Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Thunderdome and bullying.

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Gokei wrote: »
    For clarification, which subjects? Bullying? Or talking about bullying?

    Neither I was on about discussing banned posters and moderation of the site.


  • Options
    #33
    Femme_Fatale
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,628 ✭✭✭Femme_Fatale


    returnNull wrote: »
    I always enjoyed reading the dome.
    I used to, but recently started questioning how much of a "laugh" it really was.


  • Options
    #34
    Artful_Badger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,339 ✭✭✭Artful_Badger


    returnNull wrote: »
    for somebody that doesnt know exactly what happened(like myself)looking for a siteban when the powers that be decideed it only warranted a 1 month ban,yes i would say youre over -estimating the seriousness.They can only action what happened on boards.

    I'm not looking for anything just questioning how serious the powers that be can be taking an issue like bullying when the consequences for doing it is a one month ban. I know enough of what happened to comment on it, and even if I didnt I could take Dav at his word and work off the fact posters were banned for bullying. The degree of it shouldnt matter with something as serious as bullying. Did they only bully the guy a little bit making it less of an issue ?
    I think each case should be taken on its own.

    Which is fine in determining what type of offence it was. But if it constitutes bullying which is a very serious thing then there is no "lot of bullying" "some bullying". To label it as bullying at all shows how serious Dav saw the transgressions, yet to me the sanction doesnt reflect it. He said "You're lucky to only get a month". The posters luck should have ran out the second he was determined to have bullied another member of boards.


  • Options
    #35
    Friend Computer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 369 ✭✭Friend Computer


    P_1 wrote: »
    In two minds over that to be honest. Basically the TD was 'opt in' which you can infer that the people on the receiving end of the abuse consented to receive the abuse (say an online verbal version of an S&M club). I'm not all that sure if it is right to punish consenting adults for that kind of thing to be honest

    The 'Dome was a game and like all games it had rules, one of which was that certain things were off-limits (LGBT, Personal Issues, LTI, etc.). I also believe (it's been a while) that basically everything is kept within the 'Dome. Just like S&M, people set their limits beforehand and it doesn't spill out into other activities.

    I'd say it's right to punish consenting adults when they don't play by the rules they agreed to.


  • Options
    #36
    Tombi!
    Registered Users Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    I agree with what Friend Computer said... you basically jump in and you're gonna get abuse hurled at you. There were a few forums you couldn't drag stuff up from and that 's that.
    Inside the Thunderdome you could be the biggest dick that ever walked the face of the Earth and outside it you were just Joe down the street who's a plumber.

    If the game is dragged outside the TD then it's not part of the game anymore. It's breaking the rules of the TD and (maybe more importantly since the TD had very little rules from what I understand from lurking) you're ruining the game itself.

    As for those that have been sitebanned for a month or whatever, if they tried moving the game outside of TD, I have no pity and don't see much point in their arguments/reasoning.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Insect Overlord
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 30,893 Mod ✭✭✭✭Insect Overlord


    Artful_Badger wrote: »
    I'm not looking for anything just questioning how serious the powers that be can be taking an issue like bullying when the consequences for doing it is a one month ban. I know enough of what happened to comment on it, and even if I didnt I could take Dav at his word and work off the fact posters were banned for bullying. The degree of it shouldnt matter with something as serious as bullying. Did they only bully the guy a little bit making it less of an issue ?

    Would you also recommend that school bullies should be permanently expelled? Cop on a bit.


  • Options
    #38
    Femme_Fatale
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,628 ✭✭✭Femme_Fatale


    Insect Overlord wrote: »
    Would you also recommend that school bullies should be permanently expelled?
    I don't see anything unusual about the notion of school bullies being permanently expelled, or it happening.


  • Options
    #39
    Insect Overlord
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 30,893 Mod ✭✭✭✭Insect Overlord


    Femme_Fatale wrote: »
    I don't see anything unusual about the notion of school bullies being permanently expelled, or it happening.

    For a first offence? They have to, at the very least, be given a chance to prove that they've learned their lesson.


  • Options
    #40
    Artful_Badger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,339 ✭✭✭Artful_Badger


    Insect Overlord wrote: »
    Would you also recommend that school bullies should be permanently expelled? Cop on a bit.

    Permanently expelled ? You think a student would be allowed back into a school after getting expelled for bullying or that they dont get expelled for bullying ? And those are kids with an inherent right to an education, we're talking about adults here on a discussion forum.


  • Options
    #41
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Artful_Badger wrote: »
    I'm not looking for anything just questioning how serious the powers that be can be taking an issue like bullying when the consequences for doing it is a one month ban. I know enough of what happened to comment on it, and even if I didnt I could take Dav at his word and work off the fact posters were banned for bullying. The degree of it shouldnt matter with something as serious as bullying. Did they only bully the guy a little bit making it less of an issue ? [/QUOUTE]

    So you get one side of the story, throw in a bit of rumour and conjecture and that's enough for you? Do the accused not get to give their side of the story in your world? Would it surprise you to know that posts have been deleted from prison threads when people have tried to explain what happened?

    Which is fine in determining what type of offence it was. But if it constitutes bullying which is a very serious thing then there is no "lot of bullying" "some bullying". To label it as bullying at all shows how serious Dav saw the transgressions, yet to me the sanction doesnt reflect it. He said "You're lucky to only get a month". The posters luck should have ran out the second he was determined to have bullied another member of boards.

    And again you take that label and run with it. The month ban is nearly up, do you think the posters who have had these accusations made against them should/will be allowed to create DR threads about this and get THEIR side of the story out? Or do you think the boards admin will shut them down and not allow the threads?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Artful_Badger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,339 ✭✭✭Artful_Badger


    bumper234 wrote: »
    So you get one side of the story, throw in a bit of rumour and conjecture and that's enough for you? Do the accused not get to give their side of the story in your world? Would it surprise you to know that posts have been deleted from prison threads when people have tried to explain what happened?

    I dont need to know any other side of the story. What rumor or conjecture have I been working off? The rest is between admins and the banned posters. All I have to do in relation to discussing sanctions for offences is know what sanctions are being handed down for what offences. In this case its a one month ban for bullying and harassment.

    And again you take that label and run with it. The month ban is nearly up, do you think the posters who have had these accusations made against them should/will be allowed to create DR threads about this and get THEIR side of the story out? Or do you think the boards admin will shut them down and not allow the threads?

    I take that label because it is the reason given for the ban. I don't know what will or will not be allowed in relation to them telling their story but that's nothing to do with this thread. They were banned for bullying, I'm questioning if a one month ban reflects the seriousness of bullying that's all.


  • Options
    #43
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Artful_Badger wrote: »
    I dont need to know any other side of the story. What rumor or conjecture have I been working off? The rest is between admins and the banned posters. All I have to do in relation to discussing sanctions for offences is know what sanctions are being handed down for what offences. In this case its a one month ban for bullying and harassment.




    I take that label because it is the reason given for the ban. I don't know what will or will not be allowed in relation to them telling their story but that's nothing to do with this thread. They were banned for bullying, I'm questioning if a one month ban reflects the seriousness of bullying that's all.

    So one side of an accusation is enough for you to make up your mind? Please don't ever do jury service.


  • Options
    #44
    Artful_Badger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,339 ✭✭✭Artful_Badger


    bumper234 wrote: »
    So one side of an accusation is enough for you to make up your mind? Please don't ever do jury service.

    You're missing the point I'm making. Dav and the admins are the law on here, there is no jury and any issue about whether or not it was bullying is between those banned and those who banned them.

    Its the length of the bans for the type of offence I'm discussing.


  • Options
    #45
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Artful_Badger wrote: »
    You're missing the point I'm making. Dav and the admins are the law on here, there is no jury and any issue about whether or not it was bullying is between those banned and those who banned them.

    Its the length of the bans for the type of offence I'm discussing.

    Exactly......there is no process per se. Serious accusations have been made against the people who were banned. Some of those are very well known on here and without a single chance to even answer these accusations they have been labled as bullies. And you say you don't care about that you care more that they should have been banned for life? :eek:


  • Options
    #46
    Artful_Badger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,339 ✭✭✭Artful_Badger


    bumper234 wrote: »
    Exactly......there is no process per se. Serious accusations have been made against the people who were banned. Some of those are very well known on here and without a single chance to even answer these accusations they have been labled as bullies. And you say you don't care about that you care more that they should have been banned for life? :eek:

    The process was that it was investigated to find out what happened. They were found to have bullied other posters by those charged with investigating and dealing with these things on this site. If you have an issue with that take it up with those people.

    But as far as anyone else is concerned the powers that be dealt with an instance of bullying by issuing one month bans. Thats what I'm discussing. The sanction for the offence not bans for just these particular posters.


  • Options
    #47
    EoghanIRL
    Registered Users Posts: 4,080 ✭✭✭EoghanIRL


    As a member with several hundred posts in the dome I thinks if fair To say that people went too far and they got what they deserved. It was only ever supposed to be a game but towards the end people took it too far.


  • Options
    #48
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Artful_Badger wrote: »
    The process was that it was investigated to find out what happened. They were found to have bullied other posters by those charged with investigating and dealing with these things on this site. If you have an issue with that take it up with those people.

    But as far as anyone else is concerned the powers that be dealt with an instance of bullying by issuing one month bans. Thats what I'm discussing. The sanction for the offence not bans for just these particular posters.

    A one sided investigation that NEVER asked the other side for their take on events or asked them a single question. Seriously if you were accused of this would you be happy to just accept the ban without a single chance to defend yourself?


  • Options
    #49
    Esoteric_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,255 ✭✭✭✭Esoteric_


    bumper234 wrote: »
    A one sided investigation that NEVER asked the other side for their take on events or asked them a single question. Seriously if you were accused of this would you be happy to just accept the ban without a single chance to defend yourself?

    Boards Admin don't ban people without evidence, except on the very odd occasion where they make a mistake.

    Boards staff don't generally get involved unless it's a serious matter.

    Obviously, it's serious to warrant Dav's intervention, and they obviously have the evidence needed if they issued bans.

    Boards isn't a court room. Admin and staff decisions are the last word.

    The point of the OP was to question the severity (or perceived lack of) of the punishments. Why are you trying to turn it into a vendetta on behalf of the people involved?


  • Options
    #50
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Esoteric_ wrote: »
    Boards Admin don't ban people without evidence, except on the very odd occasion where they make a mistake.

    Boards staff don't generally get involved unless it's a serious matter.

    Obviously, it's serious to warrant Dav's intervention, and they obviously have the evidence needed if they issued bans.

    Boards isn't a court room. Admin and staff decisions are the last word.

    The point of the OP was to question the severity (or perceived lack of) of the punishments. Why are you trying to turn it into a vendetta on behalf of the people involved?

    No vendetta on behalf of anyone I am just asking why it's ok to label some very well known posters with a sickening label without first giving them a chance to defend themselves. Yes I know boards is a private company and yes I know admin are judge/jury/executioner but by banning and labeling these people cyber bullies without giving a chance to refute the allegations I think boards has left itself open to legal action.


  • Options
    #51
    Artful_Badger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,339 ✭✭✭Artful_Badger


    bumper234 wrote: »
    No vendetta on behalf of anyone I am just asking why it's ok to label some very well known posters with a sickening label without first giving them a chance to defend themselves. Yes I know boards is a private company and yes I know admin are judge/jury/executioner but by banning and labeling these people cyber bullies without giving a chance to refute the allegations I think boards has left itself open to legal action.

    The admins not too long ago went to a lot of trouble to define what the users of this website seen as bullying. They wouldnt have banned anyone specifically for bullying if they didnt have evidence to back it up.

    Regardless I sincerely doubt they have left themselves open to legal action for banning an anonymous online account for bullying.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Artful_Badger wrote: »
    The admins not too long ago went to a lot of trouble to define what the users of this website seen as bullying. They wouldnt have banned anyone specifically for bullying if they didnt have evidence to back it up.

    Regardless I sincerely doubt they have left themselves open to legal action for banning an anonymous online account for bullying.

    Slander takes all forms. Anyway as I said the bans are over soon we will see if they will be allowed to discuss their side of things then.


  • Options
    #53
    Femme_Fatale
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,628 ✭✭✭Femme_Fatale


    rovoagho wrote: »
    Thread title made me LOL. Apparently contact sports can lead to injury too. Who knew?
    So people who posted in the Thunderdome should have expected to be bullied? Jeez, and there's me thinking it was just a harmless, tongue-in-cheek game/joke. Well it was insisted that's what it was anyway.


  • Options
    #54
    P_1
    Registered Users Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    To be honest I'd like to wait and hear the other side of the story before I go out and cast any judgement on the users involved


  • Options
    #55
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    P_1 wrote: »
    To be honest I'd like to wait and hear the other side of the story before I go out and cast any judgement on the users involved

    At this stage the damage is done. Some of those posters are known by other boardsies irl and they have been branded cyber bullies by boards admin without any chance to defend themselves. (One poster who did put proof up was swiftly shut down and had his post removed) are all of the banned guilty of the charges? Possibly. Are some of the banned posters innocent of the charges? Definitely.


  • Options
    #56
    Femme_Fatale
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,628 ✭✭✭Femme_Fatale


    P_1 wrote: »
    To be honest I'd like to wait and hear the other side of the story before I go out and cast any judgement on the users involved
    I do think they have right of reply for sure - and it could have been a case of them being accused of bullying by someone who is always accusing of bullying, even the most innocuous of stuff, despite being no saint themselves.

    However, in Boards' defence, it's a serious allegation and one which I'm pretty sure they would not have accepted without good reason and a lot of work/research done beforehand. So I think it can be taken as a guarantee that the banned people aren't completely innocent/wronged.


  • Options
    #57
    Artful_Badger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,339 ✭✭✭Artful_Badger


    Femme_Fatale wrote: »
    I do think they have right of reply for sure - and it could have been a case of them being accused of bullying by someone who is always accusing of bullying, even the most innocuous of stuff, despite being no saint themselves.

    However, in Boards' defence, it's a serious allegation and one which I'm pretty sure they would not have accepted without good reason and a lot of work/research done beforehand. So I think it can be taken as a guarantee that the banned people aren't completely innocent/wronged.

    And on the basis that there was an investigation and it was deemed to be bullying I ask again the question is a one month site ban reflective of the seriousness of bullying ?


  • Options
    #58
    Insect Overlord
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 30,893 Mod ✭✭✭✭Insect Overlord


    Artful_Badger wrote: »
    And on the basis that there was an investigation and it was deemed to be bullying I ask again the question is a one month site ban reflective of the seriousness of bullying ?

    Of bullying in general? No.
    Of this particular case? Most likely.


  • Options
    #59
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Artful_Badger wrote: »
    And on the basis that there was an investigation and it was deemed to be bullying I ask again the question is a one month site ban reflective of the seriousness of bullying ?

    IF in fact the people who have been accused (and found guilty without any sort of defence) did indeed act in this manner you mean?

    An investigation was done but it was a one sided investigation, that is no longer deemed to be an investigation but more along the lines of a witch hunt. Do you agree with witch hunts? Do you agree I should be allowed to accuse you of something and you should be permanently banned from here without you being given a chance to answer to the accusations against you?


  • Options
    #60
    Artful_Badger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,339 ✭✭✭Artful_Badger


    Insect Overlord wrote: »
    Of bullying in general? No.
    Of this particular case? Most likely.

    This was deemed to be bullying by Dav. The ban was for bullying and harassment. To say a one month ban in this case of bullying was most likely reflective of the offence but doesnt reflect the seriousness of the offence of bullying is general contradictory.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Insect Overlord
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 30,893 Mod ✭✭✭✭Insect Overlord


    Artful_Badger wrote: »
    This was deemed to be bullying by Dav. The ban was for bullying and harassment. To say a one month ban in this case of bullying was most likely reflective of the offence but doesnt reflect the seriousness of the offence of bullying is general contradictory.

    Each case should be judged individually. There's no "one size fits all" solution. Trying to find one might be a fun exercise in the philosophy of ethics, but it's not really going to make any practical improvement to the site.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement