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
Islam Forum: Changes to the forum charter should be discussed here.
Options
Comments
-
I don't see what the major problem is with the setup as it stands.
People keep pointing out that boards is a discussion forum, and therefore everyone should be free to discuss whatever they want. But boards is purposely segregated into different fora.
It seems to me that people want to be able to essentially troll the Islam forum. Hobbes has said that tempered & courteous discussion critical of Islam will be allowed, even going a step further and allowing links to anti-islamic threads to be posted in the other discussions thread.
There is no campaign to have the LGBT forum be open to allow those who wish to vehemently espouse the view that being gay is unnatural, dirty, or what have you. There is no campaign to have the ladies lounge be open to discussions on how women have become reckless, immoral and need to go back to being the child-rearers in the family. The reason is these views are deeply offensive, and wanting to discuss them in the place, specifically segregated for members of the LGBT community, or the female boardsies is essentially trolling.
Its the same for wanting to be able to discuss how "Muslims are more likely to rape/beat their wife/be a terrorist" or how the prophet muhammad was a psychopathic mass murdering paedophile is going to be deeply offensive to Muslims.
As Brown Bomber pointed out, even the paranormal forum has rules in place to ensure that they are not harrassed and constantly on the defensive for wanting to discuss something they believe in.0 -
Indeed. This is boards.ie in Ireland, not Yemen. So no raping of 9 year old girls or beating your wife. And yes, homosexuality is legal. If they don't like it, I suggest they feck off back to their cave.
I swear I'm not paying this guy to prove my point.
I see your a mod...I propose you for any future anti-Islam forum here.0 -
Brown Bomber wrote: »I propose you for any future anti-Islam forum here.
I'm not anti-Islam.
But it disgusts me that people, living in Ireland, are openly talking on an Irish forum about beating up their wives.
Sure you all say we all beat up our wives too 1000 years ago. But thankfully we have changed and we've put legislation in place to make that illegal.
If anybody doesn't like that they should go to some place where they can still be at it.My ads on adverts.ie
0 -
Yes but he can be fairly compared to Moses who ethnically cleansed his way to the promised land.It was debunked maybe to your satisfaction BB, certainly not debunked overall. You simply can't compare a religious founder like Buddha to a religious founder who had a thousand men executed and their wives and children sold into slavery on his order. That's why there was no fanfare against many of his points in A&A.
And to be perfectly honest Muhammed's life has sweet feck all to do with the claim that "UK Muslims are far more likely to rape than non-Muslims"
Even the sentence that preceeded it was based on a xenophobic false premise. "Even taking into consideration socio-economic and cultural differences" already assuming that Muslims are more likely to rape than non-Muslims in the UK due to their Islamic backgrounds..
He said the "statistics show" but NEVER ONCE presented these statistics. Nobody from A&A challenged him on this spiteful, unsupported smear. I see this as tacit aproval.
I absolutely agree here. and what I've snipped from your post was very well said.Plus while Islamaphobia certainly exists, every critique of the religion is not Islamaphobia. This defensive reaction is nearly as big an issue as Islamaphobia and indeed feeds it.0 -
I'm not anti-Islam.
Telling people to "Go back to their caves in Yemin" would fall under that, if not then racist. Apart from not every Muslim coming from Yemin, or living in a cave, many are Irish and have been for generations.
The rest appeared to just be offensive, for offensive sake.Brown Bomber wrote:I see your a mod...I propose you for any future anti-Islam forum here.
Mods are really only Mods in their own forum, and then their opinion is normally kept separate to the mod functions.0 -
Advertisement
-
I feel everything that has been discussed is covered. So I am stepping out of the thread until something new comes up, or the charter gets changed again.
Good luck.0 -
It is left there to discuss. As pointed out earlier, the "Other Discussions" is for people who want to push an Anti-Islam message, vs just discussing issues that they actually want an answer to.
As long what you posted falls within the current rules it is fine.
You are being purposefully obtuse. The issue, as you full well know, is what constitutes pushing an Anti-Islam agenda and what constitutes discussing issues. Look the quotes Brown Bomber gave (in context, in the actual thread). They where all (or almost all, I cant find all of them, as BB didn't bother linking to them) given with evidence, so, insulting or otherwise, they have every bit as much place in an Islam forum as posts about prayer locations in Dublin etc.Of course there is nothing to stop Unkel from going off on a tirade on another forum and linking it in the other discussions (assuming another forum didn't ban him for the comments).
Of course there is, besides the tone and aggression being grounds for moderator interjection, its off topic for pretty much any other forum. You seem to have this conspiracy theory that most other forums would be happy to house anti Islam threads. Do you think the rest of the site is anti-Islam?Also, Unkel also gives a good example of Anti-Islam type posters we had to deal with before. Even after Wibbs responds in a polite manner, he just repeats the same thing again.
I wouldn't necessarily disagree with you in relation to Unkels post (it was very confrontational), but even so, debate is still possible (he didn't just repeat himself after Wibbs response, he moved the goalposts to wife beating, so something changed). Like I said before, its a bit rich to complain that the majority of non-muslim posts may be ignorant and offensive to Islam if you never attempt to combat the problem. Having a FAQ wont be enough. People, rightly or wrongly, will be skeptical and will want to challenge. And because of a lack of interaction with Islam, they will say fairly ignorant things but that will only change with open discourse.0 -
I don't see what the major problem is with the setup as it stands.
People keep pointing out that boards is a discussion forum, and therefore everyone should be free to discuss whatever they want. But boards is purposely segregated into different fora.
Different fora for different topics, not for different people. Non veggies can post in the Veggie Forum, women in the Gentleman's Club, men in the Ladies Lounge etc etc.It seems to me that people want to be able to essentially troll the Islam forum. Hobbes has said that tempered & courteous discussion critical of Islam will be allowed, even going a step further and allowing links to anti-islamic threads to be posted in the other discussions thread.
This position is a contradiction. Tempered and courteous discussion will always involve one side who is anti islam and one who is pro (even between two muslim posters - each one will think that their opinion is closer to the true ideal of islam and that other is not). The problem, as has been in the past, is that if you aren't muslim, you are seen as having an "agenda". What Hobbes proposes is a link to anti islam trolling in other forum, which he knows full well will likely stay empty as what forum would happily house trolling of any kind, never mind islam?There is no campaign to have the LGBT forum be open to allow those who wish to vehemently espouse the view that being gay is unnatural, dirty, or what have you. There is no campaign to have the ladies lounge be open to discussions on how women have become reckless, immoral and need to go back to being the child-rearers in the family. The reason is these views are deeply offensive, and wanting to discuss them in the place, specifically segregated for members of the LGBT community, or the female boardsies is essentially trolling.
Strawman. This "campaign" isn't to allow the Islam forum be open to trolling either. The issue is what the Islam moderators decide is trolling.Its the same for wanting to be able to discuss how "Muslims are more likely to rape/beat their wife/be a terrorist" or how the prophet muhammad was a psychopathic mass murdering paedophile is going to be deeply offensive to Muslims.
There are (and have been) viable discussions for most of these points (assuming they aren't started very aggressively). There is statistical evidence which suggest muslims are more likely to be the committers of rape in western countries (the thread that Brown Bomber links to), there have been threads where discussed wife beating (and in which some muslims asserted its support in the koran) and there have been discussions on the age of Aisha when she married Muhammad and what type of leader he was.
I admit that there have been posters who have simply posted about these in an effort to aggravate the forum, but there are also posters who want to talk about controversial topics in a serious manner with evidence to back them up. The problem is that the forum gets aggravated by these posters too, as it deosnt like what they are saying, and they are labelled as being anti islam, or as having an agenda (I've been accused several times, see my Dispute Resolution thread I linked to on the last page).0 -
Brown Bomber wrote: »Yes but he can be fairly compared to Moses who ethnically cleansed his way to the promised land.
And to be perfectly honest Muhammed's life has sweet feck all to do with the claim that "UK Muslims are far more likely to rape than non-Muslims"
You quoted far more claims that that one, if thats all you wanted to discuss, why did you quote all the rest?Brown Bomber wrote: »He said the "statistics show" but NEVER ONCE presented these statistics. Nobody from A&A challenged him on this spiteful, unsupported smear. I see this as tacit aproval.
Statistics where shown. Now I only remember the ones referencing Norway and, I think, Sweden, so its possible that SamHarris was making an assumption that the case is the same in the UK (you would need to ask him, or read the thread), but its not a huge jump to make and it by no means has to be based on an anti islam agenda or islamophobia. It was point, supported by evidence, possibly open to interpretation but all you did was declare the police forces of these countries, not to mention any media sourced, as islamophobic. This is what kills discussions and what needs to stop.0 -
Mark Hamill wrote: »You are being purposefully obtuse.
I thought I was being clear, and better people then me explained it better as well.
If you are looking for a set in stone X will get you spanked while Y is acceptable, the answer there is none.
X could quite easily be acceptable depending on who said it. For example a recent post in the forum where someone referred to Muslims as "Islamists". They were not banned, nor warned. It was pointed out that the term has negative connotations, but the persons question was answered.
Now if the same person keeps bringing up Y despite being discussed in depth, or kept referring to muslims as Islamists, you have to ask "Does this person really care about an answer? Or do they want to keep posting this in the forum just to make a point?".
The short answer for you is this: Use the forum as normal. If what you post overlaps what is not acceptable in the new charter, then we will tell you then. We trust you enough to read the charter and understand what is deemed unacceptable.that most other forums would be happy to house anti Islam threads.
Other forums already do.Do you think the rest of the site is anti-Islam?
No, I think in other forums where a certain subject matter isn't the primary point of the forum, that the tone changes. For example in AH there are quite a few threads/posts that would get you bounced out of Ladies Lounge if you posted the exact same thing.
So it's no different.but even so, debate is still possible
No it isn't. If your conversation starts off by literally being offensive, it is quite obvious the person could give a toss about debating.
It's in the charter at the very top that offending their god, prophets, etc is considered offensive.he didn't just repeat himself after Wibbs response
He called him a pedophile, which after being pointed out he is wrong, he still posted the same thing.Having a FAQ wont be enough. People, rightly or wrongly, will be skeptical and will want to challenge.
They are welcome to challenge. If it isn't new material though they are more likely to just be ignored or pointed to FAQ/earlier thread or wikipedia.
So in closing (because I have given up repeating myself).
1. Read the new charter.
2. Post whatever you want that avoids what is mentioned in the charter as offensive.0 -
Advertisement
-
BB, the idea that there are only two ways to run a forum - the A&A way or the Islam way, is short-sighted. There should be a happy medium.
That thread you alluded to in A&A is the exception. We don't really entertain much stuff there on Islam at all and if it wasn't for a few busy posters the thread wouldn't have drawn in a whole bunch of non-regulars who probably spotted the thread on the Boards homepage and jumped in with two feet. For example the poster of much of what you quoted earlier has only ever posted in that one thread.
Yes, stuff got posted that went under the radar, but that's why we need Reported Posts. I got one Reported Post for the entire thread from ed2hands for the post which I warned here.
Help me - to help you!
But getting back to the Islam forum, I think the troll threads (Aisha etc) can be weeded out pretty quickly. It's what happens the genuine questioning of stuff that will determine whether there is a open or shut forum. It remains to be seen.0 -
This post has been deleted.0
-
This post had been deleted.
I really don't understand where you made that leap of Logic, and to be honest I don't really care anymore, as you appear to tilting at windmills (and I expect indignation to this comment as some claim to prove your point).
As pointed out earlier as an example the person who posted wasn't aware they were being offensive, so no warning/ban.
However if it was a forum regular they would expect to get a warning, because they should know better.
This has nothing to do with if you are Muslim or any other religion or lack thereof, and you are being disingenuous to even hint at that.0 -
Mark Hamill wrote: »Different fora for different topics, not for different people. Non veggies can post in the Veggie Forum, women in the Gentleman's Club, men in the Ladies Lounge etc etc.
No one has suggested non-Muslims would not be allowed to post in the Islam forum.This position is a contradiction. Tempered and courteous discussion will always involve one side who is anti islam and one who is pro (even between two muslim posters - each one will think that their opinion is closer to the true ideal of islam and that other is not). The problem, as has been in the past, is that if you aren't muslim, you are seen as having an "agenda". What Hobbes proposes is a link to anti islam trolling in other forum, which he knows full well will likely stay empty as what forum would happily house trolling of any kind, never mind islam?
Trolling in one forum would not be seen as trolling in another. To use your example, if I posted a topic "Meat is great" in the vegetarian forum, it would be trolling. The same in after hours or the food forum wouldn't be. If I posted "Smoking is bad for you and should be outlawed" in the smoking forum I'd be banned, but that would be fine in humanities.
Same goes for Islam. Some threads, such as ones which directly insult god, or the prophet or muslims in general are going to be seen as trolling, but would be fine in AH, A&A or possibly even humanities.There are (and have been) viable discussions for most of these points (assuming they aren't started very aggressively). There is statistical evidence which suggest muslims are more likely to be the committers of rape in western countries (the thread that Brown Bomber links to), there have been threads where discussed wife beating (and in which some muslims asserted its support in the koran) and there have been discussions on the age of Aisha when she married Muhammad and what type of leader he was.
I admit that there have been posters who have simply posted about these in an effort to aggravate the forum, but there are also posters who want to talk about controversial topics in a serious manner with evidence to back them up. The problem is that the forum gets aggravated by these posters too, as it deosnt like what they are saying, and they are labelled as being anti islam, or as having an agenda (I've been accused several times, see my Dispute Resolution thread I linked to on the last page).
Would you agree then that the two examples I gave (the anti-homosexuality and anti-women) could also lead to viable discussions provided they aren't started agressively, and hence should be permitted in LGBT, and the LL respectively?0 -
Other forums already do.
Can you give an example of such a thread on another forum? (besides AH)No, I think in other forums where a certain subject matter isn't the primary point of the forum, that the tone changes. For example in AH there are quite a few threads/posts that would get you bounced out of Ladies Lounge if you posted the exact same thing.
So it's no different.
AH is not on the same wavelength as the rest of the site, it generally has much more generalised discussions that wouldn't stick well into other forums (and generally discusses them in a less seriously). Even then, it wouldn't readily house the type of racist or islamophobic threads you think will end up in your link thread.No it isn't. If your conversation starts off by literally being offensive, it is quite obvious the person could give a toss about debating.
This is not always the case. People ignorant of the facts generally make posts that come across as quite insulting to those that do know the facts. Sometimes they are open to discussion (or can be directed into one), but you can only figure it out if actually take the time to respond and see what they do. Every few weeks there is a thread ignorantly asking "why are atheists X" or "why don't atheists do X" (eg) or offering some bizarre logical fallacy or false dichotomies (eg) etc etc. People ask make ignorant statements and ask loaded questions all the time. But you can only know if they are open to change if you offer it to them.It's in the charter at the very top that offending their god, prophets, etc is considered offensive.
The problem is, what constitutes offending a god, or a prophet? Some theists are offended that people dont agree with them when it comes to their gods existence. One muslims got offended at me when I questioned what evidence he had for believing in djinns (I can find the link, if you like). Just asking a hard question, can be offensive to some people.He called him a pedophile, which after being pointed out he is wrong, he still posted the same thing.
Apologies, after reading back, I see that I overlooked a post were he did just repeat himself. I'm not trying to defend those who don't respond to points made to them, they don't contribute to discussions.They are welcome to challenge. If it isn't new material though they are more likely to just be ignored or pointed to FAQ/earlier thread or wikipedia.
So in closing (because I have given up repeating myself).
1. Read the new charter.
2. Post whatever you want that avoids what is mentioned in the charter as offensive.
What constitutes what's offensive to a god or a prophet? Just direct, accusatory insults? Can topics that offend muslims be discussed as long as direct insults to omnipowerful gods and long dead prophets aren't made? What if there is supporting evidence? Does a muslims right to offense override reality?0 -
I really don't understand where you made that leap of Logic, and to be honest I don't really care anymore, as you appear to tilting at windmills (and I expect indignation to this comment as some claim to prove your point).
So you make a baseless and insulting accusation, and then declare any defensiveness to be a verification for your accusation? If I didn't know better I would say you were trolling.As pointed out earlier as an example the person who posted wasn't aware they were being offensive, so no warning/ban.
However if it was a forum regular they would expect to get a warning, because they should know better.
This has nothing to do with if you are Muslim or any other religion or lack thereof, and you are being disingenuous to even hint at that.
If it wasn't for the fact that any kind of strong (but honest) critical debate has been labelled as an anti islam agenda, you may have a point. I have seen (and been victim to) mods label posters as being anti islam and having negative agenda because they posted (without insult) on various threads with questions and points that the muslim posters didn't like. I have been told in pms that I have an "atheistic agenda" and all I ever do is pick holes in other peoples posts.0 -
No one has suggested non-Muslims would not be allowed to post in the Islam forum.
So your point about their being different fora was irrelevant?Trolling in one forum would not be seen as trolling in another. To use your example, if I posted a topic "Meat is great" in the vegetarian forum, it would be trolling. The same in after hours or the food forum wouldn't be. If I posted "Smoking is bad for you and should be outlawed" in the smoking forum I'd be banned, but that would be fine in humanities.
Trolling is trolling. That one forum might not offer resistance wouldn't stop your topics from being trolling. If you posted any of those topics in any of those fora mentioned, and didn't engage with people who offered a contrary view, you would be trolling.Same goes for Islam. Some threads, such as ones which directly insult god, or the prophet or muslims in general are going to be seen as trolling, but would be fine in AH, A&A or possibly even humanities.
AH is different. As for the others, the problem is what constitutes a direct insult. Like I said, I once questioned a muslim why he believed in djinn and he took it as an insult to the koran and to allah. None of those forums would be open to a thread which simply throws around "insults" with no accompanying evidence or discussion.Would you agree then that the two examples I gave (the anti-homosexuality and anti-women) could also lead to viable discussions provided they aren't started agressively, and hence should be permitted in LGBT, and the LL respectively?
Yes, and I assume they are (I'm not a regular of either). I do know that the likes of the veggie forum and the MMA forum and the A&A forum will entertain anti-whatever-their-ethos-is threads if undertaken by serious OPs who respond and debate properly.0 -
Mark Hamill wrote: »So your point about their being different fora was irrelevant?
Not at all. It just means that the segregation of the fora allow different levels of discussion, have a different feel, and a different tone of debate. This isn't even just religious fora either. You can't go on to Anime & Manga and explain calmly why you think that that stuff is for kids, and grown up nerds. You can't go on to Hip Hop and politely let them know that Hip Hop is a crap genre of music devoid of musical talent and coherent lyrics. The reason for those forums is for people to discuss something they all have a mutual love for. Anti- types coming on to the forum to let people know why they are wrong serves no purpose.
You don't need to like Manga or Anime to post in that forum to ask genuine questions like how it developed?, who are the major artists?, what are the different sub-sets of Anime? You could probably even start topics critical of Anime, where you said that you think the gratuitous violence in some of the comics should not be viewed by children or teenagers.
As far as I can tell its the same with Islam. You can ask question about the religion. You can ask what lead people to accept it as their faith. You could ask about the various sects of Islam. You can probably even start threads critical of Islam where you say that you think that a literal interpretation of the Koran is not appropriate as some of the beliefs in the book are not applicable for today.
However, like the grown up nerds, and disparaging comments about Hip Hop, sweeping statements about Islam/Muslims such as Muslims are violent, or wifebeaters or that Mohammed was a deluded psycho are just plain insulting (no matter how true you believe it to be). The great thing about boards though is there is a place for all of these kind of things. I can go onto humanities and start a topic about how I believe much of the youth today are living in fantasy world where they read Anime, play World of Warcraft and recite gansta hip hop lyrics, and that I believe that as a society we need to address this issue. I can go onto AH or A&A and start a topic where I say I believe that a religion founded by a mass-murderer is doomed from the outset to be a violent one, and discuss it to my hearts content. Thanks to the new rules I can even pop into Islam and let them know about it, should they wish to defend strawmans.0 -
This post has been deleted.0
-
This post had been deleted.
You can, and people have. More then once I might add not just recently, but in previous years.
The recent incident the thread was shut down because people were taking a person explaining the korans writing as their stance (and it wasn't), and then badgering them and playing word games to claim they were, despite that person explicitly denying it a number of times before. It stopped being a discussion about womens rights and instead a person having to defend themselves from attacks.
If someone wants to discuss womens rights in Islam on the forum, they are more then welcome to. But if you are not able to follow the charter rules in doing so you will be warned for it.
Be aware, Islam is not like Catholicism, where you have the pope handing down all the laws. Instead you have a large number of Imans in different countries, who interpret the scriptures differently.0 -
Advertisement
-
This post had been deleted.
Don't get me wrong. Maybe I should have laid my cards on the table.
My view on Islam is that it is a backward, regressive, misogynistic, irrational and inhumane religion. I also believe that of all the religions, when Islam has been used as a method of governing ideology it inevitable ends up as a repressive, homophobic, and academically retarded nation. I also believe that of all the founders of the big religions, Mohammed was the most reprehensible.
I just don't believe I should be allowed to express those sentiments in the Islam forum. There are plenty of places where I can discuss the dark side of Islam and now I can even go to the Islam forum to let the posters there know they can come and join me and defend their faith should they so wish. I just don't have a desire to go there and try and force them to defend their faith.
As for discussions on when it is appropriate to beat ones wife, discussions like that should not be allowed on boards.ie full stop. I would presume that any poster who held and expressed that view would be site-banned, and rightly so.0 -
As for discussions on when it is appropriate to beat ones wife, discussions like that should not be allowed on boards.ie full stop.
I think asking what the Korans interpretation on the issue is, or how it is handled in different sects/countries is certainly worth discussing. As long as it is the discussion of the religion and isn't used as a basis to attack a person who may be responding.0 -
I think asking what the Korans interpretation on the issue is, or how it is handled in different sects/countries is certainly worth discussing. As long as it is the discussion of the religion and isn't used as a basis to attack a person who may be responding.
Rather you than me moderate that one
.
It would be my opinion that any discussion that overtly or tacitly implies that beating your wife is acceptable should not be tolerated on boards. Much the same as racism, homophobia, or incitement to violence shouldn't be tolerated either.0 -
Don't get me wrong. Maybe I should have laid my cards on the table.
My view on Islam is that it is a backward, regressive, misogynistic, irrational and inhumane religion. I also believe that of all the religions, when Islam has been used as a method of governing ideology it inevitable ends up as a repressive, homophobic, and academically retarded nation. I also believe that of all the founders of the big religions, Mohammed was the most reprehensible.
I just don't believe I should be allowed to express those sentiments in the Islam forum. There are plenty of places where I can discuss the dark side of Islam and now I can even go to the Islam forum to let the posters there know they can come and join me and defend their faith should they so wish. I just don't have a desire to go there and try and force them to defend their faith.
This guy has nailed it. I'm not that particularly interested in Islam or other religion debates, not my thing. Many people are and just like people interested in soccer, GAA or Doctor Who, they are entitled to a community where they can discuss stuff between them. Debate is welcomed but not trolling.As for discussions on when it is appropriate to beat ones wife, discussions like that should not be allowed on boards.ie full stop. I would presume that any poster who held and expressed that view would be site-banned, and rightly so.
This is where the problem lies and needs more defining. I can go on AH and criticise all religions to my hearts content, not my thing, but it's available. Humanities as well as long as i keep it respectful.
I don't think there is any board I can say beating my wife is debatable, I'd be banned and the thread locked quick sharpish and rightly so.
So, we've a situation were a mod says the Koran can be construed as allowing wife beating, though he personally does not condone it and finds it reprehensible.
The problem I have is, wife beating is obviously a banned subject on boards and rightly so. A mod has said, it can be interpreted that it is allowed in the Koran. So, where do we go from here? If it's in the Koran, surely it's debatable?
Otherwise, what's the fecking point in having an Islam forum?Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.
0 -
As for discussions on when it is appropriate to beat ones wife, discussions like that should not be allowed on boards.ie full stop. I would presume that any poster who held and expressed that view would be site-banned, and rightly so.It would be my opinion that any discussion that overtly or tacitly implies that beating your wife is acceptable should not be tolerated on boards.
A moderator of the Islam forum recently argued that it could be appropriate to beat his wife.My ads on adverts.ie
0 -
-
link?
There is a thread in feedback if you look. I mentioned earlier a summary of the situation (post 111). The thread in question is still in the forum and nothing is deleted in it. This thread is not to discuss that situation (as it has already been covered, in forum/feedback/mod forum and internal discussion with cmods/mods/admins).
Unkel I think the point yekahS made is missed on you, especially due to your earlier comments in this thread.0 -
@dead one : dont post here again please. If you want to query a ban go to the dispute resolution forum, if you just want to vent your ill will towards a mod, go do it on a site that isnt boards.ie.
I've deleted several posts that had next to nothing to do with discussion of the charter changes and also some posts that were made responding to the off topic goodness.
please, this is not a thread for punching the mods. The mods have offered to talk openly about the changes to the charter, here's your opportunity to have you say and hopefulyl make a constructive change to the forum itself. If however users decide instead to take this opportunity to vent personal grievances or insult the mods then I see no point in
a. subjecting the mods to that kind of treatment when they are offering dialogue
b. allowing such opportunists access to feedback in the future
c. allowing as much leeway in the scope of the feedback allowed on a topic.0 -
link?
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=74123971&postcount=50irishconvert wrote:I don't know, I haven't been in a situation where I felt it was appropriate. I stress that hitting a wife is to be regarded is a last resort.
I believe irishconvert meant that in accordance with the Qu'ran, hitting a wife is a last resort, rather than his own opinion on the matter. That's the quote which has caused a lot of the confusion though.0 -
Advertisement
-
this is my last post in this thread, as you have honored me, so it is my right to thank you@dead one : dont post here again please.
I highly appreciate this act of freedom,I've deleted several posts that had next to nothing to do with discussion of the charter changes and also some posts that were made responding to the off topic goodness.0
Advertisement