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

Can I now please have my post reinstated?

Options

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Beruthiel
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 42,362 Mod ✭✭✭✭Beruthiel


    Have you discussed this with the forum Mod?


  • Options
    #3
    Black Uhlan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 283 ✭✭Black Uhlan


    yeah, I was told it has to be discussed. That was 3 days ago. I was threatened with a ban for singling out posters or groups of posters which is fair enough.

    However, I did no such thing. What I did was comment on an anomymous blogger who was quoted in the opening post. I did not make any connection between this anonymous blogger and any other anonymous user of this site, nor did I know of any.


  • Options
    #4
    bonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    This confusion might be my fault...

    6th cleared up in the other thread that accusations were being made about a boards.ie user in the post.

    You thanked him for clearing that up.

    From that, I (mis)read it to mean that you understood why the post had been deleted...when apparently you meant that you understood why we needed to discuss it.

    As a result, I didn't get back to 6th about the issue...so its my fault.

    For what its worth, I don't believe the post should be undeleted. It seems that the majority of the post is you making allegations about a politics.ie user.

    Although politics.ie is obviously a seperate site, and therefore not a boards.ie user, I don't see any merit in boards.ie being used as a medium for launching allegations about specific politics.ie members.

    You could have written the post in a manner that didn't actually name names. If you like, I can PM you the text, and you can rewrite it in a manner which is not actually doing so and repost. I'm pretty sure 6th won't have a problem with that.

    If anyone criticises it for not naming names, I'll intervene and say that it was done on our request.


  • Options
    #5
    Black Uhlan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 283 ✭✭Black Uhlan


    bonkey wrote: »
    This confusion might be my fault...

    6th cleared up in the other thread that accusations were being made about a boards.ie user in the post.

    You thanked him for clearing that up.

    From that, I (mis)read it to mean that you understood why the post had been deleted...when apparently you meant that you understood why we needed to discuss it.

    As a result, I didn't get back to 6th about the issue...so its my fault.

    For what its worth, I don't believe the post should be undeleted. It seems that the majority of the post is you making allegations about a politics.ie user.

    Although politics.ie is obviously a seperate site, and therefore not a boards.ie user, I don't see any merit in boards.ie being used as a medium for launching allegations about specific politics.ie members.

    You could have written the post in a manner that didn't actually name names. If you like, I can PM you the text, and you can rewrite it in a manner which is not actually doing so and repost. I'm pretty sure 6th won't have a problem with that.

    If anyone criticises it for not naming names, I'll intervene and say that it was done on our request.

    I really don't want to sound flippant here because I do appreciate you taking the time to address this but did the post break any rules? And if not why was it censored.

    I didn't name any names as I don't actually know any, other than internet pseudonyms.

    The fact that he was a politics.ie user is irrelevant as far as I am concerned.

    What is relevant is that the the blogger whose blog was the source material for the OP.

    The blog in question is a caustic, vitriolic site dedicated to smearing Declan Ganley.

    Thread Title:No Campaigner- Sock Puppet for Monarchist Catholic Elite

    The counter-argument was raised by another poster that Ganley has been smeared sometimes fairly, sometimes not and this was just another example lacking in substance.
    todolist wrote: »
    There's a lot of smears and false info put out against Ganley.Fact is the Nice referendum was defeated,the Lisbon referendum was defeated yet both were re-run because the result didn't meet Brussles expetations.You see a pattern here?

    This POV was rejected by serial YES man
    meglome wrote: »
    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0311/1224242664635.html

    Yeah we're all out to get him :rolleyes: You see a pattern here?

    I really am amazed that anyone with an interest in CT's would trust Ganley.

    Which is where I came in. With proof enough for me that the blog was indeed an orchestrated smear campaign against Declan Ganley. This info was obtained from politics.ie and the site was linked to.

    Is is boards.ie policy to protect anonymous users of other sites?? Enough to censor posts? More than the site itself actually does? Crazy if true! Did 6th delete the post unilaterally? Has the post actually broken any rules or general guidelines?


Advertisement