Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

Fr_Dougal

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

“Repulsive”, really, D? I do get that there are a cohort of “bound up” individuals who seem to really dislike that others are discussing, enlightening, supporting, and, even, celebrating something that, most of us, do everyday.

But, let’s face it, the ‘Etiquette’ thread is one for everyone, all are welcome, man, womxn, people of colour, all creeds, and orientations. Everyone. To see nothing wrong with a thread that is just an excuse to abuse and mock others (the ‘Wokeism of the Day’ thread) or to hate on women (the ‘Onlyfans’ thread) while disparaging a thread that brings people together is just wilful ignorance, if you ask me.

“Thunderdome”? Like ‘two enter, one leaves’? I don’t follow. There has, certainly, been some combative posts in the ‘Etiquette’ thread but it’s in no way an “aggressive” thread.

If the mods decided to move the thread, although I can’t see why they would, that’s up to them. But considering I’ve never heard of the ‘Cuckoos Nest’ I’m not sure the thread would do well there. Maybe some of the other, if you’ll pardon the pun, “regulars” in the ‘Etiquette’ thread are familiar with it, I don’t know, you’d have to ask them.

I understand that it may be hard for some to read post after post of others having very regular “movements” when they, themselves, are straining to get any joy. But, believe me, every poster in that thread is there to support, encourage and advise anyone who wants to “reach out”.

While the ‘Etiquette’ thread may not sit well with those users, it is not the stain on the AH forum that both the ‘Wokeism’ and ‘Onlyfans’ threads are. I’m not a mod, myself, but I just can’t see how they are still there, fouling up the rest of the forum. Especially, considering there is a forum that is perfectly welcoming and, indeed, encouraging for that sort of thing right there, in CA.

You see, E, it just goes to show that people have different “standards”. Whilst you might think it’s okay to “discuss” your bowel movements in a forum, most people would not. There is a “reason” why toilets have a “door”, and people don’t all wander into one area together to have a “movement”, that’s what animals do; quite similar to that thread.

So standards are “different”, you might not find certain threads palatable, others don’t find that rather disgusting “discussion of bowel movements” thread low brow, so be it.

You need to learn to “accept” the Wokieism thread, and many other threads that you might not understand, just as others have accepted threads that you can “relate” to.

excludedbin

Invidious wrote: »

First, CA/IMHO does not adopt a "no-rules" approach. It might be handy for you to portray it as such, but it's also a lazy generalization that denigrates the moderators and admins who have put effort into building and running the forum.

And I'd say it's a testament to just how bad the users are that even with the considerable work the mods put in, the forum is in the state it is.

It's more correct to say that, in CA/IMHO, the proverbial line in the sand is not where posters like yourself and Joeytheparrot want it to be. Calling for less free speech and more politically correct crackdowns on allegedly -ist and -phobic expression is all very well, but it completely misunderstands the intent behind creating CA/IMHO in the first place. It was never meant to be a sanitized safe space — if that's what you want, there are numerous other forums on Boards that cater to that need.

There's a lot of room between "sanitized safe space" and not allowing vile abuse against whatever the hated group du jour is. And I think we all know what the "intent" behind the creation of CA/IMHO was; Politics Café was an abject failure because the kind of people who wanted it, wanted an unrestricted ****-fest where they can sling whatever abuse against marginalised groups that they want. Inevitably, it failed because they wanted more leeway than could be reasonably given.

But those people still make up an exceedingly loud (but I would say not particularly large) portion of the Boards userbase that isn't going away (or, more likely, the new owners are terrified of turning away any traffic). So they needed a home, rather than spreading out onto the rest of the site and dragging it down to that level. Because after the shuttering of Politics Café, they moved to AH, making an already bad forum worse. Then CA/IMHO came into being and now here we are.
Because even they know that the reason that, shall we say, certain right-wing sites (e.g. the Twitter alternative Gab) have languished in obscurity is that as it turns out, most people don't want to deal with sites largely made up of petulant children screeching abuse at anyone they don't like.

So CA is a dumping ground, where the absolute minimum is done only to stop the absolute worst because it's a tightrope act of corralling them in the forum while still not letting it go too far. It should be obvious, by now, that the rules about racism, etc. are nothing but a fig leaf. It may not be "no-rules" but Jesus, it's not as far from it as you're making out.

As with Gab and sites like that, the problem becomes self-perpetuating. The dregs drive out any reasonable people which just keeps shifting discourse more and more into the extreme, which drives out more, and around it goes. The solution isn't particularly novel or difficult to understand or realise. Sadly, it just seems that the people in charge have zero interest in grasping that nettle.

I know, I'm being very cynical in my belief that it's a desire from the owners to keep site traffic up at literally any cost but what other conclusion is there? It's no secret that Boards has been haemorrhaging users for years and I doubt Distilled Media have been particularly pleased about that. But it's the kind of short-sighted solution that may buoy numbers in the short term but long term, if it continues, the site will eventually end up like Voat. Extremists don't make for a sustainable userbase, after all, and extremists are the audience the likes of CA/IMHO are courting.

But hey, it's not my site so it's not really any skin off my nose. It's just sad.

Second, if you want more stringently moderated forum where you can discuss current affairs, have you tried posting in Politics or Humanities?

Politics is strictly for politics and Humanities has been a walking dead forum for years (because it's not really for 'current affairs' but more academic discussion of, well, the humanities). There doesn't really exist any kind of general 'current affairs' forum apart from CA/IMHO.

Beasty

The "state" of the forum is really down to the users

And if people do not like that "state" there are many other forums on the site catering for different subjects and indeed discussing current topics in a different fashion

People really need to look back at the Feedback threads on Politics Cafe, Politics Cafe 2.0 and the like to start to understand the need for Current Affairs and the sort of posting it does cater for. Keeping it in one place allows us to keep an eye on controversial issues (and many threads in CA are not controversial) and allows posters to ignore the forum if they do not which to view such content

EmmetSpiceland

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

You see, E, it just goes to show that people have different “standards”. Whilst you might think it’s okay to “discuss” your bowel movements in a forum, most people would not. There is a “reason” why toilets have a “door”, and people don’t all wander into one area together to have a “movement”, that’s what animals do; quite similar to that thread.

So standards are “different”, you might not find certain threads palatable, others don’t find that rather disgusting “discussion of bowel movements” thread low brow, so be it.

You need to learn to “accept” the Wokieism thread, and many other threads that you might not understand, just as others have accepted threads that you can “relate” to.

Well, I certainly don’t want to cast any “aspersions” but I, myself, would have a wide circle of friends. From school, to the club, college, work and from my home area. With almost every “group”, once there’s a few of us and the pints are set, the talk will inevitably turn to the toilet. Whether it be a humours yarn, an informative experience, or a cautionary tale the subject will come up.

I will grant you that one lad I know, he was a rather sickly boy and I believe he suffered from a “shy colon”, did tell me that he didn’t really like the lavatorial exchanges. He wasn’t much into sports either so, while we wouldn’t see too much of him, when we did we’d do our best to work around him.

It is quite odd that you find the discussion of bowel movements “disgusting”, I mean, no one is asking you to smell them and, if you know that such talk makes you, rather, squeamish then I would advise not reading it.

Here is where my “issue” with both the ‘Wokeism’ and ‘Onlyfans’ threads arises. Both of them attract a certain type of poster, an angry, malicious, type who spread out from these CA staging points and infects the forum at large. This wouldn’t be an issue if both of these, which I do, personally, feel are, in fact, “current affairs”, were moved over there.

I took a look at this ‘Cuckoo’s Nest’ you mentioned. It doesn’t seem very active, one user posting and most threads months without any posting. It appears to be, what could best be regarded as, “zany”. No place for such an esteemed thread as the ‘Etiquette’ thread.

If the two, aforementioned, threads were, in fact, moved into CA they would get more posts than they currently do, not less. And with the extra “leeway” from stricter moderation they would be more popular than ever.

I’m failing to see where the “downside”, for you lot, is here?

excludedbin

excludedbin wrote: »

And I'd say it's a testament to just how bad the users are that even with the considerable work the mods put in, the forum is in the state it is.


There's a lot of room between "sanitized safe space" and not allowing vile abuse against whatever the hated group du jour is. And I think we all know what the "intent" behind the creation of CA/IMHO was; Politics Café was an abject failure because the kind of people who wanted it, wanted an unrestricted ****-fest where they can sling whatever abuse against marginalised groups that they want. Inevitably, it failed because they wanted more leeway than could be reasonably given.

But those people still make up an exceedingly loud (but I would say not particularly large) portion of the Boards userbase that isn't going away (or, more likely, the new owners are terrified of turning away any traffic). So they needed a home, rather than spreading out onto the rest of the site and dragging it down to that level. Because after the shuttering of Politics Café, they moved to AH, making an already bad forum worse. Then CA/IMHO came into being and now here we are.
Because even they know that the reason that, shall we say, certain right-wing sites (e.g. the Twitter alternative Gab) have languished in obscurity is that as it turns out, most people don't want to deal with sites largely made up of petulant children screeching abuse at anyone they don't like.

So CA is a dumping ground, where the absolute minimum is done only to stop the absolute worst because it's a tightrope act of corralling them in the forum while still not letting it go too far. It should be obvious, by now, that the rules about racism, etc. are nothing but a fig leaf. It may not be "no-rules" but Jesus, it's not as far from it as you're making out.

As with Gab and sites like that, the problem becomes self-perpetuating. The dregs drive out any reasonable people which just keeps shifting discourse more and more into the extreme, which drives out more, and around it goes. The solution isn't particularly novel or difficult to understand or realise. Sadly, it just seems that the people in charge have zero interest in grasping that nettle.

I know, I'm being very cynical in my belief that it's a desire from the owners to keep site traffic up at literally any cost but what other conclusion is there? It's no secret that Boards has been haemorrhaging users for years and I doubt Distilled Media have been particularly pleased about that. But it's the kind of short-sighted solution that may buoy numbers in the short term but long term, if it continues, the site will eventually end up like Voat. Extremists don't make for a sustainable userbase, after all, and extremists are the audience the likes of CA/IMHO are courting.

But hey, it's not my site so it's not really any skin off my nose. It's just sad.


Politics is strictly for politics and Humanities has been a walking dead forum for years (because it's not really for 'current affairs' but more academic discussion of, well, the humanities). There doesn't really exist any kind of general 'current affairs' forum apart from CA/IMHO.

Theres an awful lot of mental contortions there to justify one forum with one "right" set of rules being dead on its arse and another with all the "wrong" rules being busy

There's no chance- no chance at all, mind- that you have the politics forum you wanted and its not, by god, to your taste (nor, it seems, anyone else's)?

having chased the rabble- who seem, by the way, to cover a range that includes the vast majority of the users of the site both by number and by post volume- out of yer vaunted high castle, it ill-becomes ye to sniff the hanky at how they carry on down in the streets.

Again, nothing of substance raised that isnt covered by "people shouldnt be *allowed* post things I disagree with."

Dress it up all you like.

Invidious

excludedbin wrote: »

...extremists are the audience the likes of CA/IMHO are courting.

I don't believe that's true at all.

As I noted above, almost 7 in 10 people in the country believe that Irish society has become too politically correct. The majority is weary of the woke inquisition dictating what can and cannot be said, and tired of being called -ists and -phobes every time they voice a frank opinion.

In your view, there are seemingly two kinds of people: those who fit compliantly into the woke, progressive, D4 lefty-liberal mold, and the "extremists" who do not.

Reality is more complex. There are plenty of intelligent, non-extreme posters on Boards who still can't accept ideological notions such as that a man identifying as a woman actually is a woman, or that Traveler criminals are just victims of settled society's institutional racism.

Overheal

Invidious wrote: »

I don't believe that's true at all.

As I noted above, almost 7 in 10 people in the country believe that Irish society has become too politically correct. The majority is weary of the woke inquisition dictating what can and cannot be said, and tired of being called -ists and -phobes every time they voice a frank opinion.

In your view, there are seemingly two kinds of people: those who fit compliantly into the woke, progressive, D4 lefty-liberal mold, and the "extremists" who do not.

Reality is more complex. There are plenty of intelligent, non-extreme posters on Boards who still can't accept ideological notions such as that a man identifying as a woman actually is a woman, or that Traveler criminals are just victims of settled society's institutional racism.

But 57% of statistics are made up. 98% of mathematicians acknowledge that!

(Argumentum ad populum)

Timberrrrrrrr

Overheal wrote: »

But 57% of statistics are made up. 98% of mathematicians acknowledge that!

And they are right 60% of the time every time!

The rules of the forum are simple but absolute.
We have one guiding principle: Don't be a dick.

Do not post any material that you know or should know is hateful, abusive, harassing, false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, vulgar, obscene, profane, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or illegal.

You are free to express your views in a forceful manner provided you remain civil. Hate speech, insults, and purposely inflammatory remarks (i.e., trolling) will not be tolerated. Do not post threats or state or imply that any individual or group is deserving of harm. If we tell you to refrain from behaviour that we regard as uncivil, or that in our view detracts from a productive discussion, do so or face revocation of your posting privileges.

We reserve the right to delete any post for any or no reason whatsoever.

That would appear to be the rules for CA. All joking aside, a f*ck tonne of posts and or / accounts would be done and dusted if this was strictly applied.

I'm not having a go at any mods or admins, I know you clearly have a deluge of stuff to deal with lately, but the charter doesn't really add up to the reality of what goes on in CA.

I'll shut up now:-)

CtevenSrowder

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Do you honestly think the CA forum is genuinely a place where "a multiplicity of views can be debated robustly, frankly, and openly".

I do. It only seems to be those with a certain political slant that have issues with CA, at least based on this thread. Those who tend to see racism, sexism, xenophobia, transphobia etc. everywhere. Most people who post on CA seem to think it's fine. There are a multitude of opinions, and those that cross the line tend to be dealt with. The moderation is perfectly fine, with mods more than happy to rescind threadbans when you interact with them and those that post actual racism swiftly being banned for the most part.

There is plenty of good discussion in CA, a lot of ****e too, but that will always be the case regardless.

KyussB

Returning again to topic of evidence/facts reported by mainstream newspapers - it appears that mods/admins are able to decide that some facts don't count, even when cited from reputable newspapers - and that you can receive mod action out of the blue for citing those facts.

Even when the weight in favour of those facts increases, as they are independently cited/repeated by other newspapers, there appears to be no recourse for this once a final decision has been made by mods/admins.

This leads to a fairly Kafkaesque situation, where it is impossible to even cite statements of fact made in news stories from reputable newspapers on Boards, without risking mod action.

Does this not seem utterly bizarre to anyone, and in need of clarification/fixing? (including retroactively fixing past mod actions - as otherwise the bizarre situation stands)

Once someone falls enough into mod/admins target sights, it feels a lot like it becomes a free-for-all where pretty much any excuse can be made up for mod action - even when that's completely inconsistent with the stated rules and guidelines for the forum. Like the social media equivalent of constructive dismissal from a job.

Invidious

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

I do. It only seems to be those with a certain political slant that have issues with CA, at least based on this thread. Those who tend to see racism, sexism, xenophobia, transphobia etc. everywhere. Most people who post on CA seem to think it's fine. There are a multitude of opinions, and those that cross the line tend to be dealt with. The moderation is perfectly fine, with mods more than happy to rescind threadbans when you interact with them and those that post actual racism swiftly being banned for the most part.

There is plenty of good discussion in CA, a lot of ****e too, but that will always be the case regardless.

An excellent summary of the current situation. The vast majority of posters (950 active users at the current moment, making it easily the busiest forum on Boards.ie) seem happy enough with CA/IMHO. Then we have a small yet committed contingent of posters, all hailing from much the same ideological position, who complain and campaign ceaselessly, trying to have the forum censored or shut down because what they see there offends them.

Any forum will always have a small number of disgruntled outliers who want it censored, closed, or changed in some other way. But they're not representative of the majority.

Beasty

Invidious wrote: »

s (950 active users at the current moment, making it easily the busiest forum on Boards.ie)

Not quite - the majority of that number are actually viewing the Coronavirus forum, but CA has cetainly been the second busiest forum since the pandemic hit with nearly as many posts as AH and Soccer aggregated

Mostly not ban worthy posts but in recent days, I think the current affairs forum has done a fine job of demonstrating how it attracts the far right.

end of the road

well of course it does, but so what? they are a tiny but very vocal minority who the majority think are crack pots.
how about taking some responsibility and debunking their drivel?
current affairs is not going to be a forum that only caters to our views, you need to understand and accept this.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

well of course it does, but so what? they are a tiny but very vocal minority who the majority think are crack pots.
how about taking some responsibility and debunking their drivel?
current affairs is not going to be a forum that only caters to our views, you need to understand and accept this.

In fairness I believe myself and plenty of other posters have done plenty to combat that but ultimately there are other threads that simply are pointless to engage with.

Invidious

Beasty wrote: »

Not quite - the majority of that number are actually viewing the Coronavirus forum, but CA has cetainly been the second busiest forum since the pandemic hit with nearly as many posts as AH and Soccer aggregated

Thanks for that info, Beasty. I didn't realise that the number of active users included those viewing the Coronavirus forum.

That said, I think my point stands ... that CA/IMHO has become a large and busy forum, and most people seem relatively happy about it.

Deleted User wrote: »

Mostly not ban worthy posts but in recent days, I think the current affairs forum has done a fine job of demonstrating how it attracts the far right.

For some people, it seems, the world is divided into "people who think exactly like me" and "the far right." Usually, people who see "the far right" exerting some major sway over Boards or Ireland are simply conflating all non-left opinions into "the far right," and thus vastly exaggerating the influence of genuine far-right beliefs.

Discodog

Invidious wrote: »

Thanks for that info, Beasty. I didn't realise that the number of active users included those viewing the Coronavirus forum.

That said, I think my point stands ... that CA/IMHO has become a large and busy forum, and most people seem relatively happy about it.



For some people, it seems, the world is divided into "people who think exactly like me" and "the far right." Usually, people who see "the far right" exerting some major sway over Boards or Ireland are simply conflating all non-left opinions into "the far right," and thus vastly exaggerating the influence of genuine far-right beliefs.

So the Garda Commissioner is wrong to be concerned ?

end of the road

Discodog wrote: »

So the Garda Commissioner is wrong to be concerned ?

no, he's correct to be concerned, the far/alt right are a scurge and they must be challenged and debunked at every possible opportunity.
however, there are way way bigger candidates out there then boards for the far/alt right to get their nonsense read and heard, and those platforms don't necessarily present the same opportunities for people to be able to challenge them given the size of those platforms.

boards does get some alt/far right types, the reality is that they don't go unchallenged and some of them, not liking that, eventually go off on one and storm off or get banned, they are able to be challenged as while boards is a big site, the nonsense is generally concentrated to a small part or parts of the site.

excludedbin

Sure but Boards is one of the biggest Irish 'social media' sites. If they're looking to make inroads in this country (and we know they are) then this is one of the main places they'd do it. The issue is that you can only devote so much time and energy to debunking the nonsense they put out - people will and do get fed up having to constantly beat back the tide of disinformation and outright lies and inevitably give up. Far-right agitators don't, especially not when they've been given a forum set up to cater to them and their goals.

You even see it on this forum where there's a bizarre insistence that the far-right doesn't exist or is exaggerated in spite of numerous instances of it being described by authorities as a serious and growing threat. It's a mixture of true believers and useful idiots, eager to back them up out of a misguided adherence to principles that are, quite simply, unworkable on today's internet.

So you wind up with an echo-chamber where, ultimately, largely only their voices persist and they go unchallenged (hence why 'the majority are happy with it' - most of those unhappy have just left since it's clear decent people aren't the audience). Now there's major companies taking measures against them; granted that's mostly because more and more people are getting fed up of dealing with them* and so is more about their bottom line than a principled stand, but it does still increasingly leave Boards' insistence on doing nothing all the more glaring and perplexing.

And you can say it's confined to small parts of the site but time was, it wasn't on the site at all. Any presence is too much because like a cancer, if untreated it'll only grow. Personally, I think the people in charge are far, far behind the times and just don't understand how much the internet has changed in the last, say, twenty years (coupled with Distilled being petrified of losing users). Wide-eyed idealism cannot coexist with extremists who can and do cynically exploit that for their own ends. This isn't 1997 any more and Boards now exists in a world where a resurgent far-right are making more and more inroads in Western nations.

But we're 140 pages into this thread now. It's a nice talking shop to contain any concerns about the forum but one does get the distinct impression it's so that they can be summarily ignored. Oh well. Intelligence agencies and policing authorities will continue to warn of the dangers and Boards leadership will continue to do their best to pretend it doesn't exist. After all, what the hell do the people whose jobs are to keep an eye on these things know?

*As I've said previously, trying to build a platform out of an audience of people like that is unsustainable. Voat, for example, barely manages to cling to life because it's absolute poison not only to advertisers but other users who aren't as extreme and those that persist on it barely donate enough to keep it afloat. Then Parler was recently removed from Apple's app store and Google Play and now Amazon have revoked their use of AWS. Again, because those people are absolute anathema not only to advertisers but anyone who isn't like them. I could go on...

Annasopra

excludedbin wrote: »

Sure but Boards is one of the biggest Irish 'social media' sites. If they're looking to make inroads in this country (and we know they are) then this is one of the main places they'd do it. The issue is that you can only devote so much time and energy to debunking the nonsense they put out - people will and do get fed up having to constantly beat back the tide of disinformation and outright lies and inevitably give up. Far-right agitators don't, especially not when they've been given a forum set up to cater to them and their goals.

You even see it on this forum where there's a bizarre insistence that the far-right doesn't exist or is exaggerated in spite of numerous instances of it being described by authorities as a serious and growing threat. It's a mixture of true believers and useful idiots, eager to back them up out of a misguided adherence to principles that are, quite simply, unworkable on today's internet.

So you wind up with an echo-chamber where, ultimately, largely only their voices persist and they go unchallenged (hence why 'the majority are happy with it' - most of those unhappy have just left since it's clear decent people aren't the audience). Now there's major companies taking measures against them; granted that's mostly because more and more people are getting fed up of dealing with them* and so is more about their bottom line than a principled stand, but it does still increasingly leave Boards' insistence on doing nothing all the more glaring and perplexing.

And you can say it's confined to small parts of the site but time was, it wasn't on the site at all. Any presence is too much because like a cancer, if untreated it'll only grow. Personally, I think the people in charge are far, far behind the times and just don't understand how much the internet has changed in the last, say, twenty years (coupled with Distilled being petrified of losing users). Wide-eyed idealism cannot coexist with extremists who can and do cynically exploit that for their own ends. This isn't 1997 any more and Boards now exists in a world where a resurgent far-right are making more and more inroads in Western nations.

But we're 140 pages into this thread now. It's a nice talking shop to contain any concerns about the forum but one does get the distinct impression it's so that they can be summarily ignored. Oh well. Intelligence agencies and policing authorities will continue to warn of the dangers and Boards leadership will continue to do their best to pretend it doesn't exist. After all, what the hell do the people whose jobs are to keep an eye on these things know?

*As I've said previously, trying to build a platform out of an audience of people like that is unsustainable. Voat, for example, barely manages to cling to life because it's absolute poison not only to advertisers but other users who aren't as extreme and those that persist on it barely donate enough to keep it afloat. Then Parler was recently removed from Apple's app store and Google Play and now Amazon have revoked their use of AWS. Again, because those people are absolute anathema not only to advertisers but anyone who isn't like them. I could go on...

Once upon a time voat was a haven for banned users from here. Now that voat is gone its like they have all come back.

Omackeral

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Once upon a time voat was a haven for banned users from here. Now that voat is gone its like they have all come back.

Joey why do you insist on hit-and-run posting in CA and then come here to complain about the forum? You've been asked umpteen times to reply to accusations you've made but keep disappearing. How is that ''open, honest and frank discussion'', as you've previously put it?

Kraftwerk

The biggest problem in CA is people trolling threads. The usual suspects pop in, pick a random post to start an argument over, make some hypocritical post. Then disappear without engaging or backing up their argument when they get called out on their hypocrisy.

Then they slime on into feedback to piss and whinge about the entire forum being a cesspit and full of the far right.

Why are these resident trolls allowed to do this on a daily basis?

Omackeral

I don't think they're even trolling, I think they know what they're saying is utter scutter and are afraid to tackle it because it goes against ''their side'' but it's still indefensible.

Donald Trump

I think that boards.ie should be a better policy over the dissemination of pseudo-science and "anti-lockdown" gob****es on the Covid forum

It's not discussion. It's people spreading lies and trying to twist stats to try to rise others behind them in order to suit their own particular agenda. It's not a "difference of opinon" it's people talking through their holes. When the scientific community is 99% agreed and has understood a threat and issued advice, boards shouldn't be providing a platform for quacks to push tripe contrary to that advice.


If I started a thread over there seriously suggesting that people drink bleach, I'd expect it to be rightly shut down. Saps looking for validation by posting about how they are going on their holidays regardless and trying to encourage others to do likewise, as they don't even have the courage to stand out and just do it without a crowd, should similarly be shut down

Omackeral

Omackeral wrote: »

I don't think they're even trolling, I think they know what they're saying is utter scutter and are afraid to tackle it because it goes against ''their side'' but it's still indefensible.

Well a quick glance at the latest posts in the Nkencho thread and they're frankly mental. They're not discussing current affairs, it just seems to be people bitching about the thread being called out on Twitter.

For an idea, here's a quote from one of the latest posts "poor old **** is simply one of those pathetic lefty bitches filled with self loathing and unwarranted white guilt"....

That's not a comment on moderation, it'll a comment on the type of poster that the current affairs threads are attracting. Why the hell would anyone want to join that discussion?

Gatling

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well a quick glance at the latest posts in the Nkencho thread and they're frankly mental. They're not discussing current affairs,

Actually it's part and parcel ,

Unsurprising the most vocal boardsies are complaining most ,
If you have no real interacting on a thread why spend so much effort on it in here ?

Gatling

Gatling wrote: »

Actually it's part and parcel ,

Unsurprising the most vocal keyboardists are complaining most ,
If you have no real interacting on a thread why spend so much effort on it in here ?

Because if anyone had any urge to participate in that thread, it would become pretty apparent that it's an example of a thread that's become a cesspit. Most people don't want to go anywhere near participating in it for that reason.

Gatling

[Deleted User] wrote: »

. Most people don't want to go anywhere near participating in it for that reason.

No you can speak for you only not most as you claim ,it's easier to cry I'm offended close it down rather than engaging in form of discussion ,it's like a child in school constantly running to a teacher to tell tales .

Gatling

Gatling wrote: »

No you can speak for you only not most as you claim ,it's easier to cry I'm offended close it down rather than engaging in form of discussion ,it's like a child in school constantly running to a teacher to tell tales .

Sure thing but I'm pretty sure that I'm not alone in that.