Did you really...

BraziliaNZ

so we're both guilty then!

Daemos

Careful now, they might do a SOTS on you and make you 'disappear'...

<_<

>_>

Dohnny Jepp

DaPoolRulz wrote: »

Careful now, they might do a SOTS on you and make you 'disappear'...

<_<

>_>

SOTS never existed. It was all a dream.

Hank_Jones

Dohnny Jepp wrote: »

SOTS never existed. It was all a dream nightmare.

FYP.

FarmerGreen

SOTS changed Sigpo for ever.
He would have liked that.

DeVore

SOTS chose to close his account.

Brazillian, so... i take it you DO work for the PS then... and no that doesnt make two of us because I have not practised double standards, I've stuck exactly to my standards, always have always will... been doing it for years here.

You on the other hand scream censorship when your ill disguised abusive rant filled thread got binned while you report a mild (by comparison) criticism of an area Irish society/economy (not a specific, named individual mind) ... which just happens to be the one YOU work in.

Hypocrite.... umm, much?

DeV.

4zn76tysfajdxp

DeVore wrote: »

SOTS "chose" to "close" his account.

FYP, O'Brien.

bonkey

BraziliaNZ wrote: »

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.

At the risk of pointing out the obvious, the "standard" which your thread was held to was "bring unacceptable threads to our attention and we'll deal with them as they deserve".

You're skipping the "bring it to our attention" part, and then finding issue either that we haven't dealt with it, or that we haven't dealt with it as you think we should. (Note that what you think we should do was never part of the "standard").

You then brought it to deV's attention, and his response would be that he'd deal with it now that he was made aware of it.

How, exactly, is there a double-standard there?

DeVore

The double standard is:

1. "I want to be able to say what I like.... freedom of expression maaan."

2. "Hey, they said nasty things about my sector of the economy. Shut them up."



I guess when you talk about "your freedom of expression" you really do mean "your".




What, not going to play any more? You were very quick to accuse me of all sorts, not sticking around for my turn?

DeV.

BraziliaNZ

Look I just think it's lame that only certain celebrities can be slagged on boards. Celebrities are there for the public to pick apart, there's a whole industry built on it called women's magazines. I'm not losing any sleep over posting on internet forums though.

DeVore

Get a blog.

thread closes tomorrow.

DeV.

Vegeta

DeVore wrote: »

The double standard is:

1. "I want to be able to say what I like.... freedom of expression maaan."

Just on this point, there is an obvious effort to clean AH up or to quell overly negative posts. Mod notices in threads about dead celebrities etc etc

Barring stuff that will get boards.ie sued I am just wondering what the reasoning is there.

DeVore

Civility.

I do not want to put my time and effort and energy into building a platform for kidults to fling poo using me as a body-shield.



Look around the internet.... see anything you like in terms of user generated content?

DeV.

Jazzy

DeVore wrote: »

Civility.

I do not want to put my time and effort and energy into building a platform for kidults to fling poo using me as a body-shield.

so you are imposing your ideas of civility upon us simply because you can?

tbh

Jazzy wrote: »

so you are imposing your ideas of civility upon us simply because you can?

wouldn't you, if it was your site?

Sparks

Jazzy wrote: »

so you are imposing your ideas of civility upon us simply because you can?

Did you forget that 'civility' is by definition other people's ideas of how to behave?

Quazzie

DeVore wrote: »

"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
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.

I'm not quiet sure what this thread is about, and don't really care but I just wanted to point out that displaying and publicly talking about what posts any individual reported is not on. That is supposed to be done in private and as an act of civility towards the community by bringing stuff that might have been missed to the mods attention. Having it thrown back in someones face is not on, and goes against most of what I thought Boards was about.

Jazzy

tbh wrote: »

wouldn't you, if it was your site?

no, as Id be wrong.

I understand whats going on here though, you can see through the lines clearly enough. boards is getting bigger and more and more in the public eye, so its going to be playing hardball with users as regards what could potentially garner the site bad publicity or even a law suit.
I understand, but its a bit crap that you wont get the full spectrum of feelings on issues as there will be this constant worry that maybe you have said and done too much. once that starts happening, the more it will turn into a day-glo merry go round.. and to be fair, its already looking that way across a lot of forums anyway

Sparks wrote: »

Did you forget that 'civility' is by definition other people's ideas of how to behave?

thats why I said Id be wrong and so would you, DeV and even Jesus

DeVore

Jazzy wrote: »

so you are imposing your ideas of civility upon us simply because you can?

Because I believe its a better way and that more people engage in more meaningful discussion and thats what I want to build.


I get it Jazzy, you dont like me or the site. Why you stay is beyond me but .... *shrug*

DeV.

Sparks

Jazzy wrote: »

I understand whats going on here though, you can see through the lines clearly enough. boards is getting bigger and more and more in the public eye, so its going to be playing hardball with users as regards what could potentially garner the site bad publicity or even a law suit.

I think you may have missed the self-contradiction in that statement.
Civility is a group definition - ie. it's the standard the group will accept. As the group gets larger, that definition changes. A joke about the shootings in Cumbria over a pint with an old friend in the pub is not funny when the wives and children of those killed are listening as well.
The group reading here getting larger is why civility becomes more important, not because of lawsuits (those showed up long before the group got larger), but because of basic human decency.
Or, if you like, pragmatism. You're on a large stage here, and everything you say and do on it is readily and easily available via search engine and internet archive to any future partner, employer, loan assessor, insurance company, Garda or civil servant who has any sort of question as to you or your character. It's just a good idea not to act like a complete gombeen on a stage like that.

Jazzy

DeVore wrote: »

Because I believe its a better way and that more people engage in more meaningful discussion and thats what I want to build.


I get it Jazzy, you dont like me or the site. Why you stay is beyond me but .... *shrug*

DeV.

no, I dont mind you and I like the site, thats why I post here

what I dont like is people imposing themselves unnecessarily onto others and the propaganda which is common on boards. that and the hand shandy / Dáil-esque politics are what is really grating, but that seems to be easing down.

Yeah, the thread should have been closed, I wasnt really paying attention to the dumb posts in the thread as its a waste of time, but I thought the article deirdre reynolds wrote fully deserved to be slated - hence why I started this thread.

Sparks wrote: »

but because of basic human decency.

is basic human decency posting on a locked thread to have a little snipe at a poster simply because you can?

Sparks

Jazzy wrote: »

I thought the article deirdre reynolds wrote fully deserved to be slated - hence why I started this thread.

And apparently ignored the point that the article might have deserved slating, but it wasn't receiving it - reynolds was being slated, and not for her professional failings but for unrelated personal stuff.

is basic human decency posting on a locked thread to have a little snipe at a poster simply because you can?

A link please?

Jazzy

Sparks wrote: »

And apparently ignored the point that the article might have deserved slating, but it wasn't receiving it - reynolds was being slated, and not for her professional failings but for unrelated personal stuff.

as I said, I ignored the dumb posts in the thread and when I went back to read the thread, it was gone. hence why I started this thread. read between lines plx

Sparks wrote:

A link please?

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055535149

an admin told me that DeV had gone back into the locked thread just to post that, which I think is a bit of a snipe

DeVore

So ... many... points...


1. Yes the newspaper article deserved to be slated imho. It was a good example of the kind of churnalism I thoroughly dislike. I dont have any problem with people saying that. In fact, I just did.


2. You make out that I "suddenly" just started on this civility trip. You've been here since 2004 .... are you seriously telling me you havent heard me preaching the sermon of civility from waaay back then? Let me refresh your memory.

Posted by me, here.

Me wrote:

I dont know about everywhere else in the world but anywhere I admin people *will* be civil or they will be sent away like children while the adults talk.

I dont care if its male-female or any combination thereof. Gender is irrelevant. It costs nothing to be civil and it shows intelligence and a decent upbringing.


Riot,and everyone else, if someone is bothering you on Boards.ie bring it to the Admin board under Technology and it *will* be dealt with.

DeV.

You know when that was.... 2001. yeah, 2001.

Man, you are right, I've changed SO MUCH. :rolleyes:



3. You agree the thread deserved to be cut. OMG JAZZY IS TEH HITRLE CENSORSHIP AND MY RIGHTS BOOHOOOOOO CHANGE BAD.
So, you too would "impose" your civility on threads like that. You just draw your line a little further down the scale then me.

Lets recap, you agree that the thread you raised this thread about, deserved to be removed, even though you accuse me of moving the goalposts, which I demonstrably havent and that you would do the same and impose your view of whats acceptible too.


Wow.


I really dont know where to go with this after that. Anything further just looks like I'm kicking a man when he's down.

DeV.

Jazzy

DeVore wrote: »

2. You make out that I "suddenly" just started on this civility trip. You've been here since 2004 .... are you seriously telling me you havent heard me preaching the sermon of civility from waaay back then? Let me refresh your memory.

Ive found that goes up & down depending what mood you are in and who you are dealing with

DeVore wrote:

Man, you are right, I've changed SO MUCH. :rolleyes:

i havent said anything on this thread about you 'changing'. what I have said is how the site is changing and how its probably going to become far less tolerant and a bit more rigid. I think it has already and you can see that in peoples posting styles.

DeVore wrote:

3. You agree the thread deserved to be cut. OMG JAZZY IS TEH HITRLE CENSORSHIP AND MY RIGHTS BOOHOOOOOO CHANGE BAD.
So, you too would "impose" your civility on threads like that. You just draw your line a little further down the scale then me.

Lets recap, you agree that the thread you raised this thread about, deserved to be removed, even though you accuse me of moving the goalposts, which I demonstrably havent and that you would do the same and impose your view of whats acceptible too.

I agree now that the facts have been laid before me, when I started this thread they hadnt. notice the way I didnt post after page 3 or so as I was pretty much in agreement as to why it had been moved. I did mention and have sinced mentioned other ulterior motives which I still think are definately there. Also I didnt say Id impose my view, in fact I said Id be wrong.
But isnt that the point of threads and these forums? to learn that which we dont know? Or are you just revelling in trying to put me down or something to even think of coming to that possibility. you are a gamer indeed Devore

DeVore wrote:

I really dont know where to go with this after that. Anything further just looks like I'm kicking a man when he's down.

DeV.

see what I said of propaganda earlier? trying to over play your hand in an effort to vilify me and discredit what I have said. I shouldnt be surprised though, it is the norm in feedback.

c u @ lan

Overheal

Jazzy wrote: »

Ive found that goes up & down depending what mood you are in and who you are dealing with

Isn't that just another way to say 'being human'?

Sparks

Jazzy wrote: »

read between lines plx

You'd rather we didn't read what you read, but what you were thinking?
How, exactly?

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055535149
an admin told me that DeV had gone back into the locked thread just to post that, which I think is a bit of a snipe

There's a snipe in there somewhere alright, but I think it's more of the "make out that there's dissent between the admins" kind than of the kind you mentioned. The last two posts on that thread are ten minutes apart - if I saw that in any other case, the first thing I'd think of would be that the second mod was a slow typist. The second thing I'd think of would be that the first was a fast typist.

Mind you, I'd probably see stuff like this from you in that thread and just start to think it was a good thing it was closed and that it wasn't worth thinking about anymore:

Jazzy wrote:

stop being a shower of no and a shower of over importence. just put 1 or 2 more mods in and dont think about it too hard. thinking about stuff too hard is wat tends to turn boards into retard central

Vegeta

Jazzy wrote: »

what I have said is how the site is changing and how its probably going to become far less tolerant and a bit more rigid. I think it has already

This is what I take from our lovely little thread and being honest I would tend to agree that the above is definitely happening.

Are our disagreements based on "Is this good or bad for boards.ie?"

Jazzy

Sparks wrote: »

You'd rather we didn't read what you read, but what you were thinking?
How, exactly?

you said:
"And apparently ignored the point that the article might have deserved slating, but it wasn't receiving it - reynolds was being slated"
and I had already said how I ignored the dumb posts. to me it was as if you were doing the 'confused mod' act, which is a classic of course if you werent, then I dunno.. maybe your trying to over exagerate the point or something inane.

Sparks wrote:

There's a snipe in there somewhere alright, but I think it's more of the "make out that there's dissent between the admins" kind than of the kind you mentioned. The last two posts on that thread are ten minutes apart - if I saw that in any other case, the first thing I'd think of would be that the second mod was a slow typist. The second thing I'd think of would be that the first was a fast typist.

i wasnt making out there was dissent between the admins in that thread. I was saying how admins tend not to do something which makes sense, simply because they dont like the person suggesting it. which is true of mods and admins on this site, heck I could name some for you but that would be rude.

Sparks wrote:

Mind you, I'd probably see stuff like this from you in that thread and just start to think it was a good thing it was closed and that it wasn't worth thinking about anymore:

if you read Dav's post you would see the issue was resolved amicably. and as I also posted in that thread, I was drunk and pretty much making a fool of myself with one post there. I still think some things on this site are over-thought and some under-thought, but thats true in all walks of life.. finding the balance between is good though.
and if you are saying that DeVore can only type one sentence in 10 minutes then.. well... lol ? really? thats all you could come up with?

Dohnny Jepp

Jazzy wrote: »

c u @ lan

Ah the old counter strike threat. lol