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

Banned from After Hours

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,556 ✭✭✭✭Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    there? you see?
    darkman2 agrees with him.
    I rest my case.


  • Options
    #63
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    darkman2 wrote: »
    TBH I dont think this ban was justified. Sometimes emotions get in the way of clear and reasoned thought. The sudden death of Logic1 is of course horrible and sad but why let that cloud a potential message that does exist regarding the use of drugs? If someone on drugs dies then I think it only right to use as an example to others because this is very effective for the argument against drugs. Emotion is understandable but sometimes there is too much and it can cloud our judgement. Dont get me wrong - Im shocked by this but there is an underlying message. How otherwise healthy fit young men choose this is of grave concern to us all - god forbid - it is one of our family members or indeed us.

    It might be a good thing to do if done right, but it wasn't his decision to make.

    TerrorFirmer : no one is a winner here.


  • Options
    #64
    TerrorFirmer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 29,930 ✭✭✭✭TerrorFirmer


    astrofool wrote: »
    Terrorfirmer was wrong to post it in a condolences thread.

    Mods were wrong to close the thread, rather than just delete the offending posts (something about, how we react when at our worst type of thing? I just don't think the condolence thread should be locked for someone who has died).

    I was probably wrong for not checking feedback in the few seconds after the original post was closed (http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055347451).

    However, we should

    a) be able to have a condolence thread that doesn't need to be locked

    b) be able to have a discussion thread on how he died, or at the very least be able to debate the independent article, as hard as that might be

    or boards.ie might as well pack up and go home.

    I already admitted that was incredibly stupid of me - I wasn't thinking, I know that sounds ridiculous, but I honestly wasn't thinking of it as a condolence's thread, being pretty used to all sorts of discussion in AH.

    But the thing is, I got PM's and implications that even mere discussion of it was unacceptable - most of the hostility arises from discussing it rather then the posting of it in the most inappropriate of places.


  • Options
    #65
    Chinafoot
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,894 ✭✭✭Chinafoot


    astrofool wrote: »
    b) be able to have a discussion thread on how he died,

    Why? Why on earth should we discuss how he died on a public message board?


  • Options
    #66
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    astrofool wrote: »
    b) be able to have a discussion thread on how he died, or at the very least be able to debate the independent article, as hard as that might be

    He wasn't in the public domain, why should his death be a topic for public debate?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    darkman2
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,632 ✭✭✭darkman2


    Princess Innocent Knickers wrote: »
    there? you see?
    darkman2 agrees with him.
    I rest my case.

    Rest your case on what? I posted my thoughts on this issue. If your insulting me then I dont know why.


  • Options
    #68
    FruitLover
    Registered Users Posts: 2,534 ✭✭✭FruitLover


    darkman2 wrote: »
    If someone on drugs dies then I think it only right to use as an example to others

    You think using someone's corpse as a puppet to warn people off drugs is 'only right'?

    You can make a point without defiling a boards member's grave. Even TerrorFirmer himself now acknowledges that.


  • Options
    #69
    Sherifu
    Registered Users Posts: 17,727 ✭✭✭✭Sherifu


    Hell of a first day Mord. :)


  • Options
    #70
    Gone West
    Registered Users Posts: 6,374 ✭✭✭Gone West


    terrorfirmer, remember in a previous life you put a death threat somewhere & got cat banned from the whole games category for life and then had your name changed?
    You probably regret that, and with age you will probably come to regret the two threads you've posted in today. Its just that they both lacked completely in taste, and arguing further about it is just digging yourself deeper into a pointless hole.


  • Options
    #71
    darkman2
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,632 ✭✭✭darkman2


    FruitLover wrote: »
    You think using someone's corpse as a puppet to warn people off drugs is 'only right'?


    Im sorry but the harsh reality is that, no, you cannot. He may have been a Boards member but its a death mirrored in so many homes across this country.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    astrofool
    Registered Users Posts: 16,688 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    The independent article is in the public domain.

    FruitLover, your analogies are extreme.


  • Options
    #73
    Terry
    Registered Users Posts: 26,061 ✭✭✭✭Terry


    Boston wrote: »
    He wasn't in the public domain, why should his death be a topic for public debate?
    The same way the crimes committed by others or accidents involving others or pretty much anything that makes the papers is open for discussion.

    If it's acceptable for the papers to say he died from drug abuse (even when that was not 100% verified), why is it not acceptable here?

    Are we to ignore the deaths of people from drug abuse just because they were members here and a couple of people spoke to them once on IRC?


  • Options
    #74
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    astrofool wrote: »
    The independent article is in the public domain.

    FruitLover, your analogies are extreme.

    The information in the inquest would have been made public and thats what the article was about. The indy was trying to sell papers with a "sexy" story, that doesn't give someone cover to try and also exploit what happens. Words cannot describe how mercenary what TerrorFirmer did was.


  • Options
    #75
    Marcus.Aurelius
    Registered Users Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭Marcus.Aurelius


    Terry wrote: »
    The same way the crimes committed by others or accidents involving others or pretty much anything that makes the papers is open for discussion.

    If it's acceptable for the papers to say he died from drug abuse (even when that was not 100% verified), why is it not acceptable here?

    Are we to ignore the deaths of people from drug abuse just because they were members here and a couple of people spoke to them once on IRC?

    Agreed, the ban may have been overly harsh. Had the moderator asked the OP in thread to delete his comments or face an infraction, this mess could have been avoided. The fact that PIK was reasonably close to the deceased does not help in making mod decisions over this.

    Perhaps the ban was well-meant, but misplaced.


  • Options
    #76
    randylonghorn
    Registered Users Posts: 29,509 ✭✭✭✭randylonghorn


    Havok, your intentions may have been good, but it was a very bad call, as you have more or less admitted now yourself.
    TerrorFirmer wrote: »
    People learn from others mistakes - many important charities, foundations, etc are set up by those who have lost loved ones/friends to drugs and other substance abuse - they want others to benefit from those who fell at such hurdles.

    I'm merely trying to make people aware of the reality of drugs.
    I have highlighted the really important bit ... the families and those closest to those who were lost made the decision. You or indeed I don't have that right.

    Let it drop.

    You too, Boston, though yes, I can see where you're coming from.


  • Options
    #77
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Terry wrote: »
    The same way the crimes committed by others or accidents involving others or pretty much anything that makes the papers is open for discussion.

    If it's acceptable for the papers to say he died from drug abuse (even when that was not 100% verified), why is it not acceptable here?

    Are we to ignore the deaths of people from drug abuse just because they were members here and a couple of people spoke to them once on IRC?

    As far as I remember the family asked for privacy and people not to speculate, I can't remember if that was posted in the thread or conveyed through others. Have you read all the relevant posts in the thread terry?

    I should add that I don't think just because something made it into some rag that its fair game.

    Btw, great job belittling what he meant to people here (I wasn't even that close to him before you ask). To some he was a dear friend, far more then a tag line in a chat room.


  • Options
    #78
    Big_Mac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 991 ✭✭✭Big_Mac


    Let he who is without sin cast the first stone, OP
    No, he wasn't in the public domain, but then again people in the pubs locally would no doubt have been talking about Logic1 after his death. I do think that there is a time and a place to talk about the dangers and pitfalls of taking drugs, but a condolence thread was definitely not it. We are all adults in some shape or form, and we have all been educated as to the dangers of drugs so no one enters into using them with ignorance. Realistically if the OP wanted to highlight the dangers, then the thread should have been something like 'X amount of people have died from drug use in the last year etc etc etc.....' The way it was done, ie to use the death of a much loved boardsie to stand on his soapbox to preach was complete lunacy.All the charters on boards say to use common sense and it was clearly lacking in this instance. Ban deserved OP, maybe you will engage your brain before posting something like this again.


  • Options
    #79
    Terry
    Registered Users Posts: 26,061 ✭✭✭✭Terry


    Marcus.Aurelius wrote: »
    Agreed, the ban may have been overly harsh. Had the moderator asked the OP in thread to delete his comments or face an infraction, this mess could have been avoided. The fact that PIK was reasonably close to the deceased does not help in making mod decisions over this.

    Perhaps the ban was well-meant, but misplaced.
    No, Mordeth made the right decision.
    You can't see the deleted posts. :)

    Boston wrote: »
    As far as I remember the family asked for privacy and people not to speculate, I can't remember if that was posted in the thread or conveyed through others. Have you read all the relevant posts in the thread terry?
    Yes, I have read the whole thread on more than one occasion.
    I should add that I don't think just because something made it into some rag that its fair game.
    Yet that Kunle dude was?
    I think you are failing to see the bigger picture here and allowed your emotions to get in the way.
    Btw, great job belittling what he meant to people here (I wasn't even that close to him before you ask). To some he was a dear friend, far more then a tag line in a chat room.

    Again, your emotions getting in the way.
    Or sometihng.
    I have no idea what else would be responsible for such vitriol.


  • Options
    #80
    Marcus.Aurelius
    Registered Users Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭Marcus.Aurelius


    Terry wrote: »
    No, Mordeth made the right decision.
    You can't see the deleted posts. :)

    I saw some of them before they were deleted :) But I may have missed some that were deleted before I saw them, so I can't be sure. Good point


  • Options
    #81
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    Well yes terry, of course its personal.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Kintarō Hattori
    Registered Users Posts: 14,993 ✭✭✭✭Kintarō Hattori


    Why not just let this thread finish. It's now run it's course. TerrorFirmer apologised for his posts. He's been banned. Terry stands by Snickers decision to ban etc.


  • Options
    #83
    Steve
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    FFS, im sorry but this thread is the biggest pile of crap I've ever had the misfortune to read.

    When I eventually die, I'm pretty sure that I won't want a locked thread in AH and a sad complaint bitchfest thread in feeback as the only reminders of my existence.

    Is there no respect left amongst us.:mad:


  • Options
    #84
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,159 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Kintarō Hattori wrote: »
    Why not just let this thread finish. It's now run it's course. TerrorFirmer apologised for his posts. He's been banned. Terry stands by Snickers decision to ban etc.
    QFT.

    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.



  • Options
    #85
    Marcus.Aurelius
    Registered Users Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭Marcus.Aurelius


    Agreed, Lock Please.

    EDIT: This thread is hardly any better for the guy's family than the initial thread, but at least that one has been cleaned.


  • Options
    #86
    Big_Mac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 991 ✭✭✭Big_Mac


    SteveC wrote: »
    FFS, im sorry but this thread is the biggest pile of crap I've ever had the misfortune to read.

    When I eventually die, I'm pretty sure that I won't want a locked thread in AH and a sad complaint bitchfest thread in feeback as the only reminders of my existence.

    Is there no respect left amongst us.:mad:

    Why would you bother to post in this thread if you think its a pile of crap?


  • Options
    #87
    astrofool
    Registered Users Posts: 16,688 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    Could all the posts be removed from the condolence thread, and it reopened? Will this also restore the thread's timeline, so it's not on the first few pages?


  • Options
    #88
    bug
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,204 ✭✭✭bug


    This is the largest car crash I have ever seen on boards since I joined...on many many levels.


  • Options
    #89
    AlmightyCushion
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    Kintarō Hattori wrote: »
    Why not just let this thread finish. It's now run it's course. TerrorFirmer apologised for his posts. He's been banned. Terry stands by Snickers decision to ban etc.

    I agree. Nothing more will be acomplished with the thread.
    astrofool wrote: »
    Could all the posts be removed from the condolence thread, and it reopened? Will this also restore the thread's timeline, so it's not on the first few pages?

    All posts are removed except Karomas final post. It will restore the timeline if Karomas was removed. I think it's best the way it is. Terry left a message in Karomas post saying if any one wants to leave their condolenses to pm us and we'll reopen it for them to do so and lock it afterwards.


  • Options
    #90
    Ruu_Old
    Closed Accounts Posts: 36,634 ✭✭✭✭Ruu_Old


    The thread has run its course, things were said that shouldn't have been said. Lets move on shall we?


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement