Why is this person a mod?

Fromthetrees

First time posting on feedback. Usually don't care about most stuff but I think what this mod says is unacceptable, disgusting and outrageous.

irishconvert
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2007

People involved in the distribution of class A drugs do an unbelieveable amount of damage to our society. Anyone involved in this business deserves the death penalty.

To get to the stage of hitting your wife, you first have to be in a position where you are so annoyed you are no longer sleeping in the same bed as her.

Here he equates Muslims protesting against America on the streets of Dublin with people protesting on the streets of Dublin over Bloody Sunday.
No one with any sanity can make such a comparison.

Originally Posted by MrD012
what is it again they are chanting ?

Originally Posted by irishconvert
God is greatest, down down America? Is it really surprising some of these lads have a problem with America as it is probably responsible for bombing some of their homelands back to the stone age.

Hey, do you remember the protest to the British Embassy in Dublin after the Bloody Sunday shootings? Can you tell us your view on what happened at that protest?

There's 3 proper crazy reasons for why I'm questioning why this person is a mod. I'm very sure if I spent another 15 minutes I could find another 3 equally outrageous posts.

5starpool

A. None of those posts are in the forum he/she moderates.
B. Hardly earth shatteringly controversial opinions. Strong opinions expressed frankly, yes, but hardly unbecoming of a moderator, especially since they are not a moderator as far as those posts are concerned.

You have an issue with those posts, I'm sure there are a lot of people who don't.

Edit: OK, the wife hitting one is clearly batshít actually.

EazyD

5starpool wrote: »

A. None of those posts are in the forum he/she moderates.
B. Hardly earth shatteringly controversial opinions. Strong opinions expressed frankly, yes, but hardly unbecoming of a moderator, especially since they are not a moderator as far as those posts are concerned.

You have an issue with those posts, I'm sure there are a lot of people who don't.

Edit: OK, the wife hitting one is clearly batshít actually.

While I would agree that the moderator has by no means any obligation to refrain from voicing their opinion in forums, it goes without saying that it is the nature of their position that makes such strong views look unfavourable.

LoLth

iirc the wife beating discussion was already brought up in feedback and discussed at the time.

Is there any particular reason why you are bringing up these posts now? (1 post from 2011, one from 2012 and one from january 2013)...I cant believe you spent 15 minutes digging those up to be honest.

anyway, as 5tarpool has pointed out, while we expect moderators to behave within the rules of any forum they post in, a moderator is just a user in any forum they do not moderate. Users are allowed opinions, so are mods. You or I may not agree with their opinion but thats the joy of discussion and debate.

If you have an issue with a post, report it and let the mods decide if its too far over the line.

irish bloke

Fromthetrees wrote: »

First time posting on feedback. Usually don't care about most stuff but I think what this mod says is unacceptable, disgusting and outrageous

There's 3 proper crazy reasons for why I'm questioning why this person is a mod. I'm very sure if I spent another 15 minutes I could find another 3 equally outrageous posts.

Seen a lot worse to be honest.

lanyard

Someone who condones hitting their wife shouldn't be given the privilege of moderating discussion. They are obviously not balanced and are on the fringes of society.

Fromthetrees

LoLth wrote: »

iirc the wife beating discussion was already brought up in feedback and discussed at the time.

Is there any particular reason why you are bringing up these posts now? (1 post from 2011, one from 2012 and one from january 2013)...I cant believe you spent 15 minutes digging those up to be honest.

anyway, as 5tarpool has pointed out, while we expect moderators to behave within the rules of any forum they post in, a moderator is just a user in any forum they do not moderate. Users are allowed opinions, so are mods. You or I may not agree with their opinion but thats the joy of discussion and debate.

If you have an issue with a post, report it and let the mods decide if its too far over the line.

Is there something wrong with bringing this issue to feedback now? I haven't posted here before.

The main problem is how can I properly post in a forum when one of the mods of that forum has such a warped way of looking at the world.

Death penalty for drug distributors, women can be beaten, Irish people protesting on Irish streets over Irish people being murdered in cold blood is totally equitable to Irish/non Irish Muslims protesting on Irish streets over America bombing countries thousands of miles away.

The mindset is scary quite frankly.

Pawwed Rig

5starpool wrote: »

A. None of those posts are in the forum he/she moderates.

The wife beating one is in the Islam forum which the mod moderates.

5starpool wrote: »

Hardly earth shatteringly controversial opinions. Strong opinions expressed frankly, yes, but hardly unbecoming of a moderator, especially since they are not a moderator as far as those posts are concerned.

You have an issue with those posts, I'm sure there are a lot of people who don't.

Agree with this. I don't think the other two opinions are that controversial. Many would consider tougher laws on drugs to be preferable.
The point about the protest is a non issue.

And to be fair what the guy actually said was
'Look, to be honest I am not the type of person who goes around hitting anyone, my wife included. To get to the stage of hitting your wife, you first have to be in a position where you are so annoyed you are no longer sleeping in the same bed as her. My opinion is that if you are at this stage and you feel you have to hit your wife then you may as well call time on the marriage. Actually if I did hit my wife I think she would divorce me quicker than you can say sharia law! '

lanyard

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

The wife beating one is in the Islam forum which the mod moderates.


Agree with this. I don't think the other two opinions are that controversial. Many would consider tougher laws on drugs to be preferable.
The point about the protest is a non issue.

And to be fair what the guy actually said was
'Look, to be honest I am not the type of person who goes around hitting anyone, my wife included. To get to the stage of hitting your wife, you first have to be in a position where you are so annoyed you are no longer sleeping in the same bed as her. My opinion is that if you are at this stage and you feel you have to hit your wife then you may as well call time on the marriage. Actually if I did hit my wife I think she would divorce me quicker than you can say sharia law! '

He actually said the following:

oceanclub wrote: »

What do you consider valid circumstances for hitting your wife, and what do you consider not severe?

P.

irishconvert 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.

So at some point he feels it would be appropriate to hit his wife.

Madam_X

Just my opinion on this:

I'm not in agreement with one person being named tbh, but speaking in general terms: I used to agree that it shouldn't matter what a moderator posts in the forums they don't moderate (besides charter-breaching, which applies to anyone)... when I used to be a moderator. Now I realise that that's pretty disingenuous. If you have a bolded username and "Moderator" under it, it's not unreasonable to relax a bit outside the forum(s) you moderate, but it's also not unreasonable to be expected to uphold a certain standard, seeing as it's visible to all that you have been assigned with moderating, even if elsewhere on the site. Not everyone can be expected to realise that you're a regular member outside of the forum(s) you mod when your profile doesn't look that way.

Inflammatory, polarising comments just blurted out without any substance are not thought highly of when posted by a regular member (sometimes even reprimanded) let alone someone who is more representative of the site.

It's hypocritical IMO to post flame-baiting stuff in one forum if you are instructing people not to do so in another - that's not the same as saying though that you can't make mistakes or have a more easygoing, irreverent persona outside of the forums you moderate.

Not too far back, a moderator (who is no longer on the site) posted pretty provocative sectarian comments - and it looked worse IMO coming from a moderator, even though it wasn't in the forum they modded. It can also give the impression to those who are not fully au fait with the place that mods have a level of impunity. It's not the case, but IMO perceptions can be as important as realities sometimes.

Czarcasm

The whole "Mods outside their own forums aren't posting as Mods" get out clause has been done to death all over Feedback already, I just think Moderators are charged with a responsibility in a leadership role and have a duty to uphold the image of that role.

What seems to happen at the moment is that Boards policy says it's ok for Moderators to "take a poo at Paul's" so to speak, and leave the Moderators of that forum to deal with the stink, while said Moderator goes back to their own fresh smelling house.

Moderators SHOULD BE held to a higher standard at ALL times, but that doesn't mean they can't be allowed to visit Paul's house. They SHOULD BE held to the "You wouldn't do that in your own house" standard.

They can still be the same, civil posters they are in their own forums, still be allowed express their opinions and so on, but allowing them an excuse to have free reign outside their own forums sets an example for any visitors to Paul's house that says it's ok to treat the place like a dump if they see people who are supposed to be leading by example doing it.

Orion

lanyard wrote: »

Someone who condones hitting their wife shouldn't be given the privilege of moderating discussion. They are obviously not balanced and are on the fringes of society.

As an athiest I feel that someone who believes in a mythical divine entity shouldn't be a moderator. They are obviously deluded and should not be given any position of power.

Does that help provide perspective?

Madam_X

Orion wrote: »

As an athiest I feel that someone who believes in a mythical divine entity shouldn't be a moderator. They are obviously deluded and should not be given any position of power.

Does that help provide perspective?

Not IMO, seeing as domestic violence involves physically harming someone, the concept of atheism doesn't.

Orion

Madam_X wrote: »

If you have a bolded username and "Moderator" under it ... but it's also not unreasonable to be expected to uphold a certain standard,

Czarcasm wrote: »

I just think Moderators are charged with a responsibility in a leadership role and have a duty to uphold the image of that role.

Just a bit of background here - I'm pretty sure that for the earlier 2 of the posts linked in the OP irishconvert wasn't a mod of any forum at the time so this argument doesn't apply. [edit] I'm 100% sure he wasn't a mod at the time of the wife beating post at least. Not as confident about the 2012 one[/edit]

Don't get me wrong - I find some of his arguments and views completely alien to my way of thinking. But that doesn't mean he can't be a good mod of a forum.

Orion

Madam_X wrote: »

Not IMO, seeing as domestic violence involves physically harming someone, the concept of atheism doesn't.

You completely missed my point. I see religion as harmful - mentally and, as history has shown, physically. So therefore religious people shouldn't be mods. Fact! :cool:

Madam_X

Orion wrote: »

You completely missed my point. I see religion as harmful - mentally and, as history has shown, physically. So therefore religious people shouldn't be mods. Fact! :cool:

But your view on religion is subjective. Domestic violence as harmful is objective.

Micky Dolenz

Orion wrote: »

As an athiest I feel that someone who believes in a mythical divine entity shouldn't be a moderator. They are obviously deluded and should not be given any position of power.

Does that help provide perspective?

No, it does not help provide perspective.

Can you expand please.

lanyard

Orion wrote: »

As an athiest I feel that someone who believes in a mythical divine entity shouldn't be a moderator. They are obviously deluded and should not be given any position of power.

Does that help provide perspective?

WTF!!

Czarcasm

Orion wrote: »

Just a bit of background here - I'm pretty sure that for the earlier 2 of the posts linked in the OP irishconvert wasn't a mod of any forum at the time so this argument doesn't apply.

Don't get me wrong - I find some of his arguments and views completely alien to my way of thinking. But that doesn't mean he can't be a good mod of a forum.

Ah no Orion I wasn't specifically directing my post at irishconvert or any Moderator in particular, I was directing it at the often trotted out excuse that "Moderators are not Moderators outside forums they moderate".

It's a bit like saying for example that in an office environment a manager isn't a manager outside their own department. Yes they are, and they still have to maintain that leadership role outside their own department, leading by example. They're still on Boards, only in another department so to speak.

It's all well and good to say "Oh but it's a voluntary and thankless job", etc. The key word there is voluntary- they don't HAVE to do the job, but if they do volunteer their time, the least they could do is take the role seriously and bring other posters up to their standard, not bow down to the standards of posters who couldn't care less about the image of Boards.

Orion

Madam_X wrote: »

But your view on religion is subjective. Domestic violence as harmful is objective.

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

No, it does not help provide perspective.

Can you expand please.

Religion is subjective. As are opinions.

The post I replied to said that a Muslim who believes in everything that his religion teaches are "obviously not balanced and are on the fringes of society". That was the comment I was responding to. It's ludicrous to suggest that someone is unbalanced purely because of their religious beliefs. The christian bible teaches that an eye for an eye is acceptable. It advocates death for apostacy and heresy. Genocide was perpetrated in Jericho and Babel (one divine and the other mundane). Examples such as these are in all abrahamic religions. But it doesn't mean that all believers are "on the fringes of society". That was the point I was trying to get across. Well that and that there was a blinkered view of what society is.

I'm sorry if the irony didn't come across in text form.

Orion

Czarcasm wrote: »

Athe least they could do is take the role seriously and bring other posters up to their standard, not bow down to the standards of posters who couldn't care less about the image of Boards.

We do take the role seriously - when we are in our own forums. When I post outside Parenting or Giving up Smoking I'm not a mod. End of. If I act the dick across the site I'd be removed of my modship pretty quickly. But having an opinion is not acting the dick.

Also, as I said irishconvert wasn't a mod then at all - in any forum - so why should he be held up to this standard that wasn't expected of him then?

Madam_X

Well ok, I was specifically focusing on the "Stage of hitting your wife" thing rather than Islam in general. Whether it's a religious belief or not, it's objectively wrong, as it appears to be legitimising physical harm.

Orion wrote: »

But having an opinion is not acting the dick.

Oh expressing one can be. (I'm speaking in general now) Saying "My opinion is that all gays should be exterminated" and nothing further to substantiate it, is being a dick. It's inflammatory and likely designed to provoke a reaction. Saying "I object to homosexuality because... (reasons given)" is a controversial opinion, but the expression of it in that way is not being a dick.

Micky Dolenz

Orion wrote: »

Religion is subjective. As are opinions.

The post I replied to said that a Muslim who believes in everything that his religion teaches are "obviously not balanced and are on the fringes of society". That was the comment I was responding to. It's ludicrous to suggest that someone is unbalanced purely because of their religious beliefs. The christian bible teaches that an eye for an eye is acceptable. It advocates death for apostacy and heresy. Genocide was perpetrated in Jericho and Babel (one divine and the other mundane). Examples such as these are in all abrahamic religions. But it doesn't mean that all believers are "on the fringes of society". That was the point I was trying to get across. Well that and that there was a blinkered view of what society is.

I'm sorry if the irony didn't come across in text form.

Irony certainly is a funny thing, and certainly one that is not lost on me.


What I see is a poster condoning violence against women under certain "conditions" citing Religion as a reason or an excuse.

Do you think this to be acceptable?

Czarcasm

Orion wrote: »

We do take the role seriously - when we are in our own forums. When I post outside Parenting or Giving up Smoking I'm not a mod. End of.

And that's the attitude I disagree with. A Moderator is charged with a leadership role, and while "in the office" so to speak, as in while they are on Boards, they have a responsibility to be good leaders, who can express their opinions in a civil and proper manner the same as the majority of posters manage to do. A Moderator should at all times be conscious of the fact that they have a duty to be an example to ordinary members of Boards.

If I act the dick across the site I'd be removed of my modship pretty quickly. But having an opinion is not acting the dick.

Of course nobody is saying Moderators are not entitled to their opinion the same as ordinary members, but they should be conscious of how their opinion might be perceived and should be consciously aware of how they word their posts.

Also, as I said irishconvert wasn't a mod then at all - in any forum - so why should he be held up to this standard that wasn't expected of him then?

Personally speaking, I think it was out of order for the OP to be allowed single out a single Moderator like that and twist their posts out of context. The OP should've PM'ed a CMod in this instance as Feedback is for more general site and forum issues as opposed to being Moderator or member specific.

Orion

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Irony certainly is a funny thing, and certainly one that is not lost on me.


What I see is a poster condoning violence against women under certain "conditions" citing Religion as a reason or an excuse.

Do you think this to be acceptable?

Of course not - I don't see it as acceptable in the slightest just as I don't find a lot of religious arguments for various things acceptable. But the thread is about whether or not irishconvert should be a mod because of his religious views and I was posting in that context. I also said in a previous post that I disagree with a lot of what he has to say - it doesn't mean he can't be a good moderator of a forum.

Orion

Czarcasm wrote: »

Of course nobody is saying Moderators are not entitled to their opinion the same as ordinary members, but they should be conscious of how their opinion might be perceived and should be consciously aware of how they word their posts.

I can't disagree with you more. If I am told by the cmods or admins that I have to make my posts corporate-aware and be careful what I say in forums outside of my modded ones I'll hand in my mod hat that same day. I mod two forums - they're the only ones I need to act as a mod in. In any other forum I'm an ordinary poster just like yourself and subject to the same sanctions as anyone else if I step out of line.

nesf

Madam_X wrote: »

Well ok, I was specifically focusing on the "Stage of hitting your wife" thing rather than Islam in general. Whether it's a religious belief or not, it's objectively wrong, as it appears to be legitimising physical harm.

There are situations where it is unequivocally acceptable to physically harm someone, generally when defending yourself or others from greater harm from that individual. I'm dearly hoping that's what irishconvert meant by "last resort."

K-9

Madam_X wrote: »

But your view on religion is subjective. Domestic violence as harmful is objective.

It depends, if his comment is in line with Islamic teaching or what he thinks it means, in the context of a discussion on Islam it is relevant. I think he said he doesn't agree with it, but if he is giving a comment on Islamic teaching on a board about Islam, that's a bit different to the same comment on say AH in a thread about domestic violence..

I rarely join discussions on religion, only encounter them when politics and religion collide. I've seen a good few comments and views that I'd view as abhorrent on those threads, but on a board about a particular religion and theology, would be fine. Theology is theory to me, different to how Governments should act on social issues.

The views on drugs and America are a bit hard line, but common enough. As long as it doesn't interfere with his modding, he has a right to his beliefs. Sure we all know Boards mods are all liberal, lefties, pc brigadiers!

Czarcasm

Orion wrote: »

I can't disagree with you more. If I am told by the cmods or admins that I have to make my posts corporate-aware and be careful what I say in forums outside of my modded ones I'll hand in my mod hat that same day. I mod two forums - they're the only ones I need to act as a mod in. In any other forum I'm an ordinary poster just like yourself and subject to the same sanctions as anyone else if I step out of line.

And that's exactly my point right there- it's a voluntary role, and if a Moderator feels they cannot meet the challenges presented by that role (to be an example of leadership to ordinary posters), then they are free to step down from that role, or as the case may be, choose to decline that role in the first place.

It goes all the way up the chain- Cmods should be an example to Moderators, Hosted Moderators and ordinary members, Admins should be an example to Cmods, Moderators, Hosted Moderators, and ordinary members.

Each person is charged with the responsibility to make Boards a place where people want to be, and where they are expected to meet a standard, a bar set high because it's set by example.

This is the true spirit of community, while at the same time projecting Boards corporate image in a positive light. Just look at what a minority of idiots have done to Facebook. If people are not held accountable in some respect and held to a standard- chaos ensues and the place goes to shìt, and I'm fairly sure the majority of members around here would prefer to see that didn't happen that Boards just went the same way as Facebook.

K-9

There is a wider issue, nothing to do with the mod, but if Islam does allow domestic violence in certain circumstances (and I don't have a clue if it does or not), Boards shouldn't really be facilitating a discussion on that. I can't think of many forums that condoning DV would be allowed, so I don't see how any discussion even entertaining the thought that it is acceptable, can be allowed.

General site wide view and morals overtakes any freedom of religion belief argument, Boards secularism in a way!

Overheal

Fromthetrees wrote: »

Irish people protesting on Irish streets over Irish people being murdered in cold blood is totally equitable to Irish/non Irish Muslims protesting on Irish streets over America bombing countries thousands of miles away.

You act as if an Irishman never held an anti-war rally in Ireland, when nary a war had ever come near there. Don't kid yourself.

Not to mention, destruction of USAF property in Shannon as a protest to the very same bombings that these Muslims are protesting to.

Cop on.

Madam_X wrote: »

Not IMO, seeing as domestic violence involves physically harming someone, the concept of atheism doesn't.

Apply the same argument to people that don't take issue with physically correcting children, animals, or butchering things for meat, people that hunt, or people that volunteer in the military. Just to name a few. Hitting a bold child, hitting your wife, they're not things I look on with any particular favor. Even mild disdain. However, its a far stones throw away from things that are really worth taking offense to... death penalty for drug dealers? I've heard worse things people want to do to the bankers in AH. This whole thread meekly smells of islamophobia and little else. I don't see the problem here.