Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Incorrect post deletion

  • 16-11-2011 07:41PM
    #1
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭


    I have neither been banned nor infracted but a post of mine has been deleted.

    I have spoken with the relevant mod by PM and he has stated that he is not prepared to change his decision.

    He is no longer prepared to discuss the situation by PM.
    slowburner,

    I've already stated my position in regards to the posting and as stated am more than happy to have this reviewed by a Cmod, however, I am equally happy that the post was correctly deleted.

    Constant PM's to me will not change my mind on this and I am therefore copying in a Cmod on your behalf.
    Should I begin the dispute resolution process here now, or should I wait for the opinion of a cMod?

    All PMs sent by me to the forum mod were cc'd to the cMods but I have not heard from them as yet.

    Many Thanks.


Comments

  • #2
    Spear
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Help & Feedback Category Moderators Posts: 25,951 CMod ✭✭✭✭Spear


    slowburner wrote: »
    I have neither been banned nor infracted but a post of mine has been deleted.

    In which case it doesn't come under the DRP, so it's moved to the Helpdesk which does cover more general issues.


  • #3
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Thanks,
    Where do I go from here?


  • #4
    Spear
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Help & Feedback Category Moderators Posts: 25,951 CMod ✭✭✭✭Spear


    slowburner wrote: »
    Thanks,
    Where do I go from here?

    It'll be addressed here, though you may wish to notify any appropriate mods/cmods to ensure they're aware.


  • #5
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Spear wrote: »
    It'll be addressed here, though you may wish to notify any appropriate mods/cmods to ensure they're aware.
    Will do.


  • #6
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    I have sent the relevant mod a pm informing him of this thread.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    beer enigma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,241 ✭✭✭beer enigma


    slowburner wrote: »
    I have sent the relevant mod a pm informing him of this thread.

    I'm more than happy for anyone to look at and advise on the thread - it started with a post praising 'bailiffs' direct their good work - slowburner took offence at fisheries officers being called bailiffs even though a bailiff is a respected title in the UK and France - the OP meant no disrespect

    Slowburners response started with praise for OPs post then slammed him for disrespect - comment was unnecessarily hard to a new angler & off topic

    Working hard to get new anglers on the angling site & a pm like that could deter them from posting again

    I told slowburner I stood over my decision & he told me he was referring to Cmod to which I was ok about & told him I'd respect Cmod decision

    He pmd 3 or 4 times more questioning moderation of board & I simply told him I stood by my decision & included sparks in my reply and that I'd go with any Cmod decision

    Slowburner is a decent poster & nothing against him but he unnecessarily slammed the OP and then went off in a tangent quoting 'bad moderation' on other topics

    I felt his post didn't add to the OPs post, in fact deterred from it, almost to a degree of flaming - I deleted it, pmd slowburner to explain immediately and didn't infraction or ban - I stand by my decision guys

    Andi


  • #8
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    I deleted my previous post because it was too long. I hope what follows is more acceptable.

    An inland fisheries protection officer is an employee of the state charged with enforcement of various fisheries protection acts which have been passed to protect all fish in inland and coastal waters.
    Briefly, their duties include sea patrols to prosecute and seize illegal nets, monitoring and prosecution of pollution of watercourses and prosecution of offenders engaged in illegal fishing.

    It is probably one of the most dangerous jobs carried out anywhere in the state sector. Fisheries officers often find themselves in remote areas without any form of support - unlike other enforcement agencies. Violence towards fisheries officers is common, indeed four colleague officers died as a direct result of carrying out their duties in 1990.
    http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/1992/02/26/00038.asp

    All I ask is that the use of the word bailiff should not be allowed in the angling forum to refer to fisheries officers and that as matter of respect, posters who use the term, should be reminded that it is grossly insulting to fisheries officers.

    Andip might be unaware of how loaded the term is in Ireland and I believe that some posters in the forum may be using this lack of awareness to pull the wool over his eyes, knowing that they can insult fisheries officers deliberately, publicly and with impunity.

    It might well be a respected title in Britain and France, but in Ireland it has a vastly different connotation.
    It is the negative cultural memory of the activities of bailiffs in forced evictions during the Great Famine of 1845 and after.
    In the not too distant past, ownership of many important fisheries was closely associated with absentee landlords and enforcement of the ownership of those fisheries was carried out by the same bailiffs who carried out forced evictions.
    In the more recent past, a deliberate insult to state fisheries officers has been the term 'Landlords men' which in context, is indistinguishable from the term 'bailiff'.

    Today, many of these fisheries are now in state ownership and fisheries officers carry out their thankless, difficult and dangerous work for the people of Ireland - not for any landlord.
    A small section of the angling public resent the fact that they must pay license fees - enforcement of the licensing laws are part of the duties of a fisheries officer and frequently, it is this minority who use the insulting term.

    I was a fisheries officer for many years and to call me a former bailiff is to insult me - deliberately or innocently does not matter - I will still correct whoever says it.

    It is no different and has the same degree of insult as calling a policeman a p*g.


  • #9
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Andip wrote: »
    I'm more than happy for anyone to look at and advise on the thread - it started with a post praising 'bailiffs' direct their good work - slowburner took offence at fisheries officers being called bailiffs even though a bailiff is a respected title in the UK and France - the OP meant no disrespect

    Slowburners response started with praise for OPs post then slammed him for disrespect - comment was unnecessarily hard to a new angler & off topic

    Working hard to get new anglers on the angling site & a pm like that could deter them from posting again

    I told slowburner I stood over my decision & he told me he was referring to Cmod to which I was ok about & told him I'd respect Cmod decision

    He pmd 3 or 4 times more questioning moderation of board & I simply told him I stood by my decision & included sparks in my reply and that I'd go with any Cmod decision

    Slowburner is a decent poster & nothing against him but he unnecessarily slammed the OP and then went off in a tangent quoting 'bad moderation' on other topics

    I felt his post didn't add to the OPs post, in fact deterred from it, almost to a degree of flaming - I deleted it, pmd slowburner to explain immediately and didn't infraction or ban - I stand by my decision guys

    Andi
    I would be grateful for the opportunity to correct some misleading impressions given by the quote above.

    This gives the impression that I questioned moderation publicly. I did not, any discussion of the standards of moderation was by pm only.

    I questioned moderation of one other post only. The post advocated criminal damage and is still standing.
    see here > http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=73458091&postcount=36

    I never once used the phrase 'bad moderation'.
    I used the phrase 'Strange standards indeed' to emphasise how one post advocating criminal damage can be left standing, while another post defining the differences between a fisheries officer and a bailiff, is deleted.


  • #10
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    A formal or stickied undertaking, that forum users are requested not to call fisheries officers, 'bailiffs' - would happily resolve the matter for me.





    See here for the commonly perception of a bailiff.
    http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=bailiff


  • #11
    beer enigma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,241 ✭✭✭beer enigma


    I get the impression that whatever I say wont be right.........:rolleyes:

    Feel free to put up your revised post on the board - It's a general post & open to comment, so will be interesting to see other peoples views on it.

    I have nothing against the sentiment of what you are saying, I just felt that the original post was directed harshly at the OP.

    Can we now put this to bed ?


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Andip wrote: »
    I get the impression that whatever I say wont be right.........:rolleyes:

    Feel free to put up your revised post on the board - It's a general post & open to comment, so will be interesting to see other peoples views on it.

    I have nothing against the sentiment of what you are saying, I just felt that the original post was directed harshly at the OP.

    Can we now put this to bed ?


    I don't think we can put this to bed until there is a clear commitment from the forum mods not to tolerate insults (deliberate or otherwise) to fisheries officers.
    As I said, it is no different to calling policemen p*gs.
    It might be more appropriate to see that commitment here, rather than on the forum.


  • #13
    Zzippy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,166 ✭✭✭✭Zzippy


    Just to add my support to slowburner - as a current fishery officer I can confirm that "bailiff" is used as a derogatory term towards us, and due to its negative connotations in Ireland is mostly used by poachers etc to other people in order to ridicule our work and gain support, or deter co-operation with us.
    The term bailiff has not been used officially for a very long time for just this reason.
    I have mentioned it in the forum a few times before, and I would also appreciate this rule being introduced. If we want to attract new anglers posting on the forum, we should also encourage them to work with fishery officers, who need eyes on the ground and information to catch poachers, rather than perpetuating the "bailiff" stereotype.


  • #14
    beer enigma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,241 ✭✭✭beer enigma


    slowburner wrote: »
    Andip wrote: »
    I get the impression that whatever I say wont be right.........:rolleyes:

    Feel free to put up your revised post on the board - It's a general post & open to comment, so will be interesting to see other peoples views on it.

    I have nothing against the sentiment of what you are saying, I just felt that the original post was directed harshly at the OP.

    Can we now put this to bed ?


    I don't think we can put this to bed until there is a clear commitment from the forum mods not to tolerate insults (deliberate or otherwise) to fisheries officers.
    As I said, it is no different to calling policemen p*gs.
    It might be more appropriate to see that commitment here, rather than on the forum.

    Theres no point in giving commitments 'off board' as it shouldn't work like that - my reason for deletion was actually more about the tone used to the OP.

    Start a thread & add your post as above and I'll post a commitment in reply if that solves it for you


  • #15
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Andip wrote: »
    Start a thread & add your post as above and I'll post a commitment in reply if that solves it for you
    Thanks Andip.


  • #16
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Andip wrote: »
    Theres no point in giving commitments 'off board' as it shouldn't work like that - my reason for deletion was actually more about the tone used to the OP.

    Start a thread & add your post as above and I'll post a commitment in reply if that solves it for you
    I am sorry Andip, that you feel you should stand down as a mod over this issue.
    Sincerely, that is not an outcome I would have hoped for, or welcome.
    I have no issue with you as a mod or otherwise - but it is very much necessary to put an end to the persistent insults to fishery officers on the forum.

    However, I do hope that you honour your commitment before you go.

    Hopefully, ''the mindless posters (you know who you are)'', mentioned in the post below from your co-moderator, refers to posters who insult fishery officers by calling them bailiffs and not to the posters who brought the issue to light.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=75625498&postcount=8


  • #17
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Andip wrote: »
    Theres no point in giving commitments 'off board' as it shouldn't work like that - my reason for deletion was actually more about the tone used to the OP.

    Start a thread & add your post as above and I'll post a commitment in reply if that solves it for you
    I started a thread as requested above.
    Here
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=75647088#post75647088

    The moderator who agreed to settle the matter, stepped down.

    The remaining moderator has closed the thread.
    See here
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=75647088&postcount=14

    Therefore, there has been no resolution of the situation.
    I would be very grateful for the input or advice of a category mod or administrator as clearly the forum mods have managed to sidestep resolution.


  • #18
    rpmcmurphy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 222 ✭✭rpmcmurphy


    Hi guys,
    I too, having worked as a fishery officer, find the use of the above term as insulting as it has negative connotations associated with it. If we need a similar comparison we need look no further than some of the negative slang words attributed to our police force or Gardai to give them their correct title. The term bailiff and indeed waterkeeper has through legislation been changed to fishery officer for these reasons. As angling is a sport that is striving to modernise itself in its methods and policies in terms of ethics and practice i think it is imperative that the current and correct reference be made to those that go to such lengths to promote, protect and develop our fisheries resource. Anyone who refers to a f/o as a bailiff (with rare exception through complete ignorance) do so in an inflammatory context. I would support a forum policy of referring to the employees of IFI by their correct title
    I am in no way critical of the moderators in the angling forum and would like to commend them on carrying out what is at times a difficult and indeed thankless role
    Tight lines
    RPMCM


  • #19
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    This is an extract from the Angling forum charter here
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054978633
    Personal Abuse
    - Posters who abuse others on here will be banned. Permanent bans will be handed out on a first offence if a moderator feels it is warranted. There is no argument on this one. Abuse someone and you will be banned. Calling someone an idiot is abuse.* Don't attack the poster, attack the post.
    - Attacks on public figures should have be based on actions and without swear words.
    'Joe Bloggs is a ******' for example is not a valid contribution. Similar posts will likely result in at least
    an infraction, possibly a ban for the poster
    *Calling a fishery officer a bailiff is abuse.

    It is still actively tolerated, possibly even encouraged, in the angling forum.

    Some advice from Boards.ie would be most welcome - is it time to move this to Dispute Resolution :confused:


  • #20
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Please can we have a verdict, or at least some third party input on this issue?


  • #21
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    The silence is deafening.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    bitemybanger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,475 ✭✭✭bitemybanger


    There IS no issue. Calling a Fishery officer a Bailliff is in no way, shape or form "abusive" and im sorry you feel this way. The Angling forum is a peaceful forum and is a pleasure to moderate and i stand by Andip in his decision.
    there will be no sticky thread on the forum nor an amendment to the forum Charter on this issue.


  • #23
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    If any other group of people found a word used to describe them to be offensive there would be immediate action.

    For example;
    To call travellers, knackers, would be offensive;
    to call black people, ****, would be offensive;
    to call Gardaí, pigs, would be offensive;
    to call fishery officers, bailiffs, is offensive.

    If the first three insults would not be tolerated - why tolerate the fourth?

    (Please excuse me for using these despicable, abusive terms but I have no other way of making the point.)


  • #24
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    bitemybanger wrote: »
    There IS no issue. Calling a Fishery officer a Bailliff is in no way, shape or form "abusive" and im sorry you feel this way. The Angling forum is a peaceful forum and is a pleasure to moderate and i stand by Andip in his decision.
    there will be no sticky thread on the forum nor an amendment to the forum Charter on this issue.
    It is not a question of me 'feeling this way' - it is the law since 1939.
    see here

    Any other member of the fisheries protection service will take being called a bailiff to be an insult.
    There are cases where the term is used innocently or out of ignorance - but in my experience, these are few and far between.


  • #25
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    This issue has clearly reached an impasse.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=75922005&postcount=23

    Moderation of this forum is effectively an attempt to overturn legislation that has been in place for 72 years.

    Where do we go from here to resolve the issue?


  • #26
    bitemybanger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,475 ✭✭✭bitemybanger


    slowburner wrote: »
    If any other group of people found a word used to describe them to be offensive there would be immediate action.

    For example;
    To call travellers, knackers, would be offensive;
    to call black people, ****, would be offensive;
    to call Gardaí, pigs, would be offensive;
    to call fishery officers, bailiffs, is offensive.

    If the first three insults would not be tolerated - why tolerate the fourth?

    (Please excuse me for using these despicable, abusive terms but I have no other way of making the point.)

    I think you are mistaking a common misconception of a word or title with a blatant form of racisim or abuse.


  • #27
    beer enigma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,241 ✭✭✭beer enigma


    slowburner wrote: »
    This issue has clearly reached an impasse.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=75922005&postcount=23

    Moderation of this forum is effectively an attempt to overturn legislation that has been in place for 72 years.

    Where do we go from here to resolve the issue?

    There's a misconception here -

    I deleted the post as it was a negative comment - the forum record will show this as the comment I left.

    Comments on the angling board have implied that anyone that uses the bailiff term is doing so deliberately - the fact that the OP did nothing but praise the work of fisheries officers shows this not to be the case.

    The reply by slowburner slammed the OP - so much applauding the suggestion of a softly softly reply as suggested on the recent thread.

    There were two things wrong with the reply to the OP

    1) the comment was directed personally at the OP - this is a breach of boards rules - you can comment on a post, but not directly at another poster. Many a poster has been banned or infracted for this, but I didn't do either.

    2) the post slammed the OP - this could detract a poster from posting again.

    The sad thing is that the aggressive attitude adopted on recent posts has driven the two sides further apart. There are some who couldn't give a fiddlers what terminology is used, such as the OP on the original thread. However, the hackles have now been brought up and I feel we will never achieve a democratic status quo on the subject.

    Just for the record, I think the suggestion of a light reminder to anyone using any term that someone finds unpleasant is the perfect solution. I don't think it should be written into the rules though or you'd be duty bound to ban anyone using it & this would include the OP who was in fact just writing to praise their work.

    Also for the record, I fully support the work done by any Fisheries Officer and only wish there were resources to to increase numbers and give them stronger powers.

    Finally, from the minute I withdrew as a mod on angling, I could not comment on the post as it would undermine the other mods position.

    Being a mod is a lot more than just deleting spam and up until recently I've always enjoyed a modicum of respect in all of my 11 years on Boards.

    If you hold out for a ban on the the term bailiff this will never by resolved, but if everyone is agreeable to 'suggesting' the term is not used when used innocently then we can move on. Any poster that used the term as a deliberate insult will get a ban anyway & again just for this ever increasing record, I have actually banned one user about 8 months back for doing exactly that.

    I stand by the reason for deleting the post on grounds 1 & 2 above, but please don't confuse this with the bailiff issue.


  • #28
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    bitemybanger wrote: »
    I think you are mistaking a common misconception of a word or title with a blatant form of racisim or abuse.
    There is no mistake.
    Calling a fisheries officer a bailiff is a term of abuse.
    How many times do I have to repeat this before you understand?


  • #29
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    There is no sense in making references to a post which has disappeared into the electronic ether.
    I can argue from memory, Andip can argue from memory: but that would be subject to interpretation and misinterpretation and therefore untrustworthy - that is, assuming we want to be truthful and honest in this matter.
    I most certainly did not attack the op personally.
    I addressed the terminology used. I applauded the sentiment of what the op was saying about fisheries officers.
    I agree that my reaction was harsh but it was justified in an attempt to end the enduring history of insults to fisheries officers in the angling forum.

    It is very good to know that a poster has been banned for using the term bailiff as a deliberate insult.
    However, there are many existing examples of posters using the term in a less blatant way, or as snide comments.
    These have either genuinely slipped under the mods' radar or are deliberately tolerated.

    For example:
    Where I'm from being a bailiff is barely a step above a child molester
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=73977056&postcount=36
    Bailiffs are annoying *****. I have no respect for them. They will never go after people setting nets at night or targeting poachers. they sit on their ass eating donuts all day then go around harassing people on fisheries when they have tickets.
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=73515316&postcount=25


    Furthermore, there have been many attempts by myself and others to 'gently remind' posters not to use the word bailiff.
    See here
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61239099&postcount=2
    or Andip's own post here
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=73697257&postcount=54

    These efforts have either fallen on deaf ears or been ridiculed
    see here
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=73770071&postcount=25


    I have attempted to address the matter twice by starting threads in the angling forum. Both have been locked.
    The reason given for locking the first thread was
    it's starting to upset people
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=75647088&postcount=14

    Fisheries officers are clearly upset by the persistent insults and yet there is no locking of those threads.
    If it is clear that fisheries officers are being 'upset': will those threads be locked?
    Somehow, I doubt it.

    I have been shot at, assaulted, threatened, had strokehauls removed from various parts of my body, I've done things and suffered things that you just would not believe, and I have been called much worse than a bailiff over the course of my career in fisheries protection. There are still many places where I simply cannot live. There are places where I cannot even bring my family - all as a result of doing my job.

    It is just depressing to see an extension of that sort of carry on in a forum dedicated to angling.


  • #30
    beer enigma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,241 ✭✭✭beer enigma


    Fine - I've stood down from 11 years of boards in angling

    I've offered An olive leaf

    Run the board as you wish - I'm calling on Cmod to call this as I'm appalled at the disrespect shown - if it's not your way then it no way.

    You agree on board to accept a soft response and yet attack again and again

    I'm totally fed up and hacked off with your total lack or 'give' on this and to be honest am now leaving it up to the Cmod

    You slammed the OP which most mods would have infracted - you commented directly against him which classes as a direct comment - straight ban

    I did neither

    I even PM'd u direct to solve and u still come back

    I'm not commenting further and will let a Cmod decide

    My 8 year old is going in for a major op next week - I have better things to worry about

    I'm working to get funding for more fisheries officers - this just hacks me off

    If its not your way then it's no way - the OP was praising & you have turned this into a negative - I'm calling on Cmod for a decision to end this as the angling board has suffered more damage thanks to your post than even seen

    Sleep well on that


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Andip wrote: »
    Fine - I've stood down from 11 years of boards in angling
    I've offered An olive leaf
    An olive leaf was offered on this forum and I accepted it and thanked you for it. I started the thread in response but it was locked without giving the commitment required.
    Run the board as you wish - I'm calling on Cmod to call this as I'm appalled at the disrespect shown - if it's not your way then it no way.
    It is not my way, it is simply the right way.
    You agree on board to accept a soft response and yet attack again and again
    I stated that it was not my job to remind posters and that this is the mod's place.
    I'm totally fed up and hacked off with your total lack or 'give' on this and to be honest am now leaving it up to the Cmod
    You give a commitment and then stand down before honouring the commitment. I try to start two threads to resolve the issue and both are promptly locked - I am not the one with the lack of give.
    You slammed the OP which most mods would have infracted - you commented directly against him which classes as a direct comment - straight ban

    I did neither
    As I said in my previous post, there is no point in referring to a post which no longer exists.
    I remember targeting the language the poster used and not the poster.
    I even PM'd u direct to solve and u still come back
    At no point in any of your three pms was there any offer of resolution.
    I'm not commenting further and will let a Cmod decide

    My 8 year old is going in for a major op next week - I have better things to worry about
    I genuinely and sincerely hope that all goes well for your son and your family. I know only too well what it is like.
    I'm working to get funding for more fisheries officers - this just hacks me off

    If its not your way then it's no way - the OP was praising & you have turned this into a negative - I'm calling on Cmod for a decision to end this as the angling board has suffered more damage thanks to your post than even seen
    Melodrama. I have posted several times in the angling forum since this process started and have even had contributions from those who have attacked me in the past without any problems.


  • #32
    beer enigma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,241 ✭✭✭beer enigma


    Hey Slowburner

    Look as I've said before - I've nothing personal against you - quite the opposite as god help us we need a few more to stand our ground - I feel the forum has been damaged as a result of this and to be honest want this finished as family issues take precedence. It's not melodramatic, I've received 2 PMs over this from people saying that they are not going to post again on the forum - I've never had that before. Admittedly one is a new guy, but one has been around for ages, so I do have genuine concerns.

    That said

    I took a decision to stand down & in fairness couldn't then comment on forum rules as it would undermine the existing mod - I'm sorry if this caused issues, but it just wouldn't have been fair

    I still don't think that there should be a rule stating  nobody use the bailiff term as new posters may use it innocently - any breach of forum rules is a ban and to ban for an innocent breach would be harsh. I DO accept that some contributors feel strongly on the matter and think that the polite correction is the best way forward if Bitemybanger agrees . - again , im not gonna undermine him.

    I'll happily place the original post and your reply here so anyone interested in the thread can view it - the OP clearly meant only positive comments and I felt your reply was overly harsh - the last paragraph was personal & I deleted it primarily on that.

    Can we agree that a soft correction is the way forward ? If the mod is agreeable I'll gladly post to that effect that it's resolved & we can get on with life.

    I can't comment much more as my boy is in serious probs here and to be honest there's priorities

    Will you agree on a soft comment approach & I'll post to that effect ? Mod - ok with you ?

    Originally Posted by fisherking
    Walking here today and saw a fella spinning
    I informed him that it was out of season he gave me the usual ****e
    He said he fished here all year round with no problem!
    I told him again the season was closed and to check the website....
    He muttered something (in his language) and strolled off
    I have had this same conversation a million times in the demesne where i dont even fish so i decided to give the baliff a shout
    I couldnt believe how quick he was on the spot
    Its funny as it turns out the guy was spinning with a single barbless but didnt know the seasons........
    Alot of negative stuff is written about ballifs but i have to say i thought he was excellent
    Just to say if you do see something suspicious give the ifi a call !
    its up to us....


    "This is great. Indeed it is down to us.

    However, fisheries' officers do not work on behalf of the county Sheriff and they do not assist in the repossession of property. That is what a bailiff does.

    A fisheries' officer is not a bailiff and a bailiff is not a fisheries' officer - it's not difficult to understand.

    If the intention is to insult a fisheries' officer, then persist in calling him or her a bailiff - whatever floats your boat. "


  • #33
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Likewise Andi, I have nothing against you.
    Life is too short for that kind of rubbish.
    I think it is a terrible shame that you stood down and I very much hope that you will reconsider this move. The forum would undoubtedly be a poorer one without you.
    Personally, I would be delighted to see you back in your rightful place and I feel certain that not one person would argue against your return.
    There is no need for you to comment any further - you have much more important things to get on with.
    I sincerely wish you all the very best with your son's health.
    Go mberimíd beo ar an am seo arís.



    If the remaining mod states clearly, in the angling forum, that there will be a policy of correcting posters who misuse the term bailiff,
    and others who have been offended by the term, are satisfied,
    then yes,
    I would accept the compromise - subject to the wording being unequivocal and evidence of the policy being implemented.

    It does not follow that if the issue was listed in the forum rules it could cause problems with a compulsory or automatic issuing of bans to posters who might misuse the word, innocently.
    It is patently clear from the forum charter, that the mods have ultimate discretion in the issuing of bans.
    Personal Abuse
    - Posters who abuse others on here will be banned. Permanent bans will be handed out on a first offence if a moderator feels it is warranted. There is no argument on this one. Abuse someone and you will be banned. Calling someone an idiot is abuse. Don't attack the poster, attack the post.
    Thank you for retrieving the post which started this. There is no evidence of any breach of the forum charter - it is quite clearly the post which is attacked, not the poster.
    If the tone is harsh, it is because it is at the end of a litany of posts I made in response to posters misusing the term and consequently insulting fisheries officers.
    I tried on several occasions to gently remind people and was either ignored or ridiculed. My reminders and the reminders of others had no effect.
    That's why we are here.

    I suspect that if I was to 'gently remind' a poster in future, that the thread would be locked, yet again.
    It is the mod's duty to redirect wayward posts, not mine.
    We really need to hear what Bitemybanger has to say.


  • #34
    bitemybanger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,475 ✭✭✭bitemybanger


    slowburner wrote: »
    Likewise Andi, I have nothing against you.
    Life is too short for that kind of rubbish.
    I think it is a terrible shame that you stood down and I very much hope that you will reconsider this move. The forum would undoubtedly be a poorer one without you.
    Personally, I would be delighted to see you back in your rightful place and I feel certain that not one person would argue against your return.
    There is no need for you to comment any further - you have much more important things to get on with.
    I sincerely wish you all the very best with your son's health.
    Go mberimíd beo ar an am seo arís.



    If the remaining mod states clearly, in the angling forum, that there will be a policy of correcting posters who misuse the term bailiff,
    and others who have been offended by the term, are satisfied,
    then yes,
    I would accept the compromise - subject to the wording being unequivocal and evidence of the policy being implemented.

    It does not follow that if the issue was listed in the forum rules it could cause problems with a compulsory or automatic issuing of bans to posters who might misuse the word, innocently.
    It is patently clear from the forum charter, that the mods have ultimate discretion in the issuing of bans.
    Thank you for retrieving the post which started this. There is no evidence of any breach of the forum charter - it is quite clearly the post which is attacked, not the poster.
    If the tone is harsh, it is because it is at the end of a litany of posts I made in response to posters misusing the term and consequently insulting fisheries officers.
    I tried on several occasions to gently remind people and was either ignored or ridiculed. My reminders and the reminders of others had no effect.
    That's why we are here.

    I suspect that if I was to 'gently remind' a poster in future, that the thread would be locked, yet again.
    It is the mod's duty to redirect wayward posts, not mine.
    We really need to hear what Bitemybanger has to say.

    I have no problem with any of this.
    If a poster uses the term Bailiff, you have two options.. Either state yourself to the poster in a reply that the term Bailiff is insulting. (any attack on yourself or whoever is giving the reminder will receive an infraction for attacking the poster, not the post)
    or
    send myself a PM or report the post and i will gently remind the poster that fisheries officers take offence to being called Bailiff's and to refrain from doing so in future posts.


  • #35
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    bitemybanger wrote: »
    I have no problem with any of this.
    If a poster uses the term Bailiff, you have two options.. Either state yourself to the poster in a reply that the term Bailiff is insulting. (any attack on yourself or whoever is giving the reminder will receive an infraction for attacking the poster, not the post)
    or
    send myself a PM or report the post and i will gently remind the poster that fisheries officers take offence to being called Bailiff's and to refrain from doing so in future posts.
    I am happy enough to take this as a statement of forum policy.
    However, the reminder should really come from the mods in the first instance.
    If we can have an agreement on this, then the matter can be closed.


  • #36
    slowburner
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,225 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    If it is up to me, I am happy enough to call an end to this process as a result of Andip's post in the Angling forum.



    Happy Christmas to all concerned.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    bitemybanger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,475 ✭✭✭bitemybanger


    slowburner wrote: »
    I am happy enough to take this as a statement of forum policy.
    However, the reminder should really come from the mods in the first instance.
    If we can have an agreement on this, then the matter can be closed.

    Sounds good.
    A PM or report post and I will act accordingly to intent of the use of the term as soon as I get the message.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement