KPMG Drunk girl shutdown

humanji

pithater1 wrote: »

Been reading through the last few pages and it has struck me that would we be having this conversation if after the first thread was posted one of the AH mods could have posted something like this explaining why it was closed.

"Sorry but we can't really be talking about this,
1 - people are trying to identify the girl in question, that's not fair on her
2 - the defamation laws in Ireland are a minefield and this has the potential to get the site into trouble"
Any more threads on this topic will be deleted

Now I know hindsight is everything but TBH lads ye did kinda screw up by not explaining why ye closed and deleted the thread. Ye've left yourselves open to the double standard and other criticisms that ye could simply have cut off at the pass, creating more work and headaches for all.

Oh definitely, but 20/20 hindsight and all that. At the time, we did what we do every time the exact same situation occurs; we deleted to be safe and asked those in charge, and then later gave users the reason. The reason coming so late is 100% my fault, as I was the one who mentioned it to the other mods, but fell asleep before posting it. In future, it's a safe bet the same thing will be done, but it'll be on subjects the majority don't care about. There'll be no feedback threads and no complaints.

The one thing that has changed, and has only become apparent as a result of this, is that AH is trying to be less tolerant to random abuse threads.

oppenheimer1

humanji wrote: »

That's all bull and isn't what is being said.

What exactly did I say was incorrect? Mods have stated that no complaint was received about the thread in question and that it was removed preemptively, because they feared the legal consequences.

They didn't appear to be concerned about the consequences for the Cork Girls though.

My name is URL

humanji wrote: »

What's the Athlone Scumbag video? I'd hope that in general, unless there's a good reason for discussing a video, then they'd generally not be posted.

It's the one with two people (husband and wife?) shouting obscenities at each other in the street. I recall vast amounts of vitriol aimed at the couple in question and others of their ilk.

Loads of videos like that are posted, and most of the time they just act as magnets for abusive and bigoted posts. Maybe a solid rule needs to be drawn up for people who want to post videos.. ie; not just doing it to incite a predictable reaction from posters.

decko11

no complaint yet re Death Threats

anyone got a source ??? or just a user here called Higher

clairefontaine

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Ireland seriously needs to take steps to clarify that a service provider is not responsible for what their users post in real time. Seriously, this isn't just a Boards thing in fairness, that whole MCD business a few years ago was insane.

If someone wants to sue, they should have to request the user's IP and sue the individual who posted whatever it is they have a problem with. To hold Boards legally liable for its users conduct is ridiculous. Imagine if Twitter was responsible for the content of every tweet posted on it?

As usual, I suspect this is another case of the Irish legal system trying to deal with an issue and making an absolute cock and balls of the whole thing.

I believe they can already do this, where they can petition for court orders to obtain ISP addresses.

There was an article recently documenting this. I wont mention anything as I have no idea what the rules and regulations are about referring to it.

The thing is when you use the law, the bottom line to regulate your behaviour [and Im not just referring to boards policy but to individuals generally, it really is the lowest common denominator as in " well it's not illegal therefore I'll go ahead..." we all end up in a cesspool. The law is the bottom line, not an aspirational one.

I dunno, I suppose if I were running a site, I would take a publishers stance on it all and decide what kind of publisher I wanted to be, as if I were running an electronic printing press. I may not be writing the stuff but I am distributing it.... something along those lines.

humanji

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

What exactly did I say was incorrect? Mods have stated that no complaint was received about the thread in question and that it was removed preemptively, because they feared the legal consequences.

They didn't appear to be concerned about the consequences for the Cork Girls though.

So no other reason was taken into account? You can 100% guarantee, that despite everyone involved telling you so, they're all lying to you?

K-9

humanji wrote: »

The one thing that has changed, and has only become apparent as a result of this, is that AH is trying to be less tolerant to random abuse threads.

+1

Tbh I don't think I was modding AH at the time of the Cork girls thread, or just getting a feel for modding it not long after joining the team. I just don't recall reported posts about the video, definitely nowhere near this level.

P_1

humanji wrote: »

Oh definitely, but 20/20 hindsight and all that. At the time, we did what we do every time the exact same situation occurs; we deleted to be safe and asked those in charge, and then later gave users the reason. The reason coming so late is 100% my fault, as I was the one who mentioned it to the other mods, but fell asleep before posting it. In future, it's a safe bet the same thing will be done, but it'll be on subjects the majority don't care about. There'll be no feedback threads and no complaints.

The one thing that has changed, and has only become apparent as a result of this, is that AH is trying to be less tolerant to random abuse threads.

We all screw up at some stage

Where I think people are being unfair is that they assume that mods are there 24/7, and are open to abuse. I can only imagine some of the vitriol that's being sent your way at the moment.

A humble suggestion would be to expand the stickied post in AH explaining (briefly) why the threads were closed/deleted and why opening new ones is not to happen. That should hopefully stave off some of the arguments that are coming your way.

Dravokivich

Has feedback created a partnership with ranting and raving recently?

handsomecake

MarkMc wrote: »

Its for Charity

does he have pippa middletons permission to use that name?

OU812

I'll just leave this here...

midlandsmissus

K-9 wrote: »

+1

Tbh I don't think I was modding AH at the time of the Cork girls thread, or just getting a feel for modding it not long after joining the team. I just don't recall reported posts about the video, definitely nowhere near this level.

How was there reported posts? It was hardly up any time at all?

Micky Dolenz

handsomecake wrote: »

does he have pippa middletons permission to use that name?

No, but we asked her arse. We think it said ok.

FoxT

I think that boards was probably correct to close down discussion on this issue in AH.

Boards has its own unique ethos, and this has in my view, succeeded in many ways. I like boards. I prefer it to no-holds-barred sites like reddit or 4chan - and there is no doubt in my mind that boards would end up as some kind of 4chan lookalike site if it wasnt modded so heavily.

BUT!
It is annoying to see threads on any issue being banned, with no clear reason being offered.

AND
It is disappointing to get the whiff of double standards... Ah heor is fair game, 2 working class kids fighting is fair game, daughter of 'highest earning partner at KPMG' is not.


SO

Can I suggest that boards to a bit of work to develop clearer guidelines for both mods AND users.
AND
if discussion on a topic is to be banned, PLEASE, come up with some kind of rational reason.

'Can of worms', or, 'minefield' type excuses are not good enough, and insult our intelligence, and do not help.

-FoxT

oppenheimer1

humanji wrote: »

So no other reason was taken into account? You can 100% guarantee, that despite everyone involved telling you so, they're all lying to you?

I believe the driving motive for the shutdown was the perceived threat of legal consequences and that the other reasons being spouted are convenient ex-post cop outs.

As for "abuse" that the moderators are getting, I do believe that if they take on the role here that they should be occasionally asked to explain actions which are inconsistent with other actions (or lack thereof) on the site. Moderators too should be asking the site owners for clear guidance on what can and cannot be allowed, it is unfair for those that have to implement inconsistent policy ant then be asked to explain their actions - and would appear be left to swing.

Handsome Bob

Dravokivich wrote: »

Has feedback created a partnership with ranting and raving recently?

Just what are you inferring sir!? :mad:

LizT

midlandsmissus wrote: »

How was I supposed to know it was for charity? I've been on the site ages, and I never saw it anywhere, and I'm sorry, charity or not, I still don't think it's an appropriate name. Why can't you take a charity name that's not related to a woman's arse.

And new people coming to the site definitely wont know it's for charity they'll just see the name and think that's a bit annoying.

Whatever about rolling your eyes, if I think something looks idiotic I can comment on it.

I just feel a bit annoyed with Boards in general! Feelings are high around here today! It's the most annoyed I've ever felt at boards actually.

I suggested the name Pippa Middleton in the thread in AH, a lot of users thanked it. It's a bit of craic, the thread on AH has raised over 17k at last count. The whole ssf thread in AH is a bit tongue in cheek. I genuinely don't think people take it that seriously. If it offends you that much, just ignore it because the name will be changed back at the end of the month.

Orion

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Can I also say what kind of name is 'PippaMiddletonsarse' for a Cmod?

I saw the sticky and the name , and I was like how did a poster post a sticky? And then I saw it was the name of a Cmod! A woman's arse is not a good name for a Mod I'm sure nearly anyone would see as obvious.

What would be a good name? How do you define a name as good or bad? Surely you meant 'in your opinion it is inappropriate' rather than it's a bad name in itself. Bad implies there's something well ...bad about it.

K-9

midlandsmissus wrote: »

How was there reported posts? It was hardly up any time at all?

6 or 7 in a very short time for the original, probably 30 or 40 at least since for others. Maybe I'm making it all up though!

Lyaiera

Orion wrote: »

What would be a good name? How do you define a name as good or bad? Surely you meant 'in your opinion it is inappropriate' rather than it's a bad name in itself. Bad implies there's something well ...bad about it.

FFS Orion, we've skirted around the issue, dropped hints and tried to be tactful and now you're making me spell it out to you. WHERE'S THE BLOODY ALLITERATION!?!

Edit: Apart from the "Pippa" part. :P

Second edit: And that bit was just luck!

Micky Dolenz

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Can I also say what kind of name is 'PippaMiddletonsarse' for a Cmod?

I saw the sticky and the name , and I was like how did a poster post a sticky? And then I saw it was the name of a Cmod! A woman's arse is not a good name for a Mod I'm sure nearly anyone would see as obvious.

I could not agree more with you

K-9

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

I believe the driving motive for the shutdown was the perceived threat of legal consequences and that the other reasons being spouted are convenient ex-post cop outs.

So those saying that they were concerned about the girl are just giving cop out excuses? Nice.

tonyclifton

They should just shut the Internet down completely serves no usefull purpose just a platform for people to force their options onto other people or to see validation from others ... Society is dumbing down and Internet forums lead polarisation of view to extremes... And potato !

minidazzler

LizT wrote: »

. If it offends you that much, just ignore it because the name will be changed back at the end of the month.

Lets make it after the next beers... I wanna be able to say I spanked Pippa Middletons Arse

oppenheimer1

K-9 wrote: »

So those saying that they were concerned about the girl are just giving cop out excuses? Nice.

Well they weren't too concerned for the two Cork Girls were they?

As I said the driving motive for the shutdown was the fear of legal actions. The other things that come along seem to be just nice things to justify the actions and hide the real motive behind. It would be nice to have some honesty and consistency.

To be honest I don't think it was fair that that girl had that posted on her, but I also said at the time I didn't think it was right for the Cork Girls to have their moment captured for all eternity too. But they didn't sue so it was alright.

minidazzler

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Well they weren't too concerned for the two Cork Girls were they?

No one on boards named the Cork girls. They weren't identifiable, they were just fighting.

KPMG girl has been named all over the internet, so any future jobs she goes for will lead to that video if they name check.

LizT

minidazzler wrote: »

Lets make it after the next beers... I wanna be able to say I spanked Pippa Middletons Arse

Don't we all

oppenheimer1

minidazzler wrote: »

No one on boards named the Cork girls. They weren't identifiable, they were just fighting.

KPMG girl has been named all over the internet, so any future jobs she goes for will lead to that video if they name check.

Their names were mentioned in the video, their uniforms were identified. It was known who they were - Do we need to mention the Six One and Independent articles again? (a direct result of the boards.ie exposure)

K-9

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Well they weren't too concerned for the two Cork Girls were they?

As I said the driving motive for the shutdown was the fear of legal actions. The other things that come along seem to be just nice things to justify the actions and hide the real motive behind. It would be nice to have some honesty and consistency.

To be honest I don't think it was fair that that girl had that posted on her, but I also said at the time I didn't think it was right for the Cork Girls to have their moment captured for all eternity too. But they didn't sue so it was alright.

Barring going back and deleting an old thread I don't really know what more can be said on that and if we are being consistent we'd have to go back on similar threads and delete them.

I think us AH mods made the right call and that was out of concern for the girl, having a train wreck of a thread on AH where some would give her abuse, legal concerns are an issue as well. The thread was locked and the video snipped by an AH mod and it was the right thing to do, as proven by the over night thread posting peronal stuff identifying her etc.

gbee

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

(a direct result of the boards.ie exposure)

Was it not on the Peoplesrepublicofcork.com first?