posts and it was in keeping with the topic imo
    I've had a look at the post and TBH I'm surprised you did not get a PM informing you of a card or forum ban for attacking a poster rather than post. But mod discretion seems to have worked in your favour here.

    If you wish to discuss further though, please PM me


  • #2183
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    An announcement is made on-thread so that people know to stop replying to a forum member who can’t reply back. I guess a search of posts by forum mods made in the thread would be the most expedient way to find those posts.
    Generally I will advise a threadban by quoting a post(s) that I felt went over the line and simply stating "threadbanned"

    In some threads, and in particular those where we have multiple iterations, we have started listing threadbans in OPs. We do not typically do so in threads which are likely to be short-lived. It is something we may look to standardise in CA perhaps by putting a list when we get to a "thread 2", as clearly it's not as straightforward for anyone to search another earlier thread if they think someone has been threadbanned. It is always useful when posters report posters they think are threadbanned, as we are unlikely to spot them otherwise particularly in longer/faster moving threads


  • #2184
    SchrodingersCat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 941 ✭✭✭SchrodingersCat


    Beasty wrote: »
    Generally I will advise a threadban by quoting a post(s) that I felt went over the line and simply stating "threadbanned"

    In some threads, and in particular those where we have multiple iterations, we have started listing threadbans in OPs. We do not typically do so in threads which are likely to be short-lived. It is something we may look to standardise in CA perhaps by putting a list when we get to a "thread 2", as clearly it's not as straightforward for anyone to search another earlier thread if they think someone has been threadbanned. It is always useful when posters report posters they think are threadbanned, as we are unlikely to spot them otherwise particularly in longer/faster moving threads

    Thanks. I would find this useful. From reading the Multicultural thread, and from the numbers being mentioned in confidence by posters here, I thought I was missing a list of threadbanned users.


  • #2185
    Hamachi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,640 ✭✭✭Hamachi


    I’ve had several posts ‘silently’ deleted in the CA thread discussing the shooting of George Nkencho. My posts were either responding to or reinforcing existing arguments, the content of which persist in the public domain.

    Is there a specific reason why most recent post was deleted? It feels like a pretty underhand way to censor opinion that was reasonably articulate and did not violate forum rules. I’ll be keeping an eye on this going forward.


  • #2186
    CtevenSrowder
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,909 ✭✭✭CtevenSrowder


    Beasty wrote: »
    Generally I will advise a threadban by quoting a post(s) that I felt went over the line and simply stating "threadbanned"

    In some threads, and in particular those where we have multiple iterations, we have started listing threadbans in OPs. We do not typically do so in threads which are likely to be short-lived. It is something we may look to standardise in CA perhaps by putting a list when we get to a "thread 2", as clearly it's not as straightforward for anyone to search another earlier thread if they think someone has been threadbanned. It is always useful when posters report posters they think are threadbanned, as we are unlikely to spot them otherwise particularly in longer/faster moving threads

    I think listing threadbanned users would be a good idea.


  • #2187
    .anon.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,094 ✭✭✭.anon.


    Hamachi wrote: »
    I’ve had several posts ‘silently’ deleted in the CA thread discussing the shooting of George Nkencho.

    I've just noticed I've had a pretty innocuous post silently deleted from the unpopular opinions thread (it's quoted in this post). I'm guessing it was deleted accidentally, as a number of posts on the same page were deleted because they quoted a troll. Which is fine, I don't mind. But if, for some reason, it was deliberately deleted, it would be nice to be told why.


  • #2188
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    .anon. wrote: »
    I've just noticed I've had a pretty innocuous post silently deleted from the unpopular opinions thread (it's quoted in this post). I'm guessing it was deleted accidentally, as a number of posts on the same page were deleted because they quoted a troll. Which is fine, I don't mind. But if, for some reason, it was deliberately deleted, it would be nice to be told why.

    I've just had a look. Caught in the crossfire by the looks of it - the mod was deleting a large number of posting quoting one of our "regulars" who we try not to offer any oxygen to, and yours was inadvertently included. I've undeleted your post

    With something like that it's best to drop the mod a PM


  • #2189
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Nigerian gangs trafficking children into Ireland for sex.

    Are leftie liberals ok with their kids being raped.

    Not his first rodeo.

    Just some of the nice things to pop up on Boards most popular thread in the last hour or so.

    But sure, yeah, clicks.


  • #2190
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,053 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Beasty wrote: »
    I've just had a look. Caught in the crossfire by the looks of it - the mod was deleting a large number of posting quoting one of our "regulars" who we try not to offer any oxygen to, and yours was inadvertently included. I've undeleted your post

    With something like that it's best to drop the mod a PM

    The problem is when it’s not clear which mod was involved? Should someone ask in help desk then?


  • Advertisement
  • #2191
    Sir Oxman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,492 ✭✭✭Sir Oxman


    Closure of the 'George Nkencho' thread is over the top and should be re-opened.
    Instead of giving the impression of 'giving in' to serial whingers, maybe remove the sub-conversations (for example, Nigerian sex traffickers) and warn or threadban.
    When a good few posters on the 'Gemma' thread were using a guard's suicide as a side scoring point, the right thing was done - comments were removed and the thread kept open.


  • #2192
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,693 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    osarusan wrote: »
    I think exactly the opposite.


    Shutting down threads seems to be the less troublesome thing to do, rather than take action against individual posters who may head to DRP.


    Leave threads open for people who want to discuss the topic, get rid of those who just want to act the dick.
    The Nkencho thread was closed, and I think this post applies here.

    I appreciate that there were mod warnings and then posters who didn't adhere to the warnings received cards...but why close the thread? Why not say that X, Y and Z are now threadbanned and leave the thread open?

    I get the sense that mods (very understandably) think 'ah f**k this, it's all just too much hassle, I'm closing this thread.' Particularly if it's 1.52am!

    But I think threadbans are the way to go here - you act the dick in a thread, you lose the right to post in that thread.


  • #2193
    Kraftwerk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 472 ✭✭Kraftwerk


    Were the whingers constantly reporting the thread or something? Because there's loads of threads that are constantly going off topic and never closed. The SF thread for example is rarely on topic and is mostly shinners complaining about FG. But it's never actioned.

    Why is the nkencho thread treated differently?


  • #2194
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,427 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Nkencho thread closing is OTT.

    I suppose it shows the power of complaint, those who couldn't argue successfully that the killing was racially motivated went down the route of complaint.

    Anyone posting in the thread and not abiding by the warnings should have been warned or thread banned. Instead the nuclear option was chosen.

    The George Nkencho case is by no means resolved, and we can be sure it will continue to be discussed. Is the topic of this case now not allowed to be discussed on boards? Because other threads will invariably pop up over time.

    Glazers Out!



  • #2195
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    nullzero wrote: »
    Nkencho thread closing is OTT.

    I suppose it shows the power of complaint, those who couldn't argue successfully that the killing was racially motivated went down the route of complaint.

    Anyone posting in the thread and not abiding by the warnings should have been warned or thread banned. Instead the nuclear option was chosen.

    The George Nkencho case is by no means resolved, and we can be sure it will continue to be discussed. Is the topic of this case now not allowed to be discussed on boards? Because other threads will invariably pop up over time.

    Looking last night, it was regular posters in that thread making incredibly racist remarks about Nigerians. It didn't even relate to the topic. I'm guessing going off topic on rants is a regular feature since it happened a few days back as well when I checked it.

    Also the people making the incredibly racist jabs are more often than not regulars on the site.

    Also this will predictably result in posters blaming me and other posters for the closure of the thread. The reality is it's down to the conduct of those who wanted to go off on racist tangents...


  • #2196
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Nkencho thread was going nowhere. Open a new one when the result of the GSOC investigation is released and there are more accurate details.


  • Advertisement
  • #2197
    Kraftwerk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 472 ✭✭Kraftwerk


    Topgear on Dave wrote: »
    Nkencho thread was going nowhere. Open a new one when the result of the GSOC investigation is released and there are more accurate details.

    Just like to clarify the procedure to close threads. From what I see here it's:

    1. Whinge on the thread itself about the thread existing.
    2. Insult other posters because the thread isn't closed.
    3. Get threadbanned for contributing nothing.
    4. Move to feedback to whinge over and over.
    5. Keep reporting anything and everything from the threads you're banned from.
    6. Mods will eventually close the thread.

    Can we stick that in the charter please so we're all clear on it?


  • #2198
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Overheal wrote: »
    The problem is when it’s not clear which mod was involved? Should someone ask in help desk then?
    Simple enough to PM any of the forum mods. In this particular case it was a clear mistake and I did not have to discuss with the relevant mod before correcting it.


  • #2199
    inforfun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,862 ✭✭✭✭inforfun


    I guess some people just never learn.
    If you keep dragging stuff into a thread that isnt really relevant for that thread, you give people for whom the subject of a thread is uncomfortable, the chance to report the **** out of a thread and get it closed.


  • #2200
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    I'm just seeing from the comments here that the Nkencho thread has been closed

    The incident occurred 18 days ago. The thread has nearly 8,000 posts. Is there really much more that can be said about the incident?

    I appreciate there will be a follow up by relevant authorities, which can be addressed at the relevant time. However the thread is a magnet for anyone wanting to raise any immigration or indeed race issue. It had run its course on the thread topic.

    If anyone has any new information or has an relevant aspect they believe has not been covered please drop me a PM and we can look at re-opening it to discuss the relevant issue


  • #2201
    This is it
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,689 ✭✭✭This is it


    Beasty wrote: »
    I'm just seeing from the comments here that the Nkencho thread has been closed

    The incident occurred 18 days ago. The thread has nearly 8,000 posts. Is there really much more that can be said about the incident?

    I appreciate there will be a follow up by relevant authorities, which can be addressed at the relevant time. However the thread is a magnet for anyone wanting to raise any immigration or indeed race issue. It had run its course on the thread topic.

    If anyone has any new information or has an relevant aspect they believe has not been covered please drop me a PM and we can look at re-opening it to discuss the relevant issue

    A thread should be let run until it falls off naturally. If posters are causing issues in the thread then thread ban them, card them, ban them, etc. For those posters to kill a thread that others are using to discuss the topic legitimately reads as lazy modding to me. Don't let the few dictate what thread is open or closed, remove them from the situation if they don't follow the rules and the previous warnings.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement