Echo chambers of hate in After Hours.

hungry hypno toad

Alf Stewart. wrote: »

Feedback threads exist as places where people can submit feedback to try and help improve the site.

It isn't somewhere posters head to take swipes at each other and try and stir, something I believe you have attempted here in the last two posts where you have quoted me.

That is all.

So your reference to a months posting gap wasn't a swipe? I guess this highlights the double standards at the heart of boards.

hungry hypno toad

hungry hypno toad wrote: »

So your reference to a months posting gap wasn't a swipe? I guess this highlights the double standards at the heart of boards.

I think what he is suggesting that the fact your account is only a month old builds into what I was saying that it is curious that many of the people most involved in these echo chambers of hate are the same.

hungry hypno toad

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I think what he is suggesting that the fact your account is only a month old builds into what I was saying that it is curious that many of the people most involved in these echo chambers of hate are the same.

He mentioned a months break in posting, not the account being a month old.

hungry hypno toad

hungry hypno toad wrote: »

He mentioned a months break in posting, not the account being a month old.

So you're saying that this isn't your first account?

hungry hypno toad

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So you're saying that this isn't your first account?

No, that is clearly NOT what we mean.

hungry hypno toad

hungry hypno toad wrote: »

No, that is clearly NOT what we mean.

We?

Anyway, this is going off topic. But certainly, very curious statements being made. Now up to admin/mods to look into things.

Yourself isit

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So you're saying that this isn't your first account?

This isn't mine but I closed a previous account.

How much policing of this site do you want to engage in?

hungry hypno toad

[Deleted User] wrote: »

We?

Anyway, this is going off topic. But certainly, very curious statements being made. Now up to admin/mods to look into things.

We as myself and Alf. Not that difficult to comprehend.

darced

This post has been deleted.

hungry hypno toad

darced wrote: »

The whole thing just feels like some posters do not like having their political stance questioned and would rather the debate is shut down or channeled in one direction.

It's increasingly clear to me that the number of people unhappy with the way Europe is heading is growing and probably now out-number the more liberal side and this seems to be what is causing the problems on this site. There has been a clear shift to the right and some people can not or do not want to accept it.

The whole internet is currently rife with this left v right nonsense, there is nothing really Boards can do to stop it unless they pick a side.

Y, the OP is now trying to get me banned because I disagree with him. Typical behaviour from his ilk.

Alf Stewart.

hungry hypno toad wrote: »

So your reference to a months posting gap wasn't a swipe? I guess this highlights the double standards at the heart of boards.

My mention of a months posting gap was just noting that your account was like one of many that tend to come and go on posting sprees with sizable gaps in between.

However my point stands, and I'll leave it there.

darced

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Realistically the side Boards will take will be the one that makes most money. So... neither. If they go right, they'll likely lose a lot of advertising, sponsorship, and clients because, realistically, none would want to associated with that.

Yourself isit

I popped into that thread. Some criticism of Islam. The general to and fro about integration.

However there was a certain poster who kept accusing people who disagreed with him or who disagreed with the tenants of Islam of a mental illness, to the point of recommending psychiatric treatment to certain posters. These are generalised ad homimens.

The same poster had a history of fairly nasty posting on catholicism, the kind of posts that would generate an instant ban were they about Islam.

An no I won't report him as my feeling on criticism of both Islam and catholicism (or any religion) is basically the same as Chris hitchens. criticise them all.

Collie D

Have to agree. The first site I came to for info on the recent Dortmund and Paris attacks was AH. I find for breaking news it's better than watching televised news as various sites are linked that I may not have come across.

However, it's an absolute cert that within a page of the OP some "hilarious" individual will post some snide sarcy remark like "Oh, I bet it was Buddhist extremists".

When an attack occurs in Europe the majority are aware that the most likely guilty party are Islamist extremists. But why be so ****ing happy about it? There is almost a celebratory atmosphere from some posters when what was suspected by most is confirmed.

"Loss of life doesn't matter once I am seen to be right" It's grotesque.

hungry hypno toad

Collie D wrote: »

Have to agree. The first site I came to for info on the recent Dortmund and Paris attacks was AH. I find for breaking news it's better than watching televised news as various sites are linked that I may not have come across.

However, it's an absolute cert that within a page of the OP some "hilarious" individual will post some snide sarcy remark like "Oh, I bet it was Buddhist extremists".

When an attack occurs in Europe the majority are aware that the most likely guilty party are Islamist extremists. But why be so ****ing happy about it? There is almost a celebratory atmosphere from some posters when what was suspected by most is confirmed.

"Loss of life doesn't matter once I am seen to be right" It's grotesque.

How is this different to the posters claiming that Europe is safer than any time in history and mention the number killed in road accidents or Syria etc?

Yourself isit

Collie D wrote: »

Have to agree. The first site I came to for info on the recent Dortmund and Paris attacks was AH. I find for breaking news it's better than watching televised news as various sites are linked that I may not have come across.

However, it's an absolute cert that within a page of the OP some "hilarious" individual will post some snide sarcy remark like "Oh, I bet it was Buddhist extremists".

When an attack occurs in Europe the majority are aware that the most likely guilty party are Islamist extremists. But why be so ****ing happy about it? There is almost a celebratory atmosphere from some posters when what was suspected by most is confirmed.

"Loss of life doesn't matter once I am seen to be right" It's grotesque.

Loss of life doesn't really concern either side, the glee is unparalleled in these kind of threads when it turns out to be a white man.

As for the Buddhist comments I think there is a ban on "speculation", which is really a ban on criticising Islam, hence the side remarks.

Yourself isit

One of the thankers of the original post was all over the thread on the stealing a tabernacle from a Catholic Church both diverting the thread to child abuse (since the perpetrator must have been a victim) and clearly stating that all believing catholics, past present and future, were responsible for Catholic child abuse. Similar arguments on Islam would no doubt get a ban.

The poster seems to remain unbanned.

BuffyBot

For a thread that basically seems to be about people making ill-judged and sweeping generalisations, there's quite a few occuring here.

I've just had to sanction people and clean up some posts.
Keep to the topic at hand, and do not make personal attacks on other posters

hungry hypno toad

Yourself isit wrote: »

One of the thankers of the original post was all over the thread on the stealing a tabernacle from a Catholic Church both diverting the thread to child abuse (since the perpetrator must have been a victim) and clearly stating that all believing catholics, past present and future, were responsible for Catholic child abuse. Similar arguments on Islam would no doubt get a ban.

The poster seems to remain unbanned.

The Catholic Church is seen as fair game on here but Islam is off limits.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Will I Am Not

I had my last account for 2 years, approx 2000 posts, amassing a whopping one yellow card in that period.

Closed it for privacy reasons. Not that it's anybody's business but mine but in a shocking twist of irony I'm probably being tarred with that big brush you're using.

hungry hypno toad

The Fake Sheikh wrote: »

I had my last account for 2 years, approx 2000 posts, amassing a whopping one yellow card in that period.

Closed it for privacy reasons. Not that it's anybody's business but mine but in a shocking twist of irony I'm probably being tarred with that big brush you're using.

So what you are really saying is that you are a real Sheikh?

Collie D

hungry hypno toad wrote: »

How is this different to the posters claiming that Europe is safer than any time in history and mention the number killed in road accidents or Syria etc?

Fair enough point. But I think those type of posts are less prevalent than the type I referred to. There are about four or five posters who I've never seen on any other type of thread. Fair enough, we all have our weird interests but I feel there is a definite agenda driven motive behind some posters even registering.

From my own perspective as somebody who would be liberal leaning I just find the "Merkel/liberals/lefties have blood on their hands tonight" type of posts offensive. Just because I don't agree on certain things does not mean I am as guilty as some hate filled nutjob who ploughs a truck into pedestrians.

JRant

You could accuse Boards.ie of many many things but an "echo chamber of hate" is not one of them.

The main problems as I see them is
1: Don't feed the bloody trolls. I mean it's so obvious when someone trolls, yet it inevitably ends up with 2/3 pages of absolute nonsense.
2: As soon as I see 1 of a handful of posters appear I just unfollow. These posters are known and basically just rock into a discussion add the square root of feck all and try get the thread locked, which they usually succeed in.

Now, 1 is on the users of the forum, just ignore these dopes.
2, however, lies squarely at the feet of the mods IMO. There's 5/6 posters who engage in this behaviour and if I'm noticing it then it must surely be obvious to mods.

hungry hypno toad

Collie D wrote: »

Fair enough point. But I think those type of posts are less prevalent than the type I referred to. There are about four or five posters who I've never seen on any other type of thread. Fair enough, we all have our weird interests but I feel there is a definite agenda driven motive behind some posters even registering.

From my own perspective as somebody who would be liberal leaning I just find the "Merkel/liberals/lefties have blood on their hands tonight" type of posts offensive. Just because I don't agree on certain things does not mean I am as guilty as some hate filled nutjob who ploughs a truck into pedestrians.

Merkel made a decision that has since cost European lives.

The 'blood on hands' comments may be harsh but that doesn't necessarily mean they are wrong certainly in respect of politicians.

alchemist33

I remember after the Boston bombings boards was a great source of information but threads have deteriorated since to the point where I haven't even opened the latest because I know exactly what'll be in it: strawmen about "liberals" excusing the latest attack, Merkel, conspiracies about the police prioritising stopping the bad guys over letting the internet know who did it, and eejits thinking they're being original by saying "religion of peace." I'll thank the odd post which tries to address the problem of Islamic extremism in an intelligent way but they'll be swamped by the others who only see one solution which is to close all borders even though most of the terrorists are homegrown.
There is an intelligent debate to be had about security, Islam and immigration but there's no chance of it happening here.

AlekSmart

Deleted User wrote: »

I think what he is suggesting that the fact your account is only a month old builds into what I was saying that it is curious that many of the people most involved in these echo chambers of hate are the same.

As a catchphrase,"Echo Chamber of Hate" is quite snappy,for sure.

However,to put it forward here as a reasonable,realistic description of a Thread,on which singnificant numbers of posters simply disagree with your position is hugely OTT,and very obviously incorrect.

I continue to be in robust disagreement with the Mods and Admins regarding the policies being selectively applied on the issues you raise...BUT,that disagreement stops well short of oul guff about Hate Speech,Echo Chambers of Hate,Safe Spaces and whatever buzz-term can be applied to plain simple disagreement,and reluctance to conform to your thinking.

Like it or not,our current E.U Migration situation stems from mass upheaval amongst Peoples of the same belief structure.
These Peoples have proven very capable of eliminating their own dissenting factions on a vast scale,without any aid from external elements.

When,in a short space of time,Millions of such people,from all of those conflicting groups,up sticks and arrive amidst the Western European populace with so much of their own "stuff" remaining unresolved,it is a very pertinent Topic relative to the broader issue.

It has NOTHING to do with Echo Chambers of anything...but it has everything to do with a reasonable,sensible and entirely prudent desire on our part to retain,maintain and protect,our existing mores and values.

That discussion will continue to occur,in fact it will expand and increase in stridency,should your suggestion to suppress and restrict it be accepted in any way.

Samaris

JRant wrote: »

You could accuse Boards.ie of many many things but an "echo chamber of hate" is not one of them.

The main problems as I see them is
1: Don't feed the bloody trolls. I mean it's so obvious when someone trolls, yet it inevitably ends up with 2/3 pages of absolute nonsense.
2: As soon as I see 1 of a handful of posters appear I just unfollow. These posters are known and basically just rock into a discussion add the square root of feck all and try get the thread locked, which they usually succeed in.

Now, 1 is on the users of the forum, just ignore these dopes.
2, however, lies squarely at the feet of the mods IMO. There's 5/6 posters who engage in this behaviour and if I'm noticing it then it must surely be obvious to mods.

It's a problem. Thing is, we can't just boot "trollish posters" (my mental list may include some of the same posters you're thinking of, but it also may not) without going through the procedures to ensure they're not just ordinary posters with a bit of an asshole streak - internet posting does tend to bring up the asshole streak and god knows threads on politics, immigration, feminism, homosexuality and Travellers often brings it out in AH (also social welfare).

We did manage to get rid of most of the last batch of trolls during what as far as I'm concerned is the Troll War of 2016 (or they got bored and left/matured a bit), but it takes time to rootle out the actual trolls from the right-on-ers. It's easier when they are black-and-white reregs, they've broken the rules, they're out. Otherwise, they need to build up a bit of a posting history to allow for a fair chance (it can be a bit irritating for the mods to have to read all their bull**** too!) and if they show their absolute inability to learn the basics of civil discourse/internet housetraining, they can be fairly ejected to reddit, or whatever bridge they came from to piddle on their carpets instead.

The other major issue is this English-speaking world-wide obsession with the rather American views of left and right-wing. Obviously it comes out hard in (most of) the types of threads I listed above. There are plenty of normal, sane, decent posters of anywhere along a general sliding-rule range of political opinions, but when you get a batch that are extreme-whatever, weeding them out allows for a rise in "THEY ARE CENSORING OUR X-WINGEDNESS!" and it's even more of a bugger if you're aware you don't share their general political views anyway. It also makes the moderate leans-to-X-wing-political-view people nervous and more inclined to believe that the political viewpoints are being rooted out rather than the virulent trolls. The (not unreasonable) push from posters for a "light-hand" makes the balance trickier as you need take into account that others may see it as evil mod censorship.

Ultimately, in the bad patches of trollishness (and this really ain't the worst period), it takes time to get it dealt with and generally the mods come in for a lot of irritation from normal posters who don't get why X idiot is still around (s/he's probably managed to just skirt the boundaries so far). There's a rather delicate balance between fair weeding out of trolls and censorship of opinion, especially from an outside perspective. They'll often claim they were banned for being X-wing, when actually, they were banned for attacking someone by PM or being a rereg or something not immediately obvious.

There's a lot of decent, courteous posters in AH who make for intelligent, sane, civil discussions on all sorts of topics. Unfortunately, it seems that just the existence of such is enough to draw in trolls that live for fcuking it up for everyone. Until the day they get a freaking hobby, we'll keep weeding them out, but it takes time, especially if there may be batches of similar ones. Keep reporting them, it builds up their histories and eventually they will be returned to their bridge if they keep it up. But some of them are not deliberate trolls and just haven't quite got where the lines are and/or are being encouraged by the actual trolls who are quite happy to see someone else carded because of their bollockology. God knows I've crossed the line occasionally.


By the way, and because I do mod in there, I don't really like posting in these threads (I quite often write a post and then delete it again in Feedback!). Don't take anything I said as being representative of anyone else, these are just my opinions, not necessarily those of any other mod, nor any more than my understanding of how to handle these issues.

AlekSmart

alchemist33 wrote: »

I remember after the Boston bombings boards was a great source of information but threads have deteriorated since to the point where I haven't even opened the latest because I know exactly what'll be in it: strawmen about "liberals" excusing the latest attack, Merkel, conspiracies about the police prioritising stopping the bad guys over letting the internet know who did it, and eejits thinking they're being original by saying "religion of peace." I'll thank the odd post which tries to address the problem of Islamic extremism in an intelligent way but they'll be swamped by the others who only see one solution which is to close all borders even though most of the terrorists are homegrown.
There is an intelligent debate to be had about security, Islam and immigration but there's no chance of it happening here.

I would suggest that there is EVERY chance of it being intelligently debated on the Cafe thread.
However,in order to do so,the word Islam,has to removed from the red-Button list.
There are gazillions of smoking,drinking,carousing laissez-faire Muslims out there who are living their lives in harmony with their fellow religionists AND everybody else.
What many appear unaware of,or unwilling to consider is the reality that vast numbers of these "ordinary" Muslims are subject to significant,restrictive and oppressive imposition of their religious laws to the exclusion of all other structural rules.

Very few dissenting,or questioning voices appear from within Western European Islam,which makes the maintenance of free & clear channels,such as the E.U. Migration thread all the more important.

Shutting down threads because some Contributors & Moderators confuse Questioning Islam with Hating Islam,remains a very short-sighted and far reaching,negative policy for any Open Discussion Forum.

Sad Professor

As an aside, wasn't the whole point of Politics Cafe to move political discussion out of AH?