Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

KyussB

Can someone tell me exactly what I can and can not discuss in the following thread?
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058114445&page=50

Because it's not at all clear what is and is not on topic or off topic, given where it's at now.

If mods are going to action 'off topic' stuff, but do not post on threads to state what is on topic and what is off topic - then the post reporting system is going to be abused by posters with a grudge and history of backseat modding, to single out people as being 'off topic' just for discussing tangents that naturally come up in threads.

That's actually happening - the post reporting system is being abused like that - and the mods aren't posting on the thread to get it back on topic - leading to individual posters being singled out, while everyone else in the entire thread can discuss anything they like no matter how far from the original topic.

perhaps you are posting....off topic..... a lot?

markodaly

gozunda wrote: »

Mod question

What's the story in Current Affairs with individuals thread bombing discussions with abuse of the topic of and / or posters but otherwise not engaged in the discussion?

Seems a fair amount of it going on. Just ends up flaming / derailing threads.

I would somewhat agree with this. It seems very prevalent in a number of threads, where posters don't engage or discuss or debate in the usual way we see in a forum, but post up tweet after tweet after tweet.

As I said, if one wanted to view all these Tweets, they should go to Twitter, not be in the middle of a Twitter bomb on boards.ie

Maybe create a separate thread, where this stuff is permitted, but on the whole, there should be some rule to clamp down on it as it doesn't add to the discussion.

Tokyo

gozunda wrote: »

Mod question

What's the story in Current Affairs with individuals thread bombing discussions with abuse of the topic of and / or posters but otherwise not engaged in the discussion?

markodaly wrote: »

I would somewhat agree with this. It seems very prevalent in a number of threads, where posters don't engage or discuss or debate in the usual way we see in a forum, but post up tweet after tweet after tweet.

As mentioned before, there's no issue with posting a tweet if it's used to add support to a post or point of view. However some people are taking the piss.

I just spent a couple of hours going through threads, deleting link dumps and twitter dumps, for minor offenders. Cards have been issued to people who have been warned before, and a repeat offender has been threadbanned.

gozunda

mike_ie wrote: »

As mentioned before, there's no issue with posting a tweet if it's used to add support to a post or point of view. However some people are taking the piss.

I just spent a couple of hours going through threads, deleting link dumps and twitter dumps, for minor offenders. Cards have been issued to people who have been warned before, and a repeat offender has been threadbanned.

Mike - not referring to tweet dumps - though its not impossible a wider issue would cover that.

This is the issue specifically of individuals turning up on a thread being abusive of the discussion and those discussing same. But otherwise not engaging in the discussion. I'm not going to post any direct examples for obvious reasons but can pm if you wish.

It's something which is notable in Current Affairs atm. But generally not being actioned despite this deliberately inflaming/ derailing threads

KyussB

KyussB wrote: »

Can someone tell me exactly what I can and can not discuss in the following thread?
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058114445&page=50

Because it's not at all clear what is and is not on topic or off topic, given where it's at now.

If mods are going to action 'off topic' stuff, but do not post on threads to state what is on topic and what is off topic - then the post reporting system is going to be abused by posters with a grudge and history of backseat modding, to single out people as being 'off topic' just for discussing tangents that naturally come up in threads.

That's actually happening - the post reporting system is being abused like that - and the mods aren't posting on the thread to get it back on topic - leading to individual posters being singled out, while everyone else in the entire thread can discuss anything they like no matter how far from the original topic.

Any response from mods on this, given where the thread is at? Am I going to get randomly dinged for discussing anything that is presently being discussed in the thread? (especially if singled out with the post reporting)

What can I and can I not discuss on that thread?

Beasty

KyussB wrote: »

Any response from mods on this, given where the thread is at? Am I going to get randomly dinged for discussing anything that is presently being discussed in the thread? (especially if singled out with the post reporting)

What can I and can I not discuss on that thread?

If you are complaining about the card you received there is a process to follow. If you would like to understand why you picked up the card discuss it with the mod. This thread is not your soapbox for highlighting issues that are specific to yourself

KyussB

You can bloody well see that I'm not complaining about any card. I was directed to this thread by the mod, for feedback on the moderation of the forum.

I'm asking a very simple question: How can people know what is considered on topic or off topic on that thread, given where it's at now?

Mods won't say what is/isn't on/off topic - and most of the discussion on the thread looks potentially off topic - so people don't know what can be replied to in that thread, without it being considered off topic by a mod.

What are mods going to do about that problem? Or the additonal problem, of how that ambiguity enables abuse of the post reporting system?

These issues affect all posters.

Beasty

I'm not going to try and spell it out to you. It's very easy to remain on topic. If you choose to go off at a tangent to get your personal political views into an discussion do not be surprised if you get picked up on it

Ultimately we use our own judgement when moderating, but it's very easy for posters to avoid getting picked up on things

KyussB

Most of the discussion taking place in the thread right now, are tangential personal political views that aren't about the main topic. How can that be replied to, without risking falling foul of moderator judgement?

That's the problem - it's ambiguous and posters can't read mods minds, to know what their judgement is going to be, about what is on/off topic - and that ambiguity in judgment is open to abuse through the post reporting system.

There are ways to resolve that with ample room for mods exercising judgement - e.g. a general mod note can first be placed in the thread when something is off topic, without singling people out first time.

Can the mods/admins acknowledge the problem, and adopt some kind of solution like that? (not necessarily that specific solution, mind - I'd rather the mods present a solution, because I feel one I present is more likely to be batted down)

Slowyourrole

Currently there is a thread on JK Rowling that is being used as a megathread for people to give out about trans rights. It's full of deliberate misuse of pronouns which seems to be ok on Boards. But it's also discussing a case that is currently before the courts and there has been links to the name and picture of a person which would seem to be contrary to a court order according to media.

Gatling

Slowyourrole wrote: »

But it's also discussing a case that is currently before the courts and there has been links to the name and picture of a person which would seem to be contrary to a court order according to

It's not before the courts ,there was a discussion in court to try prevent the release of a dangerous sex offender ,they have since been released ,but Barbie Kardashian was arrested for apparently making threats ,the gardai can only hold Barbie for a short period before they have to be released

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Slowyourrole wrote: »

Currently there is a thread on JK Rowling that is being used as a megathread for people to give out about trans rights. It's full of deliberate misuse of pronouns which seems to be ok on Boards. But it's also discussing a case that is currently before the courts and there has been links to the name and picture of a person which would seem to be contrary to a court order according to media.

Well, then maybe boards.ie should just allow a general megathread on transgender activism, outside the LGBT forum. As there are other groups affected, why should people not be able “give out” about it? What do people have to fear if their position is robust?

As for misgendering, boards seems to clamp down on it swiftly if it’s reported, from what I’ve seen of other threads. And the Rowling thread too.

Slowyourrole

Gatling wrote: »

It's not before the courts ,there was a discussion in court to try prevent the release of a dangerous sex offender ,they have since been released ,but Barbie Kardashian was arrested for apparently making threats ,the gardai can only hold Barbie for a short period before they have to be released

The sex offender you refer to is on bail also according to the Indo

The teenager is currently on bail, facing charges of sexually assaulting two women and of threatening to kill or cause serious harm to a third.

And the post I referred to linking states the two people are the same and links to another site identifying them with a picture.

Bonniedog wrote: »

Here is piece which has Garda photo of the person, and it is the same person as referred to yesterday.

Thankfully the person is facing further charges. Do people still think actual women should be locked up with this obviously bat crazy psycho?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Well, then maybe boards.ie should just allow a general megathread on transgender activism, outside the LGBT forum. As there are other groups affected, why should people not be able “give out” about it? What do people have to fear if their position is robust?

As for misgendering, boards seems to clamp down on it swiftly if it’s reported, from what I’ve seen of other threads. And the Rowling thread too.

Can I ask what the point of this thread is if posters like the above are allowed use other threads to personally attack people who use it?

Gatling wrote: »

Looks like someone is gone crying to feedback to get a discussion shut down

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Pathetic. I’m surprised it took so long.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Slowyourrole wrote: »

Can I ask what the point of this thread is if posters like the above are allowed use other threads to personally attack people who use it?

I’m sorry, am I not allowed to hold an opinion? It wasn’t a personal attack. It was a comment on an action you took. And maybe I’m not allowed to do that. Report it, so. Could not care less if I get infracted for it.

Slowyourrole

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I’m sorry, am I not allowed to hold an opinion? It wasn’t a personal attack. It was a comment on an action you took. And maybe I’m not allowed to do that. Report it, so. Could not care less if I get infracted for it.

You're using personal attacks to shut down discussion here. I'd point out the irony but I doubt it would matter.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Slowyourrole wrote: »

You're using personal attacks to shut down discussion here. I'd point out the irony but I doubt it would matter.

The post of mine that you quoted is from another thread and YOU posted it. How on earth is that ME trying to shut down discussion?

In this thread, I did ask why there couldn’t be a megathread to discuss transgender activism. That is the opposite of trying to shut discussion. The more discussion, the merrier, as far as I’m concerned. You are the one complaining about the Rowling thread becoming a general megathread on the topic. Seems like you are the one trying to shut down discussion.

Slowyourrole

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

The post of mine that you quoted is from another thread and YOU posted it. How on earth is that ME trying to shut down discussion?

In this thread, I did ask why there couldn’t be a megathread to discuss transgender activism. That is the opposite of trying to shut discussion. The more discussion, the merrier, as far as I’m concerned. You are the one complaining about the Rowling thread becoming a general megathread on the topic. Seems like you are the one trying to shut down discussion.

You insulted me in another thread for discussing something here.There's no point in having a feedback thread if posters will be harassed, here or elsewhere, for using it. I haven't tried to shut down the thread. I've been engaging with posters in it. I have no issue discussing things within the rules of the forum. The three issues I raised are about breaches of those rules. They also happen to be breaches of the law.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Slowyourrole wrote: »

You insulted me in another thread for discussing something here.There's no point in having a feedback thread if posters will be harassed, here or elsewhere, for using it. I haven't tried to shut down the thread. I've been engaging with posters in it. I have no issue discussing things within the rules of the forum. The three issues I raised are about breaches of those rules. They also happen to be breaches of the law.

The devaluation of words continues. Harrassed? A post not addressed to you is harassment?

Slowyourrole

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

The devaluation of words continues. Harrassed? A post not addressed to you is harassment?

Yes.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Slowyourrole wrote: »

Yes.

Then I envy your remarkably easy existence if that represents harassment in your world. You don't know you're born.

AllForIt

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Have to say, I’ve noticed a a worrying “outbreak” of CA posters scuttling into AH, of late.

Sometimes it’s just the odd post in, an otherwise, normal thread. Mouth breathers, shinnerbots, cross-eyed conspiracy theorists et al “funking up the place”.

But that “Woke-ism” thread is just an excuse to spit bile, and hatred, with wanton abandon. Maybe the mods could ease up on checking the rat traps for a bit?

I got the idea for that thread from a UK radio/youtube channel that does a weekly 'woke of the week' segment. The presenter of the show is more of a left winger and certainly not a righty, incidentally.

It is done in as lighthearted a way as possible, is quite amusing and I thought to emulate that here. Personally I think that's the right way to handle most of those woke topics; talking about them seriously gives them too much respect, hence the reason for putting it in AH. And I thought a single catch all thread would be appreciated by mods and posters alike rather than having a thread for every single woke topic which ends up being a bit repetitive.

To say the thread is full of bile and hatred is going way over the top. In fact after the first few pages I asked a mod to shut it down because of the negative reaction to it*, comments that were directed at me personally. And this ties in what gozunda was saying earlier, that the topic wasn't being discussed but I was getting what you might call 'abuse', so if there is bile and hatred, it certainly isn't one sided.

*I've just noticed your were first in with your 'Yawn' comment 5 minutes after I opened the thread. And if your're woke yourself you shouldn't really be yawning.

If a mod wishes to move it to IMHO I don't mind. Not sure if that will satisfy you though. I was reading today that Laurence Fox is setting up a political party in the UK in direct opposition to 'cancel culture' which is all tied in with this woke stuff. Point being if anyone thinks the woke subject is trivial and not worthy of discussion you'd be dead wrong.

EmmetSpiceland

AllForIt wrote: »

I got the idea for that thread from a UK radio/youtube channel that does a weekly 'woke of the week' segment. The presenter of the show is more of a left winger and certainly not a righty, incidentally.

It is done in as lighthearted a way as possible, is quite amusing and I thought to emulate that here. Personally I think that's the right way to handle most of those woke topics; talking about them seriously gives them too much respect, hence the reason for putting it in AH. And I thought a single catch all thread would be appreciated by mods and posters alike rather than having a thread for every single woke topic which ends up being a bit repetitive.

To say the thread is full of bile and hatred is going way over the top. In fact after the first few pages I asked a mod to shut it down because of the negative reaction to it*, comments that were directed at me personally. And this ties in what gozunda was saying earlier, that the topic wasn't being discussed but I was getting what you might call 'abuse', so if there is bile and hatred, it certainly isn't one sided.

*I've just noticed your were first in with your 'Yawn' comment 5 minutes after I opened the thread. And if your're woke yourself you shouldn't really be yawning.

If a mod wishes to move it to IMHO I don't mind. Not sure if that will satisfy you though. I was reading today that Laurence Fox is setting up a political party in the UK in direct opposition to 'cancel culture' which is all tied in with this woke stuff. Point being if anyone thinks the woke subject is trivial and not worthy of discussion you'd be dead wrong.

And do you think that thread has been “lighthearted”? Not seeing it myself.

I’d have no problem with the thread moving to CA, I think it would be far better suited there. The “regulars” there would get much more enjoyment out of mocking the woke side while the Schlafly’s against the trans folk could get a few “digs” in, as well.

Just sticks out like a sore thumb in AH. Although, it seems to have “dropped back” a few pages so perhaps there’s no need to move it at all.

Eric Cartman

Have been infracted and given a warning for calling a man who transitioned to become a woman 'it' ,

I personally think the whole pronouns thing is a nightmare but just to get some feedback here from mods etc.. about going forward. What word/pronoun can I use for men who have 'become' women that is not 'she', I'm not trying to kick up but I don't think 'she' is correct, 'he' would have me infracted, and apparently 'it' is also an intractable offence..

Timberrrrrrrr

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Have been infracted and given a warning for calling a man who transitioned to become a woman 'it' ,

I personally think the whole pronouns thing is a nightmare but just to get some feedback here from mods etc.. about going forward. What word/pronoun can I use for men who have 'become' women that is not 'she', I'm not trying to kick up but I don't think 'she' is correct, 'he' would have me infracted, and apparently 'it' is also an intractable offence..

There's your problem right there.

Eric Cartman

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

There's your problem right there.

yeah, I understand why I got the card, thats all fine, but I used 'it' to not be some edge lord calling the person 'he' , but I'm not using 'she' because no amount of nonsense is going to make me believe that this person is a woman, so I'm looking for a safe all encompassing pronoun that won't upset mods or snowflakes yet absolutely doesn't suggest for one second that I'm talking about a biological woman.

excludedbin

You've gotta love the irony that they honestly can't see anything wrong with dehumanising people they dislike. It's like everything that's wrong with the forum perfectly wrapped up in one neat post. Well, it's everything that's wrong with the Rowling thread but it does also serve as an exemplar of the problems in the wider forum.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

but I used 'it' to not be some edge lord calling the person 'he'

But to be an edgelord calling her "it"?

Eric Cartman wrote: »

snowflakes

Once again, you've got to just love the irony here. Throwing a strop because you have to abide by the same rules as everyone else doesn't make you a "snowflake" but expecting a basic level of respect and decency does.

Timberrrrrrrr

Eric Cartman wrote: »

yeah, I understand why I got the card, thats all fine, but I used 'it' to not be some edge lord calling the person 'he' , but I'm not using 'she' because no amount of nonsense is going to make me believe that this person is a woman, so I'm looking for a safe all encompassing pronoun that won't upset mods or snowflakes yet absolutely doesn't suggest for one second that I'm talking about a biological woman.

"He" would be less insulting than "it".

Eric Cartman

excludedbin wrote: »

You've gotta love the irony that they honestly can't see anything wrong with dehumanising people they dislike. It's like everything that's wrong with the forum perfectly wrapped up in one neat post. Well, it's everything that's wrong with the Rowling thread but it does also serve as an exemplar of the problems in the wider forum.

I don't see how anything is dehumanising anyone, just looking for a mod safe pronoun but if you were born with a penis I'm not calling you she

Eric Cartman

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

"He" would be less insulting than "it".

ok, but I know 'he' is card-able, what isn't dehumanising or card-able.