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

Ban for on-topic and helpful information.

Options
  • 27-01-2017 12:06pm
    #1
    Special Circumstances
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭


    Hi,
    1) I posted some off topic sarcasm about the insurance industry.
    2) It was deleted. No more off topic please.
    3) No issue with the above, so far so good.
    4) I posted some completely relevant and on topic information.*
    5) Deleted. Banned.
    6) PM'd mod, upholds decision.

    *I posted a quote direct from an insurance employees mouth about the unfortunate reality where novice drivers in their 30's are all tarred wit the same brush as people who have been banned but pretend that they haven't or whatever.

    As boards does not allow a quote as a post, I paraphrased this acknowledgement made by the source of the quote.

    Originally Posted by Special Circumstances View Post
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Sue Pa Key Pa View Post
    Insurers tend to avoid, or be cautious of, mature novice drivers because they would not be the norm. I have extensive experience (no statistics) of drivers reinventing themselves after a troubled past motoring history they do not wish to declare. Most people start driving long before 30, so they do come up on the radar

    And yes, I know, the good honest decent ones all get tarred with the same brush
    Helpful insurance fact - older novice drivers are scammers. We're ALL scammers.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057693060&page=2

    I fail to see how the it is forbidden to form the opinion that insurers consider all of us >10 year old car owning drivers as scammers, people who start late are scammers, people who have had a non fault claim are scammers etc etc.

    If insurers say all whiplash is a scam, all older car owners are scammers etc etc - is it me who should be sanctioned for paraphrasing their terms and conditions as "ye're all scammers"???


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Special Circumstances
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Special Circumstances


    Here's today's "ye are all scammers" quote from the same forum, different poster
    Of course real injuries should rightly be compensated, thats why we buy insurance but I'd be very confident that the majority of the whiplash claims are either false or very much exaggerated.

    Every single day this is thrown out there, but only certain people get banned for it?


  • Options
    #3
    Special Circumstances
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Special Circumstances


    Janey Mac, 103 views all in all so far.


  • Options
    #4
    The Hill Billy
    Registered Users Posts: 22,775 ✭✭✭✭The Hill Billy


    Cool your heels. CMods aren't online 24/7. They probably have jobs & other real life matters to take care of.

    If you don't hear from a Motors CMod after 24 hours post back here & I or an other Admin will give them a nudge.

    tHB


  • Options
    #5
    Special Circumstances
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Special Circumstances


    No hassle at all lad!

    My first reply was just pasting in the daily "ye are all/mostly scammers" dig that gets thrown around. Just to back up my assertion that it was quite common for insurance industry posters to imply most of the claims were scams. Without any ban.

    My second reply, well ... first time in here - I was just surprised at all my adoring fans coming in for a look. I didn't know I had accumulated so many!


  • Options
    #6
    tricky D
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,700 ✭✭✭tricky D


    Hi. I'll take a look at this for you. Please forward preferably by PM your correspondence with the relevant mod.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Special Circumstances
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Special Circumstances


    Cheers tricky D. You should have them now. No rush.


  • Options
    #8
    Special Circumstances
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Special Circumstances


    Ban lifted thanks guys.

    If someone does have the time to help me be a better poster...

    Was it wrong to quote the perfectly on topic and relevant info to the thread?

    Was it bannably wrong to suggest that the insurance industry in Ireland regards all motorists as scammers?


    I just don't know where I went wrong.


  • Options
    #9
    dudara
    Registered Users Posts: 33,518 ✭✭✭✭dudara


    The best way is to discuss with the mods in question as they know their forum best.

    UPDATE: Reopened at CMod request


  • Options
    #10
    tricky D
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,700 ✭✭✭tricky D


    Your ban was not liftesd, it lapsed.

    Your ban is UPHELD on the basis that a clear mod instruction [ http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102409238&postcount=19 ]
    biko wrote: »
    Offtopic comments removed. Only post if you have an actual helpful answer for OP.
    was ignored in your subsequent post which was removed
    Special Circumstances wrote:
    Helpful insurance fact - older novice drivers are scammers. We're ALL scammers.
    . The post was also borderline trolling and off topic. What happened was: off topic and unhelpful posts were removed and noted with the mod instruction no problem there. However your post a few minutes later was directly ignoring the mod instruction and given your record which isn't great and shows little sign of improving, the 3 day ban was initiated. Your mote that other users posted similarly in other threads does not apply to the thread in question as the mod instruction was applied to that thread alone which is fine. The charter was changed

    Your recent post ban posting [ http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102443953&postcount=22 ] incorrectly states that Admins saw no problem which is not the case. No Admin review occurred but the thread was marked resolved erroneously due to a misinterpretation of your most recent post above. I have edited your claim of this from that post. Discussing bans on thread in that manner is a no-no but due to it being a misunderstanding no action beyond the edit is required.


  • Options
    #11
    Special Circumstances
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Special Circumstances


    tricky D wrote: »
    Your ban was not liftesd, it lapsed.

    Your ban is UPHELD on the basis that a clear mod instruction [ http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102409238&postcount=19 ] was ignored in your subsequent post which was removed . The post was also borderline trolling and off topic. What happened was: off topic and unhelpful posts were removed and noted with the mod instruction no problem there. However your post a few minutes later was directly ignoring the mod instruction and given your record which isn't great and shows little sign of improving, the 3 day ban was initiated. Your mote that other users posted similarly in other threads does not apply to the thread in question as the mod instruction was applied to that thread alone which is fine. The charter was changed

    Your recent post ban posting [ http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102443953&postcount=22 ] incorrectly states that Admins saw no problem which is not the case. No Admin review occurred but the thread was marked resolved erroneously due to a misinterpretation of your most recent post above. I have edited your claim of this from that post. Discussing bans on thread in that manner is a no-no but due to it being a misunderstanding no action beyond the edit is required.

    OK I appreciate the cleanup without any fuss. Cheers tricky D.

    What's the ratio of helpful to unhelpful where a post contravenes a mod order for no unhelpful ness.


    I mean the bit I quoted in from a different thread was completely relevant and helpful.

    Both you and the original mod seem to concentrating on the inference I drew from that other posters quote which was helpful and on topic.

    As my inference related to helpful information can we at least say that it was not off topic?

    As my inference was accurate, or at very least a legitimate opinion to form based on the real world situation of Irish motor insurance... was it unhelpful? Off topic? I don't understand how.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Special Circumstances
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Special Circumstances


    What's the problem with my record BTW?


  • Options
    #13
    tricky D
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,700 ✭✭✭tricky D


    Special Circumstances wrote: »
    OK I appreciate the cleanup without any fuss. Cheers tricky D.
    No problem, cheers.
    Special Circumstances wrote: »
    What's the ratio of helpful to unhelpful where a post contravenes a mod order for no unhelpful ness.
    Ratios are irrelevant post a mod instruction. Besides defining such a thing as ratios deprives mods of the ability to determine the best course of a discussion with a required level of discretion.
    Special Circumstances wrote: »
    I mean the bit I quoted in from a different thread was completely relevant and helpful.

    Both you and the original mod seem to concentrating on the inference I drew from that other posters quote which was helpful and on topic.

    As my inference related to helpful information can we at least say that it was not off topic?

    As my inference was accurate, or at very least a legitimate opinion to form based on the real world situation of Irish motor insurance... was it unhelpful? Off topic? I don't understand how.

    You made 2 posts in the thread:
    Special Circumstances wrote:
    doyler55 wrote:
    The price of insurance in this country is getting out of hand.
    Not at all. Have you seen the conditions these insurance employees work in? Industrial revolution workhouse kinda stuff. Home then to their barefoot emaciated family for a few hours kip while the kids that can walk best despite the rickets head out to search for lumps of coal with a bit of burnin left in them.

    Tis more we should be paying the poor craturs!
    pre instruction so fine just removed only, and
    Special Circumstances wrote:
    Helpful insurance fact - older novice drivers are scammers. We're ALL scammers.
    post instruction. Considering the OP was seeking advice on companies to approach, the above provide no help in any relevant way, are off topic and is clearly ignoring mod instruction in the latter which is borderline trolling.

    Special Circumstances wrote: »
    What's the problem with my record BTW?
    You have 6 days of bans, 2 warnings and 1 infraction so far this year which speaks for itself.


  • Options
    #14
    tricky D
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,700 ✭✭✭tricky D


    I see you have again, despite my note above that this is a clear no-no, have posted this; http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102445323&postcount=6 (ed: now removed) which is contrary to
    Motors Charter wrote:
    If you have an issue with moderation then PM the moderator in question. Do NOT argue the point on-thread, as this serves only to derail the thread and will result in a ban.
    This does you no favours whatsoever and may result in another ban by local mods as per charter. Considering this year''s record so far, such bans risk becoming longer.


  • Options
    #15
    Special Circumstances
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Special Circumstances


    tricky D wrote: »
    I see you have again, despite my note above that this is a clear no-no, have posted this; http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102445323&postcount=6 (ed: now removed) which is contrary to


    This does you no favours whatsoever and may result in another ban by local mods as per charter. Considering this year''s record so far, such bans risk becoming longer.

    Can I appeal the various bans/warnings other than this? I didnt know that not challenging would lead to an automatic presumption of guilt and exponential increases in subsequent actions.

    The rest of them were mostly just the usual price of speaking the truth on boards.ie, the injured party being the usual person who receives the mod action for speaking the truth but the inflammatory and false statements from another poster are allowed to stand.
    Same old boards.

    This case here has a huge impact on things though. If you cannot quote perfectly helpful and on topic advice into a thread from another thread and make a perfectly legitimate comment on it you're gonna have to ban people left right and centre.

    Is it board policy now that it is both false and a bannable offence to say that insurance companies treat late learner drivers and older car owners as scammers?

    Can I at least be assured that the mods and admins (hallowed be thy names) will attempt to be consistent on these positions?


  • Options
    #16
    Special Circumstances
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Special Circumstances


    I think it's very disingenuous and deceitful to keep editing out the undeniably helpful and on topic part of my post after the mod instruction by the way.
    Why do that?


  • Options
    #17
    tricky D
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,700 ✭✭✭tricky D


    I'll ask for an Admin review.


  • Options
    #18
    Special Circumstances
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Special Circumstances


    tricky D wrote: »
    I'll ask for an Admin review.

    OK I appreciate your efforts apart from the repeated snipping out of the helpful and on topic bits of my post.


    Admin review so. Hmmmmm.

    Dudara or tom Dunne maybe? What are the odds I wonder. Tom Dunne got very odd with me earlier after I said his tagline was a bit condescending but maybe he's over that now. Dudara was drawing in stuff from another thread to derail what I was saying in a different thread, I don't see him being banned for it though.

    Oh well. Boards.ie- now yer talking about the things we want ye to talk about in the way we want you to talk about them.


  • Options
    #19
    tricky D
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,700 ✭✭✭tricky D


    Ftr the only snipping I have done is of your in thread moderation comments contrary to charter.


  • Options
    #20
    dudara
    Registered Users Posts: 33,518 ✭✭✭✭dudara


    Special Circumstances wrote: »
    Dudara or tom Dunne maybe? What are the odds I wonder. Tom Dunne got very odd with me earlier after I said his tagline was a bit condescending but maybe he's over that now. Dudara was drawing in stuff from another thread to derail what I was saying in a different thread, I don't see him being banned for it though.

    Well, since you're requesting so nicely, I'll ask one of the other Admins to review your appeal.


  • Options
    #21
    Special Circumstances
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,569 ✭✭✭Special Circumstances


    tricky D wrote: »
    Ftr the only snipping I have done is of your in thread moderation comments contrary to charter.

    Now now. You keep referring to my post after the mod instruction but you only reproduce it in part.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Taltos
    Registered Users Posts: 20,830 ✭✭✭✭Taltos


    OK "lad" I'll take this one.
    First off, just reading this thread the tone or writing style you are using is coming across as extremely condescending, not a great start, nor is the insinuation that neither Tom Dunne nor dudara are willing or able to give you a fair hearing. So far, that's a wonderful start. Well done SC.

    So to the ban. - Upheld
    I think it's very disingenuous and deceitful to keep editing out the undeniably helpful and on topic part of my post after the mod instruction by the way.
    Why do that?
    Because it was off topic and was a direct violation of prior mod warnings.

    Now, if you don't get that then maybe you need to take a longer break from the forum, you can choose to do that yourself or just keep contributing as you have and the next ban will be longer. Either that or you cop on and contribute as everyone else is expected to and is willing to.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement