Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Gaaboardmod3

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 32
1
General discussion / Re: The ulster rugby trial
« on: April 06, 2018, 09:01:46 AM »
Locking this topic now.

2
General discussion / Re: The OFFICIAL Liverpool FC thread
« on: April 05, 2018, 12:58:37 PM »
4. Inappropriate posts, incitement or racist posting.
   This is a very broad topic, and can be the most subjective in the way the moderators view things. In general, it would be the 'good manners' rule. Specific examples of
    inappropriate posts would be the following. (This list is by no means conclusive)
      - Abusive posts between fans of soccer teams, clearly not part of good humoured banter. Mentions of Hillsborough, Munich, Heysel or alluding to these incidents in a         way designed to incite other posters to break forum rules.
      - Sectarian posts, or posts advocating violence against any community or person. Some of the topics under discussion from the different cultures on this island have
        come close to this. That will not be allowed or accomodated.
      - Racist posts, including posts propogating racist views about any race or community.
      - inappropriate posts such as the Maddie McCann jokes etc.
     
  Penalties - 1st Offence - Warning, Second Offence - 10 Day Ban, Third Offence - Permanent Ban


Consider this the warning.

3
General discussion / Re: Brexit.
« on: December 05, 2017, 11:30:41 AM »
Lads, just a bit of tidy up here. And a WUM account has been banned.

4
General discussion / 5 Sams - RIP
« on: December 04, 2017, 02:13:52 PM »
Rufus mentioned on the Death Notices Thread, that we should ideally have our own thread for 5 Sams, who was obviously one of our longest standing posters. It's a terrible tragedy for his family, and a loss to all of us in the GAABoard community. Many of us have never met 5 Sams, but he always was one of the best posters on this board, and by all accounts a lovely man in real life, according to the people who did know him. A proud Down man, and a lover of his football.

I'll leave this thread here so people can post their thoughts, and I will update it with funeral arrangements in case anyone is up around the Newry/Ballyholland area and wants to attend. I believe the arrangements are not finalised yet.

Ar dheis Dé go raibh a anam dílis.

5
General discussion / Re: The Many Faces of US Politics...
« on: November 09, 2017, 09:25:59 AM »
Once again, personal abuse has gotten out of hand on this thread. I will lock it if you cannot control yourselves. I have handed out a temporary ban to allow for a cooling off.

6
Antrim / Re: ANTRIM HURLING
« on: October 10, 2017, 08:31:25 AM »
3. Revealing a posters personal identity.
   An inherent part of most discussion boards is that members may choose to adopt an alias, if they wish, as their board username. This choice of anonymity must be
  respected and any move to identify the real life identity of a poster on this board, where they have not done so themselves, is a breach of board rules.

 
   Penalties - 1st Offence - 15 Day Ban, Second Offence - Permanent Ban

As per the above, Hekeepsdroppingballs has been banned for 15 days.

7
Down / Re: Down Club Hurling & Football
« on: October 09, 2017, 03:53:39 PM »
Removed a couple of posts there and warned the poster. Please refrain from needlessly insulting posts about rival clubs or players.

8
General discussion / Re: More Active/Stricter Moderation - Yes/No
« on: October 09, 2017, 11:22:19 AM »
Ironic that the poster who initiated this whole debate would undoubtedly be permanently banned by now if the rules were followed rigidly.

As someone else said - everyone needs to lighten up a bit and take themselves a little less seriously.  It's an anonymous internet discussion forum, not international diplomacy.

Harsh, I started the thread!

A rule of thumb I think is treat it like the local pub. If you wouldn't say something there for fear of getting a well deserved box on the mouth, then don't say it here.

9
General discussion / Re: More Active/Stricter Moderation - Yes/No
« on: October 09, 2017, 10:46:17 AM »
Hi Lads,

I've done a bit of digging and thinking on this, and I take on board the point about enforcing rules we have in place. If you report a post, I will moderate it based on the rules we have published. I will not proactively trawl through posts on every thread to make sure everything is in order, but if I see something myself that is unreported I will follow up just as if it were reported.

I will refer to the following rules a lot of the time as my guide, and I will adhere to their penalties and try my best to implement the spirit of the rules.

1. Personal abuse.
    Personal abuse is one of the most common problems on internet boards. Known sometimes as 'playing the man', whether foul language is used or not, this behaviour is
    not allowed.
    e.g. Calling someone a fat fool is the same as calling someone something more vulgar. This rule applies even in situations where another user has breached this, or
    another rule. Retaliation is still a breach of the rule.
   
    Penalties- 1st Offence - Warning,  Second Offence - 2 Day Ban, Third Offence - 10 Day Ban, Fourth Offence - Permanent Ban

I hope this is self explanatory. To me this is the just as bad as 'trolling' in bringing threads into an unreadable state. And many posters have been guilty of this. It stops now. If you can't reply to a poster without insulting them, then either ignore their posts completely, or you will be subject to the above. That goes for everyone.


2. Libellous/insulting posts about a real person

   In this day and age, many more people are becoming aware of the existance of boards such as this. While this is generally a good thing, it also means that the posts are
   more likely to be read by a casual visitor to the site. In these circumstances, the board must protect itself against allegations of libel, or defamation and so any posts
   which make derogatory remarks about a named, or clearly implied, individual, are a serious breach of the rules, and dangerous to the board itself. This particularly applies
   to individuals' private lives, finances, legal issues etc etc. This also applies to unwarranted abuse of GAA players and officials.
   
   Penalties - 1st Offence - Warning, Second Offence  - 5 Day Ban, Third Offence - Permanent Ban

This one I freely admit is not consistent in its application. Where the topic of conversation is Irish, or particularly part of the GAA community, then you are treading on very dangerous ground and that will be a red flag item for Moderators. However, that doesn't mean you have carte blanche to talk about other people, and if posts are reported, you will also be subject to the above.

4. Inappropriate posts, incitement or racist posting.
   This is a very broad topic, and can be the most subjective in the way the moderators view things. In general, it would be the 'good manners' rule. Specific examples of
    inappropriate posts would be the following. (This list is by no means conclusive)
      - Abusive posts between fans of soccer teams, clearly not part of good humoured banter. Mentions of Hillsborough, Munich, Heysel or alluding to these incidents in a
        way designed to incite other posters to break forum rules.
      - Sectarian posts, or posts advocating violence against any community or person. Some of the topics under discussion from the different cultures on this island have
        come close to this. That will not be allowed or accomodated.
      - Racist posts, including posts propogating racist views about any race or community.
      - inappropriate posts such as the Maddie McCann jokes etc.
     
   Penalties - 1st Offence - Warning, Second Offence - 10 Day Ban, Third Offence - Permanent Ban

This rule was brought into effect because this board was almost ruined by soccer threads descending into madness. It is obvious that we need to reiterate this rule, not just for soccer, but for far wider areas. With the current refugee crisis, and other social issues, posts about groups like Refugees, Asylum Seekers, Racial Groups or the Travelling Community are all covered by this rule. If you make a racist or insulting post about any such group, you will be pulled up on it. This is subjective in certain areas, as mentioned above, but it is objective in those specific areas.  This does not mean that you cannot have an opinion that Refugees or Asylum Seekers should/should not be allowed into the country etc, but if you have such an opinion, you cannot use racist terms, or stereotypes to back up that sort of position. You'll have to tread a fine line and debate it properly. If your opinions are distasteful to many, you should expect to be challenged on them, and if you veer into this territory, you will be subject to this rule.

8. Joining up to cause trouble, or to annoy people.
   Occasionally, some people join the board simply to post something abusive, or to 'flame' the board. These people are generally easy to spot (see the F365 invasion last
   year) and have no real interest in the GAA Board. Also some people, who have been banned permanently, rejoin under different usernames and continue with the
   behaviour that led to the ban. By tracking IPs, behaviour and other items, we can sometimes tell this fairly easily, and these users will be banned again.
   
   Penalty - Immediate Permanent Ban

This may be the most subjective of all, and was actually created to counter a very specific scenario where we had posters from F365 joining, posting highly inflammatory material, and then being banned. This was not a 'trolling' rule. However as people have pointed out, it could easily be interpreted in that manner and so that is a valid perspective. Trolls are hard to legislate for, because as long as they do not post abuse, do not post racist or vulgar material, and argue their position in a logical manner, then it is hard to call them trolls. Of course if a pattern of contrarian behaviour emerges, then the likelihood is that these are not genuinely held positions (no matter how abhorrent they appear to a lot of us) but they are actually trolling.


So what does all that mean? It means that I cannot and will not ban someone for having a contrary position, even if it is a horrible one, as long as that person adheres to board rules about posting of material.

I encourage people who do not want to engage or read such posts to ignore, or alternatively to report them if they are in clear breach of one of the rules, especially the ones mentioned here.

If a poster or posters are seen to have a pattern of 'stirring it up' across several topics, then the moderator will make a subjective decision on whether the poster is a troll and can take action according to Rule 8.

Finally, as for myself, I will commit to reviewing all reports within as quick a time as possible, and I will use those rules as a guideline. I think we do need to tighten things up to make this board more usable, and that has been a bit lax recently. I won't please everyone. Some of your reports will be not acted on, but I will try explain why. Some bans will annoy people, but I hope this post explains the rationale.

I hope this post explains my thinking on this, other moderators and the admin may have a different view, but until told otherwise, this is the direction I will take.

Cheers

10
General discussion / Re: Foxcommander
« on: October 09, 2017, 10:44:18 AM »
Hi Lads,

I've done a bit of digging and thinking on this, and I take on board the point about enforcing rules we have in place. If you report a post, I will moderate it based on the rules we have published. I will not proactively trawl through posts on every thread to make sure everything is in order, but if I see something myself that is unreported I will follow up just as if it were reported.

I will refer to the following rules a lot of the time as my guide, and I will adhere to their penalties and try my best to implement the spirit of the rules.

1. Personal abuse.
    Personal abuse is one of the most common problems on internet boards. Known sometimes as 'playing the man', whether foul language is used or not, this behaviour is
    not allowed.
    e.g. Calling someone a fat fool is the same as calling someone something more vulgar. This rule applies even in situations where another user has breached this, or
    another rule. Retaliation is still a breach of the rule.
   
    Penalties- 1st Offence - Warning,  Second Offence - 2 Day Ban, Third Offence - 10 Day Ban, Fourth Offence - Permanent Ban

I hope this is self explanatory. To me this is the just as bad as 'trolling' in bringing threads into an unreadable state. And many posters have been guilty of this. It stops now. If you can't reply to a poster without insulting them, then either ignore their posts completely, or you will be subject to the above. That goes for everyone.


2. Libellous/insulting posts about a real person

   In this day and age, many more people are becoming aware of the existance of boards such as this. While this is generally a good thing, it also means that the posts are
   more likely to be read by a casual visitor to the site. In these circumstances, the board must protect itself against allegations of libel, or defamation and so any posts
   which make derogatory remarks about a named, or clearly implied, individual, are a serious breach of the rules, and dangerous to the board itself. This particularly applies
   to individuals' private lives, finances, legal issues etc etc. This also applies to unwarranted abuse of GAA players and officials.
   
   Penalties - 1st Offence - Warning, Second Offence  - 5 Day Ban, Third Offence - Permanent Ban

This one I freely admit is not consistent in its application. Where the topic of conversation is Irish, or particularly part of the GAA community, then you are treading on very dangerous ground and that will be a red flag item for Moderators. However, that doesn't mean you have carte blanche to talk about other people, and if posts are reported, you will also be subject to the above.

4. Inappropriate posts, incitement or racist posting.
   This is a very broad topic, and can be the most subjective in the way the moderators view things. In general, it would be the 'good manners' rule. Specific examples of
    inappropriate posts would be the following. (This list is by no means conclusive)
      - Abusive posts between fans of soccer teams, clearly not part of good humoured banter. Mentions of Hillsborough, Munich, Heysel or alluding to these incidents in a
        way designed to incite other posters to break forum rules.
      - Sectarian posts, or posts advocating violence against any community or person. Some of the topics under discussion from the different cultures on this island have
        come close to this. That will not be allowed or accomodated.
      - Racist posts, including posts propogating racist views about any race or community.
      - inappropriate posts such as the Maddie McCann jokes etc.
     
   Penalties - 1st Offence - Warning, Second Offence - 10 Day Ban, Third Offence - Permanent Ban

This rule was brought into effect because this board was almost ruined by soccer threads descending into madness. It is obvious that we need to reiterate this rule, not just for soccer, but for far wider areas. With the current refugee crisis, and other social issues, posts about groups like Refugees, Asylum Seekers, Racial Groups or the Travelling Community are all covered by this rule. If you make a racist or insulting post about any such group, you will be pulled up on it. This is subjective in certain areas, as mentioned above, but it is objective in those specific areas.  This does not mean that you cannot have an opinion that Refugees or Asylum Seekers should/should not be allowed into the country etc, but if you have such an opinion, you cannot use racist terms, or stereotypes to back up that sort of position. You'll have to tread a fine line and debate it properly. If your opinions are distasteful to many, you should expect to be challenged on them, and if you veer into this territory, you will be subject to this rule.

8. Joining up to cause trouble, or to annoy people.
   Occasionally, some people join the board simply to post something abusive, or to 'flame' the board. These people are generally easy to spot (see the F365 invasion last
   year) and have no real interest in the GAA Board. Also some people, who have been banned permanently, rejoin under different usernames and continue with the
   behaviour that led to the ban. By tracking IPs, behaviour and other items, we can sometimes tell this fairly easily, and these users will be banned again.
   
   Penalty - Immediate Permanent Ban

This may be the most subjective of all, and was actually created to counter a very specific scenario where we had posters from F365 joining, posting highly inflammatory material, and then being banned. This was not a 'trolling' rule. However as people have pointed out, it could easily be interpreted in that manner and so that is a valid perspective. Trolls are hard to legislate for, because as long as they do not post abuse, do not post racist or vulgar material, and argue their position in a logical manner, then it is hard to call them trolls. Of course if a pattern of contrarian behaviour emerges, then the likelihood is that these are not genuinely held positions (no matter how abhorrent they appear to a lot of us) but they are actually trolling.


So what does all that mean? It means that I cannot and will not ban someone for having a contrary position, even if it is a horrible one, as long as that person adheres to board rules about posting of material.

I encourage people who do not want to engage or read such posts to ignore, or alternatively to report them if they are in clear breach of one of the rules, especially the ones mentioned here.

If a poster or posters are seen to have a pattern of 'stirring it up' across several topics, then the moderator will make a subjective decision on whether the poster is a troll and can take action according to Rule 8.

Finally, as for myself, I will commit to reviewing all reports within as quick a time as possible, and I will use those rules as a guideline. I think we do need to tighten things up to make this board more usable, and that has been a bit lax recently. I won't please everyone. Some of your reports will be not acted on, but I will try explain why. Some bans will annoy people, but I hope this post explains the rationale.

I hope this post explains my thinking on this, other moderators and the admin may have a different view, but until told otherwise, this is the direction I will take.

Cheers

11
General discussion / Re: Foxcommander
« on: October 06, 2017, 03:42:16 PM »
OK, thanks. The last post was reported yesterday. Certainly a breach of the Personal Abuse rule.

12
General discussion / Re: Foxcommander
« on: October 06, 2017, 03:32:36 PM »
I can find no report of it. did you Report it?

13
General discussion / Re: Foxcommander
« on: October 06, 2017, 03:16:57 PM »
Sorry - but there's nothing tricky about a decision to ban someone who calls another forum member a c*cksucker.


Mod - you signed up for the job to be a moderator. If you don't want to do it - give it up.

what post is that? Was it reported?

14
General discussion / Re: Foxcommander
« on: October 06, 2017, 03:03:34 PM »
Lads, my final say on this matter. I know people are frustrated with not banning posters who seem to constantly set out to wind others up. I also know that banning people brings its own frustrations and upsets from those who want very light moderation if any at all.

I know that most people actually want the same thing, a forum where they can chat and discuss things without being afraid that everything they say is being monitored, but at the same time in a place where it will not be destroyed by WUMs or by continuous abusive messages between posters spoiling the thread for everyone.

Out of interest I have a poll set up to take a pulse on attitudes towards moderation, but I absolutely accept that some threads have been spoiled by people who have no interest in doing anything other than winding people up.

I'm also aware that there are other posters whose views are absolutely abhorrent to me personally, and to a lot of other people. The tricky thing is trying to decide whether banning them is right, because they are more destructive than they are worth, or should they be left in situ so that other people can tear down their nonsense.

It's a balancing act, and I try to err on the side of less bannings, but perhaps I need to take stock of things, and maybe a purge is needed. I will review some of these reported threads and see if we can tighten things up a bit.

Also, I am aware that people start topics like this, in general, out of an interest in improving the board so I have no problem on that score.

15
General discussion / Re: Foxcommander
« on: October 06, 2017, 02:43:21 PM »
Did you just go all Godwin's law on us? :)

In a way, but in this instance the poster is literally espousing Neo-Nazi sentiments consistently. Just because saying Nazi is a meme now doesn’t mean it shouldn't be used when it actually describes an account’s stance. We’re not talking about Mickey Harte making his players say Hail Marys and someone saying he’s like Hitler.

Please respond to the substantive point being made in the above post.

I'm not sure what the 'point' was. You hypothesised that he would only be allowed here and in Neo Nazi sites. And then said is that the sort of company we want to keep. That's not a point, that's an innuendo based on you making a highly presumptive statement.

So the answer is 'No, I do not want to be associated with Nazi sites, but neither do I believe he'd be banned from all other sites other than this one.'


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 32