Terry's Lisbon Thread in AH

Scofflaw

nesf wrote: »

I don't know but honestly, I'd like a couple of lunatic Yes campaigners on the European Union forum so I could ban them for a change. :P

Absolutely. I know I'd feel a lot better afterwards. Even a nice federalist troll would do.

cordially,
Scofflaw

humanji

My name is URL wrote: »

Fair enough, maybe I did read too much into it.

The original point I made is still perfectly cromulent though =p

It's more of a political thread than an advisory by a mod not to post about Lisbon in the forum

I think that, simply for using the word "cromulent" in a sentence, anything else you ever say should be obeyed without quesiton.

ShooterSF wrote: »

It was somewhat about the rules. The question that leaves then is how is people's education about Lisbon relevant to AH, especially while telling us AH is not the place to discuss Lisbon?

It's relevant because people keep asking about it. Leaving that post as the only mention of Lisbon in AH seems a reasonable compromise to me.

ShooterSF

humanji wrote: »

It's relevant because people keep asking about it. Leaving that post as the only mention of Lisbon in AH seems a reasonable compromise to me.

Again what advantage does it offer say over a post simply telling people AH is not the place to discuss Lisbon but rather the european sub-forum of politics? Why the need for anything further?

nesf

ShooterSF wrote: »

Again what advantage does it offer say over a post simply telling people AH is not the place to discuss Lisbon but rather the european sub-forum of politics? Why the need for anything further?

Does there have to be a need? Terry is entitled to his own opinions on the matter and his post underlined the fact that boards.ie is non-partisan in this. Christ if anything we've got a lot more No posters on the European Union forum than Yes posters.

humanji

Because there's loads of people who complain about not knowing about the treaty. If you listent o most of the Yes/No campaigns, you'd think it's the most important thing to ever happen. So what harm is there in telling people to find out about it? Ah is one of the busiest forums on the site, so people will see the notice and maybe, just maybe, pull their fingers out and find out what they're voting on.

Bob_Harris

humanji wrote: »

So what harm is there in telling people to find out about it? Ah is one of the busiest forums on the site, so people will see the notice and maybe, just maybe, pull their fingers out and find out what they're voting on.

Maybe they will, but they will also go with a slight leaning to the Yes side after reading it.

My name is URL

nesf wrote: »

Does there have to be a need? Terry is entitled to his own opinions on the matter and his post underlined the fact that boards.ie is non-partisan in this. Christ if anything we've got a lot more No posters on the European Union forum than Yes posters.

It's somewhat partisan if user discussion is not allowed on a particular forum other than one post made by a mod, whether it's anti or pro Lisbon.

humanji

Maybe they will, but they will also go with a slight leaning to the Yes side after reading it.

If they're simplistic morons with no ability to decide for themselves, then maybe. Seriously, this inferiority complex of the No voters is insane. Ye won last time and will most definitely win next time. Why worry?

Red Sleeping Beauty

Boards doesn't have very many "general discussion" forums and After Hours is probably the closest to it. It also doesn't have a current affairs forum (unless you count the desolate News and Media forum) so by proxy After Hours is kind of a forum where general stuff goes. A little flavour of politics wouldn't hurt. Similar to a "pub discussion" I suppose as its been called before. There's a difference between general discussion, current affairs and politics discussions.

Terry's post is hardly a ringing endorsement for voting yes (nor would it be if he said he's voting no) and he's not stated any reason for his vote but I'm assuming given the thrust of his post that he's read the treaty, or part of it. He didn't add in any links though for where you can read it. I did post here with some useful links on where you can read the treaty. Might be worth a copy pasta.

Is all Lisbon Treaty discussion now lock-downed across all forums save for the European Union forum ?

nesf

My name is URL wrote: »

It's somewhat partisan if user discussion is not allowed on a particular forum other than one post made by a mod, whether it's anti or pro Lisbon.

It's not really. We have mods openly campaigning for a No vote on EU. If someone is impressionable to vote Yes based on Terry's post then they'll probably be stupid enough to switch to a No after seeing their first Coir poster.

Seriously, mountain, molehill.

MmmmmCheese

Telling people what he was voting for wasnt necessary.

I'm not voting myself so i don't particularly care but thats just my two cents.

My name is URL

nesf wrote: »

It's not really. We have mods openly campaigning for a No vote on EU. If someone is impressionable to vote Yes based on Terry's post then they'll probably be stupid enough to switch to a No after seeing their first Coir poster.

Seriously, mountain, molehill.

If Terry had stated that he was going to vote No would the same people have thanked his post?

It's a politically fueled thread. The issue would be the same had it been anti-Lisbon.

The fact is it's in the wrong forum. imo, if it was intended to dissuade users from posting about Lisbon in AH it should have simply asked that of users and provided links to the appropriate forum, it shouldn't have been an opinion piece

marco_polo

nesf wrote: »

I don't know but honestly, I'd like a couple of lunatic Yes campaigners on the European Union forum so I could ban them for a change. :P

Scofflaw wrote: »

Absolutely. I know I'd feel a lot better afterwards. Even a nice federalist troll would do.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I categorically deny that the Valrey_Giscard_d'Estaing_Is_God account which is about to be registered is mine

nesf

My name is URL wrote: »

If Terry had stated that he was going to vote No would the same people have thanked his post?

If it still contained the core message of "go find out about the Treaty, don't just take the posters at face value", I'd still be approve of it.

My name is URL

nesf wrote: »

If it still contained the core message of "go find out about the Treaty, don't just take the posters at face value", I'd still be approve of it.

Would you really?

If he had said, "I've done my research and have decided to vote No" would you or others be as supportive of the thread?

Without wanting to go off on tangents, I find it grossly unfair that people will question ones reasoning for making a decision purely because it contradicts their own decisions.

nesf

My name is URL wrote: »

Would you really?

If he had said, "I've done my research and have decided to vote No" would you or others be as supportive of the thread?

Without wanting to go off on tangents, I find it grossly unfair that people will question ones reasoning for making a decision purely because it contradicts their own decisions.

Yes, because as I've stated multiple times on the EU forum there are some logical and coherent positions from which to vote No. The core one being that you oppose any sharing of sovereignty with a pan-national body. In such a case then it makes complete sense to vote No, I'd disagree with you but I'd fully respect your position.

My name is URL

nesf wrote: »

Yes, because as I've stated multiple times on the EU forum there are some logical and coherent positions from which to vote No. The core one being that you oppose any sharing of sovereignty with a pan-national body. In such a case then it makes complete sense to vote No, I'd disagree with you but I'd fully respect your position.

Well you wouldn't need to disagree with me because I'm not anti-Lisbon.

My complaint is purely down to the fact that Terry demonstrated his backing of the treaty, in the wrong forum, and at the same time basically told others not to express their opinions, and then stickied it as thought-out piece of advice for others.

If it had stated that he would vote No, I'd still have an issue with it, and I'm sure that some of the people that thanked it would also have an issue with it.

I just don't think it needs to be there

BuffyBot

..this thread has a limited lifespan tbh.

Mountain, molehill indeed..

My name is URL

BuffyBot wrote: »

..this thread has a limited lifespan tbh.

Mountain, molehill indeed..

Because you don't agree with it..

Close it

But give some reasons as to why the thread needs to be a sticky in AH before you do

nesf

My name is URL wrote: »

If it had stated that he would vote No, I'd still have an issue with it, and I'm sure that some of the people that thanked it would also have an issue with it.

You're assuming that it's only acceptable because he's a Yes supporter? If you think that's why the Admins haven't acted then you're honestly seeing things that are not there.

dr.bollocko

My name is URL wrote: »

Because you don't agree with it..

Close it

But give some reasons as to why the thread needs to be a sticky in AH before you do

It's just up there in the ole short term as a response to negative reaction over closing our lisbon thread really. Try and humanise the decision making process and let people see we take things on board but we can't have everything on AH. With a bit of advice thrown in. I like the way Terry words things. I still don't have a problem with it. I wouldn't have a problem with it if he were voting no either.

My name is URL

nesf wrote: »

You're assuming that it's only acceptable because he's a Yes supporter? If you think that's why the Admins haven't acted then you're honestly seeing things that are not there.

I never said that. The thread is been touted as an insight about doing research before voting. People have shown agreement with him in the form of thanks

Would those same people have thanked it if he had of hinted towards a No vote instead of Yes? I doubt it

So it's political, not an insight into making clearer decisions. And that's why it shouldn't be in AH

WhiteWashMan

My name is URL wrote: »

But give some reasons as to why the thread needs to be a sticky in AH before you do

Sorry?
What?

Perhaps the mods should ask the public's opinion before they take a **** as well?

Seriously, the amount of pedantic crap on this site is increasing day by day. This is not a feedback issue, if you want an answer, PM the mod.