Bonkey the Censor

Ailill

Bonkey locked a thread on the Politics Forum called Mayday Events. It would seem the only reason he did so was because the opinions expressed there were not to his liking.

It all seems a little Soviet to me.

mr_angry

Are you sure it wouldn't be because of some statements from yourself such as this:

originally posted by Ailill

That really would be a fun way to spend may Day - beating up crusties and so-called Anarchists. These people are just young thugs out to make trouble - it's just a little adventure for them but it's a huge pain in the ass for the Gardaí and everyone else.

If I see the Gardaí beating a few of these soapdodgers over the head I cheer!!

And much as I hate to start a whole new postcount debacle, yours doesn't exactly indicate a long history of constructive Boards usage, does it? And we're supposed to believe that you're now an expert on what is rational discussion, over an experienced moderator?

ecksor

I've just read the thread.

Some posters there have a case to make that they were engaged in a political discussion. Your desire to see protestors assaulted doesn't qualify.

Ailill

Originally posted by ecksor
I've just read the thread.

Some posters there have a case to make that they were engaged in a political discussion. Your desire to see protestors assaulted doesn't qualify.

I think everyone's opinion is equally valid, however repugnant you might find it.

These protestors annoy me a great deal because they're certainly not representing MY views, yet this small band of malcontents will be the ones making the headlines. That's why I like to see the Gardaí getting stuck into them, the Gardaí are doing that on behalf of me, and people like me, which pleases me very much.



BTW, since when did the number of posts a person makes have any bearing on thier right to express their views?

ecksor

Originally posted by Ailill
I think everyone's opinion is equally valid, however repugnant you might find it.

I think that your post didn't count as political discussion. You can hold your opinion all you want, nobody is stopping you, but on the politics forum there are certain standards enforced to try to keep the discussion useful.

These protestors annoy me a great deal because they're certainly not representing MY views, yet this small band of malcontents will be the ones making the headlines. That's why I like to see the Gardaí getting stuck into them, the Gardaí are doing that on behalf of me, and people like me, which pleases me very much.

I think that the protestors opinions are perfectly valid no matter how repugnant you find it. :rolleyes:

Yes I'm being flippant, no this isn't the place for this discussion. Attempting to make a political point here and now doesn't make your posts on that thread relevant or useful.

User45701

I dont go to that forum but if i did i would have said exeatly what Ailill said except i would have been MUCH MORE grafic about the details of all the pain and torture methods we should try out on the primtives.

If someone starts a fight over a fone or cause they dont like bush they are both a drain on the goverments funding

ecksor

Originally posted by User45701
I dont go to that forum but if i did i would have said exeatly what Ailill said except i would have been MUCH MORE grafic about the details of all the pain and torture methods we should try out on the primtives.

So?

Funky

Originally posted by User45701
I dont go to that forum but if i did i would have said exeatly what Ailill said except i would have been MUCH MORE grafic about the details of all the pain and torture methods we should try out on the primtives.

It is of my opinion that neanderthals could post more coherent posts than you.

ecksor

Originally posted by Funky
It is of my opinion that neanderthals could post more coherent posts than you.

Pot. Kettle. Banned.

mr_angry

BTW, since when did the number of posts a person makes have any bearing on thier right to express their views?

Its a little questionable, I admit. And I'm sure bonkey is well capable of representing himself in this matter, but lets face facts - you're criticising a moderator for deciding a thread had gone terminally off-topic, implying you know better. I just thought I'd highlight that point for the viewing pleasure of the general public. No offence intended. I wouldn't want the airing of your 'protest' to be impeded in any way by the Boards law enforcement team.

Oh the irony...

Boston

Originally posted by Ailill
Bonkey locked a thread on the Politics Forum called Mayday Events. It would seem the only reason he did so was because the opinions expressed there were not to his liking.

It all seems a little Soviet to me.

Maybe it was all the threats of violence and the decent of the thread into macho man bull****? Bonkey is very highly reguarded moderator who puts a huge amounth of effort into that the forum. I've never once seen him let his personal believes get in the way of doing his job.

User45701

Originally posted by ecksor
So?

I was posting what my view was.
When people post there views people just accept that it is that persons view and they either ignore it or respond by saying that they agree or disagree with it.

I personley think that strict rules are the way to go.

Boston

Originally posted by User45701
I was posting what my view was.
When people post there views people just accept that it is that persons view and they either ignore it or respond by saying that they agree or disagree with it.

I personley think that strict rules are the way to go.

Point ecksor was making is that you're view on may day protests have no bearing on this thread

ecksor

Originally posted by User45701
I was posting what my view was.

That view isn't relevant to this thread (neither was the one you were responding to come to that).

When people post there views people just accept that it is that persons view and they either ignore it or respond by saying that they agree or disagree with it.

I see now why you have so many posts.

User45701

Originally posted by ecksor
That view isn't relevant to this thread (neither was the one you were responding to come to that).

My post was relevent i was saying that i would have said the same thing as him.
This was me saying that what he said was not wrong and that i agree with what he said.

Originally posted by ecksor

I see now why you have so many posts.

?

ecksor

Originally posted by User45701
My post was relevent i was saying that i would have said the same thing as him.

And again I ask "So?".

This was me saying that what he said was not wrong and that i agree with what he said.

Well, you know, if you're going to argue that someone is right it's better to actually give reasons why you think they're right rather than just agree with their sentiments. So, what exactly makes such a sentiment relevant or useful to a political discussion?

Crash

He's making the point that you post a hell of a lot of superflous ****.

User45701

Originally posted by ecksor
And again I ask "So?".

I was posting what my view was.
When people post there views people just accept that it is that persons view and they either ignore it or respond by saying that they agree or disagree with it.

Originally posted by ecksor

Well, you know, if you're going to argue that someone is right it's better to actually give reasons why you think they're right rather than just agree with their sentiments. So, what exactly makes such a sentiment relevant or useful to a political discussion?

It is relevent because it has to do with someones view.
political debate is about peoples views.

You vote for the people whos views you most agree with or disagree with the least

Originally posted by ecksor

Well, you know, if you're going to argue that someone is right it's better to actually give reasons why you think they're right rather than just agree with their sentiments.

I did do that i typed it but decided to erace and not post because it was off topic

Originally posted by User45701

If someone starts a fight over a fone or cause they dont like bush they are both a drain on the goverments funding

1.People who comit crimes (primtives) are a problem.

2.They serve no purpse

3.They are a drain on socaity.

4.Because of them there is need for a larger police force

5.They make no sence, Retorical (is that how you spell it?) question
Does anyone know why they comit crimes like steal phones and rob shops go on joy rides ect.

Hmm i had allot more oh well.

ecksor

This isn't the politics forum, so leave that stuff out of here.

Your agreement or disagreement with his sentiments about mayday events aren't on topic here. If you had come along with some sort of rationale as to why his posts were appropriate, that would have been on topic.

Why people vote the way they vote is entirely their business, but that doesn't mean that people can come along here and just voice their opinion without backing it up or attempting to engage in meaningful debate or discussion.

I did do that i typed it but decided to erace and not post because it was off topic

You misunderstand. Debating the rights and wrongs of his opinion is not what I'm talking about. The rights and wrongs of voicing the opinion in the manner he did are what I'm talking about. There may be some overlap, but you've clearly misunderstood the purpose of this forum and/or this thread.

Beruthiel

Originally posted by Ailill
It all seems a little Soviet to me.

Bonkey for president!

no ballet boxes required
ww)

Asok

Originally posted by User45701
Blah

Originally posted by ecksor
wtf?

I have read the entire thread and after the 3rd post it just seems to slide down the "making sense" scale.

The Corinthian

Personally, I saw that thread and must admit that I too would not have been terribly averse to sending the more militant protesters to one of those special holiday camps where you leave via a chimney.

However, what people don’t seem to be considering is there is no such thing as absolute free speech. Just because you have a view, it does not mean that expressing it is a good thing. If the view directly or indirectly causes more harm than good, then that view (or at the very least how it is expressed) is a negative influence on the more susceptible to influence in Society.

On which note...

Originally posted by User45701
political debate is about peoples views.

Debate is about presenting facts and argument, not simply views.

bonkey

Wow....this thread reached a second page before I managed to even notice it existed.....

Anyway....just thought I'd offer my 2c.

Yes, I was a bit harsh closing that thread. unquestionable. So why did I do it? I did it because there has been a frightening increase in muppetry in the Politics forum recently. This, coupled with a recent revision of the rules, has led the mods to take a slightly harsher stance for the moment, to try and get things back on a more even track.

I had already ended up in a discussion (in the same thread, I believe) about people advocating violence, and to be quite frank my objection is based mostly on legal grounds. If someone came onto that board and was advocating going out and beating <insert-your-ethnic-or-religious-minority-of-choice> for whatever reason, boards.ie could find itself legally liable for permitting such content in a moderated environment. In our current political climate, expressing a wish that someone else would use a legal pretext (i.e. police riot squads) to beat up someone else, and expressing a desire to be able to be in such a group would most likely also qualify as incitement to violence and/or hatred.

Now, protestors are not an ethnic of religious minority, but they are a clearly definable group. They were being name-called (crusties) in a number of posts which were also expressing the hope that violence be carried out on these individuals. Note - not one person qualified their wishes to say that if people rioted or caused damage to property that they hoped the police would deal with them in kind. No - they just wanted to see the protestors hurt, and were expressing a desire to be amongst those handing out the beatings. That is at the very least - in my non-legal opinion - incitement to hatred if not incitement to violence, and I will not permit that in the Politics forum while I remain moderator there.

Now just to clear one thing up...I am not denying anyone their freedom of speech. I have not (yet) banned anyone for their distasteful comments, nor prevented anyone else from opening a new thread to discuss the same subject. All I am doing is making it clear that your freedom of speech carries no freedom from responsibility.

If the wishes for violence persist in new threads, then I will be turning to the Admins to ask whether or not they want it stomped out, or at least whether or not they wish to get legal advice on their liability on the subject.

I find it utterly laughable though that someone is complaining about lack of freedom of speech, when what they were doing was expressing a wish for someone else to get hurt. And why do they want to see those people get hurt? Because in the eyes of the violence-wishersthe people they want to see hurt can't peacefully make a protest.

Someone call Alannis Morisette, because maybe that will finally help her understand what "ironic" means.

jc

GuanYin

Can all mods get cool titles like that?

I want to be Syke The Destroyer

Along with my cohorts Asok the Strange and Beruthiel the Virtuously Liberal, we will rule you all!!

Beruthiel

Originally posted by syke
Can all mods get cool titles like that?

I want to be Syke The Destroyer

why not just put it in your tag? why have you got Banned there btw?

Beruthiel the Virtuously Liberal

moi? hmmm :dunno:
<=== lets give it a go and see....

User45701

bonkey i see what you are saying
and ecksor ye it was clearley just a misunderstanding

Bonkey allot more people have views that incurage or promote violence against a group of people like "scumbags" (aka Primtives) or protesters.
Is it illigal to say stuff like you want all primtives to be imprisoened and used as labor to build roads and such?
or to say there should be restrictions on marchs that prevent them from taking place on main roads that block peoples buses?

I thought those where considerd extremest views?
I thought it was illigal to say things against <insert your ethnic group of choice>?

zedsDeadBaby

I have been reading boards for the last 2 years. Only now am i in a company which will let me post.

Some observations.
Some moderators have a sense of humour. Some dont.
Some take their job far too seriously and believe they are a higher being than than humble man or woman . Some are completely down to earth.

Bonkey is in the don't have a sense of humour and believes he's a higher being categories (imho) .

This works for him. If you are going to post something on his forum you better be ready to fall foul of his mood no matter what your post is about.

What you posted was just an opinion (while i do not agree with it) as far as i'm concerned and you should not have been reprimanded. But to some its not valid, so really you have to look at who the moderatore is and tailor your replies to suit them. Hardly the best situation to have for open discussion but there you are.
Take it like man (or protest)

ecksor

Originally posted by zedsDeadBaby
I have been reading boards for the last 2 years. Only now am i in a company which will let me post.

Call me a cynic, but I'm trying to think of a network setup that would let you read but not post and I can't. Anyone care to enlighten me before I start guessing what colour bridge you live under?

ecksor

Oh look, you're posting from the same IP with the same inane rubbish as a particular user who's banned from Politics.

bug

Bonkey is in the don't have a sense of humour and believes he's a higher being categories (imho) .
This works for him. If you are going to post something on his forum you better be ready to fall foul of his mood no matter what your post is about.

Bonkey is possibly one of the most eloquent, well-informed, fair mods on boards, and this thread is pants.

GuanYin

Originally posted by bug
and this thread is pants.

whose pants exactly?

Syke, giving this thread the respect it deserves.