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

Boards.ie Politics forum is a poor man's Politics.ie

Options
123457

Comments

  • Options
    #182
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    K-9 wrote: »
    No. So the question is, what are you saying?

    The bomb wasn't okay, yet you set up a thread saying ...........?
    I didnt start that thread..... and even if I did politically motivated violence in the north is certainly worthy of discussion, or do you disagree?


  • Options
    #183
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    @nesf

    So if a statement is qualified by saying that it is a necessary evil and that some good came of it it is ok?

    Theres lots of conflicting things here from different mods.


  • Options
    #184
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    Wolfe Tone wrote: »
    @nesf

    So if a statement is qualified by saying that it is a necessary evil and that some good came of it it is ok?

    Theres lots of conflicting things here from different mods.

    The problem is with the phrase necessary evil because it implies that that was the only way to achieve the ends.

    Leave it as X was evil but some good came out of it in the end. I don't think any of the other mods would have a problem with such a statement.


  • Options
    #185
    Amhran Nua
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,124 ✭✭✭Amhran Nua


    RDM_83 again wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Ain't that the sad truth, I had a couple of run ins with him myself. Angry little man.

    To bring things back on topic...
    Permabear wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.
    ...I have to say I'm surprised at a libertarian standing up for more regulation! :D No, the simple truth is that politics, perhaps uniquely, is an area which demands a certain level of freedom of expression. As has already been pointed out in this thread, AH posters carry as much electoral weight as political anoraks.

    P.ie, for all its weaknesses, gets this much right - light handed moderation in most places and let the chips fall where they may. This has not, surprisingly, led to every thread turning into the thunderdome, but has instead created an environment of free political expression.

    Too much moderation/regulation/god forbid making the forum into some sort of a private club will stunt and reduce the politics forum considerably. This is a place where people have to be heard.


  • Options
    #186
    RDM_83 again
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    What if your a follower of Nietzsche lots of references to evil ? :) seriously though thats so subjective

    "Leave it as X was evil but some good came out of it in the end. I don't think any of the other mods would have a problem with such a statement."

    Is this statement applicable to current events to which the outcome is not clear.

    IE
    "X last week was evil, though I understand the reasoning behind it from the perpetrators point of view and I feel some good may come of it"


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #187
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    nesf wrote: »
    The problem is with the phrase necessary evil because it implies that that was the only way to achieve the ends.

    Leave it as X was evil but some good came out of it in the end. I don't think any of the other mods would have a problem with such a statement.
    What if I say I think it was a necessary evil? Its certainly an interesting arguement and debate whether or not armed campaign was necessary to force Unionists to treat nationalists as like something approaching equals.

    Its a bit mad to have to thread along this line when it will be blatantly clear what I really think, I would rather not hide my views behind a lot of spin, I would rather be up front and honest, something I am sure you can respect.


  • Options
    #188
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Wolfe Tone wrote: »
    I didnt start that thread..... and even if I did politically motivated violence in the north is certainly worthy of discussion, or do you disagree?

    That's twice you've answered a question with another one!
    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    P.ie, for all its weaknesses, gets this much right - light handed moderation in most places and let the chips fall where they may. This has not, surprisingly, led to every thread turning into the thunderdome, but has instead created an environment of free political expression.

    No, it's a thunderdome.

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



  • Options
    #189
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    K-9 wrote: »
    That's twice you've answered a question with another one!



    No, it's a thunderdome.
    As a republican it is only natural I would like to discuss modern day militant republicanism.

    Its something I find very interesting and I like to discuss it and read other people views on it, thats why I started the dissident related threads I did.


  • Options
    #190
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Wolfe Tone wrote: »
    What if I say I think it was a necessary evil? Its certainly an interesting arguement and debate whether or not armed campaign was necessary to force Unionists to treat nationalists as like something approaching equals.

    Ah, think this is the point. It could be argued that it was necessary to change the status quo in the late 60's/early 70's.

    How the RIRA campaign is okay now is slightly harder!

    Republican posters face a dilemma as regards how it was okay then, but not now. Making excuses for the RIRA, isn't the way to do it for me.

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



  • Options
    #191
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    K-9 wrote: »
    Ah, think this is the point. It could be argued that it was necessary to change the status quo in the late 60's/early 70's.

    How the RIRA campaign is okay now is slightly harder!

    Republican posters face a dilemma as regards how it was okay then, but not now. Making excuses for the RIRA, isn't the way to do it for me.
    Here we are back to making excuses, I fail to see how pointing out that a bomb detonated at 3 am outside an empty building after a warning is not an attempt to blast apart civilians is making excuses.

    We could all pretend it was an attempt at another omagh but that would not be true.

    I could tell you why armed campaign is not justified now but that would derail this even further.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #192
    Amhran Nua
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,124 ✭✭✭Amhran Nua


    K-9 wrote: »
    No, it's a thunderdome.
    Funny how its popularity dwarfs that of the boards politics section if that is the case? The fact is, it's not a thunderdome, it's a good place to say what you want about politics in Ireland. Far from perfect, true, but politics is different to any other forum topic - if people can't speak, they will find a way to make themselves heard one way or the other.


  • Options
    #193
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    K-9 wrote: »
    Republican posters face a dilemma as regards how it was okay then, but not now.
    That's a circle that Irish republicans throughout history seem to have had no difficulty squaring. Past violence was not merely necessary but unavoidable; but now things are different. Unless you're the splinter group du jour, in which case nothing has changed, and violence is the only language thon crowd will ever understand. Rinse and repeat.


  • Options
    #194
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    Funny how its popularity dwarfs that of the boards politics section if that is the case? The fact is, it's not a thunderdome, it's a good place to say what you want about politics in Ireland. Far from perfect, true, but politics is different to any other forum topic - if people can't speak, they will find a way to make themselves heard one way or the other.

    AH talks politics a plenty too, less moderated and more freedom of expression.

    It isn't a fair comparison.

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



  • Options
    #195
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    That's a circle that Irish republicans throughout history seem to have had no difficulty squaring. Past violence was not merely necessary but unavoidable; but now things are different. Unless you're the splinter group du jour, in which case nothing has changed, and violence is the only language thon crowd will ever understand. Rinse and repeat.
    Ah, I was wondering when you would arrive....


    Where would statements like:
    nothing would make me happier than to see every single one of them die behind bars.

    fair under the new code?


  • Options
    #196
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Wolfe Tone wrote: »
    Here we are back to making excuses, I fail to see how pointing out that a bomb detonated at 3 am outside an empty building after a warning is not an attempt to blast apart civilians is making excuses.

    We could all pretend it was an attempt at another omagh but that would not be true.

    I could tell you why armed campaign is not justified now but that would derail this even further.

    Well if we all knew letting of a bomb in a bank resulted in no casualties, sure we'd all do it to further our cause or belief!

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



  • Options
    #197
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Wolfe Tone wrote: »
    Where would statements like:
    nothing would make me happier than to see every single one of them die behind bars.

    fair under the new code?
    I apologise if my desire to see terrorists and murderers punished for their crimes with life imprisonment offends you in some way.


  • Options
    #198
    Amhran Nua
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,124 ✭✭✭Amhran Nua


    K-9 wrote: »
    AH talks politics a plenty too, less moderated and more freedom of expression.

    It isn't a fair comparison.
    My point is that less moderation and fewer rules are the way forward. The more you stamp down on people, the more they just leave. To really see the politics forum blossom, you have to grant more freedom - note there is a difference between that and licence.


  • Options
    #199
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    K-9 wrote: »
    Well if we all knew letting of a bomb in a bank resulted in no casualties, sure we'd all do it to further our cause or belief!
    I simply said the aim was not to kill civilians, that is not justifying it....


  • Options
    #200
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I apologise if my desire to see terrorists and murderers punished for their crimes with life imprisonment offends you in some way.
    Wll you say that nothing would make you happer than to see them die, doesn't seem very objective does it? However its a viewpoint I understand, and you shouldn't be prevented from articulating it..... nor should anyone be prevented if they so wish, from arguing that they are not terrorists.


  • Options
    #201
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    My point is that less moderation and fewer rules are the way forward. The more you stamp down on people, the more they just leave. To really see the politics forum blossom, you have to grant more freedom - note there is a difference between that and licence.

    Maybe it is. P.ie has lost regular posters in the past because of lack of moderation and vitriolic posters adding zilch to the site.

    Comparing both is apples and oranges. Politics is part of a wider discussion site that makes p.ie look tiny.
    Wolfe Tone wrote: »
    I simply said the aim was not to kill civilians, that is not justifying it....

    Nope. You should just have said "they didn't target civilians" and left it at that or repeatedly stuck to it. You got conflicting opinions. Tends to happen on discussion sites.

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



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #202
    Tragedy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,056 ✭✭✭Tragedy


    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    My point is that less moderation and fewer rules are the way forward. The more you stamp down on people, the more they just leave. To really see the politics forum blossom, you have to grant more freedom - note there is a difference between that and licence.

    More moderation and more rules are the way forward. The more you stamp down people, force them to engage in a coherent matter and not just thread jump to post witty one-liners or post hate and rhetoric, the more you'll see the politics forum blossom as people begin to see that they can post their opinions and feelings (within the rules) without being jumped on. Yes, people will disagree, but they will do so within the boundaries set down by moderating team.

    You cannot have discussions in anarchy.


  • Options
    #203
    Amhran Nua
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,124 ✭✭✭Amhran Nua


    K-9 wrote: »
    Maybe it is. P.ie has lost regular posters in the past because of lack of moderation and vitriolic posters adding zilch to the site.

    Comparing both is apples and oranges. Politics is part of a wider discussion site that makes p.ie look tiny.
    Tragedy wrote: »
    More moderation and more rules are the way forward. The more you stamp down people, force them to engage in a coherent matter and not just thread jump to post witty one-liners or post hate and rhetoric, the more you'll see the politics forum blossom as people begin to see that they can post their opinions and feelings (within the rules) without being jumped on. Yes, people will disagree, but they will do so within the boundaries set down by moderating team.

    You cannot have discussions in anarchy.
    Suit yourselves. I've told you what's going to happen, what's already happening. I've no particular concern either way.


  • Options
    #204
    Tragedy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,056 ✭✭✭Tragedy


    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    Suit yourselves. I've told you what's going to happen, what's already happening. I've no particular concern either way.
    Eh, people are avoiding the politics forum because it's a cesspit. They aren't jumping into it headfirst.


  • Options
    #205
    Amhran Nua
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,124 ✭✭✭Amhran Nua


    Tragedy wrote: »
    Eh, people are avoiding the politics forum because it's a cesspit.
    Just like people are avoiding p.ie like the plague, except they aren't. Like I said, take it or leave it, it bothers me not at all.


  • Options
    #206
    Tragedy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,056 ✭✭✭Tragedy


    Amhran Nua wrote: »
    Just like people are avoiding p.ie like the plague, except they aren't. Like I said, take it or leave it, it bothers me not at all.
    Considering this is the most political and unknown general election we've had in generations, the fact p.ie hasn't grown more is testament to how turned off people are by that site. I've had a few friends mention to me that they went on there(as search results for anything political usually turn up p.ie as a high result) and didn't know whether to be scared or amused by the site.

    They definitely weren't tempted by it, that's certain.


  • Options
    #207
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    Tragedy wrote: »
    More moderation and more rules are the way forward.

    No it isn't necessarily. there are enought rules. Just enforce them in a fair way which allows appeal.
    The more you stamp down people, force them to engage in a coherent matter and not just thread jump to post witty one-liners or post hate and rhetoric, the more you'll see the politics forum blossom as people begin to see that they can post their opinions and feelings (within the rules) without being jumped on. Yes, people will disagree, but they will do so within the boundaries set down by moderating team.

    Which does not require more rules!
    You cannot have discussions in anarchy.


    Interesting concept. anarchists would say one can have respect without authoritarianism.


  • Options
    #208
    Tragedy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,056 ✭✭✭Tragedy


    ISAW wrote: »

    Interesting concept. anarchists would say one can have respect without authoritarianism.
    That's fantastic, unfortunately we're on the internet where there's no such thing as shared responsibility, collectivism or ..well, you know, consequences past getting banned ;)


  • Options
    #209
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    Tragedy wrote: »
    That's fantastic, unfortunately we're on the internet where there's no such thing as shared responsibility, collectivism or ..well, you know, consequences past getting banned ;)
    Well, if you slag off a certain unionist politician you could end up in court!


  • Options
    #210
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    Wolfe Tone wrote: »
    What if I say I think it was a necessary evil? Its certainly an interesting arguement and debate whether or not armed campaign was necessary to force Unionists to treat nationalists as like something approaching equals.

    I'd ask you to do that in a separate thread not derail a current thread with it. It's an interesting debate but one that should stay in a thread of its own.
    Wolfe Tone wrote: »
    Its a bit mad to have to thread along this line when it will be blatantly clear what I really think, I would rather not hide my views behind a lot of spin, I would rather be up front and honest, something I am sure you can respect.

    We ask you to do the exact same thing if you think/hold the opinion of something libellous about a politician. Or to not be up front and honest if all you can say about a politician is insults and vitriol. We also don't leave you be up front and honest about what you think of a moderator decision.

    This would just be another step in a long line of areas where we (regrettably) have had to ask members to not express their true views on a topic.

    Honestly I really wish I didn't have to argue for this kind of intervention but if you appear to support or condone bombings in a thread it'll just turn that thread into one long trainwreck of a pitched battle between those who agree with you and those who don't regardless of what the thread was originally about.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #211
    GuanYin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,552 ✭✭✭✭GuanYin


    Wolfe Tone wrote: »
    fair under the new code?
    There is no new code.

    The rule you fell victim to and are debating here has been in place and enforced since March 2009.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement