Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

EmmetSpiceland

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Just leave this here.

You let it go 24 hours without bumping! Come on, I was doing you a favour, J.

Snow Garden

Beasty wrote: »

The closure was all my doing - there were no other Admins around at the time. Hence it's not one you can put down to the site (but you can of course put it down to me)

Fair enough Beasty but I still you were wrong to close the thread in that I thought your justification wasn't enough to make that call.

Beasty

Snow Garden wrote: »

Fair enough Beasty but I still you were wrong to close the thread in that I thought your justification wasn't enough to make that call.

And you are perfectly entitled to that view. Equally I fully accept I'm certainly not always "right" but equally on something like this there cannot be a "right" or "wrong" - it can only be a judgement call

I will re-iterate though, the new thread is already discussing some of the points I considered off-topic for that original thread. They are though better suited to this new thread in my view, as I consider it to be a "wider" topic

McMurphy

With all due respect beasty, the thread is only a few days old and already you have several of the same "crew", you know the lads I'm on about, (fierce fond of using inverted commas and what not) already at the same crap that got the last thread shut.

They're even at it in this feedback thread FFS.

Be a real shame if they're continued to be allowed to post their nonsense with impunity as has been happening of late.

Just an observation.

WishUWereHere

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Ah, Sir Apropos of Nothing, we meet again.

Try here:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058021984

The thread did drop off the first page, so it’s understandable you missed it, but I’m sure one of your “group” will be along to ensure that doesn’t happen again.

1) I wonder can You or your fellow posters EVER reply withOUT resorting to calling posters names???

2) I wasn't aware of the other thread. Thank You for enlightening me.

3) I belong to NO 'group'.

Why do I think You are trying to get this thread locked like the last one? AND what can possibly be achieved by that?

EmmetSpiceland

WishUWereHere wrote: »

1) I wonder can You or your fellow posters EVER reply withOUT resorting to calling posters names???

2) I wasn't aware of the other thread. Thank You for enlightening me.

3) I belong to NO 'group'.

Why do I think You are trying to get this thread locked like the last one? AND what can possibly be achieved by that?

You posted a random link in a “feedback” thread, I would call that “apropos of nothing”, what on earth were you thinking?

You’re welcome.

Ah, got it. *wink* *wink* my lips are sealed.

This is a “feedback” thread, I don’t believe it will be locked anytime soon, nor should it be.

Why do I think that you, and others in a group that you’re not, in anyway way, attached to, are turning the “expenses” thread in the “current affairs” forum into another news dump for any random story that mentions Fine Gael? Are you trying to get the thread locked yourself?

James Brown

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

You posted a random link in a “feedback” thread, I would call that “apropos of nothing”, what on earth were you thinking?

You’re welcome.

Ah, got it. *wink* *wink* my lips are sealed.

This is a “feedback” thread, I don’t believe it will be locked anytime soon, nor should it be.

Why do I think that you, and others in a group that you’re not, in anyway way, attached to, are turning the “expenses” thread in the “current affairs” forum into another news dump for any random story that mentions Fine Gael? Are you trying to get the thread locked yourself?

TBF, people are commenting on the 'expenses' of Maria Bailey and Alan Farrell and how it pertains to them and their party. Also, related, how they both put in dodgy claims. You might not have read about that. I'd say ignore it.

EmmetSpiceland

Matt Barrett wrote: »

TBF, people are commenting on the 'expenses' of Maria Bailey and Alan Farrell and how it pertains to them and their party. Also, related, how they both put in dodgy claims. You might not have read about that. I'd say ignore it.

Here, even now you lot are “dumping” a link about a FG politician removing Bailey from social media. Nothing to do with expenses.

Anything to keep the thread “bumped” but then you’ll throw accusations of dragging the thread “off topic”, pure hypocrisy.

James Brown

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Here, even now you lot are “dumping” a link about a FG politician removing Bailey from social media. Nothing to do with expenses.

Anything to keep the thread “bumped” but then you’ll throw accusations of dragging the thread “off topic”, pure hypocrisy.

What you might be missing is that these are politicians and the caliber and credibility of these people is relevant to folk. It's not my fault you want the story gone. Sadly the behaviour of people looking to get the thread closed has been pointed out so I don't see much point in trying same with this. The 'off topic' some engaged in was to turn the thread into a slagging match.

Otherwise:

There's numerous threads on farming and soaps. No interest myself, so I don't engage.

McMurphy

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Here, even now you lot are “dumping” a link about a FG politician removing Bailey from social media. Nothing to do with expenses.

Anything to keep the thread “bumped” but then you’ll throw accusations of dragging the thread “off topic”, pure hypocrisy.

Anyone who thinks the following:

• TD and minister revealed to be involved in a controversial case in which a Dublin business was asked for a substantial sum of cash, and later (when said business refused) lodging an insurance claim against them.
  
  
• The same TD having been named as claiming several thousand euro in expenses they weren't entitled to claim during a completely random audit.....
  
  
  
• Previously aforementioned minister apparently cutting ties with also aforementioned TD a few days after her expenses claim got reported on......

Aren't connected stories - well then, I'm just going to have to assume that you weren't too great at dot to dot books back in the day, possibly not these days either.

Beasty

Just to be clear. I am seeing no good reason to close the current thread (I accept I took a different view on the original Bailey thread, but we were in no way "lobbied" to close that one - as already mentioned I made a judgement call on that - one that some others clearly disagreed with)

If anyone believes there is good reason to close any thread, it's not something to be discussed here. Report it and we will consider any representations made.

pinkyeye

Beasty wrote: »

Just to be clear. I am seeing no good reason to close the current thread (I accept I took a different view on the original Bailey thread, but we were in no way "lobbied" to close that one - as already mentioned I made a judgement call on that - one that some others clearly disagreed with)

If anyone believes there is good reason to close any thread, it's not something to be discussed here. Report it and we will consider any representations made.

Judgement call my arse. :rolleyes:

Totally biased and further posts since then have done nothing but confirm this for me.

That's fine, it's done and gone but it certainly won't be let go so easily again.

Hotblack Desiato

Looks like this is now an acceptable standard of posting in Current Affairs / IMHO:

Basic common sense isn't required. I don't know, maybe it's all these women making decisions. They sure are a looney bunch when they get together.

This is it

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Looks like this is now an acceptable standard of posting in Current Affairs / IMHO:

I doubt it. Without context I'd say it wasn't reported, or if it was it was probably missed. These things happen. PM a mod and they'll take a look I'm sure.

Overheal

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Looks like this is now an acceptable standard of posting in Current Affairs / IMHO:

Looks like facetious humor to me

Beasty

One thing that can be guaranteed - with such a wide variation between what offends people we simply cannot please everyone all the time. I think though it's a bit unfair when someone heads over here to raise their specific concern simply because they know their point will get a lot higher profile in Feedback.

Specific items like that should be raised with the local mods and if not satisfied then start a thread in Help Desk

osarusan

It could do with mods that are a bit more active.

With the exception of Beasty, I can't recall seeing more than handful of mod actions from any of the other mods or cmods, and in some cases, I can't ever remember seeing any.

EmmetSpiceland

osarusan wrote: »

It could do with mods that are a bit more active.

With the exception of Beasty, I can't recall seeing more than handful of mod actions from any of the other mods or cmods, and in some cases, I can't ever remember seeing any.

Really? The “heavier” that place gets modded the more chance of its regular denizens wandering into AH.

The place is a hive of every negative -ism, -itry, -phobia and -ogyny. Yes, there are a few brave souls fighting the “good fight” but, really, it’s like sandbagging the tide but it keeps them all, mostly, in one spot and mainly away from AH.

Leave them at it.

One thing I would like to see is a way to request a thread be moved from AH into CA without having to “report” a post. I don’t want to be “ratting” on an individual poster, I’d just like their backward, and nasty, thread be moved to the more appropriate forum.

Mr E

osarusan wrote: »

It could do with mods that are a bit more active.

With the exception of Beasty, I can't recall seeing more than handful of mod actions from any of the other mods or cmods, and in some cases, I can't ever remember seeing any.

While we'd love to be able to police the forum 24/7, real life sometimes gets in the way. We all have day jobs (and it's not on Boards).

I checked all your reported posts this week and they were all dealt with.

I just cleaned up the Antifa thread too.

osarusan

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Really? The “heavier” that place gets modded the more chance of its regular denizens wandering into AH.

The place is a hive of every negative -ism, -itry, -phobia and -ogyny. Yes, there are a few brave souls fighting the “good fight” but, really, it’s like sandbagging the tide but it keeps them all, mostly, in one spot and mainly away from AH.

If the purpose of CA was to provide a swamp for all the trolls to wallow in, then yeah, great, but that isn't what it was set up for, and the vast majority in CA just want to discuss current affairs, and have nowhere else to do so.

Beasty

The main problem posters will be dealt with (some already have been). It just takes time to build a case, largely through an accumulation of sanctions in the forum. Posters getting relatively short bans now will find a rapid escalation if they fail to adhere to the warnings they do get

Raconteuse

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Looks like this is now an acceptable standard of posting in Current Affairs / IMHO:

Delightful. :rolleyes:

But unsurprising.

Raconteuse

Beasty wrote: »

The main problem posters will be dealt with (some already have been). It just takes time to build a case, largely through an accumulation of sanctions in the forum. Posters getting relatively short bans now will find a rapid escalation if they fail to adhere to the warnings they do get

Beasty, misogyny has become grim again on Boards. I mean there are enough of those women hating kips around the internet. Boards is supposed to be a welcoming place for men and women.

The Ladies' Lounge is dead now - thanks to people just giving up on it because of it being crashed by people telling them they're being irrational women and whatabouting.

A thread was started on CA about female genital mutilation. In no time, the "what about males" and "people care more about females" (clearly, when there are cultures where she will have her clitoris sliced off and vaginal opening sewn up in infancy) comments started.

One person acting in the above vein was met with this response: "It’s what he does. Picks absolutely ridiculous positions on issues and then argues his point. 

Just ignore him." Hardly abusive. And absolutely correct - the poster in question is constantly being provocative. But it was the person who posted what I quoted that got the admonishment. Not the stirrer. How is that fair?

Beasty

Raconteuse wrote: »

One person acting in the above vein was met with this response: "It’s what he does. Picks absolutely ridiculous positions on issues and then argues his point. 

Just ignore him." Hardly abusive. And absolutely correct - the poster in question is constantly being provocative. But it was the person who posted what I quoted that got the admonishment. Not the stirrer. How is that fair?

I cannot discuss individual cases. Equally I cannot read every post. This week alone I have been on 2 separate flights to and back from the UK. When I've been here I've been up after midnight feeding the new grandchild.

The below comments are not specific to this point, nor to you as a poster - they are equally relevant to everyone who posts in CA

I know the answer is going to be we need more mods and probably Admins, but the point I am making is it's completely impractical to try and follow all threads. We had a report yesterday asking to look at "30-40 pages". With the best will in the world if we devote time to that sort of stuff we would never be able to get on with our "real lives"

The only way I can continue to provide support and in particular moderating duties in a forum like that is via reports. Even then sometimes they get buried (such as from the 2 days when I was away this week. I still try to look, but it takes a bit longer. I know Mr E has also spent quite a bit of time in the forum particularly when I was away, and did a lot of cleaning up)

You have probably noticed we've had a wave of new threads in recent days, along with some of the older ones either ongoing or being resurrected. Of course we could ship some of these threads over to other forums, but mainly they are acceptable for CA. What that means is we get a lot of posting in the forum, and it does attract some of the, for want of a better term, "dregs of the re-regs" (and no doubt one of them will now try and come up with a name play on that). there is also a benefit from that in that they can be spotted and dealt with, usually quite promptly, and they do become a priority when they are on a rampage. In turn such posts encourage others to express their own views more to the extreme

I know this is a bit long winded, but in summary - report stuff. We should get to it, but if it continues bugging you report again (but please leave it at least 24 hours, and don't report stuff that's already been dealt with - you will be surprised at how many reports we see of posts that have already been clearly carded). Please though, do not take it into your own hands to call things out in thread. that just escalates things and causes us more issues to deal with. Sometimes we may think yes it's a bit extreme, but is there any good reason to sanction and/or censure, other than it does not agree with the perception of others? Also don't be surprised if posts disappear without explanation - sometimes it's the re-regs, and sometimes it's the posts responding to them. They do not deserve the oxygen even a quote provides them though and I'm unlikely to explain it except in exceptional circumstances

And to re-iterate one final point. We cater for the full range of views, within reason. Just because someone else's view does not agree with your own does not make it unacceptable

osarusan

Beasty wrote: »

We had a report yesterday asking to look at "30-40 pages". With the best will in the world if we devote time to that sort of stuff we would never be able to get on with our "real lives"

Not to mention any other part of your post, and just to deal with this part.


That was my reported post, and it was a typo. I meant to say look at the following couple of pages, and then, realising that posts per page can vary due to settings, meant to change it to 'the following/next 30-40 posts', but left the word 'pages' there.

I forget my exact words (next/following), but I first reported a post, then reported it again maybe 15-20 minutes later, asking not only that post but the following 30-40 posts be looked at, as the post I reported had produced 30-40 rapid responses, all of which ended up being deleted.

Whoever read my reported post could not fail to recognise it was a typo, as there were at that time only 40-50 posts after that post I reported. It would not have been possible to devote such time to look at 30-40 pages, as they did not exist.


Please don't use, and, by omitting the word 'following/next' from your version of events, misrepresent, an obvious typo as an example of the kind of unreasonable or onerous requests that users are making of mods or admins.

blanch152

Beasty wrote: »

And to re-iterate one final point. We cater for the full range of views, within reason. Just because someone else's view does not agree with your own does not make it unacceptable

Many posters cannot cope with this point. For some, there is only one orthodox view of the world. For others, they cannot cope with their views and opinions being challenged, particularly when those views are based on a misrepresentation of the facts.

Raconteuse

Beasty wrote: »

I cannot discuss individual cases. Equally I cannot read every post. This week alone I have been on 2 separate flights to and back from the UK. When I've been here I've been up after midnight feeding the new grandchild.

The below comments are not specific to this point, nor to you as a poster - they are equally relevant to everyone who posts in CA

I know the answer is going to be we need more mods and probably Admins, but the point I am making is it's completely impractical to try and follow all threads. We had a report yesterday asking to look at "30-40 pages". With the best will in the world if we devote time to that sort of stuff we would never be able to get on with our "real lives"

The only way I can continue to provide support and in particular moderating duties in a forum like that is via reports. Even then sometimes they get buried (such as from the 2 days when I was away this week. I still try to look, but it takes a bit longer. I know Mr E has also spent quite a bit of time in the forum particularly when I was away, and did a lot of cleaning up)

You have probably noticed we've had a wave of new threads in recent days, along with some of the older ones either ongoing or being resurrected. Of course we could ship some of these threads over to other forums, but mainly they are acceptable for CA. What that means is we get a lot of posting in the forum, and it does attract some of the, for want of a better term, "dregs of the re-regs" (and no doubt one of them will now try and come up with a name play on that). there is also a benefit from that in that they can be spotted and dealt with, usually quite promptly, and they do become a priority when they are on a rampage. In turn such posts encourage others to express their own views more to the extreme

I know this is a bit long winded, but in summary - report stuff. We should get to it, but if it continues bugging you report again (but please leave it at least 24 hours, and don't report stuff that's already been dealt with - you will be surprised at how many reports we see of posts that have already been clearly carded). Please though, do not take it into your own hands to call things out in thread. that just escalates things and causes us more issues to deal with. Sometimes we may think yes it's a bit extreme, but is there any good reason to sanction and/or censure, other than it does not agree with the perception of others? Also don't be surprised if posts disappear without explanation - sometimes it's the re-regs, and sometimes it's the posts responding to them. They do not deserve the oxygen even a quote provides them though and I'm unlikely to explain it except in exceptional circumstances

And to re-iterate one final point. We cater for the full range of views, within reason. Just because someone else's view does not agree with your own does not make it unacceptable

The last part is a total cop-out (I don't just mean from you, I mean from everyone who misuses it to justify being a dick). It's dishonest and... kinda gas-lighting imo. I don't want an echo chamber at all. It's often people who use that line that do. I doubt many people take issue with mere disagreement/a different view - a minority do: those who call everyone a snowflake or a fascist. But those of us in the centre accept and respect that there are varying viewpoints. It's so disingenuous to put inflammatory stirring/being a dick into the same category as mere disagreement/differing point of view. They're not the same thing at all.

And I don't expect anyone ever to read pages and pages, or to be inspired as to what's wrong, or to prioritise Boards moderation over their personal lives. My point was the unfair moderation. Constant stirrer - nothing. One non abusive post - mod action.

And it doesn't look like a hoot is given about the misogyny anyway (the crowd on After Hours post their woman hating bile happily) but it is there, and I'm not the only one who sees it.

Beasty

Raconteuse wrote: »

And I don't expect anyone ever to read pages and pages, or to be inspired as to what's wrong, or to prioritise Boards moderation over their personal lives. My point was the unfair moderation. Constant stirrer - nothing. One non abusive post - mod action.

Maybe you should consider taking some of the guesswork out of this for the mods, and report posts you have a problem with. Coming over here to complain about a specific issue when you have made no attempt to even report it is unacceptable

end of the road

Deleted User wrote: »

The 'London Bridge Incident' thread unsurprisingly has become a magnet for trolls. Why not introduce a minimum post limit (say 250) for entry into Current Affairs. It would ward off the usual suspects devoid of patience, and raise the discourse bar considerably.

they tried that with politics cafe and it killed the forum, also it would be unfair to keep out someone with a small few posts, or who has even just joined, who actually may genuinely want to contribute. we were all newbies at one stage after all.
if people really want rid of trolls then the best thing is really just to ignore them, trolls are always going to be a thing on here and people just need to get used to that unfortunately, they will always exist while forums exist.
the systems in place will do what they can but i think on this people are expecting to much if i'm honest.

EmmetSpiceland

It would also leave AH as the sinkhole for them and then the regular users of the forum would follow, best leave them all where they are.