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

Different Charter for Different Forums

Options
  • 04-07-2009 5:15pm
    #1
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭


    Just got an infraction in the TV forum for typing "cnut". Come on now. Wtf? I don't have time to read every bloody forum charter. It's only a forum/ Can we not just have the same charter regarding swearing in every forum except for places like 'After Hours' and 'Thunderdome'. I didn't mean to cause any harm ffs or anything like that. I spelt it wrong on purpose!

    ?
    Post edited by Shield on


«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    5starpool
    Subscribers Posts: 32,855 ✭✭✭✭5starpool


    It really depends on the context you used the word in tbh.

    If you said "I have a cnut of a hangover today" it would be very harsh to infract.
    If you said "Personality XYZ really is a nasty cnut" then you would deserve the infraction.


  • Options
    #3
    Karl Hungus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 29,130 ✭✭✭✭Karl Hungus


    K4t wrote: »
    I don't have time to read every bloody forum charter.

    Then don't act surprised if you get an infraction.


  • Options
    #4
    tallaght01
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,778 ✭✭✭tallaght01


    Karl Hungus wrote: »
    Then don't act surprised if you get an infraction.

    Do most people read all the charters?


  • Options
    #5
    Mimikyu
    Registered Users Posts: 18,919 ✭✭✭✭Mimikyu


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #6
    faceman
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,635 CMod ✭✭✭✭faceman


    If its in the charter about swearing and you got infracted then so be it. 1 Infraction aint the end of the world

    Most people dont read the charter. I doubt many people read the welcome email either. Most people dont read the Rules of the Road. But that excuse doesnt seem to wash with the Gardai! :D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Karl Hungus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 29,130 ✭✭✭✭Karl Hungus


    tallaght01 wrote: »
    Do most people read all the charters?

    No, I'd say absolutely nobody does. But I'd say a cursory glance at the charters of forums you post in is a good idea, and if you ignore the charter and make an error, then an infraction is obviously to be expected.


  • Options
    #8
    tallaght01
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,778 ✭✭✭tallaght01


    Karl Hungus wrote: »
    No, I'd say absolutely nobody does.

    Karl Hungus wrote: »
    if you ignore the charter and make an error, then an infraction is obviously to be expected.

    I think the above illustrates the problem.

    I only read the bio+med one because I had to add something to it.

    We all know no-one reads them. Just look at the number of views for them. But we still expect people to follow what's in them.

    I always try and make a forum announcement on the rare occasion that we add something to the charter.

    But I think there being a single sitewide policy on the basics like swearing has a lot of merit.


  • Options
    #9
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    I think the point is, nobody is forcing anyone to read the charter, but if you don't, and you breech it, you can't really complain. which, I have to say, is fair enough.


  • Options
    #10
    tallaght01
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,778 ✭✭✭tallaght01


    tbh wrote: »
    I think the point is, nobody is forcing anyone to read the charter, but if you don't, and you breech it, you can't really complain. which, I have to say, is fair enough.

    I understand the point being made.

    But I'm saying there's a shed load of forums, and some long ass charters. And we all know charters don't get read.

    I think we're using a bit of an ineffective method of getting the rules across to people.


  • Options
    #11
    Gordon
    Registered Users Posts: 35,524 ✭✭✭✭Gordon


    Calling a particular broadcaster a 'shower of ****s' can possibly provoke legal letters to this site, it's fair enough that you aren't allowed to glibly make such broad statements without backup imo.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    tallaght01 wrote: »
    I understand the point being made.

    But I'm saying there's a shed load of forums, and some long ass charters. And we all know charters don't get read.

    I think we're using a bit of an ineffective method of getting the rules across to people.

    ah, I think it's not too much to expect that someone new to the site should have the courtesy to check out the rules of the place. It hasn't really stuck me as a huge problem up to now tbh, most people don't break the rules without knowing what they are doing. Most disputes in feedback or helpdesk aren't complaints about the lack of guidance from the charter, more about mods interpretations.

    tbh, I think if we start deciding that reading the charter is too much to expect from users, we go down the path of dumbing down the site beyond salvation....just my opinion tho.

    don't forget, the vast majority of posters who never read the charter never break the rules either. Should we change the way we do things to suit the 1% of people who can't do that?


  • Options
    #13
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    I disagree with the swearing ban on the Television forum - I didn't think a moderator could "tailor" a forum to suit themselves.


  • Options
    #14
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    tallaght01 wrote: »
    We all know no-one reads them. Just look at the number of views for them. But we still expect people to follow what's in them.
    Yes, we do - because you're supposed to read them. If we fail to enforce the rules because we work on the assumption that people don't read them, why bother having rules at all?

    An infraction is a pretty minor sanction, and when I give one, I generally include the suggestion to read the charter before posting again.


  • Options
    #15
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    K4t wrote: »
    I spelt it wrong on purpose!

    ?

    didn't the fact that you have to spell it wrong to use it not give you a hint that you're not supposed to use it?


  • Options
    #16
    The_Minister
    Registered Users Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    K4t wrote: »
    I don't have time to read every bloody forum charter. It's only a forum/ Can we not just have the same charter regarding swearing in every forum except for places like 'After Hours' and 'Thunderdome'.
    I was going to give you an awful bollicking, until I realised you were referring to the swearing rule in particular, and not rules that are only specific to one forum.

    I agree with you that the rule against swearing in the tv forum seems pointless and unnessacery.


  • Options
    #17
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    Gordon wrote: »
    Calling a particular broadcaster a 'shower of ****s' can possibly provoke legal letters to this site, it's fair enough that you aren't allowed to glibly make such broad statements without backup imo.
    They were making a mockery of Michael Jackson's death. Surely I was justified?

    I rarely post in the general tv forum. Could the mod have not just sent me a warning? I have a few of these infraction things now and if they add up I could be banned. This would be a devestating blow to both myself and boards.


  • Options
    #18
    tallaght01
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,778 ✭✭✭tallaght01


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Yes, we do - because you're supposed to read them. If we fail to enforce the rules because we work on the assumption that people don't read them, why bother having rules at all?

    An infraction is a pretty minor sanction, and when I give one, I generally include the suggestion to read the charter before posting again.

    Yea, we all know you're supposed to read them. But people don't. And for a good reason. But i think that point is being lost. It was just an observation.


  • Options
    #19
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    K4t wrote: »
    They were making a mockery of Michael Jackson's death. Surely I was justified?
    it's not your call tho mate.
    I rarely post in the general tv forum. Could the mod have not just sent me a warning? I have a few of these infraction things now and if they add up I could be banned. This would be a devestating blow to both myself and boards.

    While I agree with you that boards probably couldn't continue, you only get sitebanned if you get 9 infractions in two days or something, and only then temporarily. I wouldn't worry about it :)


  • Options
    #20
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    tallaght01 wrote: »
    Yea, we all know you're supposed to read them. But people don't. And for a good reason. But i think that point is being lost. It was just an observation.

    don't blame it on the poster, don't blame it on the topic, don't blame it on the admins, blame it on the charter :)


  • Options
    #21
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    tbh wrote: »
    didn't the fact that you have to spell it wrong to use it not give you a hint that you're not supposed to use it?
    No, I don't generally swear much but I was pretty riled on this occasion.
    The_Minister wrote: »
    I was going to give you an awful bollicking, until I realised you were referring to the swearing rule in particular, and not rules that are only specific to one forum.

    I agree with you that the rule against swearing in the tv forum seems pointless and unnessacery.
    That sounds scary. Lucky me.

    Yes, it does seem pointless and unnecessary.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Gordon
    Registered Users Posts: 35,524 ✭✭✭✭Gordon


    K4t wrote: »
    They were making a mockery of Michael Jackson's death. Surely I was justified?
    Then you should have explained what they did wrong in a clear, concise, adult manner, not just called them a shower of ****s, that's just a pointless slur.
    I rarely post in the general tv forum. Could the mod have not just sent me a warning? I have a few of these infraction things now and if they add up I could be banned. This would be a devestating blow to both myself and boards.
    An infraction is a warning. You need a massive 9 (non-expired) red cards to be sitebanned, you only have one.


  • Options
    #23
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    tallaght01 wrote: »
    Yea, we all know you're supposed to read them. But people don't. And for a good reason. But i think that point is being lost. It was just an observation.
    I will add that when I wander into a new part of boards.ie for the first time I'll have a glance over the charter to familiarise myself with the local ground rules, as it were.

    I'm not sure what a "good reason" for refusing to familiarise yourself with the rules is. If I drove up Parliament Street at a sedate 50km/h, do you think I'd get off if I told the traffic cop I couldn't be bothered reading the 30km/h signs, and decided to work on the assumption that, being in town, the speed limit was 50?


  • Options
    #24
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    Gordon wrote: »
    Then you should have explained what they did wrong in a clear, concise, adult manner, not just called them a shower of ****s, that's just a pointless slur.

    An infraction is a warning. You need a massive 9 (non-expired) red cards to be sitebanned, you only have one.
    Fair enough. As I said, it was a moment of anger but that is no excuse for an adult, a citizen.

    Ok. That's fine. Thanks.


  • Options
    #25
    tallaght01
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,778 ✭✭✭tallaght01


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I will add that when I wander into a new part of boards.ie for the first time I'll have a glance over the charter to familiarise myself with the local ground rules, as it were.

    I'm not sure what a "good reason" for refusing to familiarise yourself with the rules is. If I drove up Parliament Street at a sedate 50km/h, do you think I'd get off if I told the traffic cop I couldn't be bothered reading the 30km/h signs, and decided to work on the assumption that, being in town, the speed limit was 50?

    Look, if you want to compare the importance of people reading charters to doing something that can kill people, then fine. I can't be involved in that.


  • Options
    #26
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I will add that when I wander into a new part of boards.ie for the first time I'll have a glance over the charter to familiarise myself with the local ground rules, as it were.

    I'm not sure what a "good reason" for refusing to familiarise yourself with the rules is. If I drove up Parliament Street at a sedate 50km/h, do you think I'd get off if I told the traffic cop I couldn't be bothered reading the 30km/h signs, and decided to work on the assumption that, being in town, the speed limit was 50?
    You're forgetting one minor detail, that is real life and this is the interweb. At the end of the day it's only a forum where we come to discuss and debate topics. Do such strict measures really need to be in place?


  • Options
    #27
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    tallaght01 wrote: »
    Look, if you want to compare the importance of people reading charters to doing something that can kill people, then fine. I can't be involved in that.
    If the only rules you consider worth obeying are the ones that can prevent people being killed, we don't have enough in common to have a rational discussion.


  • Options
    #28
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    tbh wrote: »
    didn't the fact that you have to spell it wrong to use it not give you a hint that you're not supposed to use it?
    That implies you're not supposed to use it anywhere on boards.ie which you know isn't true.


  • Options
    #29
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    K4t wrote: »
    You're forgetting one minor detail, that is real life and this is the interweb. At the end of the day it's only a forum where we come to discuss and debate topics. Do such strict measures really need to be in place?
    At the end of the day it's an imaginary penalty point on an imaginary Internet persona. What's the problem?


  • Options
    #30
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    Dudess wrote: »
    That implies you're not supposed to use it anywhere on boards.ie which you know isn't true.

    still forbidden in the charter tho. If the word filter doesn't work, and the charter didn't work, well...the infraction did work :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    kumate_champ07
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,150 ✭✭✭kumate_champ07


    tbh wrote: »
    didn't the fact that you have to spell it wrong to use it not give you a hint that you're not supposed to use it?

    from a thread you started a couple of weeks ago
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055600427
    tbh:
    "right I'll tell you what I hate right, is those fcuking "We the people of Eire" taxi stickers.
    ND don't think i don't get what you're implying with the use of the word Eire as well, you fcukers.
    Like that elvis looking motherfcuker in cork bleating about how it's in their consitution that they can only take white guys Well it's in my constitution that that's illegal you pathetic prick."


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement