Moderator partiality and thread shut down/bordering on defamatory statement

1874

I have an issue with how a thread I started was out of hand shut down by "Graham" in the Accommodation & Property" forum,
it appears based on a complaint/report and their own personal opinions.


In my opinion the thread was gleaning some useful discussion replies and information, when it appears people with a more vested interest started taking part, Graham waded in with a post referring to the charter in post 39 but they were vague about what I had done wrong, another poster inferred that if a reply had been to them directly that they would follow up as defamation, which it clearly was not, the same person/poster who replied and who admitted to being an estate agent then made in my opinion an assertion about my medical health which they clearly are not qualified to do (I screenshotted that) as in my opinion that is defamatory insinuating/stating things that are not correct, in which they clearly dont have qualifications in. The poster searched my posting history and formed an unqualified medical opinion publicly based on that, made false legal statements stating as above regarding what they think defamation is, and I was rounded on by 2 posters and clearly the Moderator. In instances those posters declined to answer/respond to queries I posted or made personal attacks, insisting upon their own viewpoint

Ultimately "Graham" closed the thread at 23.15 claiming nobody wants to discuss anything, when posters where replying before 2 other posters in particular seemed to have noticed the thread and launched into responses but declined to reply to my own questions.


I was looking for advice how to handle the buying process which in my opinion and which other posters had already agreed is fraught with a lack of transparency.
Now Ive participated in that Forum a number of times, and Ive noticed "Grahams" style which I consider to be overbearing, even recently I have seen where "Graham" had allowed a ridiculous thread continue where a poster was clearly either knowingly or unknowingly trying to circumvent the Residential Tenancies Act, while this was shut down ultimately, there was not an apparent hostility from the Moderator or other posters.

Beasty

What more do you think there was to discuss? I've had a glance through the thread. You received quite a lot of feedback from posters, but then the thread descended into nothing more than a bit of bickering, with you at the centre

Seems fair enough to me that the thread was closed - it saved you and others from potential sanction the way it was going

1874

Beasty wrote: »

What more do you think there was to discuss? I've had a glance through the thread. You received quite a lot of feedback from posters, but then the thread descended into nothing more than a bit of bickering, with you at the centre

Seems fair enough to me that the thread was closed - it saved you and others from potential sanction the way it was going

To be plain, it descended into bickering because 2 other posters in particular were responding solely with critcising my position, making allegations about my health, which is still publicly for view, despite an incorrect assertion insinuating defamation by me, and there was no sanction or warning for making that false statement.
The moderator shut it down at 23.15, prior to that and prior to being resolutely criticised by two posters in particular who it appears have a vested interest (one at least admitted they are an estate agent) good number of posters replied, both with posts with opinions, some highlighted what I have concluded myself.


However, 1 poster in particular, the person that claimed they are an estate agent, suggested what I said was defamation, those comments are still in place, they then followed that by making assertions about my health ( I believe that is bordering on if not defamatory), they are not a medical professional, yet they go about making comments like that?
So Estate agents (by that posters own admission) now give legal advice, medical opinion on boards too?? The same person basically admitted to stalking my profile to see what else they didnt like. As I said in the thread, I may disagree with a poster in one thread and agree with (or thank) them in another, I dont go around looking to see where else I may disagree with them.

There might not be much more to discuss regarding my query, imo there is a significant lack of transparency and it appears certain posters have taken exception to this, I believe that lack of transparency is widely known and belived, thats my opinion.


Baby01032012 basically started moderating the thread themself

I dont think Graham is being impartial if they are coming in thanking posts and moderating (post 27) or then making comments themselves (post 28)


Regarding defamation: a defamatory statement is one which tends to injure a person’s reputation in the eyes of reasonable members of society.


Baby01032012 stated if my comment in post 38 (which might not be the best wording) that if it was in reply to them, they'd take a case for defamation, but I did not refer to them personally/wasn't referring to them or any specific individual or anyone in bards. It is my opinion if you went out an asked the populace, who is the least trustworthy profession, I believe estate agent would be at or near the top. Now I maybe could have said that "I don't think Estate Agents are particularly trustworthy, or that there is not much transparency in that business, that they seem even to undermine processes in place that might make it more transparent"


Rather than addressing that or trying to alter my view, Im told I should go off to Germany because even the poster suggests the system is better there.



Yet this person themselves went on to make assertions about my health, in particular they made it publicly about my mental health.



Post 47 "Yep reviewed your history on your contribution to 3 threads on this forum, also construction, covid, separation/ divorce all posts to antagonise people and seek attention..acute hpd disorder, good luck!"


Regarding defamation: a defamatory statement is one which tends to injure a person’s reputation in the eyes of reasonable members of society.

Now that is defamatory, an estate agent is making an assertion about me which is not factual, they are not qualified to make, and stating it as if it is fact for all on boards to see,


I would like those comments and references in the thread to that in replies removed, because "Graham" hasn't removed them but saw fit to censure me over comments which did NOT refer to any individual.

I did not attack any poster individually. With discussion on posts in boards, can descend into people holding strongly onto their claims or beliefs, and from time to time you hear "ad hominen" being highlighted, when a poster attacks another person as is the case in post 47 by Baby01032012, I believe the poster was incorrect to attack me personally admitting they checked other unrelated posts to form a medical opinion!
I dont think both attacking another person and forming a formal opinion about which they are not qualified is accepted elsewhere on boards.

This person has given their legal opinion, their medical opinion.
Now I can absolutely tell you this person is not a medical professional, not because it is unlikely, but because no qualified medical professional would not take the risk of giving opinions as if they were fact publicly, let alone publicly online.


If those comments stay visible, I will at my leisure get someone to look at them eventually, the longer they are present, the less happy I will be about that.


Even in your reply, you dont seem to gather the significance of that.

Tokyo

1874 wrote: »

If those comments stay visible, I will at my leisure get someone to look at them eventually, the longer they are present, the less happy I will be about that.

Can you please clarify what you mean by that?

1874

mike_ie wrote: »

Can you please clarify what you mean by that?

I believe the post/s I highlighted and any reference to claims which are directed at me personally should be removed, how you can not censure the poster who made them, I do not know. If you need clarification on the specific posts, I'll highlight them again, I believe I have already done so.



Some people who I know, know my username on boards


Would you want a person who is not qualified making claims about you personally in any setting that are not factually correct?



I think that is understandable/straight forward/easy for you (boards.ie) to rectify and the best for all.

1874

Tokyo wrote: »

Can you please clarify what you mean by that?

I was going to follow this up and ask if you were going to reply, but you seem to have changed

Tokyo

1874 wrote: »

I was going to follow this up and ask if you were going to reply, but you seem to have changed

I have many names, and none of them matter. Names are not important. To speak is to name names, but to speak is not important.

Anyhow, back to the issue at hand. The words 'storm' and 'teacup' come to mind with respect to your complaint. With respect to the thread itself, I'm seeing one page of reasonable posts and responses, and you becoming increasingly antagonistic towards posters who didn't look at your hypothetical situation through the same lens as you, and then toward the moderator when he reminded you to rein it in a bit.

I think Graham did you a solid favor by just closing the thread. I'd have happily stood behind a warning or a card issued to you for your behaviour.

Regarding defamation by the way, I imagine it may be quite difficult to show defamation of character against an anonymous internet user.

1874

Tokyo wrote: »

I have many names, and none of them matter. Names are not important. To speak is to name names, but to speak is not important.

Anyhow, back to the issue at hand. The words 'storm' and 'teacup' come to mind with respect to your complaint. With respect to the thread itself, I'm seeing one page of reasonable posts and responses, and you becoming increasingly antagonistic towards posters who didn't look at your hypothetical situation through the same lens as you, and then toward the moderator when he reminded you to rein it in a bit.

I think Graham did you a solid favor by just closing the thread. I'd have happily stood behind a warning or a card issued to you for your behaviour.

Regarding defamation by the way, I imagine it may be quite difficult to show defamation of character against an anonymous internet user.

Thats a nice quote,

I had no idea Moderators or Posters turned up in different guises
So you have no issue One poster knowingly making statements they are unqualified to do,

As for antagonistic, I think there were a few posters in there, I just stood over my assertions that I made, I was badgered by a few posters who themselves declined to answer questions and insinuated defamation themself.
Obviously raising this in Boards is pointless given your attitude.

Tokyo

1874 wrote: »

So you have no issue One poster knowingly making statements they are unqualified to do.

Your entire thread was predicated on a statement that you were unqualified to make - your assertion that "estate agents are devious slippery baxtards." Other posters telling you that you are probably wrong and asking you to at least try and qualify your statement is not 'badgering'. If you are to hold other posters to that standard, then you need to apply it to yourself too.