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

Discussing rape allegations vs. Discussing the person making them in AH.

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,159 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I mention it because it is the worst case scenario, from which there is no current defence bar moderator's cop on.
    I'm getting the impression you mention it more to engender a visceral reaction. And maybe I'm wrong, but I'm also getting the impression you want the thread closed regardless. You've not exactly been backward in coming forward re your anger about it, both here and on thread. And now the self harm angle?
    There is no way to know beforehand which person will be pushed beyond reason, so you have to act as if they all potentially could.
    There is also no way to know beforehand if even the most innocent comment could have someone "pushed beyond reason". May as well stop discussing anything topical then and whole forums like PI should be closed. Just in case. Not.
    If we're going to go to extremes,
    By flagging up a speculative suicide risk, you're the one going to extremes to back your position.
    I do think someone harming themselves is a far worse case scenario than posting in an echo chamber, no?
    Really? You don't say. Has little bearing on the matter though.
    (I don't want echo chambers myself, but play the ball, not the player.)
    And if someone plays the player then report them and no doubt they'll be taken to task(as a few already have been in that thread).

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #33
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Wibbs wrote: »
    I'm getting the impression you mention it more to engender a visceral reaction. And maybe I'm wrong, but I'm also getting the impression you want the thread closed regardless.

    Wibbs, you are wrong. I stated, clearly, that I'm talking about people posting about the rights & wrongs of the issue, not the person who posted the issue, and asking if we need to push for people to act decently to each other, given both the risk of vulnerable people taking the criticism to mean they should harm themselves, and the risk abuse of the system by people who want to abuse & silence vulnerable people. This is a wider & bigger question than the current AH thread.

    To be fair, I read you make the same point on the thread.
    Wibbs wrote: »
    Yes some are. However people getting a dig in about what she says is different to getting a dig in about her. This is all too common a confusion I have found(and/or a way to shut down debate). Just because I might think your opinion is daft, it does not follow I assume you are. Like the Boards rule goes; attack the post, not the poster.


  • Options
    #34
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    neonsofa wrote: »
    There was no way for the blogger to know that this man she discussed would not be harmed by someone who put 2 and 2 together (she gave a lot of identifiable information). She had no way to know that he wouldn't be pushed beyond reason as you say after reading that she considered it rape when she states herself that she doesn't think he viewed it as rape. So maybe she should have acted as if he potentially could be pushed beyond reason, and not have made him so identifiable on her public blog.

    What has what she posted on her own blog got to do with the modding practices of boards.ie?


  • Options
    #35
    neonsofa
    Registered Users Posts: 5,476 ✭✭✭neonsofa


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    What has what she posted on her own blog got to do with the modding practices of boards.ie?

    Nothing I suppose, you're right- just highlighting the hypocrisy, carry on.


  • Options
    #36
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Honestly.. this person is a public figure - from what I can gather, they have a reasonably successful blog. In this way, they are no different from anybody else that would be in the public eye. Should we ban boards from saying, "oh, Donald Trump is a fool", "I hate Beyonce's music, she's awful", etc.? No, obviously not. You mention suicide.. if this is a real view and a worst case scenario, as you stated, then surely this means that we should stop all negative commentary about anything.

    Let's also be real here - this person posted this article to get likes/shares/discussion/clicks to their site - nothing more, nothing less. People are entitled to their opinions of a person and a situation.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Honestly.. this person is a public figure ...

    ...and it's open season, case closed, everything to be questioned if they are, as I read your attitude as. I just wonder where the line is? What criteria do we call a "public figure", and what do we ease off for? And why does the wider issue have to get bogged down in second-guessing the person instead of the issue.
    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Let's also be real here - this person posted this article to get likes/shares/discussion/clicks to their site - nothing more, nothing less. People are entitled to their opinions of a person and a situation.

    That's not "being real", that's drawing a conclusion. Might be right or wrong, but it doesn't matter in any of this. Doesn't matter if it's her or Katie Hopkins or anyone else. Whatever guidelines/rules/whatever governs what gets posted or not, have to hold whether the subject is posting in earnest or fishing for attention. On most things you can call out what you call BS, but when it gets to personal things such as sex, appearance, family members or other speculation, there's a risk of abuse which needs to be watched, and a reputation on boards.ie to hold on to. The more the conversation goes to the person, the higher the risk some randomer will post something the mods miss, the person doesn't, and boards gets left liable for something it never intended.


  • Options
    #38
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Deleted User wrote: »
    ...and it's open season, case closed, everything to be questioned if they are, as I read your attitude as. I just wonder where the line is? What criteria do we call a "public figure", and what do we ease off for? And why does the wider issue have to get bogged down in second-guessing the person instead of the issue.



    That's not "being real", that's drawing a conclusion. Might be right or wrong, but it doesn't matter in any of this. Doesn't matter if it's her or Katie Hopkins or anyone else. Whatever guidelines/rules/whatever governs what gets posted or not, have to hold whether the subject is posting in earnest or fishing for attention. On most things you can call out what you call BS, but when it gets to personal things such as sex, appearance, family members or other speculation, there's a risk of abuse which needs to be watched, and a reputation on boards.ie to hold on to. The more the conversation goes to the person, the higher the risk some randomer will post something the mods miss, the person doesn't, and boards gets left liable for something it never intended.

    Only Katie Hopkins is an actual parasite and professional troll.


Advertisement