(Site is a graveyard - How can boards save itself?) Any update?

This is completely untrue and total misrepresentation.

ORCs is used a term of abuse for the Russian officials, military and mercenary scum conducting illegal war on Ukraine, inflicting warcrimes and atrocities including looting, execution of civilians, rape and the kidnapping of children.

To be fair I think the original suggestion suggested that current affairs/politics would be excluded. It was to highlight fun threads.

You haven't explained anything. You weren't asked about its feasibility.

"You don't agree with personal abuse" is a lot way off agreeing that it should be sanctioned by mods.

I think it is obvious now that multiple times you've dodged a straightforward question:

So is thanking such a plainly abusive post being a dick or not? Yes or no?

Your lack of answer speaks for itself and proves that such conduct is being a dick.

For arguments sake,someone could say "the long term effects of puberty blockers aren't properly understood yet because it's a new treatment" and a standard enough reply to that from some would be "transphobic dog whistle".

That type of thing isn't worth allowing in a reasoned debate.

In the soccer forum you can't use phrases like WUM (Wind up merchant) or use snarky nicknames for players or pundits (calling Graeme Souness, Graeme SOURness for example) and warnings are handed out accordingly.

A set of forbidden phrases that do nothing to enrich discussion could be set for CA as well.

You have complained about others piling up on you and of posters being run off threads. Yet you outright dismiss others who feel the same.

That's what my point is - is it one rule for you and another for those who disagree with you. From this thread alone:

And here you mention cliques, but take issue with someone else mentioning a cabal.

Are you right when you see these things but others are wrong when they do? I'm genuinely curious here because you don't seem to see the disconnect here.

Well perhaps the users of the term are using a term they don’t understand.
It’s surprising to see defenders of clearly hateful dehumanising language.

This is gas. So you consider that posters who 1) ask intelligent questions relating to a thread and 2) take the time to phrase them correctly, are 'soapboxing'!!! Have you got something against the careful & appropriate use of language?

Maybe if it was written as "you ignored the question.. this ref is pure scutter and only the likes of yous will benefit. The fine gaelers are sh*tting their pants now as they don't want to lose another" then that would be acceptable??

And of course, I was quite correct in my analysis, was I not?? Dropped like a hot spud :)

And where does the poster call for the annihilation of all russian citizens?
That's an idiosyncratic definition of the phrase by one poster, it does not tally with Wikipedia's description of it or its common usage on boards or twitter.
So you can find posters calling for the annihilation of the invading Russian forces, and those involved with the prosecution of the war… so that they cannot inflict more damage and war crimes on Ukraine.
And you can find posters using the term ORCs, in the main referring to those same Russian forces… sometimes with a wider meaning, of Russians engaged in heinous, brutish nationalistic \ pro Putin \ anti Ukraine conduct.
But that's a million miles away from your original claim.

So where are these "hundreds if not thousands" of posts?

They don't exist.

It's surprising to see posters more concerned about the language used describing them, than the actual vile acts Russian forces are engaged in isn't it?

This is the actual act they are referring to:

Russia: 87-year old survivor of Stalin and World War 2 was assaulted by 'ordinary Russians' in downtown Moscow because he said Wagnerites are murderers.

Calling the people who did this ORCs is what bothers you?

I'm not getting into a back and forth with you.

I have already explained what I believe will help boards.ie continue.

I have seen posters being run off threads by groups/ cliques and new people getting short shrift and not coming back. That is my opinion on a feedback thread.

One person who accused people of pile on here because 4 people responded to them then decided to put what came up on screen as a billboard size poster of a Mod's comments from another thread here with the words……I dont want to get the boot in, but…and immediately proceeds to get the boot in.

I also think you should re-read some of your own comments on this thread.

Being vehemently against hate speech against those you like but being in favour of hate speech against those you hate shows how much you miss the point of having a policy of not tolerating any hate speech or dehumanising language on Boards.ie at all.
If you look at the dictionary definition of a certain derogatory word beginning with k which has been used by some to describe certain members of Irish society, one finds no reference to its abusive connotations. That a dictionary or Wikipedia doesn’t allude to the meaning hateful people use the term for is no defence against hate speech.

Much like suggesting someone is a dick who condones personal insults if you don't agree with them.

The dichotomy on display here is staggering.

It is derogatory language against Russian invaders. It is not derogatory language against posters on this site. There is not and never has been a general rule against using derogatory language to express your opinions against those responsible for vile acts.

My apologies Legend, I hadn't read through the thread and assumed you were advocating for banning some topics entirely, which seemed a bit drastic, even with my bad experiences.

If only your examples could be honoured without posters instantaneously being labeled racist, homophobic, et al ….but experience proves differently. Black and white is all many see - when any opinion differs (even mildly) from their own (or from group-think), they dig in their heals to discredit, intimidate or humiliate…. For me, it's not worth the battle to post much, given the hostile environment.

No problem, Deja. 🙂

All I'm suggesting is allowing discussion of all topics, whilst disallowing hate speech, but yes, there's no room for grey areas.

Is there any point discussing moderating the thanks?

It won't happen, not a realistic option currently. Mods can barely keep up with the reported posts.

I made the suggestion. It has been aired for consideration, other posters have expressed their view on it.

I will not bring it up again except to challenge critical comments made about the idea.

Im not getting 'personal'. My reply relates to the content of your public posts on boards and contradictions therein.

The comments referred to are being made not about posters on boards, not about Irish public figures... they are not being made about a race, religion, gender.

They are being made against Russian military and those supporting that war effort. An illegal war of atrocity.

Im sure there are also criticisms of Russia's regime and the Russians which defend it and rightly so. However it would be wrong to imply the criticisms and language are on the same level.

Posters should be entitled to use forceful and derogatory language towards those carrying out vile acts.

It is up to mods to determine if the language crosses the line in specific cases. If you return to the thread you will see that other posters have engaged with the wisdom of some of the remarks you have highlighted, which seems a good example of a discussion board in action.

But to re-iterate the notion such language is a factor in the 'decline' of boards doesnt stand up to scrutiny. The thread is one of the most active on CA and there is always the Politics forum for those who wish to discuss matters with less forceful language.

Feedback? It's simple - as far as the ordinary poster is concerned little or nothing has changed since the original thread that begat this one. One moderator in CA retired and otherwise it's been 'service' as normal.

As regards threads that deal with current affairs, culture, economy and politics etc., the site needs a root & branch examination of the parameters that posters should stay in. These should be made clear with examples. If they are too regressive, people will choose to leave. Too lax and it may cause problems. There's a balance to be struck that should generally air on the side of free speech, without endangering the site.

The present moderators and admins of these forums should be moved out to other parts of the site. New moderators/ admins should be set up that are knowledgeable on the matters raised and who apply warnings & sanctions in an impartial way to all sides of a debate, where posters clearly infringe the above parameters. There should be clear explanation of why a certain post contravened the parameters.

Thread bans should have some threshold where they expire for longer standing and valuable posters.

Some of above will increase workload on moderators. This is why light touch and clear impartial moderation is important, to reduce the level of interactions.

Indeed .

Should deal with those who make claims they cannot back up with hateful language and who erupt when somebody asks them to explain why they think that stance is ok

Sure may as well just let people say whatever they want and don't reply on thread , just report ?

Would cut out a lot of arguing alright .Probably divide a thread by half, some by three quarters ..great idea /p

Then the whinging about posters' reporting begins and the long repeated DRP about how they were unfairly threadbanned and mod bias etc . But thats ok because those threads are becoming such a major feature and an entertaining facet of the site now, nearly should have their own forum .

Any suggestions for a name for that new disappointed railing posters forum , folks ?

Seriously , do you really think people should be allowed say whatever they like unchallenged ? Whats the point of that ?

I really have no idea what you are trying to say here.

My point was clear and I have no idea what this is to do with my post.

If you want to suggest other scenarios where people should be sanctioned feel free to do so, their is no need to quote my post.