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…78101213…48

Comments

  • #452
    EmmetSpiceland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,023 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    Johnny Dogs wrote: »
    Just leave this here.

    You let it go 24 hours without bumping! Come on, I was doing you a favour, J.

    “It is not blood that makes you Irish but a willingness to be part of the Irish nation” - Thomas Davis



  • #453
    Snow Garden
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,126 ✭✭✭Snow Garden


    Beasty wrote: »
    The closure was all my doing - there were no other Admins around at the time. Hence it's not one you can put down to the site (but you can of course put it down to me)

    Fair enough Beasty but I still you were wrong to close the thread in that I thought your justification wasn't enough to make that call.


  • #454
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Snow Garden wrote: »
    Fair enough Beasty but I still you were wrong to close the thread in that I thought your justification wasn't enough to make that call.
    And you are perfectly entitled to that view. Equally I fully accept I'm certainly not always "right" but equally on something like this there cannot be a "right" or "wrong" - it can only be a judgement call

    I will re-iterate though, the new thread is already discussing some of the points I considered off-topic for that original thread. They are though better suited to this new thread in my view, as I consider it to be a "wider" topic


  • #455
    McMurphy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    With all due respect beasty, the thread is only a few days old and already you have several of the same "crew", you know the lads I'm on about, (fierce fond of using inverted commas and what not) already at the same crap that got the last thread shut.

    They're even at it in this feedback thread FFS.

    Be a real shame if they're continued to be allowed to post their nonsense with impunity as has been happening of late.

    Just an observation.


  • #456
    WishUWereHere
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭WishUWereHere


    EmmetSpiceland wrote: »
    Ah, Sir Apropos of Nothing, we meet again.

    Try here:

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058021984

    The thread did drop off the first page, so it’s understandable you missed it, but I’m sure one of your “group” will be along to ensure that doesn’t happen again.

    1) I wonder can You or your fellow posters EVER reply withOUT resorting to calling posters names???

    2) I wasn't aware of the other thread. Thank You for enlightening me.

    3) I belong to NO 'group'.

    Why do I think You are trying to get this thread locked like the last one? AND what can possibly be achieved by that?


  • Advertisement
  • #457
    EmmetSpiceland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,023 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    WishUWereHere wrote: »
    1) I wonder can You or your fellow posters EVER reply withOUT resorting to calling posters names???

    2) I wasn't aware of the other thread. Thank You for enlightening me.

    3) I belong to NO 'group'.

    Why do I think You are trying to get this thread locked like the last one? AND what can possibly be achieved by that?

    You posted a random link in a “feedback” thread, I would call that “apropos of nothing”, what on earth were you thinking?

    You’re welcome.

    Ah, got it. *wink* *wink* my lips are sealed.

    This is a “feedback” thread, I don’t believe it will be locked anytime soon, nor should it be.

    Why do I think that you, and others in a group that you’re not, in anyway way, attached to, are turning the “expenses” thread in the “current affairs” forum into another news dump for any random story that mentions Fine Gael? Are you trying to get the thread locked yourself?

    “It is not blood that makes you Irish but a willingness to be part of the Irish nation” - Thomas Davis



  • #458
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    EmmetSpiceland wrote: »
    You posted a random link in a “feedback” thread, I would call that “apropos of nothing”, what on earth were you thinking?

    You’re welcome.

    Ah, got it. *wink* *wink* my lips are sealed.

    This is a “feedback” thread, I don’t believe it will be locked anytime soon, nor should it be.

    Why do I think that you, and others in a group that you’re not, in anyway way, attached to, are turning the “expenses” thread in the “current affairs” forum into another news dump for any random story that mentions Fine Gael? Are you trying to get the thread locked yourself?

    TBF, people are commenting on the 'expenses' of Maria Bailey and Alan Farrell and how it pertains to them and their party. Also, related, how they both put in dodgy claims. You might not have read about that. I'd say ignore it.


  • #459
    EmmetSpiceland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,023 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    TBF, people are commenting on the 'expenses' of Maria Bailey and Alan Farrell and how it pertains to them and their party. Also, related, how they both put in dodgy claims. You might not have read about that. I'd say ignore it.

    Here, even now you lot are “dumping” a link about a FG politician removing Bailey from social media. Nothing to do with expenses.

    Anything to keep the thread “bumped” but then you’ll throw accusations of dragging the thread “off topic”, pure hypocrisy.

    “It is not blood that makes you Irish but a willingness to be part of the Irish nation” - Thomas Davis



  • #460
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    EmmetSpiceland wrote: »
    Here, even now you lot are “dumping” a link about a FG politician removing Bailey from social media. Nothing to do with expenses.

    Anything to keep the thread “bumped” but then you’ll throw accusations of dragging the thread “off topic”, pure hypocrisy.

    What you might be missing is that these are politicians and the caliber and credibility of these people is relevant to folk. It's not my fault you want the story gone. Sadly the behaviour of people looking to get the thread closed has been pointed out so I don't see much point in trying same with this. The 'off topic' some engaged in was to turn the thread into a slagging match.

    Otherwise:

    There's numerous threads on farming and soaps. No interest myself, so I don't engage.


  • #461
    McMurphy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    EmmetSpiceland wrote: »
    Here, even now you lot are “dumping” a link about a FG politician removing Bailey from social media. Nothing to do with expenses.

    Anything to keep the thread “bumped” but then you’ll throw accusations of dragging the thread “off topic”, pure hypocrisy.

    Anyone who thinks the following:
    • TD and minister revealed to be involved in a controversial case in which a Dublin business was asked for a substantial sum of cash, and later (when said business refused) lodging an insurance claim against them.

    • The same TD having been named as claiming several thousand euro in expenses they weren't entitled to claim during a completely random audit.....


    • Previously aforementioned minister apparently cutting ties with also aforementioned TD a few days after her expenses claim got reported on......

    Aren't connected stories - well then, I'm just going to have to assume that you weren't too great at dot to dot books back in the day, possibly not these days either. ;)


  • Advertisement
  • #462
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Just to be clear. I am seeing no good reason to close the current thread (I accept I took a different view on the original Bailey thread, but we were in no way "lobbied" to close that one - as already mentioned I made a judgement call on that - one that some others clearly disagreed with)

    If anyone believes there is good reason to close any thread, it's not something to be discussed here. Report it and we will consider any representations made.


  • #463
    pinkyeye
    Registered Users Posts: 1,293 ✭✭✭pinkyeye


    Beasty wrote: »
    Just to be clear. I am seeing no good reason to close the current thread (I accept I took a different view on the original Bailey thread, but we were in no way "lobbied" to close that one - as already mentioned I made a judgement call on that - one that some others clearly disagreed with)

    If anyone believes there is good reason to close any thread, it's not something to be discussed here. Report it and we will consider any representations made.

    Judgement call my arse. :rolleyes:

    Totally biased and further posts since then have done nothing but confirm this for me.

    That's fine, it's done and gone but it certainly won't be let go so easily again.


  • #464
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,497 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Looks like this is now an acceptable standard of posting in Current Affairs / IMHO:
    Basic common sense isn't required. I don't know, maybe it's all these women making decisions. They sure are a looney bunch when they get together.

    Scrap the cap!



  • #465
    This is it
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,688 ✭✭✭This is it


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    Looks like this is now an acceptable standard of posting in Current Affairs / IMHO:

    I doubt it. Without context I'd say it wasn't reported, or if it was it was probably missed. These things happen. PM a mod and they'll take a look I'm sure.


  • #466
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 85,053 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    Looks like this is now an acceptable standard of posting in Current Affairs / IMHO:

    Looks like facetious humor to me


  • #467
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    One thing that can be guaranteed - with such a wide variation between what offends people we simply cannot please everyone all the time. I think though it's a bit unfair when someone heads over here to raise their specific concern simply because they know their point will get a lot higher profile in Feedback.

    Specific items like that should be raised with the local mods and if not satisfied then start a thread in Help Desk


  • #468
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,693 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    It could do with mods that are a bit more active.

    With the exception of Beasty, I can't recall seeing more than handful of mod actions from any of the other mods or cmods, and in some cases, I can't ever remember seeing any.


  • #469
    EmmetSpiceland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,023 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    osarusan wrote: »
    It could do with mods that are a bit more active.

    With the exception of Beasty, I can't recall seeing more than handful of mod actions from any of the other mods or cmods, and in some cases, I can't ever remember seeing any.

    Really? The “heavier” that place gets modded the more chance of its regular denizens wandering into AH.

    The place is a hive of every negative -ism, -itry, -phobia and -ogyny. Yes, there are a few brave souls fighting the “good fight” but, really, it’s like sandbagging the tide but it keeps them all, mostly, in one spot and mainly away from AH.

    Leave them at it.

    One thing I would like to see is a way to request a thread be moved from AH into CA without having to “report” a post. I don’t want to be “ratting” on an individual poster, I’d just like their backward, and nasty, thread be moved to the more appropriate forum.

    “It is not blood that makes you Irish but a willingness to be part of the Irish nation” - Thomas Davis



  • #470
    Mr E
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 55,534 ✭✭✭✭Mr E


    osarusan wrote: »
    It could do with mods that are a bit more active.

    With the exception of Beasty, I can't recall seeing more than handful of mod actions from any of the other mods or cmods, and in some cases, I can't ever remember seeing any.

    While we'd love to be able to police the forum 24/7, real life sometimes gets in the way. We all have day jobs (and it's not on Boards).

    I checked all your reported posts this week and they were all dealt with.

    I just cleaned up the Antifa thread too.


  • #471
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,693 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    EmmetSpiceland wrote: »
    Really? The “heavier” that place gets modded the more chance of its regular denizens wandering into AH.

    The place is a hive of every negative -ism, -itry, -phobia and -ogyny. Yes, there are a few brave souls fighting the “good fight” but, really, it’s like sandbagging the tide but it keeps them all, mostly, in one spot and mainly away from AH.
    If the purpose of CA was to provide a swamp for all the trolls to wallow in, then yeah, great, but that isn't what it was set up for, and the vast majority in CA just want to discuss current affairs, and have nowhere else to do so.


  • Advertisement
  • #472
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    The main problem posters will be dealt with (some already have been). It just takes time to build a case, largely through an accumulation of sanctions in the forum. Posters getting relatively short bans now will find a rapid escalation if they fail to adhere to the warnings they do get


  • #473
    Raconteuse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,817 ✭✭✭Raconteuse


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    Looks like this is now an acceptable standard of posting in Current Affairs / IMHO:
    Delightful. :rolleyes:

    But unsurprising.


  • #474
    Raconteuse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,817 ✭✭✭Raconteuse


    Beasty wrote: »
    The main problem posters will be dealt with (some already have been). It just takes time to build a case, largely through an accumulation of sanctions in the forum. Posters getting relatively short bans now will find a rapid escalation if they fail to adhere to the warnings they do get
    Beasty, misogyny has become grim again on Boards. I mean there are enough of those women hating kips around the internet. Boards is supposed to be a welcoming place for men and women.

    The Ladies' Lounge is dead now - thanks to people just giving up on it because of it being crashed by people telling them they're being irrational women and whatabouting.

    A thread was started on CA about female genital mutilation. In no time, the "what about males" and "people care more about females" (clearly, when there are cultures where she will have her clitoris sliced off and vaginal opening sewn up in infancy) comments started.

    One person acting in the above vein was met with this response: "It’s what he does. Picks absolutely ridiculous positions on issues and then argues his point. 

    Just ignore him." Hardly abusive. And absolutely correct - the poster in question is constantly being provocative. But it was the person who posted what I quoted that got the admonishment. Not the stirrer. How is that fair?


  • #475
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Raconteuse wrote: »

    One person acting in the above vein was met with this response: "It’s what he does. Picks absolutely ridiculous positions on issues and then argues his point. 

    Just ignore him." Hardly abusive. And absolutely correct - the poster in question is constantly being provocative. But it was the person who posted what I quoted that got the admonishment. Not the stirrer. How is that fair?

    I cannot discuss individual cases. Equally I cannot read every post. This week alone I have been on 2 separate flights to and back from the UK. When I've been here I've been up after midnight feeding the new grandchild.

    The below comments are not specific to this point, nor to you as a poster - they are equally relevant to everyone who posts in CA

    I know the answer is going to be we need more mods and probably Admins, but the point I am making is it's completely impractical to try and follow all threads. We had a report yesterday asking to look at "30-40 pages". With the best will in the world if we devote time to that sort of stuff we would never be able to get on with our "real lives"

    The only way I can continue to provide support and in particular moderating duties in a forum like that is via reports. Even then sometimes they get buried (such as from the 2 days when I was away this week. I still try to look, but it takes a bit longer. I know Mr E has also spent quite a bit of time in the forum particularly when I was away, and did a lot of cleaning up)

    You have probably noticed we've had a wave of new threads in recent days, along with some of the older ones either ongoing or being resurrected. Of course we could ship some of these threads over to other forums, but mainly they are acceptable for CA. What that means is we get a lot of posting in the forum, and it does attract some of the, for want of a better term, "dregs of the re-regs" (and no doubt one of them will now try and come up with a name play on that). there is also a benefit from that in that they can be spotted and dealt with, usually quite promptly, and they do become a priority when they are on a rampage. In turn such posts encourage others to express their own views more to the extreme

    I know this is a bit long winded, but in summary - report stuff. We should get to it, but if it continues bugging you report again (but please leave it at least 24 hours, and don't report stuff that's already been dealt with - you will be surprised at how many reports we see of posts that have already been clearly carded). Please though, do not take it into your own hands to call things out in thread. that just escalates things and causes us more issues to deal with. Sometimes we may think yes it's a bit extreme, but is there any good reason to sanction and/or censure, other than it does not agree with the perception of others? Also don't be surprised if posts disappear without explanation - sometimes it's the re-regs, and sometimes it's the posts responding to them. They do not deserve the oxygen even a quote provides them though and I'm unlikely to explain it except in exceptional circumstances

    And to re-iterate one final point. We cater for the full range of views, within reason. Just because someone else's view does not agree with your own does not make it unacceptable


  • #476
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,693 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Beasty wrote: »
    We had a report yesterday asking to look at "30-40 pages". With the best will in the world if we devote time to that sort of stuff we would never be able to get on with our "real lives"
    Not to mention any other part of your post, and just to deal with this part.


    That was my reported post, and it was a typo. I meant to say look at the following couple of pages, and then, realising that posts per page can vary due to settings, meant to change it to 'the following/next 30-40 posts', but left the word 'pages' there.

    I forget my exact words (next/following), but I first reported a post, then reported it again maybe 15-20 minutes later, asking not only that post but the following 30-40 posts be looked at, as the post I reported had produced 30-40 rapid responses, all of which ended up being deleted.

    Whoever read my reported post could not fail to recognise it was a typo, as there were at that time only 40-50 posts after that post I reported. It would not have been possible to devote such time to look at 30-40 pages, as they did not exist.


    Please don't use, and, by omitting the word 'following/next' from your version of events, misrepresent, an obvious typo as an example of the kind of unreasonable or onerous requests that users are making of mods or admins.


  • #477
    blanch152
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,319 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Beasty wrote: »

    And to re-iterate one final point. We cater for the full range of views, within reason. Just because someone else's view does not agree with your own does not make it unacceptable

    Many posters cannot cope with this point. For some, there is only one orthodox view of the world. For others, they cannot cope with their views and opinions being challenged, particularly when those views are based on a misrepresentation of the facts.


  • #478
    Raconteuse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,817 ✭✭✭Raconteuse


    Beasty wrote: »
    I cannot discuss individual cases. Equally I cannot read every post. This week alone I have been on 2 separate flights to and back from the UK. When I've been here I've been up after midnight feeding the new grandchild.

    The below comments are not specific to this point, nor to you as a poster - they are equally relevant to everyone who posts in CA

    I know the answer is going to be we need more mods and probably Admins, but the point I am making is it's completely impractical to try and follow all threads. We had a report yesterday asking to look at "30-40 pages". With the best will in the world if we devote time to that sort of stuff we would never be able to get on with our "real lives"

    The only way I can continue to provide support and in particular moderating duties in a forum like that is via reports. Even then sometimes they get buried (such as from the 2 days when I was away this week. I still try to look, but it takes a bit longer. I know Mr E has also spent quite a bit of time in the forum particularly when I was away, and did a lot of cleaning up)

    You have probably noticed we've had a wave of new threads in recent days, along with some of the older ones either ongoing or being resurrected. Of course we could ship some of these threads over to other forums, but mainly they are acceptable for CA. What that means is we get a lot of posting in the forum, and it does attract some of the, for want of a better term, "dregs of the re-regs" (and no doubt one of them will now try and come up with a name play on that). there is also a benefit from that in that they can be spotted and dealt with, usually quite promptly, and they do become a priority when they are on a rampage. In turn such posts encourage others to express their own views more to the extreme

    I know this is a bit long winded, but in summary - report stuff. We should get to it, but if it continues bugging you report again (but please leave it at least 24 hours, and don't report stuff that's already been dealt with - you will be surprised at how many reports we see of posts that have already been clearly carded). Please though, do not take it into your own hands to call things out in thread. that just escalates things and causes us more issues to deal with. Sometimes we may think yes it's a bit extreme, but is there any good reason to sanction and/or censure, other than it does not agree with the perception of others? Also don't be surprised if posts disappear without explanation - sometimes it's the re-regs, and sometimes it's the posts responding to them. They do not deserve the oxygen even a quote provides them though and I'm unlikely to explain it except in exceptional circumstances

    And to re-iterate one final point. We cater for the full range of views, within reason. Just because someone else's view does not agree with your own does not make it unacceptable
    The last part is a total cop-out (I don't just mean from you, I mean from everyone who misuses it to justify being a dick). It's dishonest and... kinda gas-lighting imo. I don't want an echo chamber at all. It's often people who use that line that do. I doubt many people take issue with mere disagreement/a different view - a minority do: those who call everyone a snowflake or a fascist. But those of us in the centre accept and respect that there are varying viewpoints. It's so disingenuous to put inflammatory stirring/being a dick into the same category as mere disagreement/differing point of view. They're not the same thing at all.

    And I don't expect anyone ever to read pages and pages, or to be inspired as to what's wrong, or to prioritise Boards moderation over their personal lives. My point was the unfair moderation. Constant stirrer - nothing. One non abusive post - mod action.

    And it doesn't look like a hoot is given about the misogyny anyway (the crowd on After Hours post their woman hating bile happily) but it is there, and I'm not the only one who sees it.


  • #479
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Raconteuse wrote: »
    And I don't expect anyone ever to read pages and pages, or to be inspired as to what's wrong, or to prioritise Boards moderation over their personal lives. My point was the unfair moderation. Constant stirrer - nothing. One non abusive post - mod action.
    Maybe you should consider taking some of the guesswork out of this for the mods, and report posts you have a problem with. Coming over here to complain about a specific issue when you have made no attempt to even report it is unacceptable


  • #480
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,141 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Deleted User wrote: »
    The 'London Bridge Incident' thread unsurprisingly has become a magnet for trolls. Why not introduce a minimum post limit (say 250) for entry into Current Affairs. It would ward off the usual suspects devoid of patience, and raise the discourse bar considerably.

    they tried that with politics cafe and it killed the forum, also it would be unfair to keep out someone with a small few posts, or who has even just joined, who actually may genuinely want to contribute. we were all newbies at one stage after all.
    if people really want rid of trolls then the best thing is really just to ignore them, trolls are always going to be a thing on here and people just need to get used to that unfortunately, they will always exist while forums exist.
    the systems in place will do what they can but i think on this people are expecting to much if i'm honest.

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words.



  • Advertisement
  • #481
    EmmetSpiceland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,023 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    It would also leave AH as the sinkhole for them and then the regular users of the forum would follow, best leave them all where they are.

    “It is not blood that makes you Irish but a willingness to be part of the Irish nation” - Thomas Davis



  • #482
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,646 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    end of the road wrote: »
    they tried that with politics cafe and it killed the forum, also it would be unfair to keep out someone with a small few posts, or who has even just joined, who actually may genuinely want to contribute. we were all newbies at one stage after all.
    if people really want rid of trolls then the best thing is really just to ignore them, trolls are always going to be a thing on here and people just need to get used to that unfortunately, they will always exist while forums exist.
    the systems in place will do what they can but i think on this people are expecting to much if i'm honest.


    If only people would take this advice:rolleyes:


  • #483
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Make the site a nightmare to use and they'll come less. There's some vbulletin thing called Miserable Users that can cause all sorts of issues for certain users, basically banning them without them realising.

    I assume it's things like forms not submitting or random 404s, log outs etc.


  • #484
    KyussB
    Registered Users Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭KyussB


    While the thread is active again:
    Can a mod/admin of CA reiterate please, that normal posters telling people "get back on topic", "that's off topic" repeatedly etc., to try and limit posters from talking about specific things - especially when a poster disagrees and points out how it's on topic - is backseat modding?

    I prefer things being dealt with without posts being reported - so if a CA mod reiterates that here, I can just link to it in-thread when it happens (presumably linking like that wouldn't be backseat modding) - then it's sorted without mods ever having to know/bother with it.


  • #485
    nkl12xtw5goz70
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,497 ✭✭✭nkl12xtw5goz70


    Raconteuse wrote: »
    Beasty, misogyny has become grim again on Boards. I mean there are enough of those women hating kips around the internet. Boards is supposed to be a welcoming place for men and women.

    I currently have a female poster following me around asking questions like "Why do you hate women so much?" because I argued on a thread that a nonviolent mentally ill internet troll should not have received a three-year custodial sentence for relatively mild harassment of some female journalists — especially when another man who issued highly explicit online death threats against a senator received a six-month suspended sentence last year.

    The same poster is also irked because I pointed out on a different thread that research by a professor of education at UCD (who also happens to be a woman) reveals systematic bias by Ireland's overwhelmingly female primary teachers, who tend to label boys as boisterous, disruptive show-offs while praising girls for being calm, mature, and focused. This encourages educational underachievement in boys that begins around the age of 4 or 5 and continues through secondary school.

    But it seems that going against the grain of what some female posters want to hear will lead to inevitable accusations of misogyny and "hating women" — even if one backs up one's arguments by citing legal precedent or published academic research.

    If I believe someone was unfairly sentenced, it doesn't mean that I hate women (I would have said the same thing if his targets had been men). If I believe that female teachers are capable of systematic sexism, it doesn't mean I hate women (men are capable of systematic sexism too).

    The Current Affairs forum charter states: "You are free to express your views in a forceful manner provided you remain civil." This means that the forum may not necessarily be a welcoming place for anyone who doesn't respond well to having her viewpoints forcefully questioned. And yet the "you disagree with me so you must hate women" line of argument is so overused that I think mods should start carding posters who groundlessly accuse others of hatred, on the basis that that rhetoric itself crosses the line into incivility.
    The Ladies' Lounge is dead now - thanks to people just giving up on it because of it being crashed by people telling them they're being irrational women and whatabouting.

    The Ladies' Lounge died because of too much drama and cliquish infighting, largely generated by female posters themselves. It's simply untrue to state that the Ladies' Lounge died because of the actions of men.


  • #486
    Professor Genius
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 391 ✭✭Professor Genius


    Adeline Dead Firefly wrote: »
    I currently have a female poster following me around asking questions like "Why do you hate women so much?" because I argued on a thread that a nonviolent mentally ill internet troll should not have received a three-year custodial sentence for relatively mild harassment of some female journalists — especially when another man who issued highly explicit online death threats against a senator received a six-month suspended sentence last year.

    The same poster is also irked because I pointed out on a different thread that research by a professor of education at UCD (who also happens to be a woman) reveals systematic bias by Ireland's overwhelmingly female primary teachers, who tend to label boys as boisterous, disruptive show-offs while praising girls for being calm, mature, and focused. This encourages educational underachievement in boys that begins around the age of 4 or 5 and continues through secondary school.

    But it seems that going against the grain of what some female posters want to hear will lead to inevitable accusations of misogyny and "hating women" — even if one backs up one's arguments by citing legal precedent or published academic research.

    If I believe someone was unfairly sentenced, it doesn't mean that I hate women (I would have said the same thing if his targets had been men). If I believe that female teachers are capable of systematic sexism, it doesn't mean I hate women (men are capable of systematic sexism too).

    The Current Affairs forum charter states: "You are free to express your views in a forceful manner provided you remain civil." This means that the forum may not necessarily be a welcoming place for anyone who doesn't respond well to having her viewpoints forcefully questioned. And yet the "you disagree with me so you must hate women" line of argument is so overused that I think mods should start carding posters who groundlessly accuse others of hatred, on the basis that that rhetoric itself crosses the line into incivility.



    The Ladies' Lounge died because of too much drama and cliquish infighting, largely generated by female posters themselves. It's simply untrue to state that the Ladies' Lounge died because of the actions of men.

    Indeed. Any time a male asked a question or started a thread in the Ladies Lounge there was shrieking ‘Women are not if a hive mind, women are not of a hive mind’ and lockings/bannings/deletions/infractions ensued. It’s no surprise it ended up flushing itself down the toilet.


  • Advertisement
  • #487
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    KyussB wrote: »
    While the thread is active again:
    Can a mod/admin of CA reiterate please, that normal posters telling people "get back on topic", "that's off topic" repeatedly etc., to try and limit posters from talking about specific things - especially when a poster disagrees and points out how it's on topic - is backseat modding?

    I prefer things being dealt with without posts being reported - so if a CA mod reiterates that here, I can just link to it in-thread when it happens (presumably linking like that wouldn't be backseat modding) - then it's sorted without mods ever having to know/bother with it.

    yep, also ban posters for going off topic

    thks mods


  • #488
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    KyussB wrote: »
    While the thread is active again:
    Can a mod/admin of CA reiterate please, that normal posters telling people "get back on topic", "that's off topic" repeatedly etc., to try and limit posters from talking about specific things - especially when a poster disagrees and points out how it's on topic - is backseat modding?

    I prefer things being dealt with without posts being reported - so if a CA mod reiterates that here, I can just link to it in-thread when it happens (presumably linking like that wouldn't be backseat modding) - then it's sorted without mods ever having to know/bother with it.
    Of course it would be backseat modding. What happens when someone tells you to get back on topic, but you genuinely believe you have not strayed off topic? The mods are there to deal with such issues, so please report, and do not take on the role of moderator yourself. If we allowed that sort of stuff some threads would turn into a discussion of where the boundary between on and off topic lies, which of course is itself off topic.


  • #489
    KyussB
    Registered Users Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭KyussB


    Ya the latter, discussion of what's on/off topic, is usually where it leads. I don't think it's a big enough deal to report - I'll prolly just link your reply here when it happens (I'm assuming doing that is not backseat modding itself) - as that would pretty much settle it - cheers!


  • #490
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    KyussB wrote: »
    Ya the latter, discussion of what's on/off topic, is usually where it leads. I don't think it's a big enough deal to report - I'll prolly just link your reply here when it happens (I'm assuming doing that is not backseat modding itself) - as that would pretty much settle it - cheers!

    I've already said it would be considered backseat modding


  • #491
    KyussB
    Registered Users Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭KyussB


    Ah, didn't realize you were stating both situations (labelling stuff off topic, as well as citing your reply here in response to that) would be backseat modding - fair enough.


  • Advertisement
  • #492
    EmmetSpiceland
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,023 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    Adeline Dead Firefly wrote: »
    I currently have a female poster following me around asking questions like "Why do you hate women so much?" because I argued on a thread that a nonviolent mentally ill internet troll should not have received a three-year custodial sentence for relatively mild harassment of some female journalists — especially when another man who issued highly explicit online death threats against a senator received a six-month suspended sentence last year.

    The same poster is also irked because I pointed out on a different thread that research by a professor of education at UCD (who also happens to be a woman) reveals systematic bias by Ireland's overwhelmingly female primary teachers, who tend to label boys as boisterous, disruptive show-offs while praising girls for being calm, mature, and focused. This encourages educational underachievement in boys that begins around the age of 4 or 5 and continues through secondary school.

    But it seems that going against the grain of what some female posters want to hear will lead to inevitable accusations of misogyny and "hating women" — even if one backs up one's arguments by citing legal precedent or published academic research.

    If I believe someone was unfairly sentenced, it doesn't mean that I hate women (I would have said the same thing if his targets had been men). If I believe that female teachers are capable of systematic sexism, it doesn't mean I hate women (men are capable of systematic sexism too).

    Ah, come on now, buddy. Since you’ve come on the “scene”, two things I, personally, have noticed about you is that you don’t like Travellers and you don’t like women.

    Now, I’ve heard talk that you used to be around the site before in a more “colourful” capacity but I’m only talking about the last few months.

    You portray yourself as a, sort of, “yellow pack” Jordan Peterson fishing for acolytes. You can hide behind all the references, journals or “studies” you want but you, clearly, don’t like women, with regards to their place in the modern world.

    I’m just waiting for you to start banging the climate change denier “drum”.

    “It is not blood that makes you Irish but a willingness to be part of the Irish nation” - Thomas Davis



  • #493
    Raconteuse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,817 ✭✭✭Raconteuse


    Ah I don't think Permabear hates women at all, but PB you're falling into that same trap of "it's not misogyny if it's just robust disagreement" in response to me. Of course it's not misogyny when someone just robustly disagrees with me. It's misogyny when women are condemned as a group, when awful behaviour from some women is deemed typical of all women, when women are bitches for not fancying people, when spoken of like they're a flipping hole.

    And then the same few always get fierce concerned about the treatment of muslim and traveller women.


  • #494
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,497 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Many posters cannot cope with this point. For some, there is only one orthodox view of the world. For others, they cannot cope with their views and opinions being challenged, particularly when those views are based on a misrepresentation of the facts.

    Outright mysogyny is just as unacceptable as racism, but there is a fcukton of it on boards.

    end of the road wrote: »
    if people really want rid of trolls then the best thing is really just to ignore them

    Sorry but that is just completely naive.

    Scrap the cap!



  • #495
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    I don’t recall the supposed in-fighting that killed the Ladies Lounge. It just started to slow down as a forum but fighting, I do not recall. I’d imagine no good examples of that could be provided if sought. To me, it just seems like a lazy “LOL, women are the worst to other women” smear. There used to be great discussions on that forum and, yes, by the far the biggest problem was fly-by posters parachuting in with trolling posts and then running away.


  • #496
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,693 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Current Affairs is supposed to be a place for frank debate on contentious issues (or whatever it says).

    One of the standards that was going to separate CA from Politics is that posters wouldn't be in trouble for not backing up a claim, but it just leads to stuff like this. Is there anything that can be done about posting like this?
    Poster A wrote:
    the vast majority of prostitutes don’t have a huge online presence because they don’t have access to social media or lobby groups to tell anyone how shìt it is.
    Poster B wrote:
    Back this up
    Poster A wrote:
    Bother me arse tbh, better things to be doing on a Sunday morning than entertaining nonsense


  • #497
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    And readers are perfectly capable of drawing their own conclusions based on such exchanges. The best thing, in my view, is to agree to disagree and move on rather that continuing to draw attention to the issue


  • #498
    WishUWereHere
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭WishUWereHere


    Pardon my ignorance Beasty but........

    Really liked your last avatar. But who is the broke currently occupying your avatar now?


  • #499
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,534 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    In the words of Pete Townsend:

    He's known as the Speaker....

    Sir Lindsay Hoyle - MP for Chorley with a proper northern accent to rule over the HoC


  • #500
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,203 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    osarusan wrote: »
    Current Affairs is supposed to be a place for frank debate on contentious issues (or whatever it says).

    One of the standards that was going to separate CA from Politics is that posters wouldn't be in trouble for not backing up a claim, but it just leads to stuff like this. Is there anything that can be done about posting like this?


    I appreciate that you were using my posts as an example, but one of the easiest things you could have done about it is asked me yourself, and I would have had no problem providing mountains of evidence to back up my claim, and the critical factor is that I’ve always taken the time to do so for anyone who I thought was genuinely interested in the discussion.

    A fly-by “back this up” comment wasn’t IMHO any sort of an attempt to engage in the discussion, so I made as much effort with my reply as I felt the post deserved. As it happened I was heading out to mass at the time, so I really did have better things to be doing than entertaining that sort of nonsense. You’ll see I later engaged in the thread with posters who I figured had at least done their homework, even if it wasn’t an entirely accurate characterisation -
    To put in context, If memory serves, One Eyed Jack is proud of his very conservative religious beliefs. Might be why he defends a religious organisation.


    I didn’t ask them to back up their claims, but rather I chose to correct them by providing evidence to show their claims were, well, nonsense (they were posting from memory though, to be fair to them). The forum allows for this though as it’s not just called Current Affairs, also in the forum name is “IMHO”, which is why it’s the perfect place for frank discussion. Debates don’t interest me tbh, which is why I don’t bother with the Politics forum.

    CA/IMHO offers a perfect balance between the standards expected in AH and the standards offered in Politics. It allows for frank exchanges of opinion on contentious issues, as opposed to Politics or AH where completely different standards apply.


  • #501
    WishUWereHere
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭WishUWereHere


    Beasty wrote: »
    In the words of Pete Townsend:

    He's known as the Speaker....

    Sir Lindsay Hoyle - MP for Chorley with a proper northern accent to rule over the HoC

    Hah, nice choice. Now I do recognize him.

    Good choice


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement