A&A Feedback

Valmont

If I were to start a thread in A&A on Ayn Rand's specific brand of Atheism, can anyone honestly tell me it wouldn't turn into an exclusive tirade against the 'right-wing' and 'free-market capitalism'?

Turtwig

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

So you're not posting to defend to Jank but the only example of apparent problematic political bias that you can muster is moderating actions against Jank who's been shown far more leniency than pretty much every other forum on boards? Maybe I'm misunderstanding something here.

There IS probably a political bias against Jank but not so pronounced as to bias moderating decisions against him. If anything Rob has shown the opposite because of his disagreements with him he attempted to show Jank as much leniency as possible.

If a poster mocked another poster's mental health, depression to be specific, what action would you take?

Turtwig

Valmont wrote: »

If I were to start a thread in A&A on Ayn Rand's specific brand of Atheism, can anyone honestly tell me it wouldn't turn into an exclusive tirade against the 'right-wing' and 'free-market capitalism'?

Depends on how you start it and how you contribute to it.
If by tirade you mean the majority of posters will be against you? Yes, that'd be expected. If by tirade you mean slurring posts and personal attacks. Then those would be moderated in a manner similar to the abortion thread.

If however it's a simple hit and run attack then we'll probably just discuss biscuits.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Turtwig

Bannasidhe wrote: »

for example, as it brings me into unnecessary conflict with Bluewolf and she is, political differences aside, a poster I have great respect for.

Better change that b otherwise she'll lose all respect for you.

Bannasidhe

Valmont wrote: »

If I were to start a thread in A&A on Ayn Rand's specific brand of Atheism, can anyone honestly tell me it wouldn't turn into an exclusive tirade against the 'right-wing' and 'free-market capitalism'?

Did her atheism and political beliefs inform each other? If so, than her political beliefs are relevant.

Mind you - that would be one of those threads I have zero interest in so I suppose I am a crap 'cohort' member...

Bannasidhe

Turtwig wrote: »

Better change that b otherwise she'll lose all respect for you.

:eek:

Bannasidhe

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

What is clear is that despite your protestations to the contrary you do have a problem with Robinch and his moderation of A&A and the fact that within A&A those of a left inclination are in the majority. How this is Robinch's 'fault' is unexplained unless you think those with an inclination towards the right are unable to argue their position when outnumbered and are the victims of 'bullying' by Robinch - in which case... where are all the DRP threads about this outrageous behaviour?
Are the right afraid to complain?
Is DRP biased to the left too?

What is unclear is why you have failed to go to Help Desk of you feel so strongly about it.

You are free to open 'threads in opposition' - The hypocrisy of Karl Marx perhaps or Champagne Socialists.

No-one, as far as I can see, is preventing your right of reply, you are choosing not to exercise it and then complaining of bias. If they do impede your right of reply there are mechanisms for dealing with that - i.e. Help Desk or DRP.

Turtwig

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

This is a forum where anything goes, within reason. Poltics, ethics, science, laws on rape, veganism, loony environmentalism, homeopathy, video games, sports, church, magic, superstition, sex, economics, the list is pretty endless. It is very hard for any given post to be off topic.

The forum is welcome to any opinion only if that opinion is expressed constructively. Though, even then we are incredibly patient as has been shown with many posters who at first, don't quite, have, shall we say, amiable etiquette.

This grievances against Rob is tiring.
"man up"
Really? Stop being so juvenile nobody has to post anywhere. Really this comes across like religious types being offended because someone is criticising their beliefs. So what if someone, a mod, thinks one facet of your beliefs is stupid or silly, they're free to say that as long as they remain true to the spirit of the forum charter and you're free to challenge that belief as long as you remain true to the spirit of the forum charter. Jank, if that's the only example you have, is someone who's broken the spirit of the forum charter on several occasions - and as must be repeatedly stated the reason he's still posting here on this forum is Rob.

Like I said, if you wish start a thread bashing loony leftism. There's so many groups in Ireland and Europe. I'll probably start one by the end of the day. Although it'll probably have to wait until tomorrow what with the world cup and all.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Penn

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

But in the same way many issues about same-sex marriage is talked about on the forum even when there might not be a direct link to religion, politics might sometimes be discussed even when there might not be a direct link to religion. The foundation of the thread about Republicans is about how their religion influences their policies, more so than in most other first world countries. Sometimes the discussion might step slightly outside the religious aspect. But it's simply not an abuse of mod powers. Oftentimes threads will go slightly off-topic for a while and then return to the central topic. It happens throughout Boards.

Mods are users of their forums and are entitled to start threads and post their own opinions without it being somehow representative of the opinions of the forum itself. If you feel like the forum is unwelcoming to you because of that, that's on you and your own interpretations, not on robindch's actions.

And inflammatory nonsense like "then let him man up, come out of his A&A hidey-hole" is really making it seem like it's a personal grudge you hold rather than an issue with moderation itself.

Valmont

Turtwig wrote: »

If by tirade you mean the majority of posters will be against you? Yes, that'd be expected.

I would have expected them to more for than against to be honest, considering it would be atheism we were discussing, not capitalism!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Bannasidhe

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

'Do you believe in the existence of God/Gods?'

Yes/Not Convinced by the Evidence/ No (delete as appropriate)

Soon run out of things to discuss no?

It strikes me as strange that you were not aware of the wide range of topics discussed in A&A which would imply you do not enter the forum on any kind of regular basis (Directions to legoland was a recent highlight) yet here you are complaining about obvious bias...in a forum you are obviously unfamiliar with...

Why, we don't even know where you stand on two of the forums most fraught controversies

1. Jaffa cakes - biscuits or cakes (or would eat the packaging rather than those nasty nasty things)
2. Pineapple on pizza - abomination or 'Don't you oppress me I'll put whatever the hell I like on pizza'.

Turtwig

Valmont wrote: »

I would have expected them to more for than against to be honest, considering it would be atheism we were discussing, not capitalism!

Considering the demographic of most people in this forum and the country where they hail from that's totally unrealistic. Rand, is rightly or wrongly, perceived as a bit strange. It's sort of like starting a thread on incest to be honest. I'm kind of in that line of where I have no issue with it but when I started a thread on the topic here I didn't expect everyone to be open to the idea given their likely cultural background. Rand's views are aligned with the right and Ireland is pretty much a socialist even those parties on the right in Ireland would be politically inclined to disagreeing with some of her views. Again - to emphasise, not saying right or wrong, just pointing out the demographics, politically it'd be russian roulette to openly espouse Rand's views in Ireland and expect to get elected.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

coffee_cake

Bannasidhe wrote: »

1. Jaffa cakes - biscuits or cakes (or would eat the packaging rather than those nasty nasty things)

Wtf is wrong with you. this is why we can't have nice things :mad:

jank

Not even sure I am allowed to post this as I have been fore warned that any other utterance by me would result in a ban... regardless I have been mentioned numerous times by other posters so I think I have the right of reply.

Firstly, my main issue with this forum is in the way that Robindch treats it like his own personal fiefdom. There has been many instances where I have been in a debate with other posters where Robindch takes it on himself to interject with his own comments deliberately aimed to inflame the situation further or give a low blow with some condescending 'Grandpa Joe' style rhetoric (angry fist waving is a favourite of his). Then of course when the debate doesn't go the way he planned, he puts on the Mod Hat and threatens to give out infractions or warnings. It is impossible to debate someone fairly and justly in this fashion when you don't even know if you are addressing him as a mod or as a user or both. He is well able to give it out but frankly cannot take it. This is evident in the fact that he rarely posts in other forums like Politics, Economics or AH.

Secondly is the way it which he likes to personally interject as a mod/user into debates that are nothing of his doing. An example of this would be the Tuam babies thread mentioned already where I had to defend myself numerous times yet people were free to basically throw personal insults. There are numerous other examples that I can look up (Ill try do it tomorrow when I get time) but anytime I have posted here, I can always be sure that Robindch was never far behind ready and waiting to add his 2 cents, 2 cents that quickly became a threat of a warning/infraction/ban yet heated comments by posters who he is more politically allined with go unnoticed by and large no matter what the standard is.

Thirdly, it is interesting that two mods of this forum admit that mistakes have been made yet the status que. still prevails and the next post from me that Robindch determines to be "angry fist waving" will get me banned. Mods and people should learn from their mistakes and clearly people are not happy. I have apologised numerous times if my own posts were miscommunicated or wrongly framed.

Forthly, I have never ever seen in 12 years on boards.ie another mod publishing publicly any users past history in regards infractions, warnings etc. Robindch has done this at least 3 times in my case. I am wondering if there is precedent here and if not why was this done? In my opinion it was done in an effort to humiliate and publicly make a show of a user like some kangaroo court. Private information like that is supposed to remain private for a reason otherwise any user can look it up for themselves (This I am going to bring up with an admin, separately) but again the mods here seem to accept it. As I mentioned elsewhere the standards you walk past are the standards you accept.

Finally regarding the "Republican Fruitcake Thread" why was Robindch tolerated for so long by calling members of the tea parties 'tea baggers'? It took comments by another mod outside of A&A for him to stop this. The term now used is 'teabillies'. This is just juvenile stuff to be honest designed to inflame and mock and yet calling him out for this leads to the usual 'dance' I mentioned above. Another user who would have used terms like 'pinko liberals' or similar constantly in every thread over and over would have resulted in a quick warning to stop. This is just obvious to anyone and does prove Permabears remarks that there is a political bias and motivation for Robindch to go harder on comments from me and other more right leaning users and let other comments slide.

Aside from those facts, many posts there do not even mention the GOP or the Tea Party. The Democrats gets a mention, UKIP as well among others. Basically anyone who is not secular and/or left wing is deemed fair go all in the pretence for highlighting the issues surround the separation of church of state.
Want proof?
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=90456203&postcount=1359
Tell me why did Robin post a video about Nigel Farage where religion is NEVER mentioned in a thread about the GOP?

Cabaal

bluewolf wrote: »

Wtf is wrong with you. this is why we can't have nice things :mad:

Stop the political attacks!
You know Bannasidhe is part of the People's Front of Jaffa Cakes,

Pherekydes

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Do you misread deliberately?

Turtwig wrote: »

This is a forum where anything goes, within reason.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

jank

Turtwig wrote: »

nobody has to post anywhere.

While this is true it did not stop Robin posting on my behalf because I did not directly reply to Nodin. Instead he posted a long explanation starting with "Because you have failed to post you therefore except x,y,z blah blah blah. you are wrong etc.etc.." in the usual condensing way. Is this really acceptable behaviour for a Mod?

Pherekydes

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Kind of contradicts "within reason", don't you think?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Bannasidhe

Cabaal wrote: »

Stop the political attacks!
You know Bannasidhe is part of the People's Front of Jaffa Cakes,

I defected.

I am now a proud comrade custard cream.

Nodin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

No evidence of this "fiefdom"?

Permabear wrote:

This post had been deleted.

It's called evidence. I'm a bit intrigued as to why my name keeps coming up a lot here. It would seem Jank is becoming a Trojan horse for a host of petty grudges.

Permabear wrote:

This post had been deleted.

Evidence. Where is it?

Valmont wrote:

If I were to start a thread in A&A on Ayn Rand's specific brand of Atheism,
can anyone honestly tell me it wouldn't turn into an exclusive tirade against
the 'right-wing' and 'free-market capitalism'

It would be far better that you started to provide the evidence you were asked for
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=90953006&postcount=466

Permabear wrote:

If robindch wants to debate libertarianism, or the Tea Party stance on debt and
spending, or the novels of Ayn Rand, or gun control, or any other such issue,
then let him man up, come out of his A&A hidey-hole, and debate these issues
in appropriate forums where he is on a level playing field with everyone else.

I'd suggest cutting back on the jugs of coffee.

Permabear wrote:

This post had been deleted.

Evidence?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Nodin

jank wrote: »

Firstly, my main issue with this forum is in the way that Robindch treats it like his own personal fiefdom. There has been many instances where I have been in a debate

A link to them please.....

jank wrote: »

Secondly is the way it (...........)the standard is.

If you felt you were unfairly infracted, you had a chance to bring it up in the dispute resolution process.

jank wrote: »

Thirdly, it is interesting (............)framed..

You realise that that bans increase with each subsequent one? Unless you've had one rescinded, then whatever penalty was given the last time will be increased the next.

jank wrote: »

Forthly, I have never ever seen in 12 years on boards.ie another mod publishing publicly any users past history in regards infractions, warnings etc. ..

You having seen it and it having happened are separate things. Given the cries of martyrdom that seem to abound in the last few pages, its quite pertinent that the details of infractions be made public.

jank wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=90456203&postcount=1359
Tell me why did Robin post a video about Nigel Farage where religion is NEVER mentioned in a thread about the GOP?

Presumably he thinks they're birds of a feather. He's entitled to an opinion isn't he?

Nodin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Arriving, leaving some snarky remark and disappearing into ether. Taken in the context of the group of posts I linked to (a small sample) it underlines what was being said. Now that we've dealt with the cherry picking -

Why is it you haven't supplied evidence for your case and instead have tried to 'turn the tables' on me?

Where is the evidence re your claims of 'political fiefdom'?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.