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
12467

Comments

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


    wilco.

    DeV.


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


    Actually, you know what, its 1am here. I'm going to sleep.

    I've moved that thread to a private area for review too because theres some valid comment in it, but some fairly nasty abuse too... I'll deal with it tomorrow.

    DeV.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    I quickly skimmed the odd-numbered pages of that thread (you volunteered to read all of it, which I'm noting:)). Some nasty and unwarranted vitriol in there but judging strictly by the odd-numbered pages, still conference league compared to the Reynolds thread.

    There's no reason why the Internet should be a fuzzy ball of sunshine, lollipops and rainbows (and I recall what I posted on both boards and facebook about each of this year's Eurovision entries) but there are too many wannabe assholes about nonetheless and that Reynolds thread was mid-table premier league as these things go.


  • Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 35,471 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    EKRIUQ wrote: »
    It's still available in google cache, I won't post the link but use "somebodys name" site:www.boards.ie

    To be honest the admins have a point, it is pretty rough on her.


    Withinn the first 10 posts

    I'm not clever enough to see past page 1 but there were only two objectionable comments on there, both of which are bandied about in a half-dozen threads on any given day.

    If "What ****ing planet is she on?", a harmless and very pertinent question, is now considered grossly offensive I give up on the web.


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


    No it got a lot more personal.

    I agree sceptre, the Reynolds thread is worse then the Ryan one but the Ryan one needs moderating.

    "What f*cking planet is she on" wouldnt get me concerned (I just called Tito Ortiz a "fncking clown" I realised) but the unnecessaraily nasty personal comments are out of line.

    DeV.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14 Sigsnipper


    DeVore wrote: »
    No it got a lot more personal.

    I agree sceptre, the Reynolds thread is worse then the Ryan one but the Ryan one needs moderating.

    "What f*cking planet is she on" wouldnt get me concerned (I just called Tito Ortiz a "fncking clown" I realised) but the unnecessaraily nasty personal comments are out of line.

    DeV.
    Not a question of comments being out of line. End of the day if comments leave boards open to litigation then swift action has to be taken.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,212 ✭✭✭✭Tom Dunne


    Sigsnipper wrote: »
    Not a question of comments being out of line. End of the day if comments leave boards open to litigation then swift action has to be taken.

    SOTS, buddy, you really need to step away from Boards.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,239 ✭✭✭✭WindSock


    Dav wrote: »
    The bigger question here is why are someone's looks in any way shape or form relevant when questioning their ability to do their job?

    I mean look at me, I'm a fat and hairy, heavy metal fan. If I make a decision for this site that doesn't work out, am I expected to have to put up with people saying "that was a terrible idea - he was probably too busy wondering how many kebabs he was going to eat after work" as fair criticism? Is this a "crossing the line" case because its commenting on someone doing their job (which I don't have a problem with as long as it's civil), but would also be considered personal abuse of a member on the site?

    In fairness, you work with in the internet, your appearance is to be expected ;)

    http://www.deansproperty.com.au/Home/Profiles


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


    I'm packing to come home, I'm leaving this for the weekend. Comments about our editorial policy are fine anything else is off topic.

    DeV.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,239 ✭✭✭✭WindSock


    OutlawPete wrote: »
    You have got to be kidding me :)

    Seriously ..

    Men don't get criticized for how they look when they are crap at their jobs??

    Gerry Ryan was called fat or ugly almost every time I heard the guy discussed as being a useless presenter.

    Everytime I hear our very own Taoiseach get ridiculed, his looks are brought into it.

    When Bono is brought up as being a prick, inevitably he will be called a midget or a short-arse.



    They do for both sexes, are your eyes really that closed to that?


    They do for both sexes, but certainly moreso for women. Those are just a handfull of men that have been picked out that are commented on due to their appearances. Any critique of a woman, just about everytime her appearance comes into question.

    ''Pics or gtfo, Is she hawt, I'd hit it, I wouldn't touch it with yours, she can <insert innuendo> my <innuendo>, face like a bag of boiled rashers, who cares what this ugly munter has to say...''

    All fairly commonplace comments on threads about women in their professions in AH. Just about every one of them in fact. So by and large women bear the lions share of dismission and ridicule.
    It is fairly hard to have any sort of serious discussion when a woman is at the centre of it.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    WindSock wrote: »
    ''Pics or gtfo, Is she hawt, I'd hit it, I wouldn't touch it with yours, she can <insert innuendo> my <innuendo>, face like a bag of boiled rashers, who cares what this ugly munter has to say...''

    With regards to the "hawt", "pics or gtfo", "i'd hit that", men are generally just more honest than women, that is all.

    We say what we mean and you don't need to join Oprah's book club in order to figure out what it is that we actually want.

    Women do make these same comments in AH though.

    As for the ugly comments etc, I have no time for that crap and I myself have never called a woman or man 'ugly' in my life and so I have zero respect for anyone else that does.
    WindSock wrote: »
    All fairly commonplace comments on threads about women in their professions in AH. Just about every one of them in fact.

    After Hours is a lighthearted current affairs forum where sexual innuendo is undeniably and unashamedly alive and well.

    There are three guys to every gal and so inevitably her bewbage will come up in the conversation, that's the nature of the place.

    If what you are implying were true in general though, then the politics forum, the photography forum (etc etc) would all be the same, but they are not.

    It's not socially acceptable for women to just start talkin about how men look and if they would shag them etc, but you ALL think the same as us and you know it.

    Some women can admit that and some cannot, as they are generally comfortable with their feminist agenda as it makes them feel superior to men if they can just pretend they are their sex is ridiculed and oppressed based on looks whereas men are not.
    WindSock wrote: »
    So by and large women bear the lions share of dismission and ridicule.

    I don't agree and as tbh has acknowledged that he has banned users for speaking about a man in this fashion and I you don't have to look too hard to find other men also who being ridiculed for their appearance.
    WindSock wrote: »
    It is fairly hard to have any sort of serious discussion when a woman is at the centre of it.

    You said it :p;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Honesty is a bit of a lame excuse for being a jerk.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    OutlawPete wrote: »
    LMAO :D

    Men are generally just more honest than women, that is all.

    We say what we mean and you don't need to join Oprah's book club in order to figure out what it is that we actually want.
    Some (or many) men also seem to have this strange affliction where in groups they discuss whether they'd "tap that" or not in relation to women who wouldn't have them if they were paid large suitcases of cash up front. Perhaps less a case of honesty and more a case of too little blood running through the hippocampus. All of which is terribly off-topic I'm afraid...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    Sarky wrote: »
    Honesty is a bit of a lame excuse for being a jerk.

    I wasn't referring to the those that ripped Deirdre Reynolds part as "honest".

    I agree, some of those comments made would indeed point to the fact that there were jerks on that thread.

    My "honest" remark was in reply to Windsock complaining that threads in AH have comments like "Pics or GTFO.." etc.

    Men and women on AH and elsewhere, discuss whether they find someone attractive when they come up in athread because of the topic, that is part and parcel of the good banter that exists there.

    If a woman or a man is getting torn apart based on their appearance (be it Deirdre Reynolds or Brian Cowen), then I agree - the threads should be locked.

    My point is that it is NOT just women who are the butt of these jokes.

    Start a thread on Mick Hucknall and see how long it lasts without someone calling him an ugly ging-er.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    sceptre wrote: »
    ... Perhaps less a case of honesty and more a case of too little blood running through the hippocampus.

    Blood can't be everywhere at once.
    All of which is terribly off-topic I'm afraid...

    The problem is that for many men, such things are never considered off-topic.

    Although I am a few years older than most participants here, I admit that my psyche still responds to women in terms of how sexually attractive they appear to me. Some of you might think that I should know better. I do. I make sure that my reaction to her appearance is kept private, and does not affect my social behaviour.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭Handsome Bob


    Sarky wrote: »
    Honesty is a bit of a lame excuse for being a jerk.

    "I just tell like it is me."


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 220 ✭✭Aids By Google


    OutlawPete wrote: »
    I wasn't referring to the those that ripped Deirdre Reynolds part as "honest".

    I agree, some of those comments made would indeed point to the fact that there were jerks on that thread.

    My "honest" remark was in reply to Windsock complaining that threads in AH have comments like "Pics or GTFO.." etc.

    Men and women on AH and elsewhere, discuss whether they find someone attractive when they come up in athread because of the topic, that is part and parcel of the good banter that exists there.

    If a woman or a man is getting torn apart based on their appearance (be it Deirdre Reynolds or Brian Cowen), then I agree - the threads should be locked.

    My point is that it is NOT just women who are the butt of these jokes.

    Start a thread on Mick Hucknall and see how long it lasts without someone calling him an ugly ging-er.

    Retard....of a post.

    I lol'd good.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,706 ✭✭✭Midnight_EG


    Retard....of a post.

    I love how you copied my post, in response to your fatty thread.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,239 ✭✭✭✭WindSock


    OutlawPete wrote: »
    My point is that it is NOT just women who are the butt of these jokes.

    Start a thread on Mick Hucknall and see how long it lasts without someone calling him an ugly ging-er.

    Think you missed my point there. I didn't say all men were immune to any sort of ridicule (or drool) based on their appearance. I said that most women are. The whole thread becomes based around what she looks like, whereas a thread on a guy may or may not have a few comments thrown in here and there. And I am talking about in AH, not politics or photography.


  • Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    God, I can see the points raised on all sides on this thread.

    Tbh, what's the point in having different boards on Boards?

    AH has many weak points and many a train wreck. Please don't derail it and try and homogeneous it like so many of Boards categories.*

    *I don't mean homogeneous in a bad way. AH is supposed to be different. If you start applying the same rules across the boards, the point of AH ceases to be relevant. This is where the applying the same rules across Boards.ie falls down.

    Yes, certain standards need to be applied, but not at the risk of ruining AH or other forums.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 12,556 ✭✭✭✭AckwelFoley


    WindSock wrote: »
    Think you missed my point there. I didn't say all men were immune to any sort of ridicule (or drool) based on their appearance. I said that most women are. The whole thread becomes based around what she looks like, whereas a thread on a guy may or may not have a few comments thrown in here and there. And I am talking about in AH, not politics or photography.

    Reason is simple.

    Most posters on boards.ie are male.

    ..and most of those males are virgins, and the only experience of women they have is drooling over posters of some mongeifed version of a woman from star trek


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,807 ✭✭✭✭Orion


    snyper wrote: »
    .and most of those males are virgins, and the only experience of women they have is drooling over posters of some mongeifed version of a woman from star trek

    I thought that was a poster of you :eek:


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


    thread here on this guy - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055945506

    his appearance is being slated all over the place. Do you only close threads if it's a woman being slagged or a Sindo hack?


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


    Did you report the post?

    Also, one or two people called him Ugly (and yes, they shouldnt have and I'll edit that now). Thats considerably different to your thread. Or dont you get the concept of "quantative difference".


    Let this bone go.

    DeV.


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


    Ps: I dont give a flying **** if someone is the editor of the New York Times, but I'm not having a witch hunt on my forums, take it elsewhere.

    The Indo is a rag I wouldnt wipe my arse with but I dont give a damn who someone works for.

    DeV.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,444 ✭✭✭Dohnny Jepp


    BraziliaNZ wrote: »
    thread here on this guy - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055945506

    his appearance is being slated all over the place. Do you only close threads if it's a woman being slagged or a Sindo hack?


    To be fair that guy is ugly. . . . :pac:


  • Registered Users Posts: 83,210 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    I'm Barack Obama?


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


    BrazillianNZ, did you report any of the posts you are now blatantly trying to use to justify your attack on Ms Reynolds?

    Of have you just rushed breathlessly here with the link of another minor breach of the peace which wasn't picked up in a childish attempt to "prove" that this makes your rant acceptable?

    DeV.


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


    I didn't report them because I don't particularly care if people's appearances are slagged off on anonymous internet forums, I just was annoyed that double standards were implemented in the case of DR. I give up.


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


    No no, dont give up, we're just starting to have fun....


    "double standards" eh? Well, lets see... The only posts you have ever reported were posts about the Public Sector.

    The last one was 2009 and is here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63296121&postcount=121
    Razorfish wrote: »
    Sweet deal the unions negotiated for the lazy overpaid bloated public service.

    A 30%+ pay cut would be more like reality for them!! Private sector workers have taken this already.




    Which you complained about on the grounds of calling a large proportion of the population "lazy".


    So, are you a public sector worker because if you are.... well, that seems highly "double standards" to me?


    Well?

    DeV.


Advertisement