Why is atheist Ireland/Michael Nugent given free advertising space on boards.ie?

Brown Bomber

I'm not aware of anyone else that is afforded such a luxury. Atheist Ireland is a fee-paying lobby group headed by Michael Nugent.

He has opened 33 threads press releases all publicising atheist Ireland's campaigns, the organisation itself or issuing directives:

Teach Don't Preach: new secular education website launched
Atheist Ireland has launched a new website...

Be Honest to Godless in the Irish Census - New campaign launched
Atheist Ireland has launched our campaign...

Be Honest about Religion in the Irish Census - Campaign Updated
This campaign is now updated on the Atheist Ireland website

Atheist Ireland submission to UN CERD on Irish schools

Six Questions for Secular Voters
Atheist Ireland is writing to all election candidates

Canvass for Ivana Bacik and Ruairi Quinn, Saturday 19 Feb
On Saturday week, 19 February, Atheist Ireland members will be spending two hours in the morning canvassing and dropping leaflets

Party and candidate replies to secular policy questions
Atheist Ireland and the Humanist Association of Ireland are asking voters to vote for candidates who support secular policies in the General Election on Friday

Attend the World Atheist Convention in Dublin, June 3-5 2011
You can now buy discounted early-bird tickets for the World Atheist Convention in the O’Callaghan Alexander Hotel in Dublin, Ireland, from 3-5 June 2011. The Convention, co-hosted by Atheist Ireland

Dublin Declaration on Religion in Public Life – opinions welcome
This weekend, June 3-5, the World Atheist Convention will take place in Dublin.

Atheist Ireland meets Forum on Primary Education
Yesterday, Tuesday September 6, Jane Donnelly and I attended the Department of Education’s Forum on Patronage and Pluralism in the Primary Sector.

Atheist Ireland attends OSCE human rights conference in Warsaw
Jane Donnelly and I are in Poland today for the OSCE Human Rights Conference on Human Rights.

Five questions on secular issues for the Irish Presidential candidates
Atheist Ireland has written to the seven Presidential candidates

Atheist Ireland submission to Dept of Education on school enrolment
This is Atheist Ireland's submission to the Department of Education's discussion paper

Atheist Ireland response to interim report of Forum on Patronage and Pluralism
Ensuring Effective Remedies for an Objective, Critical and Pluralistic Secular Education Atheist Ireland has responded to the interim report of the Forum on Patronage and Pluralism.

Secular Sunday: new weekly newsletter from Atheist Ireland
Atheist ireland is starting a new weekly email newsletter called Secular Sunday. It will include details of events, activities, news items and other relevant topics. The first issue, which you can read here,

Five Steps to Civil Rights in a Secular Ireland
These are five steps to civil rights in a secular Ireland. Atheist Ireland is lobbying to promote these proposals on an ongoing basis.

Is Anything Sacred? A public discussion of blasphemy laws
Atheist Ireland is hosting a public discussion

Well I am sure that you get the point. The rest of the threads are here. http://www.boards.ie/search/submit/?user=303480&threads=1&sort=newest&date_to=&date_from=&query=*%3A*&page=1

Brown Bomber

forgot to add this, which is taken from the humanities charter which is the best definition I could find of what I perceive taking place.

Spamming or shilling: You may not use the forum to propagate your message, promote your business/website/product/service, or engage in any form of advertising. This behaviour is prohibited generally on Boards.ie, and will probably earn you a site-ban as well as a forum ban.

Have I understood this correctly?

[-0-]

What part of this has he broken?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054860288

Brown Bomber

[-0-] wrote: »

What part of this has he broken?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054860288

I'm not in a position to answer that, other than site rules obviously supersede forum charters.

Esel

[-0-] wrote: »

What part of this has he broken?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054860288

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I'm not in a position to answer that, other than site rules obviously supersede forum charters.

Interesting bit from the charter linked above:

Unlike other forums where proselytizing is banned, I suggest we don't need to do that here. As long as the basic rules are followed I can't see this being an issue - and it does spark debate.

Brown Bomber

Esel wrote: »

Interesting bit from the charter linked above:

Right, but this is something else. Advertising his website, selling tickets and general and almost exclusive promotion.

The more I think of it it is not proselytizing at all as he is preaching to the choir or in this case tapping into a target-market.

Cookie_Monster

it's advertising and spam and he should be banned

jd007

Did you report any of the threads? Post a link to his profile in the spammer thread?

Penn

"Discretion of the moderator"

Basically, the site rules are a "catch-all", but forum moderators are allowed to use their own judgement in allowing some advertisements. Michael Nugent's threads are absolutely relevant to the forum. While I'm sure profit is made from them, they are still of interest to the forum users. And he doesn't solely use the forum for advertising, he also engages in many discussions and is well respected by forum users.

This is not a unique occurance on this forum. Hell, I mod Podcasts and we allow people to advertise their own Podcasts under certain rules and conditions. And I have seen (and can provide links etc via PM to back up my claims) in many other forums on Boards where people pimp their own blog/website/events, but they are allowed to do so because they're not just here to advertise, but have become part of that community and their blog/website/event is of benefit to the posters of that community.

This is a non-issue.

Fr_Dougal

Penn wrote: »

"Discretion of the moderator"

Basically, the site rules are a "catch-all", but forum moderators are allowed to use their own judgement in allowing some advertisements. Michael Nugent's threads are absolutely relevant to the forum. While I'm sure profit is made from them, they are still of interest to the forum users.

One could argue that all spam is of interest to forum users. 'tis many a time I have been looking for a "sexy dress".

Regarding spam and advertising, I don't think the lines should be blurred; at all.

Penn

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

One could argue that all spam is of interest to forum users. 'tis many a time I have been looking for a "sexy dress".

Regarding spam and advertising, I don't think the lines should be blurred; at all.

Again, it's only one factor in what might make a mod allow it on the forum. Mods don't want people using their forums for blatant advertising any more than the admin want it on the site in general, but there are some occasions where the mods can use their judgement to say "This can greatly benefit the forum, the poster isn't purely using the forum as an advertising tool and instead engages in other discussions, and if the poster stepped beyond the boundaries of acceptability in what they're posting, action can be taken against them then.

It's not a completely black and white issue. On Cool Vids & Pics & Links, we close and delete threads people start where they're trying to get people to watch their own Youtube video. It's a form of advertising. Those people are using Boards and the CVPL forum to increase the viewcount on their Youtube videos, they don't engage in discussion or post in other threads apart from their own video, and they'd keep bumping their own threads.

Try applying that rule to the Fighting Games forum (for example). People are posting their own videos there too, linking to their own Youtube channels. Bumping threads with their own videos.

However, they are part of the community. They engage with other users. They're not doing it to increase their Youtube viewcount, they're doing it because it's something other posters are interested in, and it forms part of the discussion which is the basis of the forum.

And what about the entire Band Promotion forum? Where people can advertise their own music.

Discretion of the Moderator is an important rule because it allows mods to use their own judgement and say "Technically, this may be outside of the rules. However, the benefits far outweigh the negatives and it's reasonable to allow it under certain conditions"

Lelantos

Penn wrote: »

"Discretion of the moderator"



This is a non-issue.

Unless the OP is a bible thumper & is appalled that boards supports the dark lord

Ken.

The easiest way to sort it out is to report his posts in the Spammer Notification Thread.

If the admins have no problem with it then he's okay to continue.

Penn

ken wrote: »

The easiest way to sort it out is to report his posts in the Spammer Notification Thread.

If the admins have no problem with it then he's okay to continue.

There's a difference between advertising and spam.

Best course of action would have been to report the posts. If no action was taken, PM the mods. If they still allowed it, PM the CMods or post on HelpDesk and mark it for Admin Attention. Though the Admin will probably see it here too soon enough anyway.

Gordon

As Penn is saying, if it benefits the forum, if the community want it, then it's a positive addition to the forum and it's allowed. It's clear that the posts provoke discussion and interest, for example, the first 10 links that you posted that were originally posted back in 2011 have garnered lots of thanks or lots of discussion, the vast majority of threads see both.

Wibbs

Penn wrote: »

"Discretion of the moderator"

Basically, the site rules are a "catch-all", but forum moderators are allowed to use their own judgement in allowing some advertisements. Michael Nugent's threads are absolutely relevant to the forum. While I'm sure profit is made from them, they are still of interest to the forum users. And he doesn't solely use the forum for advertising, he also engages in many discussions and is well respected by forum users.

This is not a unique occurance on this forum. Hell, I mod Podcasts and we allow people to advertise their own Podcasts under certain rules and conditions. And I have seen (and can provide links etc via PM to back up my claims) in many other forums on Boards where people pimp their own blog/website/events, but they are allowed to do so because they're not just here to advertise, but have become part of that community and their blog/website/event is of benefit to the posters of that community.

+1 P there's is always leeway in this kinda thing for valued members of a forum and like you can think of quite the number of examples. Dead right too.

However I can also see BB's point in this case. Actually forget the individual case, take any forum on Boards and imagine if all of threads started by a user, including their first were promotion/advertising of their hobby/biz/campaign/religion and most of their posts were within those threads I could see questions being raised alright. Put it another way and narrow it down further, imagine if this was happening in one of the other Spirituality forums. How long would a Muslim or Christian or Buddhist user last in similar circumstances? How long would the head of Catholicireland.net last? Does similar happen there? Genuine questions.

Penn

Wibbs wrote: »

Put it another way and narrow it down further, imagine if this was happening in one of the other Spirituality forums. How long would a Muslim or Christian or Buddhist user last in similar circumstances? How long would the head of Catholicireland.net last? Does similar happen there? Genuine questions.

Well, I can't think of anything comparable, but that's not to say that the mods of those forums shouldn't or wouldn't allow similar. Hell, if the Pope started posting on Christianity, I wouldn't be reporting him for Advertising

Again, I think a lot of it has to do with the posters interactions with the forum. If (for example) the head of Catholicireland.net posted in Christianity that they were having a meeting people could pay to come to, and a discussion formed out of that on the thread, if the poster didn't respond and engage, then it's just blatant advertising. Or if they responded in another discussion with "I've given my own opinion on this matter here Catholicireland.net/blog-entry-16", that's advertising too as they're not engaging in discussion. Michael Nugent does post threads about whats going on with Atheist Ireland and posts a lot in those threads, but he also posts in other threads and joins in discussions, and his discussions are usually well-received.

Benny_Cake

I've found Michael to be a very good contributor and I'd also give him credit for bringing cases where Christians are being persecuted for their faith around the world to the attention of posters in the Christianity forum.If someone joined the Christianity forum purely to shill their website or events I wouldn't allow them to do that,but if they are a regular contributor who engages in discussion then it's a different matter, and I think Michael Nugent falls into that category.

Brown Bomber

Wibbs wrote: »

Put it another way and narrow it down further, imagine if this was happening in one of the other Spirituality forums. How long would a Muslim or Christian or Buddhist user last in similar circumstances? How long would the head of Catholicireland.net last? Does similar happen there? Genuine questions.

No need to imagine.

Here is a recent example from Buddhism:

THE OP

talk by Samdhong Rinpoche, Thur 30th Aug, ~18:15pm
Samdhong Rinpoche will teach on "What Buddhism has to offer the Modern World" via live streaming at videostreaming.rigpa.org

MOD/ADMIN ASIAPROD'S RESPONSE(s)

A great idea. But. No advertising in any shape or format.

No. There is a blanket Boards rule about advertising please use your common sense.
Draw peoples attention to the event but let them go and find the information for themselves. Point them to a link on the event. Talk about your experience if you have been. Stay away from the like of pricing and testimonials.

And Asiaprod is also mod/admin of the forum that Atheist Ireland exclusively lobbies in if I am not mistaken.

This is the position of the Spirituality forum:
No Advertising
This is a community forum and is not for advertising. Advertising of commercial services is strictly forbidden. Anyone found to be advertising will be banned and blacklisted from being mentioned on the forum.

Brown Bomber

Benny_Cake wrote: »

I've found Michael to be a very good contributor and I'd also give him credit for bringing cases where Christians are being persecuted for their faith around the world to the attention of posters in the Christianity forum.If someone joined the Christianity forum purely to shill their website or events I wouldn't allow them to do that,but if they are a regular contributor who engages in discussion then it's a different matter, and I think Michael Nugent falls into that category.

Are you prepared to stand by this statement? What ratio of shilling:normal use is acceptable to you personally? I would estimate that Nugent's posts which don't involve promotion/defense of Atheist Ireland and their positions, campaigns, events etc to be less than 10%.

RE the Christianity forum he more or less is using to promote his events/campaigns. The difference being he is pandering to a more suitable demographic for these particular campaigns. Three OP's, all concernced with lobbying campaigns and only one follow up post in total in any of the three thread.

Sacksian

I think the answer in this case, and other similar feedback threads, is that the judgement of the moderators and the context/nature of specific forums can prevail above hard and fast rules or black/white distinctions.

Personally, I think moderators' freedom to make such judgements should be protected (and this is where the skill in modding comes from), rather than tying them to some impossibly literal interpretation of the charters.

If they're making bad judgements, that's another matter.

looksee

OK, that is all interesting. I thought there was a general over-arching rule against advertising and that as mods we were supporting that with the occasional lee-way for a relevant charity event by long term posters.

Doctor DooM

Brown Bomber, this is looking awfully like you're trying to silence someone whos opinion you don't like.

There's been an admin on this thread. Other examples have been given (would you like me banned from boards? My youtube channel is discussed above, and on top of that I have to allow some tournament organisers to advertise too, as they're literally the lifesblood of the forum).

You can rulesmonger all you like: The reality is the decision relies with the mods, and I seriously doubt the admins are going to over ride them.

Fr_Dougal

Penn wrote: »

Again, I think a lot of it has to do with the posters interactions with the forum. If (for example) the head of Catholicireland.net posted in Christianity that they were having a meeting people could pay to come to, and a discussion formed out of that on the thread, if the poster didn't respond and engage, then it's just blatant advertising. Or if they responded in another discussion with "I've given my own opinion on this matter here Catholicireland.net/blog-entry-16", that's advertising too as they're not engaging in discussion. Michael Nugent does post threads about whats going on with Atheist Ireland and posts a lot in those threads, but he also posts in other threads and joins in discussions, and his discussions are usually well-received.

That's fair enough.

However with such an onus being placed on the importance of social media, perhaps the mods should be mindful that it would be well worth a PR/Shill/Spammers while to play the 'long game' and interact with the forum and it's members enough to reap a business/personal financial reward through their own posts etc. Perhaps in these cases boards should be more proactive in offering Official Rep accounts so that regular boards members know that these posters have their own agenda/interest.

Brown Bomber

Doctor DooM wrote: »

Brown Bomber, this is looking awfully like you're trying to silence someone whos opinion you don't like.

It should be clear that I am not trying to silence anyone. I haven't questioned his right to post whatever he desires the same as anyone other user. However, his behaviour is not that of a regular user it is that of an interest group. The issue is not his "opinions" but his advertisement of websites, ticket sales, campaigns and events and so on.

Whatever issues or "opinions" he wants to raise and discuss he can freely do so without resorting to lobbying and linking to his fee-paying organisation.

Doctor DooM wrote: »

There's been an admin on this thread. Other examples have been given (would you like me banned from boards? My youtube channel is discussed above, and on top of that I have to allow some tournament organisers to advertise too, as they're literally the lifesblood of the forum).

You can rulesmonger all you like: The reality is the decision relies with the mods, and I seriously doubt the admins are going to over ride them.

What you call "rule-mongering" I describe as a wish to see rules applied consistently and without prejudice. If Nugent is free to launch every Atheist Ireland campaign through boards then there is absolutely no reason why bou can't promote a weblink to a talk on "what Hinduism has to offer the modern world".

By the same token the head of Scientology in Ireland and should be free to advertise their cult on boards issuing press releases and other assorted propaganda.

Doctor DooM

Brown Bomber wrote: »

What you call "rule-mongering" I describe as a wish to see rules applied consistently and without prejudice.

Boards doesn't work like that.

Do you think the same rules should be applied in After Hours as in Personal Issues as in Atheism?

Moderators need to be able to pilot their own ships.

Wibbs

looksee wrote: »

OK, that is all interesting. I thought there was a general over-arching rule against advertising and that as mods we were supporting that with the occasional lee-way for a relevant charity event by long term posters.

That was my take too TBH. If someone came into say the watches forum representing a brand and the majority of their posts and all the threads they started were about that brand, they'd be hopped on PDQ and referred to hello@boards.ie. In fact they have been. OK that's a brand, but take tLL if the same situation arose about a I dunno a female only event/club/action group and was promoted by one user with a direct interest in same and all the threads they started were about same again they'd be modded when spotted. I'd be surprised if it got past the first such thread TBH. When it comes from a valued member of the community who has other strings to their bow it'll get much more leeway, but even there such threads generally get closed after a while if it's all about the promotion. I can recall a thread like that not so long ago.

I'd generally follow Sacksian's take "I think the answer in this case, and other similar feedback threads, is that the judgement of the moderators and the context/nature of specific forums can prevail above hard and fast rules or black/white distinctions.Its a hard one to navigate though and will vary across forums. Doctor DooM's forum examples for instance. Still the Buddhist example above looks pretty out of step with the A&A example. He/she was modded for that one thread and it doesn't look like he/she started others. 30 odd threads does start to look like straight out promotion(though as usual it's easy to cherrypick so...).

Possible solution? Maybe in cases like this have just one thread about and for the group/promotion/event/person. That way the community have the access to the info, but without the scent of outright promotion? That would cover Doctor DooM's event organisers etc too and another thread for youtube channels etc. Just thinking out loud but that might go some way to making for consistency regardless of forums?

Doctor DooM wrote: »

Brown Bomber, this is looking awfully like you're trying to silence someone whos opinion you don't like.

Defo not in my case(being of the agnostic/atheistic bent myself), well unless Penn's notion of the pope posting on Christianity happened, then I'd wear out the report post button

Doctor DooM

Wibbs wrote: »

Possible solution? Maybe in cases like this have just one thread about and for the group/promotion/event/person. That way the community have the access to the info, but without the scent of outright promotion? That would cover Doctor DooM's event organisers etc too and another thread for youtube channels etc. Just thinking out loud but that might go some way to making for consistency regardless of forums?


Defo not in my case(being of the agnostic/atheistic bent myself), well unless Penn's notion of the pope posting on Christianity happened, then I'd wear out the report post button

IMO Wibbs, the solution is to allow the local mods to do their jobs and make the decision, as they are the experts on the situation. Forcing anything on them without understanding the intricacies involved in each individual forums is not a good idea.

For example: I don't think one thread would do for tournaments: There'll be 3 or 4 on the go at the same time and people will be trying to make travel arrangements and the like, so I'd rather have them seperate. Otherwise it'd get messy quick.

looksee

Maybe if this is the case posters should as a general rule be given a 'one chance' warning before banning newcomers for posting about an event/their business etc. It would be very easy for a new poster to see the rules on one forum and assume that the same applies everywhere.

Yes I know they should read the charter, but a newcomer might not realise that the charters are different. It is not really intuitive to a newcomer to appreciate that this person is posting about an event and is allowed to do so because they are established posters, but the newcomer could be straight out banned.

I have no problem with people posting about their events/websites etc, it can be advantageous, but there needs to be a bit of clarity about it.

Wibbs

Doctor DooM wrote: »

No offence Wibbs, but the solution is to allow the local mods to do their jobs and make the decision, as they are the experts on the situation.

Dont get me wrong DD, I'm well down with the local mods are at the sharp end take on things, but what happens if local decisions appear to break the terms of use for all of us on the site?

4.3 Representing a company or other entity

If you are using boards.ie as a representative of a company or other entity (including, but not limited to Charity or Volunteer organisations, Student’s Unions, Trade Unions, Academic Institutions, Chambers of Commerce, Departments of Government) you represent that you have the authority to enter into these Terms of Use on behalf of that company or entity, and agree that the terms “you” and “your” in this agreement refers to your company or other entity. You may not post on boards.ie other than in your individual capacity unless you have permission from Boards.ie Limited. Contact reps@boards.ie for more details.

As looksee says

Maybe if this is the case posters should as a general rule be given a 'one chance' warning before banning newcomers for posting about an event/their business etc.

People get sitebanned for breaking it. I've personally permabanned people for similar. In this highlighted case the users posts very rarely stray beyond the organisation he represents and none of 30 odd threads he starts do. As I've noted Gordon saying before(or was it Zaph?) "Boards is a discussion site, not a noticeboard" which in this example he seems to be using it as the latter. If he contacted the office about it then cool beans, but if not it does look odd. That's why I suggested the one thread for promotion etc.

Gumbi

Benny_Cake wrote: »

I've found Michael to be a very good contributor and I'd also give him credit for bringing cases where Christians are being persecuted for their faith around the world to the attention of posters in the Christianity forum.If someone joined the Christianity forum purely to shill their website or events I wouldn't allow them to do that,but if they are a regular contributor who engages in discussion then it's a different matter, and I think Michael Nugent falls into that category.

Always the voice of reason.