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

Did you really...

Options
24567

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    4zn76tysfajdxp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,944 ✭✭✭✭4zn76tysfajdxp


    For god's sake DeVore, learn to use multi-quote.


  • Options
    #33
    Mr. Presentable
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,496 ✭✭✭Mr. Presentable


    Jazzy wrote: »
    delete the thread on after hours about Deirdre Reynolds? if so - why?

    Because the target of abuse represents another media body?

    It sets the disappoinment bar another notch higher that the thread was removed. It ought to have been moderated.

    Will this thread likewise be pulled if Ronnie Whelan "phones the office"
    Didn't think so - he's not likely to do a column of disapproval.

    Yes, the timbre of posting was foul, but that's what moderators are for. It's also what goes on in threads all across the board but you don't get the top man himself coming in and taking charge of them.

    Don't get me wrong, I completely understand why this happened, I just think it's weak and fearfull.


  • Options
    #34
    DeVore
    Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭DeVore


    You know sometimes I dont have time to babysit AH at 2am, I removed the thread because it was a total trainwreck. We're going through it now and if there is anything of substance (which I find difficult to believe) then we'll replace that.


    I must say you are all very brave taking risks on our behalf. Why dont you go and write an abusive blog post about, and make sure you put your real name and address on the bottom of it and then we'll see who is weak and fearful... of you go, make sure its really unpleasant and derides their ability to do their job competently.

    DeV.


  • Options
    #35
    BraziliaNZ
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,671 ✭✭✭BraziliaNZ


    DeVore wrote: »
    Why, what is there in it that is illegal? There's criticisms of his apparent change of position but theres no one in there calling him "a cod faced bitch".

    Double standards because she's female is what I am seeing in that regard.

    DeV.

    What are you talking about? The title of the thread calls him a "tosser". I thought Deirdre's article was insulting to the men AND women of Dublin, the way she goes on in it, and public ridicule is the least she should expect.


  • Options
    #36
    Mr. Presentable
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,496 ✭✭✭Mr. Presentable


    DeVore wrote: »
    You know sometimes I dont have time to babysit AH at 2am,DeV.

    Like I said, I completely understand, but you shouldn't have to babysit AH, that's why you have mods. To make sure sht can't happen.

    Yes, your name is signed at the bottom of every post here, not mine, and yes, with position comes responsibility. My point, though, also was that Ronnie Whelan can be called unfit for his job too, but that's OK because maybe he's not in a position to run a diatribe in the Indo tomorrow.

    IMO, if she read the thread, and called the office, she'll run a piece about "celebrity" and the lack of control over what the public can spit.

    But I could be wrong.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Nevyn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    That when someone thinks a man is crap at his job they don't pass remarks about him having a face like the back of a bus, but they do when it's a woman cos it's a woman's real failing not to be pretty. It's sexist.


  • Options
    #38
    BraziliaNZ
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,671 ✭✭✭BraziliaNZ


    Thaedydal wrote: »
    That when someone thinks a man is crap at his job they don't pass remarks about him having a face like the back of a bus, but they do when it's a woman cos it's a woman's real failing not to be pretty. It's sexist.

    In the article she's writing about the fact that she's such hot stuff and too good for the majority of men in Dublin. She's the one bringing her looks into the equation.


  • Options
    #39
    bonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Guys...offering Feedback is one thing. Trying to turn this into the thread that was removed is another.

    Please don't continue down the line of using this as a surrogate thread to get your digs in.


  • Options
    #40
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    What about the Twink thread? The David McSavage one? Nikki Hayes?

    This is pretty bizarre stuff. Ironically when Gerry Ryan voiced his objections to Boards, the exact opposite response came from here.

    Comments that cross the line - remove them instead of deleting the thread?


  • Options
    #41
    Jazzy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,315 ✭✭✭Jazzy


    gerry ryan isnt likely to sue, deirdre reynolds is. thats the problem, whereas ryan would just say something on the radio.. deirdre would make a big song and dance over it (as proved by her calling the office) and then 'stand up for herself against these nasty internet trolls who call her crap' by sueing the evil that is boards.ie
    so in short, we cant slag the over dramatic idiots who would use their slagging on boards to further themselves whatever meager way they can :)

    and for the record, she isnt bad looking :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    DeVore
    Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭DeVore


    Dudes, I wanted to sleep. The thread was a train wreck.

    We've moved it to the AH Mod forum to review it, dissect it and learn from it. No one has a manual here so we're all figuring this stuff out as we go.

    I dont care if anyone writes anything about us here. Gerry Ryan was free to complain to us but he didnt, he had a go (repeatedly) on his radio show, ironically where we werent allowed to reply (despite repeatedly contacting his researchers and offering to explain ourselves).

    That thread had nothing of value to it and was a personal diatribe from start to finish. The McWilliams thread is at least debating the points on the merits of what he has written. Thats a huge difference.

    DeV.


  • Options
    #43
    DeVore
    Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭DeVore


    To be clear Deirdre Reynolds has not threatened to sue boards at all. When we have talked to her she was in fact very pleasant about it apparently (I'm on holidays of sorts in Malta so I havent talked to the woman) We were just asked us to review it. By that stage it had been "reviewed" by me and I stand by my actions.

    Never heard of the woman before I removed it. Dont care who she is. No one should be subject to that vitriol... and if you have seen other cases of it, link them here and I'll review them too.



    DeV.


  • Options
    #44
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Plenty of people are subject to such vitriol on AH - why the exception? And the merits of what Deirdre writes were also being discussed. Can we not discuss the vapid tripe on the SIndo in case it offends the likes of Rosanna Davison?
    There is major inconsistency going on...


  • Options
    #45
    copacetic
    Subscribers Posts: 16,587 ✭✭✭✭copacetic


    DeVore wrote: »
    Never heard of the woman before I removed it. Dont care who she is. No one should be subject to that vitriol... and if you have seen other cases of it, link them here and I'll review them too.



    DeV.

    Could you look at this one Dev? It wasn't even AH..
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055825557
    I dont care if anyone writes anything about us here. Gerry Ryan was free to complain to us but he didnt, he had a go (repeatedly) on his radio show, ironically where we werent allowed to reply (despite repeatedly contacting his researchers and offering to explain ourselves).

    If I had a radio show I personally wouldn't let you on to explain why what is in that thread is ok. It generated plenty of reports and although I'm sure some even worse stuff was cleaned up, there is plenty there that shouldn't be imo.


  • Options
    #46
    bonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Dudess wrote: »
    There is major inconsistency going on...
    You've been asked to link to threads where you believe this is the case.

    Maybe we're understanding that differently, but to me that sounds like someone offering to try and clear up any inconsistencies which exist....so why not take up the offer rather than just complain about the very problem it was made to try and rectify?


  • Options
    #47
    BraziliaNZ
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,671 ✭✭✭BraziliaNZ


    as copacetic said, this one, about Gerry Ryan's daughter, personal insults from the start

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showt...p?t=2055825557


  • Options
    #48
    Nevyn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 43,045 ✭✭✭✭Nevyn


    Dudess wrote: »
    Plenty of people are subject to such vitriol on AH - why the exception? And the merits of what Deirdre writes were also being discussed. Can we not discuss the vapid tripe on the SIndo in case it offends the likes of Rosanna Davison?
    There is major inconsistency going on...

    Or it's a starting point of a wave of change and the slack which there was to the civil posting site rule is to be now tightened up on certain forums.


  • Options
    #49
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    bonkey wrote: »
    You've been asked to link to threads where you believe this is the case.
    I have?
    Maybe we're understanding that differently, but to me that sounds like someone offering to try and clear up any inconsistencies which exist....so why not take up the offer rather than just complain about the very problem it was made to try and rectify?
    It's really quite straightforward: thread containing attacks on Deirdre Reynolds - deleted; threads containing attacks on David McSavage/Twink/Bono/Nikki Hayes - left open... hence my use of the term "inconsistency".


  • Options
    #50
    FarmerGreen
    Registered Users Posts: 1,134 ✭✭✭FarmerGreen


    I'm just so glad someone is flying this thing and not taking advice from
    the passengers.
    Its not as easy as it looks.


  • Options
    #51
    DeVore
    Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭DeVore


    Attacking the post and not the poster extends to attackign what they wrote, not what their physical shape is and whether you'd ride them or not.

    Big big difference and maybe it is time to tighten the civility rules but thats something I will discuss with the AH mods and we'll come to a consensus on that.

    Rules and mods change. Some threads that would have been let go before might not now. Also, I was the one who made that decision, criticise me. I didnt see anything on GR daughter (I've got it open in another window now) and so it might simply be a difference in strictness between me and others. This happens. Shít happens. Its not a freakin' attack on your freedoms.

    I never thought I would type this but "Internet: Srs Bznss" and coming from *me* that has to mean we're through the looking glass. I'm off to bed after I read this thread.

    DeV.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    DeVore
    Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 32,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭DeVore


    BraziliaNZ wrote: »
    as copacetic said, this one, about Gerry Ryan's daughter, personal insults from the start

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showt...p?t=2055825557
    Thread doesnt exist.
    Are you wasting my time?


    Also, you didnt answer my questions before.

    DeV.


  • Options
    #53
    Hank_Jones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,783 ✭✭✭Hank_Jones


    DeVore wrote: »
    Thread doesnt exist.

    I would imagine he means this thread: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055825557

    Probably should be distancing myself from it though...


  • Options
    #54
    Otis Driftwood
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,925 ✭✭✭Otis Driftwood


    :)


  • Options
    #55
    My name is URL
    Registered Users Posts: 25,069 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    DeVore wrote: »
    Attacking the post and not the poster extends to attackign what they wrote, not what their physical shape is and whether you'd ride them or not.

    DeV.

    +1 to this part.. if it was a case where the writing skills of the journalist were being criticized and subsequently deleted I'd have an issue with it.. but personal insults like that are stupid.. it really pisses me off to see; for instance, the "Mary Harney is fat" jibes.. as if there weren't enough political issues that people could ridicule her about.. it takes away from any real substance of AH being a platform for discussion.. and your comment about it not being 4chan is spot on too.

    Being in the public eye doesn't forfeit you from being granted some common courtesy


  • Options
    #56
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,159 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Consistency? People arent consistent. Thats life. Oh sure we could all try for consistency in every little thing but then debate goes out the window. Even "robust" debate. Part of the responsibility of having some freedom to chat here, is realising that others have a similar freedom. There are boundaries of course and working them out is not easy at all. It's being worked out as we all trundle along. The centre will be reached to some degree. I hope it's never set in stone as again bye bye debate.

    As for the sexist angle? I dunno, apparently the lead singer of a well known northside Dublin band is apparently in the eyes of some a tax evading shortarse and the elected leader of the country is not easy on the eye. To name but two. We all see offense where we look to find it. Long may it continue.

    If one chooses to be in the gaze of the public eye, makes waves by doing so and makes one living from it, then part of that is a response from the public you've elected to speak for and indeed entertain. IMHO anyway Boards navigates this response pretty well so far.

    My 3 cents anyway.

    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
    #57
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,159 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    FarmerGreen wrote: »
    I'm just so glad someone is flying this thing and not taking advice from
    the passengers.
    Its not as easy as it looks.
    Nope its not.

    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
    #58
    dr.bollocko
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 35,943 Mod ✭✭✭✭dr.bollocko


    Devore has pushed the thread into the after hours moderators forum for us to look at. This action is not tantamount to a policy decision or any major shift in how after hours is going to be run in the future. It is an isolated incident.
    I do not think that a thread or example like this where a random journalist is panned and physically degraded over a poorly written article is a decent gauge with which to try and react to any perceived sexism in After Hours.
    I do not think that the gender of the person would have had an impact on the level of abuse. Perhaps the direction in which it was volleyed. But needless to say the issue to my mind would be the pointless nature of the abuse itself. Hell I have strong opinions about most things but I do not want to see AH become a series of youtube comments for crap articles from the Independent. Again we have to evaluate where we draw the line in the sand on a particular issue. That is something we have tasked ourselves with looking at pro-actively but unfortunately very often issues that arise must be looked at reactively.
    You have to look at this thread in isolation and note a number of points before exrapolating this into a larger argument because it really was unnecessarily abusive. I had never heard of this journalist before and even now struggle to recall her name. The thread was a trainwreck destined for a lock depending on how quickly the usual spew of vitriol is exhausted. Because we want to try and improve how we do things on after hours it's now in our moderators forum for us to look at. I have no interest in going to bat to keep this thread in after hours because it is better off without it. If I had seen what it turned into I would have locked it.


  • Options
    #59
    Hank_Jones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,783 ✭✭✭Hank_Jones


    nedtheshed wrote: »
    Nice sig.
    :rolleyes:

    Great, now it looks like he is referring to my sig. :p

    Due to that other post being deleted...


  • Options
    #60
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Consistency? People arent consistent. Thats life. Oh sure we could all try for consistency in every little thing but then debate goes out the window.
    So, some threads which are character assassinations can stay, some can't? On what grounds? The fact that it's difficult to be consistent? I personally don't buy that. I find the glossing over the fact that this thread is nothing exceptional but was singled out as such, to be quite bizarre.

    And as for the comments on appearance etc, simply delete them/post an on-thread warning?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    dr.bollocko
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 35,943 Mod ✭✭✭✭dr.bollocko


    Dudess wrote: »
    So, some threads which are character assassinations can stay, some can't? On what grounds?
    Good question. Perhaps that should be the thread title tbh. Maybe it's a good feedforward suggestion.
    The fact that it's difficult to be consistent? I personally don't buy that. I find the glossing over the fact that this thread is nothing exceptional but was singled out as such, to be quite bizarre.
    It's really difficult to be consistent. You've moderated AH in the past. Surely you can attest to the fact that it's difficult to be consistent.
    And as for the comments on appearance etc, simply delete them/post an on-thread warning?
    When the next one opens which may be sensitive I hope we can react better and with clearer guidelines. I do not see any benefit to re-opening or revisiting this particular thread though.


Advertisement