In light of these posts Dev made on the politics forum...

Wolfe Tone

GuanYin wrote: »

err but I am not Irish??!!!

Cmon your american, im sure we can claim you somehow.

orangehat

I think the OP needs to realise that the site is owned by the person, it's not a public forum where what is right is right, whatever the person wants is right. it's their own little fiefdom the sole purpose of which is to earn them money.

There are plenty of more open and reasonable sites out there less driven by ego, if you look for them you will find them, but you may as well talk to a wall as expect the person in question to admit any wrong.

AckwelFoley

GuanYin wrote: »

err but I am not Irish??!!!

Yes, i know that, i wasnt referring to you - it was making a reflection of those that accuse you of having an anti republican agenda

RDM_83 again

GuanYin wrote: »

There is a difference between not breaking any rules and not doing anything wrong.

I would argue that for the most part, you don't break rules, I wouldn't say you don't do anything wrong.

In my view, you are among a handful of posters who reply doggedly to a thread until everyone else gets bored and leaves. That isn't breaking the rules but it is, in my view, wrong.

This is what DeVore was trying to highlight. He was, I believe, trying to be helpful in doing so. Unfortunately, your reaction to that has pretty much proved his point.

I'm very curious about this if you read any northern politics thread or one related to SF its the usual shouting match between a few posters but i Have to say at least Mussolini has some understanding of the issues and from an opposite point of view so does KiethAFC, what content would there be on threads that are left if they didn't post, I haven't followed northern politics in a number of years but the level of factual ignorance from most posters is astounding, and never involves any issues on the ground.

ps roll on a northern forum where a different sort of moderation style could apply.

And ps what is the status of political avatars, the point Mussolini was trying to ascertain?its not a good sign when your less informed after a thread than before?

DeVore

I was taken to task for the comment by a politics mod, a caution I believe I accepted gracefully. I told them to deal with it as they would any user, though I had intended it as "direction" rather than anything insult. Musso, you can tend to monopolise the thread, much like KeithAFC can. Its killing threads when the hard core republicans and hardcore unionists simply dominante a thread till no one else can be bothered and there are a huge number of northern ireland threads just "popping up" recently to and the are all degenerating into the same argument on multiple threads.

DeV.

Wolfe Tone

Well I was insulted Dev, and I think it would have been fairer to send that via a PM, if you had to say it at all. I saw it as a personal attack.

DeV I think the issue with that is that no one sticks to the OP, lucky if we get ten posts in without "IRA scumbags, Gerry McCabe, etc etc" People see SF, or republican, and pop in to post stuff like that, and away we go down the yellow brick road. Also add in that any reasonable discussion of dissident republicans is all but impossible. Best thing to do DeV is to read the thread requesting a Northern Politics forum, its all in there. And as a previous poster said people are frightfully ignorant about even simple facts, should I just ignore that?


What do you want me to do DeV? I like to discuss these things, I didn't think it was a crime to post extensively about those things which I find interesting. I feel I make good contributions, sure you might object to the content, or disagree, but politics would be a very boring forum if all everyone ever did was agree with one another.

P. Breathnach

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

... I didn't think it was a crime to post extensively about those things which I find interesting...

I think you (and many other posters in the politics forums) miss DeV's core point: while it is not a crime to post extensively, it is a disservice to discussion to post substantially the same argument repeatedly.

I know your stance on NI politics because you go on at such length. I suspect that you do not know mine: that is mainly because I become so pissed off by what passes for discussion that I go elsewhere.

Wolfe Tone

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I think you (and many other posters in the politics forums) miss DeV's core point: while it is not a crime to post extensively, it is a disservice to discussion to post substantially the same argument repeatedly.

I know your stance on NI politics because you go on at such length. I suspect that you do not know mine: that is mainly because I become so pissed off by what passes for discussion that I go elsewhere.

When things become derailed from the original topic, which near always happens, to a discussion on the same things again, it is only natural you will see the same arguments again.

P. Breathnach

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

When things become derailed from the original topic, which near always happens, to a discussion on the same things again, it is only natural you will see the same arguments again.

From the same people, in much the same way. All convinced that they are repositories of truth. And believing that if they do not respond to everything that is said, the argument is lost. Dog-with-bone stuff.

The argument is lost when all but the same handful of people are in the same places in the same trenches firing the same ineffective missiles at one another, and the rest of us have moved off to find something more interesting.

Bottle_of_Smoke

To be honest I think the dinner table comment warranted a yellow card. However I've never been a mod so I don't know if mods can do that to a superior.

All the points put forward by Mussolini were valid in that thread. It wasn't even a northern thread, just happened to mention the 32csm who are mostly associated with the north(though in reality they're all over the island)

So yeah Mussolini takes part in a lot of northern threads, but I completely reject the notion he puts other's off posting, and I can think of other republican posters who are worthy of that comment

DeVore

I didnt mean to imply that Mussolini was the only one guilty of monopolising the conversation. It takes two to tango and I've said effectively the same to KeithAFC on a different thread.

The mods did take action and I accept their "chastisement". It may be that I need an "admin" account and a "personal" account, but thats another days thinking.

DeV.

FlutterinBantam

GuanYin wrote: »

And there in lies the crux of the problem

Spot on there .

This poster has been flogging a one issue agenda ad nauseum( nothing wrong with that I hasten to add)however his posting style is one dimensional and acerbic and doesn't really bring anything new to the table.

Same old same old, then he rears up when a Mod rightly nails him.

Usual dancing on the head of a pin

My 2c

Wolfe Tone

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Spot on there .

This poster has been flogging a one issue agenda ad nauseum( nothing wrong with that I hasten to add)however his posting style is one dimensional and acerbic and doesn't really bring anything new to the table.

Same old same old, then he rears up when a Mod rightly nails him.

Usual dancing on the head of a pin

My 2c

If I am not mistaken you are banned from the politics forum. Bit rich of you to criticize another users posting style.

FlutterinBantam

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

If I am not mistaken you are banned from the politics forum. Bit rich of you to criticize another users posting style.

What's with this Wolf Tone moniker, thought you might have gone for 'Brendan Hughes' or 'The Dark' or something.

You are slipping up pal.

Anyway don't want to derail this ... byeeeee

Amhran Nua

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

And if he is half the man he appears to be I think he will do such.

"Men" have no difficulty attaching their name to their convictions. This isn't the first time you've gotten in trouble for monopolising a thread and acting in an untoward fashion towards other posters. I fully support the actions of the mods in this instance.

K-9

I can see a problem here, in that many Republican posters moan that debates about NI end up with the same circular debate and always see it as the other side to blame. Same happens on other political discussion sites, not just the political forum of Boards, so I don't think it is a specific Boards.ie issue.

Personally, I wonder can debates about NI end up in any other way? I'd say if I posted on fora that attract mostly Loyalist centred contributors with a few Republican posters, we'd end up with the same gripes.

It's the zero sum game that is NI politics. It isn't even specific to the 2 communities, SDLP fight with SF, DUP with UUP etc., all mostly concerned with how patriotic and nationalistic they are.

It's largely an emotional topic. There are other subjects that I don't post on or other posters that I don't interact with (about 2) because it's the same old, same old thread, deja vue stuff. Some post the same stuff but can add an interesting slant to it now and again, worth reading for that.

NI stuff to me is same old, same old. Not because the subject is old, I dip in now and again awaiting an enlightened, different from the norm view. Often I see that view but it is drowned out in the usual d*ck waving contest, ignored or quickly forgotten.

Still, there are other subjects on the politics boards that get monopolised in the same way, not adding much, the 10 threads a day rants against the public service being another topic that takes over too, same old faces monopolising the debate which goes on and on like Ariston.

K-9

So, subjects with repetitive posters..... NI, Public Service pay, the Palestine question, left v. right wing US politics, Euro sceptics etc. etc.

I can see why posters would feel aggrieved that one area was picked on. Either have a consistent rule on posters monopolising topics or none at all.

FlutterinBantam

What boils my piss tbh ,is the endless propaganda churned out by the pro Palestinian lobby.

While it is politics, I would have to opine that the situation in that area is hardly a matter of great concern to the ordinary Irish citizen.

Hence the prolific instigation of these threads which usually have an anti Israel/US corollary attached, would lead this poster to believe that a certain coterie have an agenda to promote, and Boards.ie is their vehicle for this.

Perhaps if these threads were watched a little more closely and seen for what they are, or shunted off to a ME forum, for example we would have less of psuedo concern for events in that area, looked at with a myopic view and regular posters would be free to discuss events more pertinent and important to the Irish people.

big b

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

So yeah Mussolini takes part in a lot of northern threads, but I completely reject the notion he puts other's off posting, and I can think of other republican posters who are worthy of that comment

You mean you don't think it's correct?
You're wrong.

Wolfe Tone

Amhran Nua wrote: »

"Men" have no difficulty attaching their name to their convictions. This isn't the first time you've gotten in trouble for monopolising a thread and acting in an untoward fashion towards other posters. I fully support the actions of the mods in this instance.

Theres a core difference here, I didn't feel comfortable in revealing my name, the difference was that you are claiming to represent a political party, big difference. Its not that I don't appreciate the sly dig, its just that there is an important difference there.


Actually it is, and in this case I didn't act untoward toward other posters, in fact thats why I had issue, it gave the impression that I did act in an untoward way, I didn't, the mods aren't even claiming I did. And this isnt exactly "getting in trouble".

Maybe some more people will crawl out of the woodwork and have a pop beyond what can be deemed constructive criticism.


Anyways, I'm satisfied now that DeV didn't mean anything personal by it, but I still think a PM would have been the better and fairer course of action.

twinQuins

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

What boils my piss tbh ,is the endless propaganda churned out by the pro Palestinian lobby.

Weren't you banned from Politics precisely because of your contributions to one of those threads? Maybe if you weren't such a transparent troll (your incessant flame-baiting and childish insults paint you as nothing less) you wouldn't see such trouble.

So much for:

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Anyway don't want to derail this ... byeeeee

FlutterinBantam

Morkarleth wrote: »

Weren't you banned from Politics precisely because of your contributions to one of those threads? Maybe if you weren't such a transparent troll (your incessant flame-baiting and childish insults paint you as nothing less) you wouldn't see such trouble.

So much for:

Since when were you appointed a Mod.?


Address the issue or get off the the thread man.

Insect Overlord

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Since when were you appointed a Mod.?


Address the issue or get off the the thread man.

Ah, the irony of a trolling back-seat mod...

twinQuins

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Since when were you appointed a Mod.?

Afraid I don't follow. Was it my remark about you saying you were leaving? I don't see how that's backseat modding, just pointing out the glaring inconsistency.

Address the issue or get off the the thread man.

Indeed. Would you, perhaps, like to do that too? Or would that put a dent in your attention-seeking efforts? No, I'm sure you'd rather spend your time dealing with your personal vendettas against particular viewpoints and users than actually offer any real feedback.

I'm no great fan of Mussolini (or any of the republicans/nationalists on the site) either but I'm not going to go onto a feedback thread he created just to get a sly dig in because I've got a bone to pick with his politics.

Amhran Nua

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Theres a core difference here, I didn't feel comfortable in revealing my name, the difference was that you are claiming to represent a political party, big difference. Its not that I don't appreciate the sly dig, its just that there is an important difference there.

Sly dig is it? According to your own post, you've been playing that game for a while:

DeVore wrote:

you tried to fish for his first name and said he was indoctrinated

I could make out I'm associated with a dangerous group of armed republicans if I wanted, but I'd rather be "man enough" to associate my real name, and face, with my beliefs and goals. I'm a nationalist and proud of it, but I'll stand against anyone or any group that brings shame to this nation.

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

and in this case I didn't act untoward toward other posters

In this case?

Wolfe Tone

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Sly dig is it? According to your own post, you've been playing that game for a while:

I could make out I'm associated with a dangerous group of armed republicans if I wanted, but I'd rather be "man enough" to associate my real name, and face, with my beliefs and goals. I'm a nationalist and proud of it, but I'll stand against anyone or any group that brings shame to this nation.


In this case?

What are you on about? I did or said nothing wrong in that thread. The other poster was fishing for my name.

WTF??? I have never made out I am associated with a "dangerous group of armed republicans" at all.

So what, you want to know my "real name" and face? For gods sake man. The day I have my own political party I will tell you.

Amhran Nua

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

The other poster was fishing for my name.

True enough, I misread that, and apologies.

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

WTF??? I have never made out I am associated with a "dangerous group of armed republicans" at all.

I never said you did.

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

So what, you want to know my "real name" and face? For gods sake man. The day I have my own political party I will tell you.

Sorry, hold on there a minute. You made a big issue out of finding out my real name, which I duly supplied along with a lot of other details. You then in turn refused to give any information about yourself despite your earlier demands. Regardless of what I may or may not represent, if you want to be taken seriously you should have no difficulty putting your name down for what you believe in. You don't need to be in charge of a political party to stand up for your beliefs.

Wolfe Tone

Amhran Nua wrote: »

True enough, I misread that, and apologies.

Fair enough, it seems though you have come into this thread simply to have a go.

I never said you did.

Yo made a clear implication.

Sorry, hold on there a minute. You made a big issue out of finding out my real name, which I duly supplied along with a lot of other details. You then in turn refused to give any information about yourself despite your earlier demands. Regardless of what I may or may not represent, if you want to be taken seriously you should have no difficulty putting your name down for what you believe in. You don't need to be in charge of a political party to stand up for your beliefs.

I made an "issue" out of finding out your role within your party. I was aghast at the stuff you where coming out with and was eager to find out if you were an integral part of a party I briefly contemplated supporting, or simply a supporter yattering away. Thats why, I wanted to know if you where speaking for your party or not. Simple as.

Amhran Nua

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

I made an "issue" out of finding out your role within your party. I was aghast at the stuff you where coming out with and was eager to find out if you were an integral part of a party I briefly contemplated supporting, or simply a supporter yattering away. Thats why, I wanted to know if you where speaking for your party or not. Simple as.

There's no way to continue this without going far beyond what feedback is meant to be about, so I'll leave it there, with one caveat: if you had merely wanted to know my position within the group, I'd have been happy to tell you as much.

Wolfe Tone

Amhran Nua wrote: »

There's no way to continue this without going far beyond what feedback is meant to be about, so I'll leave it there, with one caveat: if you had merely wanted to know my position within the group, I'd have been happy to tell you as much.

You said you where a founding member, I didnt believe one would come out with the stuff you did.