Perma banned from Politics for the following post

Tony EH

Can anyone tell me what is so bad about this post as to warrant a permanent banning from the Politics forum?

ancapailldorcha wrote:

Dear Tony EH,

You have been permanently banned from Politics for a breach of the forum charter.

Every forum on Boards.ie has a charter which lists any specific rules that forum may have and it is really important that you read this as it'll help you familiarise yourself with how that forum works. You should also understand that every forum is different and that charters are how you learn the differences.

Please see the Boards.ie FAQ for more details.

If you wish to appeal this ban you can see details on how to do so [URL="http:////www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=1397"]here[/URL].

ancapailldorcha

Moderator Note

You have multiple below standard posts on this thread so I am reinstating your ban.

Your post:

Tony EH wrote: »

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Again I don't care who pats themselves on the back for tackling things, just that they do. It's the team/point scoring party people who can't seem to grasp the concept of country first.

"Country first" doesn't matter to the acolytes. It's only their team that matters and they'll act like a freebee propaganda organ at every opportunity that presents.

And it doesn't matter what the issues are either, even something as serious as homelessness which, of course, would be super serious if some other crowd were in power instead of their chosen political fellow travelers.

Blinded by team support.

I have contacted ancapailldorcha to ask why this is so, but have posted here too, while waiting for their reply.

This is really an over the top reaction to a post that simply highlights the FACT that party supporters, of all colours, can have a tendency to be issue blind when it comes to support for that party.

This is something that is demonstrable the world over, most explictly observed in the recent US elections where the outcome mattered not on policy, but whether a candidate had and (R) or (D) beside their name.

dudara

Thank you for contacting the mod, which is the first step in the appeal process. We will wait now for their response before deciding on the next step.

Tony EH

dudara wrote: »

Thank you for contacting the mod, which is the first step in the appeal process. We will wait now for their response before deciding on the next step.

Ok, no joy there.

I think getting a ban for that post is out of order. It's rather tame, not aimed at anyone in particular and is simply an observation that's backed up by real life events all the time.

Have to say, I am very surprised at the ban.

If one cannot be critical of the blindness of some party followers, no matter what colours they wrap themselves in, a criticism that's can be heard across the spectrum of political discussion whether on social media and TV, then it's displays a very narrow set of brackets for posting.

There's nothing offensive about that post and I fail to see where the rules have been broken.

dudara

I’m not going to debate your ban with you at this point. As an Admin I won’t offer my opinion or review until the Mod or CMod avenues have been exhausted first.

You say that you have contacted the Mod. How long has it been since you sent the PM?

Tony EH

The mod got back to me saying they were willing to over turn the ban after first saying that they were going to uphold it and then weren't going to respond further.

However, this needs to be addressed.

If such a post is a tipping point for a permanent ban from a forum, it doesn't allow for much freedom of opinion. And, frankly, I wish to know what is so offensive about the opinion (an honest one too) when there are examples of what I am talking about in abundance, not only in Ireland but elsewhere too.

It's unfair to posters to have that kind of sword of damoceles hanging over their every post, to a point where they cannot offer an honest opinion on a given, in in a broad way, where nothing personal is engaged.

That doesn't make for very interesting or, in fact, honest discussion area for anything, never mind politics.

There's a feeling from some posters in the Politics forums that there are mods with itchy ban fingers hanging over buttons waiting to get rid of people who's opinions the simply disagree with.

That's not heathy for any forum looking for robust, honest and interesting discussion.

I'm a poster who is interested in political discussion. I am free of party politics and free of any kind of political leanings to either direction. I post honestly MY OPINIONS on matters, uncoloured by any party line. I am not on Boards.ie to spread a message or to big up a poilitical party either. I am the guy in the middle.

And if people like me cannot offer honestly held opinions, then what's the point?

dudara

Tony - what is the current statement from the Mod? I’m finding it hard to understand. You seem to be saying that they told you they were willing to overturn the ban?

As I’ve already told you, this is not the point to debate rights and wrong. My job right now is to make sure that the process is carried out as defined

Tony EH

The last couple of exchanges were these:

ancapailldorcha wrote:

That post is well below standard.

I think I've made myself clear and won't be replying to any more PM's on the matter.

Tony EH wrote:

ancapailldorcha wrote:

That post is well below standard.

I think I've made myself clear and won't be replying to any more PM's on the matter.

There's nothing wrong with the "standard" of the post.

It's a legitimate criticism.

ancapailldorcha wrote:

I've had a re-read of your posts and I can reverse the ban if you'll agree to post a bit more constructively.

But, there's more to this.

I'd like to know what's so "unconstructive" about my post? Sooo outrageous that it actually warrants a ban?

I see nothing that's against the charter and it still remains a rather tame observation on the nature of party politics that's exhibited by some people, whether they're party followers or members.

I understand that I've had bans in the past, but THAT post was a tipping point for a permanent ban?

That doesn't make the slightest bit of sense to me.

If you don't to discuss it, where do I go if I want to?

Because at the moment, I'm in the dark as what it is that's so wrong here.

The Hill Billy

turbot - your post has been removed. Do not post here unless invited to do so by a CMod or Admin.

tHB

Tony EH

Ok, this is now the last message from the mod:

ancapailldorcha wrote:

I'll overturn it if you agree to post more constructively. Otherwise, I will have to leave it. I have already explained what was wrong with it and the other posts in my previous messages.

Again, I have to ask what is so "unconstructive" about my original post?

hullaballoo

This DRP is a bit premature in light of where the discussion with the moderator is.

If you require further clarity from the moderator at this point, direct the questions to him. For now, it is not open to the DRP to second-guess the moderator where the discussion prices between you and him is incomplete.

Tony EH

I've asked repeatedly. But I have just been told that the post was unconstructive.

Tony EH

So this is the last response:

ancapailldorcha wrote:

This is going round in circles so this will be my last response. Your ban was for multiple posts.

Can anyone tell me what's so bad about my posts on this thread that they warrant a permanent ban?

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057823666

Tony EH

So, has there been any movement on this?

Because I don't believe that any of my posts (reproduced below) in the the thread concerned is worthy of a permanent ban from any forum.

Originally Posted by Tony EH
Rode a crest of a wave, was pretty weak over all and peppered with lies about guys with two pints in their hands and armies guarding bank machines.

Into the bargain, he couldn't even see out the second term.

Not great really.

Originally Posted by Tony EH
None of that matters to mindless acolytes though.

Sure, there are still FF'ers floating around who'll claim that Charlie was a great Taoiseach.

Originally Posted by Tony EH

Originally Posted by Tombo2001
I find it heavily ironic that you'd make a reference to mindless acolytes; while at the same time being happy to blame all the woes of the world on the government.

Yeh. Because that's what I did.



"All the woes of the world".

FFS.

Originally Posted by Tombo2001
Yes a lot of people are 'homeless' in Dublin. Qualify that though.

Without fixed abode is the usual qualifier and has been for years.

Originally Posted by Tony EH

Originally Posted by Tombo2001
I'm not downplaying the issue of homelessness at all. I'm saying its point scoring to lay all the blame for a complex problem at the door of government.

Nobody's "blaming" the government for homelessness. They're criticising them, rightly, for their lack of movement in tackling the issue. They appear clueless in face of the problem and, in fact, appear like they have no intention of dealing with it either, in any way that can be considered serious.

There's a lot shuffling around, kicking up a bit of dust and the problem still escalates.

While they and their followers look to minimise and normalise the crisis, by trying to pretend one doesn't exist, or that the impact is not as serious as it is.

Fine Gael wanted this gig and part of that gig is dealing with social issues such as these. If they aren't prepared to do that, they're going to draw flak. They've been in power for 7 years and all that's happened is a worsening situation under their watch.

"Don't blame the government" doesn't apply.

Originally Posted by Tony EH

Originally Posted by Matt Barrett
Again I don't care who pats themselves on the back for tackling things, just that they do. It's the team/point scoring party people who can't seem to grasp the concept of country first.

"Country first" doesn't matter to the acolytes. It's only their team that matters and they'll act like a freebee propaganda organ at every opportunity that presents.

And it doesn't matter what the issues are either, even something as serious as homelessness which, of course, would be super serious if some other crowd were in power instead of their chosen political fellow travelers.

Blinded by team support.

At worst the third post is a bit terse at a trite remark made about supposedly "blaming the government for all the woes in the world".

But it's hardly worthy of a permanent banning from a forum. None of those posts are.

And the post the the mod deleted (the last one) is merely an observation and perfectly fine.

Tony EH

Is there any point in actually coming here to resolve issues?

Beasty

Tony EH wrote: »

Is there any point in actually coming here to resolve issues?

Yes - please be patient. The Politics CMods have been alerted to your appeal, but it's only a couple of days since you started this thread. I'll give them a nudge

Tony EH

Beasty wrote: »

Yes - please be patient. The Politics CMods have been alerted to your appeal, but it's only a couple of days since you started this thread. I'll give them a nudge

Ok. Thanks.

I thought I was talking to myself there.

Neyite

Hi Tony, I can take a look at this for you.

The messages you posted - are they all the pm exchanges you've had with the mod about it? If there are more, could you forward them onto me?

Tony EH

Hi Neyite.

Post #13 contains on this thread contains my posts from the https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/show...p?t=2057823666 thread.


Below are the PM exchanges (there's been quite a few):

ancapailldorcha wrote:

Dear Tony EH,

You have been permanently banned from Politics for a breach of the forum charter.

Every forum on Boards.ie has a charter which lists any specific rules that forum may have and it is really important that you read this as it'll help you familiarise yourself with how that forum works. You should also understand that every forum is different and that charters are how you learn the differences.

Please see the Boards.ie FAQ for more details.

If you wish to appeal this ban you can see details on how to do so [URL="http:////www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=1397"]here[/URL].

ancapailldorcha

Moderator Note

You have multiple below standard posts on this thread so I am reinstating your ban.

Your post:

Tony EH wrote: »

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Again I don't care who pats themselves on the back for tackling things, just that they do. It's the team/point scoring party people who can't seem to grasp the concept of country first.

"Country first" doesn't matter to the acolytes. It's only their team that matters and they'll act like a freebee propaganda organ at every opportunity that presents.

And it doesn't matter what the issues are either, even something as serious as homelessness which, of course, would be super serious if some other crowd were in power instead of their chosen political fellow travelers.

Blinded by team support.

Tony EH wrote:

Why does that post deserve a ban?

ancapailldorcha wrote:

Hi Tony,

I banned you for more than just that post. You've been posting in a manner that is unacceptable. You've received multiple sanctions on this forum with the last one being a permanent ban.

I am upholding the ban since I think that you know this isn't on. You're welcome to post in DRP if you wish.

Regards,
ancapailldorcha

Tony EH wrote:

There's nothing wrong with that post and I've already gone to the DRP.

It's a post criticising "team blindness" when it comes to party politics. That's all.

And it's a criticism that's levelled across the board and one that can be heard on many fora and many TV programmes too.

There's no justification for a permanent ban for that post.

ancapailldorcha wrote:

As I have explained before, the ban is for multiple posts. I am upholding it. You've posted in a derogatory manner denigrating people who disagree with you as "mindless acolytes" here. This isn't on so I'm upholding the ban.

Tony EH wrote:

Multiple post based on an fairly innocuous post.

And it wasn't aimed at "people who disagree with me". It wasn't aimed at anyone in particular.

ancapailldorcha wrote:

That post is well below standard.

I think I've made myself clear and won't be replying to any more PM's on the matter.

Tony EH wrote:

There's nothing wrong with the "standard" of the post.

It's a legitimate criticism.

ancapailldorcha wrote:

I've had a re-read of your posts and I can reverse the ban if you'll agree to post a bit more constructively.

Tony EH wrote:

Overturn it if you wish.

But you can also try and tell me what was so "unconstructive" about the post.

ancapailldorcha wrote:

I'll overturn it if you agree to post more constructively. Otherwise, I will have to leave it. I have already explained what was wrong with it and the other posts in my previous messages.

Tony EH wrote:

Again, I HAVE to ask, what was so "unconstructive" about the post?

I see nothing that's against the charter and it was just a simple oberservation about a tendency towards party bias, irrespective of the issue at hand.

Are you telling me that such an observation is so offensive that it cannot be produced?

ancapailldorcha wrote:

I have already explained that the ban is for more than just the one post. I'm not going to reply to any more PM's that ask the same question over and over again.

Tony EH wrote:

Why was THAT post a tipping point for you though?

When there's nothing in it to warrant such?

Genuine question, because I don't know.

ancapailldorcha wrote:

Here's an excerpt from another post which exemplifies what I am talking about:

Tony EH wrote: »

Yeh. Because that's what I did.



"All the woes of the world".

FFS.

Tony EH wrote:

What's wrong with that???

The poster said I was blaming the government for "All the woes of the world".

Which was just silly.

ancapailldorcha wrote:

It's not remotely constructive. It's sneering and infantile. Given your history, I think you knew this. You've had plenty of warnings at this stage.

Tony EH wrote:

You didn't ban me for THAT post.

Besides, it was in response to a ridiculous accusation.

ancapailldorcha wrote:

This is going round in circles so this will be my last response. Your ban was for multiple posts.

Tony EH wrote:

There's nothing wrong with either post.

One is exasperation for being accused for "blaming the government for all the woes in the world" (I mean, really), coupled with a standard definition of "homelessness".

The other is an observation on the negative nature of party politics.

Neither are tipping points for a permanent ban.

My contention is that there is nothing wrong with any of the posts that I made in the https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/show...p?t=2057823666 thread, which I've reproduced here - https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=105845888&postcount=13.

One of them can be accused of being a little terse, but that's about it. The actual post that was deleted was a perfectly legitimate observation on blindly following a party.

None of those posts are so out of line that it warrants a ban, never mind a permanent ban from a forum.

Neyite

Thanks for that, Tony.

In the Pm's the mod offered to overturn a permanent ban if you acknowledged that your posting style was inflammatory in some posts.

I've just been speaking to the mod and he has reiterated that he would be willing to reduce it to a week if you were willing to take on board that your posts were below standard and make an effort to change the posting style.

Politics has a strict charter, and both the users and the mods expect a high standard of debate that does not resort to name-calling, so in this instance I would be in agreement with the mods that you tone is problematic and you need to consider toning it down. While a permanent ban in this particular case is a bit much as a standalone sanction Politics does have an incremental process with sanctions increasing in severity for repeated breaches.

The mod is trying to meet you half way - so, could you agree to tone down the posts that could be inflammatory from here on and the mod will reduce the permaban down to a week?

Tony EH

My issue is that I don't think there should be a ban involved at all, though. There's nothing in any of the posts that merrit a ban.

There's nothing "inflammatory" in there and there's no "name-calling" either, as far as I'm concerned.

Seriously, I've asked again and again what was so bad about any of the posts on that thread.

At best this one can be considered a lttle abrupt, but that's all.

Originally Posted by Tombo2001
I find it heavily ironic that you'd make a reference to mindless acolytes; while at the same time being happy to blame all the woes of the world on the government.

Yeh. Because that's what I did.



"All the woes of the world".

FFS.

Originally Posted by Tombo2001
Yes a lot of people are 'homeless' in Dublin. Qualify that though.

Without fixed abode is the usual qualifier and has been for years.

If that warrants a ban (whether it's a week or otherwise), that's an insane level of restriction that exists on a public forum. Especially one that's for discussing politics.


However, the mod in question didn't raise an issue about that post until later. The post they focused on AND the one they deleted was this one:

Originally Posted by Tony EH

Originally Posted by Matt Barrett
Again I don't care who pats themselves on the back for tackling things, just that they do. It's the team/point scoring party people who can't seem to grasp the concept of country first.

"Country first" doesn't matter to the acolytes. It's only their team that matters and they'll act like a freebee propaganda organ at every opportunity that presents.

And it doesn't matter what the issues are either, even something as serious as homelessness which, of course, would be super serious if some other crowd were in power instead of their chosen political fellow travelers.

Blinded by team support.

And there's absolutely NOTHING wrong with that post at all. If that post really is grounds for ban, then there's something really wrong with the parameters for modding on this forum.

Neyite

Ok, well in that case the ban stands I'm afraid.

I can pass it on to admins to review if you like?

Tony EH

If you wish.

I don't believe any of those posts are deserving of a ban on a public forum. Such extremities are beyond ridiculous for a forum where people are supposed to be able to post their opinions on matters and it's no wonder that politics sections of Boards.ie are dying.

Beasty

Tony

Your record on the site is far from stellar, with 47 mod actions. Many posters have been sitebanned for records which are nowhere near as bad as that. I think the reason you have not at least been put on probation is you have caused most disruption in only 2 forums, one you are already permanently banned from, and the other being Politics

Your record across 3 Politics forums (Politics, Politics Café and European Union) reads 8 yellows, 13 reds and 7 bans. You had a previous permanent ban in the forum lifted after discussion with the mod

However with that record (and many of the actions taken against you in the main forum have been over the past 12 months) it is clear you are not getting the message. I am upholding the ban, and hoping that now you no longer have access to the 2 forums where you have caused so much trouble you can start to build up a better record. If you don't a siteban is likely to follow

Tony EH

Hi Beasty,

Look, I'll be the first one to put my hand up and admit that I can shoot my mouth off when I should hang fire. The majority, if not all of those fouls are for basically losing the rag with someone's post and some of the are very contentious indeed. I probably should have gone to the resolution board with them, but let them slide.

But in relation to the five posts in question #13 , I see no wrong here. I was asked to cool the jets and I did. There is nothing in these five posts that warrant a ban.

But, if you guys want to uphold your ban, then so be it.

Beasty

I'm looking at your overall record in various Politics forums, and TBH I'm struggling to understand how you've managed to keep access for so long.

What I would suggest though is continue posting elsewhere on the site. Avoid any trouble and show us how good a poster you can be. Then perhaps approach the Politics mods to see if they will reconsider (and I would suggest a minimum of 6 months before doing so). I've certainly not discussed anything with them about this and it's their call. However we have seen examples where posters do change their attitude and on the back of that can be re-admitted to forums they were previously banned from (although I would add the slate is not cleaned and if they were to consider allowing you back in I would expect strict conditions to be laid down)

Tony EH

I don't have any trouble at all in the other forums.

But, I have a tendency to tell people what I think of their opinions, especially some of the, frankly, awful stuff one can see on the likes of the politics forums or After Hours.

There are people who can post the most terribly, bitter minded, bilious content and I can hit the keyboard too quickly to tell them so, when I probably should step away and hang fire.

I hold my my hand for that, no problem.

My issue here is with these particular 5 posts #13 , which I don't believe are worthy of any kind of sanction at all, but (bizarrely) seem to have been a tipping point for a permanent ban.

Politics and the nature of such discussions can get heated, especially when you're dealing with hot topics and with people who are at the more extreme ends of the political spectrum. This can and does lead to frustrated outbursts.

That's what happens on public discussion forums.

Beasty

Decision is made. Ban is upheld, and I've given you a suggestion about how you might want to go about getting the Politics mods back on your side. there is no point in debating this further