Politics Election Forum & Bias

Sully

Iv noticed that the Election sub forum in Politics is overrun with an UNREAL amount of Sinn Fein supporters posting topics about McGuiness in what seems a clear effort to garner support for their candidate. Its bad enough going onto sites like TheJournal and some Facebook sites where its very obvious candidates are being targeted by the opposition supporters but Boards.ie is moderated and should be about cutting out all this.

Can the mods not do anything about putting all of the daily McGuiness threads into one big ass "Support McGuiness" thread? The whole forum seems to be just about McGuiness because his supporters are constantly posting about how great he is, how he is being targeted by the media, how we should just accept that he is a great character etc etc.

There is also a clear effort to tarnish other candidates.

Threads on the front page now (out of 20)

With Candidates names in the title:
McGuinness: 6
Norris: 3
Dana 1
Davis: 0
Gallagher: 4
Higgins: 3
Mitchell: 1

You should link to the threads you have problems with.

Sully

Its more the forums in general rather than specific ones. Just seems a lot of Sinn Fein supporters creating threads and posting in threads plus knocking others. Comes across that way strongly.

FlutterinBantam

Sully wrote: »

Its more the forums in general rather than specific ones. Just seems a lot of Sinn Fein supporters creating threads and posting in threads plus knocking others. Comes across that way strongly.

It does indeed, I have been railing against that for aeons but as usual nobody wants to put the bell on the cat.

There is a hard core in there with an agenda using the facilities of Boards.ie to promulgate their political views.

It happened in AH too but anyone who raises a contrary view is viewed as a crank and infracted.

Way over the top but the matter is ignored.

votecounts

It comes across to me that there are a lot of anti mcguinness threads there withs the moderators allowing them open even when they've gone completely off topic.

Overheal

Some pretty high-brow opening arguments made in this thread opener:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056422167

though of course skimming through the forum pulls up a lot of that type of posting. Y'all are tearing each other apart in there.

I'm sure the mods are aware of it, but thinking about it there's not a whole lot they can do sensibly other than let the thing run it's course and keep the usual defamation and libel out of it. Banning and locking people and other things that seem like good ideas on paper would probably only result in a bigger headache and a giant politically motivated mod conspiracy thread that we'd be talking about for years to come.

Doirtybirdy

Deleted User wrote: »

Threads on the front page now (out of 20)

With Candidates names in the title:
McGuinness: 6
Norris: 3
Dana 1
Davis: 0
Gallagher: 4
Higgins: 3
Mitchell: 1

Actually I only see 3 Gallagher thread on the front page.

Sinn Féin supporters are deliberately more active online than the other parties it seems.
That says as much to me about how organised vi rally Sinn Féin are,as it says how disorganised online the others are.

Their fault not Sinn Féins to be honest

seamus

There's a large contingent of vocal pro-Sinn Fein people on boards. We've known this for years. The big boards general election poll predicted SF getting 15% of the seats in the Dail, almost twice the actual figure. This also bears out in the AH poll where MMCG is polling at 22%, when non-boards polls put him closer to 13%.

There's not a whole lot you can do about it, that's just the demographic. It's not surprising that those who occupy the more radical fringe attitudes would be more vocal and active than those with more mainstream opinions.

All you can really do is try and keep discussion about individual candidates (regardless of their allegiance) to a small number of threads.

My name is URL

Can the mods not do anything about putting all of the daily McGuiness threads into one big ass "Support McGuiness" thread?

Well the top two threads in the Election forum are hardly 'Support McGuinness' threads.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056418515
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056420488

They're valid questions. There may be a bit of fanboy-ism within the threads, but isn't that to be expected? There's quite a lot of anti-McGuinness sentiment within them also.

There is also a clear effort to tarnish other candidates.

Such as? There's a clear effort to tarnish candidates in general.. it seems to be the most obvious trait of the whole election process/forum so far. Surely you're not saying that McGuinness supporters are the only culprits here?!

Do you want discussion of each candidate to be restricted to one single thread each, or just the McGuinness ones?

K-9

It seems odd that there is two threads started by the same poster attacking Gallagher. Probably could be merged.

nesf

Every relevant election or referendum the SF machine rolls into action and we are inundated with SF activists both new and old relaying the party line.

It's the same with all the other parties and groups, it's just that SF is particularly well organised and good at this.


We can't (and shouldn't!) treat them any different to any other party activist who comes on the forum, so so long as they aren't doing blatant advertising for their candidate or derailing threads then there isn't a problem.

Sully

Well when one person goes creating multiple topics on their preferred candidate and then ones bashing the leading candidates it becomes very obvious its a party political broadcast. Rather than cramming up the page with multiple threads on the one person - why not just merge them? Or keep an eye on the those who seem to be blowing the trumpet the most?

meditraitor

Have too agree with the point that the SF machine is in full swing on boards. Personally I think its good that its so obvious, these posters will only rally like minded opinions so whats to worry about,

meditraitor

Sully wrote: »

Well when one person goes creating multiple topics on their preferred candidate and then ones bashing the leading candidates it becomes very obvious its a party political broadcast. Rather than cramming up the page with multiple threads on the one person - why not just merge them? Or keep an eye on the those who seem to be blowing the trumpet the most?

No different to the FG - labour palavour during the election.

Let them have their day, its only the presidential election;)

FlutterinBantam

Why not confront the punters who are transgressing, they are well known.

Boards.ie surely should not be used as a propaganda platform for any party or vested interest.


And while you are at it take a look at the sigs.


It's a fooking joke!!

Sully

meditraitor wrote: »

No different to the FG - labour palavour during the election.

Let them have their day, its only the presidential election;)

I don't ever remember it being this bad. Yes each party has their supporters and punters proclaiming their the sun moon and stars. But this is ridiculous. Its overrun with Sinn Fein supporters and doesn't allow for a fair unbiased debate. It makes it look like Sinn Feins candidate is the only candidate with half a chance, and the rest are all a punch of eejits.

FlutterinBantam

Sully wrote: »

I don't ever remember it being this bad. Yes each party has their supporters and punters proclaiming their the sun moon and stars. But this is ridiculous. Its overrun with Sinn Fein supporters and doesn't allow for a fair unbiased debate. It makes it look like Sinn Feins candidate is the only candidate with half a chance, and the rest are all a punch of eejits.

Welcome to the real world.


A hard core of SF posters have been using the services of Boards.ie for yonks airing their views under any spurious occasion.

check out a Bobby sands thread which was bumped at regular intervals by ' interested parties'


Not all of us are idiots here, that we don't see the agenda:cool:

Dr Galen

While I'd certainly take your points on board Sully, I'd agree with Nesf in that there is isn't a whole lot you can do, or even should do.

If a poster isn't breaking the rules or posting against the charter, then we can't go around banning people just because they have a SF slant to their posts. If we do that, then we'd have to ban all activists from all parties. Where would we draw that line? As Mods, we can't impose our own editorial policy on a forum like politics. I think we all try to keep candidate threads in order, and prevent multi-threads springing up about the minutae of each candidate.

Maybe it's worth noting that there are several facets to MMG and his campaign that the others simply don't have. Apart from DN, no-one else really attracts anything like the range of views, that can be very strongly held. With this in mind, it's hardly surprising that there are several different MMG threads.

Trying to keep those threads OT can be as difficult as herding cats sometimes I'd confess though. Sometimes, for the easier running of the forum and individual threads, it's better to have several threads, discussing different sub-topics, rather than one big free for all with many conversations going on in the one place.

FlutterinBantam

Dr Galen wrote: »

While I'd certainly take your points on board Sully, I'd agree with Nesf in that there is isn't a whole lot you can do, or even should do.

If a poster isn't breaking the rules or posting against the charter, then we can't go around banning people just because they have a SF slant to their posts. If we do that, then we'd have to ban all activists from all parties. Where would we draw that line? As Mods, we can't impose our own editorial policy on a forum like politics. I think we all try to keep candidate threads in order, and prevent multi-threads springing up about the minutae of each candidate.

Maybe it's worth noting that there are several facets to MMG and his campaign that the others simply don't have. Apart from DN, no-one else really attracts anything like the range of views, that can be very strongly held. With this in mind, it's hardly surprising that there are several different MMG threads.

Trying to keep those threads OT can be as difficult as herding cats sometimes I'd confess though. Sometimes, for the easier running of the forum and individual threads, it's better to have several threads, discussing different sub-topics, rather than one big free for all with many conversations going on in the one place.

They know all that stuff like the back of their hands Doctor.:D

Experts at slipping through the cracks and keepin' her lit.

No amount of unction and plámaus will change the situation.


They are using the site as a propaganda tool, plain and simple, no argument.

My name is URL

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

They know all that stuff like the back of their hands Doctor.:D

Experts at slipping through the cracks and keepin' her lit.

No amount of unction and plámaus will change the situation.


They are using the site as a propaganda tool, plain and simple, no argument.

Flutt, you're banned from the forum while the people you claim are propagandists remain active there and partake in civil discussion on a wide range of topics. Does that not tell you something? Every thread that pops up here in Feedback which in some way relates to the hobbyhorse topics you enjoy lamenting over; you're on like a fly on shit.. so don't be going on about others spuriously sharing their views only on certain topics, and only when it suits them.

Alopex

There does seem to be a lot of SF/McGuinness posters but aside from 2 or 3 of them they're really bottom of the barrel posters. Chronically stupid people. I doubt they're gaining any votes for McGuinness.

The people arguing against him tend to be a lot smarter and make much better points. If anything this site is probably costing McGuinness some floating voters.

FlutterinBantam

My name is URL wrote: »

Flutt, you're banned from the forum while the people you claim are propagandists remain active there and partake in civil discussion on a wide range of topics. Does that not tell you something? Every thread that pops up here in Feedback which in some way relates to the hobbyhorse topics you enjoy lamenting over; you're on like a fly on shit.. so don't be going on about others spuriously sharing their views only on certain topics, and only when it suits them.

My dear man, all I'm saying is that there is an agenda from the Shinners to use every facility to spread their 'message' ad naseum.

You might be happy with that situation, I am not.

Am I now to be 'censured' for commenting on these topics and pointing out reality.

You see there's the problem, if you don't like the message or it somehow goes against the grain of the majority, you are hobbyhorsing, while the insidious propaganda goes on and everybody is afraid to confront it.

stovelid

Unfortunately things that are often against the spirit of boards might not necessarily be against the rules.

Sully

Sometimes it seems obvious that someone is abusing the spirit of the forum. Tbh, I don't see why a mega thread cant be created for all things about McGuiness. I'm surprised they haven't created a topic saying how wonderful he would be considering his second name has "Guinness" in it. :rolleyes:

Chris P. Bacon

Sully wrote: »

Sometimes it seems obvious that someone is abusing the spirit of the forum. Tbh, I don't see why a mega thread cant be created for all things about McGuiness. I'm surprised they haven't created a topic saying how wonderful he would be considering his second name has "Guinness" in it. :rolleyes:

Why dont you post some links of people abusing the forum,and see if anyone else agrees with you.

Also as of now there is 5 threads about Sean Gallagher on the first page and 3 about Martin McGuinness,i dont see what the big deal is about.

My name is URL

It's easier to just suggest that something is amiss and rely on the preformed notions of others to back it up rather than provide actual evidence or examples. The amount of paranoia and downright silliness from those opposed to McGuinness/SF is absurd.

Look at this thread - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=74729154

A couple of mentions of some vague rumor and it's automatically put down to a "coordinated campaign from SF".. it's amazing the leaps of logic which otherwise intelligent people can make when they allow their own prejudices to cloud their judgment.

FlutterinBantam

My name is URL wrote: »

It's easier to just suggest that something is amiss and rely on the preformed notions of others to back it up rather than provide actual evidence or examples. The amount of paranoia and downright silliness from those opposed to McGuinness/SF is absurd.

Look at this thread - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=74729154

A couple of mentions of some vague rumor and it's automatically put down to a "coordinated campaign from SF".. it's amazing the leaps of logic which otherwise intelligent people can make when they allow their own prejudices to cloud their judgment.

Indeed, indeed, that's the way you might to look at it.

However, despite your insults to me, the more insightful,and less driven posters have said it as it is.

Bottom line. Cut the waffle ,the cant, the jingoistic post, the result is the same.

There is a coterie of Shinner supporters using these facilities to promote their view on society.

Sully is dead right.


No getting away from that.

meditraitor

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Indeed, indeed, that's the way you might to look at it.

However, despite your insults to me, the more insightful,and less driven posters have said it as it is.

Bottom line. Cut the waffle ,the cant, the jingoistic post, the result is the same.

There is a coterie of Shinner supporters using these facilities to promote their view on society.

Sully is dead right.


No getting away from that.

I knew at some stage I would agree with one of your posts......

FlutterinBantam

meditraitor wrote: »

I knew at some stage I would agree with one of your posts......

There you go.;)

What we have here is a left wing push, who constantly speak in 'Mom and Apple Pie' terms.

i.e. Lets have Utopia but let someone else pay for it.

In my opinion the Mods in charge of these areas are lacking in social skills and experience, so they infract and ban anyone who disagrees with the general trend,and tar any contrary views as trolling and mischief makers.

There is no doubt about it.

No need for links or otherwise.


The Shinners use this site to promote their propaganda and they do it with the tacit support of the 'management'.

No question about it.


let's agree on that shall we.


Sully is right.

Wolfe Tone

Why anyone would pay attention to someone who is permabanned from both politics and AH for being an incessent troll is beyond me.

MMG is the most 'controversial' candidate, his running was always gonna provoke a lot of debate.

I always get a laugh at conspiracy theories like this, there is no shinner online campaign lol. SF members tend to be younger, very enthusiastic and motivated, perhaps that is why they are a bit overrepresented and parties with typically older less tech savvy members (FF) are chronically underepresented on boards.

FlutterinBantam

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Why anyone would pay attention to someone who is permabanned from both politics and AH for being an incessent troll is beyond me.

MMG is the most 'controversial' candidate, his running was always gonna provoke a lot of debate.

I always get a laugh at conspiracy theories like this, there is no shinner online campaign lol. SF members tend to be younger, very enthusiastic and motivated, perhaps that is why they are a bit overrepresented and parties with typically older less tech savvy members (FF) are chronically underepresented on boards.

You see that post copper fastens my point of view.

Accuse a poster of being a troll whilst denying what everyone knows.




Wes Sommerville would be wondering what he got shredded for.