Politics Cafe....? Banpocalypse now.

Richard Hillman

It was closed because the mods didn't like that their selective virtueness was getting a beatdown every single day.

Then they started to ban people to lure more like minded people in. It did, and then they got a debating beat-down, leading to more bans.

Nobody was able successfully argue the merits of opening up the borders. The closing of the thread is a win for the anti islamic immigration side. The points were proved, fact after fact after fact.

So when the question of "Why does boards not have a thread on the most talked about issue in Europe right now?", We can just say that there is nothing more to be discussed. It has been a complete disaster and all sides agree.

Myth confirmed.

AlekSmart

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Does a mod saying that we can discuss the immigration crisis but we cannot identify specific types of immigration seem legit to you?

Are we going to group Brazilians and Chinese as part of the blame for the Islamic terror attacks and mass sexual assaults?

It's ridiculous. You know it. Everyone knows it. The biggest and most talked about issue in Europe right now and Boards.ie isn't allowing a thread on it.

Quite pertinent,but as you can see from the continuation of the PCafe modding policy over into this "Feedback" thread,those who seek to differ are swiftly slapped down.

As Permabear later posts,perhaps this is indeed the end of the "Café" principle,as it allows for a somewhat more free flowing and relevant discussion,free of "Party Politics" or indeed,the need to prove dominance of one belief structure above all others.

What appears to peeve the Moderators,and some other posters is the range of individual opinion and refusal to embrace the easier option.

As you can see,my own response here, has been summarily excised as being Off Topic & personal,in contrast to a continuing and arguably deliberate effort by PCafe mods,to present my views as something they are not,and then Infract me.

As has been pointed out by Lucky Lloyd,the scale of divergent opinion is quite apparent from the scale of the EU Migration Thread,which to be honest,puts the quoted decision by the Moderator to lock it as,at the very least,defying logic and at worst barefaced biased censorship.

Chips Lovell

mike_ie wrote: »

So, being brutally honest here for a second, my own, non CMod opinion is that it's funny in a way that the OP thinks that the Cafe mods have gone ban happy, because the reality is, the easiest way to fix the Cafe would be to simply ban the five biggest ****stirrers that post in there. A month later, rinse and repeat. After three months or so, I dare say the Cafe would be much more pleasant place to be.

My own suggestion would be to create an unmoderated private forum, provide access to everyone who wants to continue posting in an unrestricted fashion, and close the door behind them.

AlekSmart

weisses wrote: »

Well if you cannot differentiate between a country and a religion ... then yes that could cause a problem.

Any appreciation of Islam,if it is to be accurate,must recognize that it is FAR more than simply "a religion".

Islam is a Country..of the Mind,Body & Soul,a concept which you will struggle to find internal contrarian opinions of.

Islam,to even it's least adherent members,represents an entire belief structure by which Life MUST be lived,if one's eternal being is to be of consequence.
It's role in the total lifestyle of it's adherents,goes far beyond our accepted "Catholic" notions of Religious Observance.

Failing to give Islam that credit,is quite simply ignoring the core issues which,in part,form the basis of the censored P Cafe discussion.

AlekSmart

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

My own suggestion would be to create an unmoderated private forum, provide access to everyone who wants to continue posting in an unrestricted fashion, and close the door behind them.

I think JG,that your suggestion would be a realistic compromise,as its quite obvious from Mike_ie's reply,that there is already an approved,consise definition of "shytt stirrring",which will now incur repeated infraction until the "stirrers" lose interest and emigrate.

It might be useful,in this instance if Mike_ie,or another person of Boards substance,were to publish a League Table of the "S-Stirrers" to allow us/them an opportunity to put our affairs in order ?

weisses

Migration thread had about 27000 posts I think its run its course ...Right now its the default place to go to if there is an attack by a Muslim.

LuckyLloyd

weisses wrote: »

Migration thread had about 27000 posts I think its run its course ...Right now its the default place to go to if there is an attack by a Muslim.

How can it have run its course? It's still an active topic, unresolved, and likely due to come into focus as we push through the summer months and the greatest volume of crossings into southern Europe are attempted. And even if that wasn't the case, from the boards.ie perspective so long as people want to continue talking about it that should be facilitated.

Regarding the link that people place between terrorism and immigration, while the "right" boards.ie view seems to be that those two topics are entirely decoupled, it seems many people don't view it that way. The latter is more important than the former.

The whole concept of limiting the terms of reference of things people want to discuss; deciding upon an acceptable content for a discussion; or that a discussion can't take place at all if it isn't running in a certain way is extremely troubling. The consistently active Louise O'Neill thread was closed in After Hours last week because of the same 'this has run its course' nonsense. Seems to me it was more likely closed because the content was considered unacceptable and any excuse to shut it down was pounced upon.

What boards is supposed to be is a meeting point of different points of view, an alternative platform in an increasingly compartmentalised echo chambery Internet. What we're talking about here is akin to blocking people who disagree with you on Twitter and deleting your tweet / post if it doesn't go "well". It's sad - boards used to be a bit of a stronger place than that.

AlekSmart

weisses wrote: »

Migration thread had about 27000 posts I think its run its course ...Right now its the default place to go to if there is an attack by a Muslim.

Or perhaps more accurately......"The default place to go,if there is an attack by a Muslim migrant into a secular European Country"

Muslims living,working,and enjoying the benefits of this form of society along with the rest of us,will scarcely merit a word.

Surely the thread has run it's course when it no longer attracts any posts,rather than whilst it continued to be a well supported approved point of reference ?

weisses

AlekSmart wrote: »

Failing to give Islam that credit,is quite simply ignoring the core issues which,in part,form the basis of the censored P Cafe discussion.

The core issue imo is that the dangers of Islam can be brought back to roughly 25 fanatics in the last 12 years committing terrorist attacks ... put that against the roughly 20 million Muslims in the EU and you get the picture I hope. That doesn't mean there shouldn't be rigorous vetting in regards to immigration and a proper policy in regards to refugees, but that is up to our own politicians.

AlekSmart

weisses wrote: »

The core issue imo is that the dangers of Islam can be brought back to roughly 25 fanatics in the last 12 years committing terrorist attacks ... put that against the roughly 20 million Muslims in the EU and you get the picture I hope. That doesn't mean there shouldn't be rigorous vetting in regards to immigration and a proper policy in regards to refugees, but that is up to our own politicians.

I suggest that you are playing down the reality of a radical Islamic Belief Structure,which has achieved and maintained a level of dominance within broader Islam over those 12 years.

You assume those 25 fanatics acted independently,with no broader support infrastructure,or ideological support/encouragement from within the Islamic milleu.

We know for sure,that radical Islam is no great respecter of Moderation within the greater Islamic structure,and will savagely deal with anything it percieves as a threat from within,such as greater access to education for Female adherents,or inappropriate levels of integration into broader Western pastimes or practices.

I would readily agree,and have repeatedly based my postings upon a strong belief,that our current Immigration/Refugee/Asylum systems require significant upgrading to allow far more rigorous vetting and assessment of potentially radicalized Islamic applicants.

We remain lucky enough to live in a democratic society,which pre-supposes that Politicians,when in Government,reflect the will of the majority in terms of policy and also act in the greater good in relation to their electorates.

It cannot be suggested that our Politicians act alone,unreferenced,and unguided by their electorates.

Wibbs

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The whole concept of limiting the terms of reference of things people want to discuss; deciding upon an acceptable content for a discussion; or that a discussion can't take place at all if it isn't running in a certain way is extremely troubling. The consistently active Louise O'Neill thread was closed in After Hours last week because of the same 'this has run its course' nonsense. Seems to me it was more likely closed because the content was considered unacceptable and any excuse to shut it down was pounced upon.

That would be my takeaway too TBH. IMHO unless there are bans flying, or about to be, because people are getting revved up and abusive, or the thread's been started by a rereg/troll, no thread should be shut down. Not anymore. Certainly not on the basis of some nebulous moderator "this has run it's course" excuse. In an active thread with little or no requirements to be moderated by near definition it has not run it's course and the decision to close it is entirely mod based and IMH BS and certainly reads like BS. If a thread is active and not breaking rules, leave the bloody thing alone. This is supposed to be a discussion site. Oh yeah and that includes if it goes a little off topic too, especially in a long thread. I dunno how some out there have conversations, but most people don't go all literal and rigid, conversations bounce around a central theme.

What boards is supposed to be is a meeting point of different points of view, an alternative platform in an increasingly compartmentalised echo chambery Internet. What we're talking about here is akin to blocking people who disagree with you on Twitter and deleting your tweet / post if it doesn't go "well". It's sad - boards used to be a bit of a stronger place than that.

+1000 and sadly non echo chambers are needed more than ever. Boards is still that kinda forum to a large extent*. Posters can have diverse views for the most part. I don't post in the PC forum, but I do read it quite a bit and just on that drive by basis it does seem terribly muddled in direction. The amount of cards(which I hate as a thing TBH) can be off putting.

*which ironically may be a major part of this discussion. In echo chambers on reddit or ArseBook or one trick pony forums this debate wouldn't be taking place about "bias", simply because such bias would be extremely open and no contrary views or feedback on same would invited at all.

Will I Am Not

weisses wrote: »

the dangers of Islam can be brought back to roughly 25 fanatics in the last 12 years

You can't be serious?

weisses

AlekSmart wrote: »

I suggest that you are playing down the reality of a radical Islamic Belief Structure,which has achieved and maintained a level of dominance within broader Islam over those 12 years.

You assume those 25 fanatics acted independently,with no broader support infrastructure,or ideological support/encouragement from within the Islamic milleu.

I am not playing it down but in the end these are the facts so far ... The last couple of years it was ISIS alone who was responsible for the attacks ... a terrorist organisation. Who like any other terrorist group has its followers.

And I am not assuming they acted alone .. I was trying to give a bit of perspective ... something lacking in the EU thread

dudara

Posters - a reminder that this Feedback thread is not to discuss Islam itself. It is to discuss the existence of an immigration thread in the PC. We are not bringing the detailed debate from the PC into Feedback

dudara

weisses

dudara wrote: »

Posters - a reminder that this Feedback thread is not to discuss Islam itself. It is to discuss the existence of an immigration thread in the PC. We are not bringing the detailed debate from the PC into Feedback

dudara

I understand what you are saying ..But the one issue cannot be discussed without mentioning the other in relation to this feedback imo.

At the end of the day its the growing Influence of Islam in Europe via Migration/refugees that people have issues with, and are discussing.

Ludo

I have also noticed this one of a discussion only being allowed becoming quite common recently.
Here is another example on a thread I read:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=101429372&postcount=352

The moderators banned all talk by people opposed to the road in question. Ridiculous.
Someone "disrupting" a thread should not result in a ban on their viewpoint being discussed.

dudara

weisses wrote: »

I understand what you are saying ..But the one issue cannot be discussed without mentioning the other in relation to this feedback imo.

At the end of the day its the growing Influence of Islam in Europe via Migration/refugees that people have issues with, and are discussing.

And I understand that, but we are not starting a detailed debate on Islam here. This is a Feedback forum and posts must offer Feedback. Observations on Islam can be offered in the context of providing Feedback.

Ludo wrote: »

I have also noticed this one of a discussion only being allowed becoming quite common recently.
Here is another example on a thread I read:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=101429372&postcount=352

The moderators banned all talk by people opposed to the road in question. Ridiculous.
Someone "disrupting" a thread should not result in a ban on their viewpoint being discussed.

The posters were not banned from posting but directed to another thread. That is not unusual in order to maintain an on-topic discussion. But this example is somewhat off topic for the Politics Cafe.

AlekSmart

weisses wrote: »

I am not playing it down but in the end these are the facts so far ... The last couple of years it was ISIS alone who was responsible for the attacks ... a terrorist organisation. Who like any other terrorist group has its followers.

And I am not assuming they acted alone .. I was trying to give a bit of perspective ... something lacking in the EU thread

Yes,however the reality that I.S./ISIS/ISIL/Daesh stand for ISLAMIC influence and attract the vast majority of ther followers/activists from within the ISLAMIC belief structure.

This represents the perspective of REALITY.

It would undoubtedly be far more beneficial to the vast majority of Muslims, and to our own Western European Society,if modern progressive Islam was self-confident enough to tell the Crazies to get stuffed,but as it currently stands,Radicalism remains the single greatest internal threat faced by Muslims everywhere.

The core issue,discussion of which is now officially at varience with Boards Administration Policy,is whether it is prudent or reasonable to facilitate the spread of Internal Islamic Strife within a vast Western EU region,which up until recently,maintained a level of control over it's Immigration/Asylum processes.

Irrespective of whether the implimentation of a New,Improved Boards policy will be successful or not,the geniie is well and truly out of it's bottle,and as such it WILL be discussed,Debated and Argued over wherever people seek information,and exchange of views,although sadly,we have little evidence that Irish Islam itself,is open to such a process.

dudara

AlekSmart wrote: »

...
The core issue,discussion of which is now officially at varience with Boards Administration Policy ...

Can you provide a copy of this to me?

AlekSmart

dudara wrote: »

Posters - a reminder that this Feedback thread is not to discuss Islam itself. It is to discuss the existence of an immigration thread in the PC. We are not bringing the detailed debate from the PC into Feedback

dudara

But we do,or rather did have just that Immigration Thread,and a well supported one at that,which was rather summarily shut-down in the manner of a a toy-out-of -the-pram tantrum.

It appears contradictory to suggest that on the one hand,we HAVE a thread to allow such discussion,only to then point to a thread which has been resoutely Locked due to it's references to the belief structure of the vast majority of the Immigrant numbers.

How do we work this out ?

AlekSmart

dudara wrote: »

Can you provide a copy of this to me?

Al, I can do is refer you to the actions of the P-Cafe Mods,which have effectively prevented any discussion of the reality of large scale Islamic dominance within the EU Immigrant flow,actions which have been upheld and supported by the supervisory mods.

Repeated clarifications of my stance has not been accepted,and my bans continue,which,I presume,indicates that these mods are interpreting and enforcing Boards policy correctly ?

I am open to being proven incorrect ?

dudara

The "policy", such as it exists, is as outlined in the Boards Terms of Use and the forum charters.

If there is a super-sekkrit agenda out there, I'm afraid I haven't gotten the memo. Disappointing. Bigly.

Tom Dunne

AlekSmart wrote: »

Repeated clarifications of my stance has not been accepted,and my bans continue,which,I presume,indicates that these mods are interpreting and enforcing Boards policy correctly ?

I am open to being proven incorrect ?

I think the thread in the PC illustrates a wider issue with society in general, not just Boards.ie. Above we have an example of some perceived policy, which moderators, cmods and admin apparently adhere to in an effort to shut down any discussion that is viewed as being at odds with our worldview. We do not sit around on the mods forum working out how to oppress the proletariat and advance our left-wing, liberalist agenda (whatever the hell that is).

For a while, I moderated the Islam forum. Living and working in a Muslim society, I naively assumed I could bring alternative viewpoint, rooted in my own experiences. And how naive that turned out to be. I faced a regular onslaught of "Mohammed was a pedophile/all Muslims are terrorists/Muslims oppress women" and so on. It quickly became tiresome and ultimately resulted in the forum being closed and folded into a World Religions forum.

I am not for one minute denying that there is an issue with refugees coming from Muslim majority countries who do not agree with our way of life and seek to articulate their rage by undertaking atrocities such as we have seen in London, Stockholm and Germany. I am of the view that if they don't like our liberal western values that they can present themselves to the nearest airport for a ticket back to where they came from. You know, just like I was aware when I lived in a Muslim country.

What I do have an issue with is the inability of people on this site to have rational, reasoned debate of one of the most contentious issues facing our society in modern times. Gross generalisations, stereotypes, xenophobia and outright racism have no place on this site nor in this society. People on this thread, and this site have proven again and again, incapable of engaging in reasoned debate. Quoting Wikipedia, The Sun or extremist (left- or right-wing) sites is not reasoned debate.

ancapailldorcha

weisses wrote: »

At the end of the day its the growing Influence of Islam in Europe via Migration/refugees that people have issues with, and are discussing.

People aren't discussing it, they're just wheeling out the same old tropes over and over again every time there is an incident. I've tried engaging before but it just leads to the same nonsense being spouted ad nauseam. It's the same posters trotting out the same Tommy Robinson talking points while moaning about accusations of racism that nobody has made.

weisses

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

People aren't discussing it, they're just wheeling out the same old tropes over and over again every time there is an incident. I've tried engaging before but it just leads to the same nonsense being spouted ad nauseam. It's the same posters trotting out the same Tommy Robinson talking points while moaning about accusations of racism that nobody has made.

Ooh I agree .. I tried to make that point earlier.

AlekSmart

Tom Dunne wrote: »

I think the thread in the PC illustrates a wider issue with society in general, not just Boards.ie. Above we have an example of some perceived policy, which moderators, cmods and admin apparently adhere to in an effort to shut down any discussion that is viewed as being at odds with our worldview. We do not sit around on the mods forum working out how to oppress the proletariat and advance our left-wing, liberalist agenda (whatever the hell that is).

For a while, I moderated the Islam forum. Living and working in a Muslim society, I naively assumed I could bring alternative viewpoint, rooted in my own experiences. And how naive that turned out to be. I faced a regular onslaught of "Mohammed was a pedophile/all Muslims are terrorists/Muslims oppress women" and so on. It quickly became tiresome and ultimately resulted in the forum being closed and folded into a World Religions forum.

I am not for one minute denying that there is an issue with refugees coming from Muslim majority countries who do not agree with our way of life and seek to articulate their rage by undertaking atrocities such as we have seen in London, Stockholm and Germany. I am of the view that if they don't like our liberal western values that they can present themselves to the nearest airport for a ticket back to where they came from. You know, just like I was aware when I lived in a Muslim country.

What I do have an issue with is the inability of people on this site to have rational, reasoned debate of one of the most contentious issues facing our society in modern times. Gross generalisations, stereotypes, xenophobia and outright racism have no place on this site nor in this society. People on this thread, and this site have proven again and again, incapable of engaging in reasoned debate. Quoting Wikipedia, The Sun or extremist (left- or right-wing) sites is not reasoned debate.

A very reasoned and reasonable post Tom Dunne,and one which i would agree with.

However,suggesting that return ticket in relation to a non-conforminst immigrant,particularly if Muslim,will almost certainly draw significant ire,if not a moderators attention.

From my own perspective,suggesting that a huge increase in mainly Muslim immigrants,and or,asylum seekers in the EU brings with it a significantly increased risk of radical involvement is an integral part of the E.U. Immigration Thread,has resulted in my recieving infractions and bans

Note,that nowever do I even come close to suggesting that ALL Muslims are terrorists,or similar tripe because that is WRONG.

However to suggest that dicussion of the EU Immigration issue can be conducted without reference to Islamicisation and Radicalization,has to be somewhat difficult if not foolhardy ?

Il Fascista

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It's the same posters trotting out the same Tommy Robinson talking points while moaning about accusations of racism that nobody has made.

This part is nonsense. People regularly try and make it a matter of race even though it has nothing to do with race.

AlekSmart

dudara wrote: »

The "policy", such as it exists, is as outlined in the Boards Terms of Use and the forum charters.

If there is a super-sekkrit agenda out there, I'm afraid I haven't gotten the memo. Disappointing. Bigly.

The Super-Seekrit agenda is perhaps best summed up in the reasoning given by the moderator for closing the E.U Immigration Thread ...

Thread closed as nobody seems to want to discuss the issue within thread rules.

With a thread full of discussion,debate and arguement being closed because it's full of discussion,debate and arguement...perhaps,just perhaps those rules require revisiting ?

Tom Dunne

AlekSmart wrote: »

However,suggesting that return ticket in relation to a non-conforminst immigrant,particularly if Muslim,will almost certainly draw significant ire,if not a moderators attention.

Which of the following do you think would draw ire and/or moderators attention (those of a sensitive disposition may not want to continue reading. Viewer discretion is advised):

"Those camel-shagging, women-oppressing rag-headed terrorists can all f**k off back to their stone age existence in the desert"

or

"Those for whom our western values and lifestyle present an affront to their sensibilities are most welcome to present themselves at the nearest consulate to request a ticket home"

They are both saying the same things, but in different ways. Do you really think the second of the two above (admittedly extreme) examples would draw the ire of a moderator? I sincerely hope not.

AlekSmart wrote: »

However to suggest that dicussion of the EU Immigration issue can be conducted without reference to Islamicisation and Radicalization,has to be somewhat difficult if not foolhardy ?

I agree, context is king (as I have said on many, many occasions). But unfortunately, references to Muslim beliefs tend to revert to the gross generalisations that I mention above. Without meaning to drag this thread off topic, a significant number of activities that we find utterly abhorrent (stoning, beheadings, etc.) are either undertaken in Saudi Arabia (which in itself is an anomaly), failed states (Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc.) or remotely tribal regions of third world countries where the rule of law is what we would probably term "influenced by the holy book".

I personally do not have an issue in referencing radicalization in any discussion. But again, I emphasise, as long as it is debated in a civil, rational manner and based on fact and verifiable sources, rather than heresay and hysteria.

SterlingArcher

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

That's the point where you need to let it go, allow the discussion to happen.

This should be the main focus. Letting open honest discussion happen. Yeah it gets ugly but so what? that happens when people talk open and free from being pretentious. The upside is when you cut through the bull. you are more likely to learn something true.

And if these type of threads with the same issues raised.pop up again and again. why the fob them off? Is it not evidence that something is not right. it is not some disgruntled few. a greater number of people are feeling this way because this is what is happening. How mamy to that the probably bigger numbers that just say what's the point.

Who wants to sit around only discussing topics with people who think the same? Pats on the back and thumbs up likes my post? I'll tell you who. The real fearmongers.