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

Again.

Options
  • 01-11-2014 2:08am
    #1
    Fr. Ned
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,589 ✭✭✭


    So,
    In reply to a post invoking Sinn Fein in yet another thread that really had nothing to do with Sinn Fein stating this..

    "While I agree with a lot of what you say regarding this FG stroke, you must concede that Sinn Fein have really shown a brutal and nasty side in the last two weeks .
    I don't want to drag this threAd off the OP and I don't want to defend FG. But Sinn Fein need to clean up their own act a bit before slagging off FG"

    I replied with this ( after being banned for being 'uncivil')

    "You're presuming that I'm a member of Sinn Fein.
    I'm not.
    I voted for FG in the 2011 GE, although I did vote for the SF candidates in the recent local and european elections.
    Adams and SF may have questions to answer as we've seen, however the media circus and the way the threads on here were allowed to attack people innocent in the eyes of the law after being through the judicial process was and is, quite frankly, disgusting.
    I'm not posting on those threads now because 1. I got a 3 day ban from politics cafe for being 'uncivil' (after the things that were posted about me with no sanction lol) and 2. I'm not going to be part of that circus anymore.
    There's a couple of right trolling clowns running those threads and they're welcome to them along with their ringmaster moderator."



    Now, the 'moderator' k9 has decided that this requires a 2 week ban from all of politics.

    I really have to ask is this necessary at this stage as I have stated that I won't be involved in threads involving SF because of the way these threads can go out of control.

    Perhaps the last line of my post was a bit of frustration on my part, but it was meant in jest and in reference to me not being involved in a 'circus' anymore.

    This strikes me as a mod having their final say, a mod who was posting and moderating in the same SF threads, attacking posters who were trying to put an end to the frenzy that surrounded such threads.

    I think this is way OTT at this stage.

    Regards,
    Ned Green


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Taltos
    Registered Users Posts: 20,830 ✭✭✭✭Taltos


    Hi Ned

    What part of this seems OK to you?
    There's a couple of right trolling clowns running those threads and they're welcome to them along with their ringmaster moderator.

    Either way, please confirm you have completed the first step in this process and attempted to resolve this dispute with the mod over PM?

    Taltos


  • Options
    #3
    Fr. Ned
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,589 ✭✭✭Fr. Ned


    Taltos wrote: »
    Hi Ned

    What part of this seems OK to you?


    Either way, please confirm you have completed the first step in this process and attempted to resolve this dispute with the mod over PM?

    Taltos

    Hi Taltos,
    I did PM the moderator in question but got no reply.
    I don't see the point TBH.
    This is the one sentence he wrote in his PM to me,

    "The sites that bad you might as well take a wee holiday."


    As I said hough, that line you refer to was used, tongue in cheek, in reference to the 'circus' line directly above it, I thought that would have been obvious.
    You can see I haven't bothered responding to the posters I mentioned to you before as I have them on ignore and I've decided to not comment further on the Adams threads.
    The post in question here was in reply to another poster who seems to think that I'm a member of that party.
    Either way, this ban has been handed down to a moderator with strong views on that subject, who was also posting on those threads.
    This has all the hallmarks of score settling to me.
    Would you not agree?

    Regards,
    Ned Green.


  • Options
    #4
    Taltos
    Registered Users Posts: 20,830 ✭✭✭✭Taltos


    No I don't agree.
    And I'm not sure why you don't either. I have to assume either you don't get the forum or you have some other agenda.

    In fact in light of this and my warning on your last DRF I am going to recommend increasing your ban to a month.
    While I discuss this with the mod you may request an admin review.

    Ban upheld and increased.
    Change your attitude on your return. Our posters and volunteer mods don't need your idea of tongue in cheek banter.


  • Options
    #5
    Fr. Ned
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,589 ✭✭✭Fr. Ned


    Taltos wrote: »
    No I don't agree.
    And I'm not sure why you don't either. I have to assume either you don't get the forum or you have some other agenda.

    In fact in light of this and my warning on your last DRF I am going to recommend increasing your ban to a month.
    While I discuss this with the mod you may request an admin review.

    Ban upheld and increased.
    Change your attitude on your return. Our posters and volunteer mods don't need your idea of tongue in cheek banter.

    Yea, fair enough.
    The way 'debate' is controlled on the politics section of this site by some 'moderators' with a certain view means that it isn't debate in the first place.
    You allow posters to make allegations against people which have been found to be not true in a court of law.

    You can continue your circus without me from here on in.
    I'm out.
    Thread, and account, closed.

    Insert smart arsed remark below.....


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement