"Lets Get Started! thread reopened the subject of the kind of site this is to be and how we behave ourselves on the site.

"A Look Under the Nation's Bonnet" I suppose means that we are here to inspect-peruse-review and debate all manner of things.
I offered to work towards a moderation policy with anyone interested, and to look at what other sites are doing. Here is a start from the CLR.

Quote :

The CLR is an open forum for discussion. But, it’s not Politics.ie, which is - to apply what splintered sunrise noted on another discussion on comments - ’something of a bear pit’ and where various terms are bandied about recklessly.

The point is that the CLR is - and has to remain - a place where people can discuss and feel free to discuss but also a place where people can be heard respectfully.

To quote Andy and Louise from Socialist Unity…

We will delete racist, homophobic, sexist, and derogatory comments about people with physical disabilities or mental distress. Comments will also be deleted that are offensive and insulting about individuals. We will also delete comments by “trolls”, i.e those people whose purpose is to impede debate and who post comments with no regard to the subject matter of debate but whose sole purpose and intention is the baiting of other people

We expect comrades to behave in a comradely and fraternal way and to treat each other with respect. We will moderate comments in a way that a Chair moderates a meeting.

We’ll still keep it a light touch, and the balance will be towards retention rather than removal. But… again, this is about debate. Criticism is essential, indeed it’s what we’re all about. But fairness is crucial and respect is paramount. Call it courtesy.

Comments»
1. Starkadder - February 2, 2008
That seems like a fair enough moderation policy.
There seems to be a bit of a controversy concerning
Indymedia (where I don’t post anymore) and P.ie
(where I do) censoring comments.

I will post more of these as I get a chance so we can take a look.

The "Look under the bonnet" subtitle should indicate curiosity about the processes going on in politics and other human social systems and I would like it if we ended up talking more about policy than politics, when we ended up discussing politics that is. We could gather a set of like minded individuals here over time who would happily indulge this general theme I think. Party politics should be left at the door - discussion of party policies would be very welcome, however. Any discussion of science and tech coupled with policy/politics gets a from me anyway.

How would these rules look around here ?

Welcome to thepropertypin.com: We've grown recently and as the community has gotten larger, in order to ensure debate continues to be healthy and for the benefit of all members, we've set out some basic rules and policies which apply to the entire forum. When you post, you agree to abide by these rules and policies. If you find any post or topic offensive or believe that the rules and policies outlined here are being broken, please report the offending content by private message to a moderator. Etiquette Policy: thepropertypin.com forum is intended to be a friendly, informative and discursive community. Members are expected to treat each other with at the very least, a certain degree of respect. At no time should forum content become insulting, slanderous, derogatory, abusive, hateful or illicit in nature. Posting Policy: 1. Please think before posting. The best method of moderation is when users police themselves. If you're particularly irked by something another poster has written, count to 20 before posting a reply. 2. Try not to run off topic. If you wish to extend the discussion, make a new thread in the most appropriate forum. 3. When making a new topic, please give a descriptive title to your thread, that adequately summarises your topic. Please DO NOT capitalise your topic title. 4. Search the forums before posting. Your topic may have already been discussed. 5. Be patient. All the users of this forum are using the board and participating in discussions in their own time. 6. Advertising and promotion are strictly prohibited. Cross-posting in multiple forums is not allowed. Posting pay-per-click, commissioned, affiliate, or referral links is not allowed. 7. When you paste text in this forum, which you did not write yourself, you must recognise the source of the content and you may only post when your use of the content is not in breach of the original source's copyright. * Posts deemed "pointless" by staff will be removed at their own discretion. If you feel, however, that a decision is unjust or unfair, please contact an Administrator directly.

I am posting stuff here from discussions on two different threads about what is good, or not good about fora sites, and more examples of how they are run. There may have been a neater way to quote from other threads but I don't know one, so it is a cut and paste job.


by johnfás Yesterday at 2:36 pm
As a general start - perhaps those who are interested might have a look at other similar websites and plagiarise. It is a general norm in the creation of disclaimers, terms and conditions, contracts, charters etc!

vBulletin forum rules
________________________________________
The vBulletin forums have grown tremendously over the last 5+ years and we thank all of you for being a part of this growing community.

In order to keep the forums running well and to prevent problems, please follow these simple rules for the forums here. If you have any questions or problems, please feel free to contact one of the Staff Members.

General Rules:
• While debating and discussion is fine, we will not tolerate rudeness, insulting posts, personal attacks or purposeless inflammatory posts. Our decision is final in these matters.
• Please refrain from posting meaningless threads, one word (or short) non-sense posts, or the such.
• Multiple or repeated posting in order to increase your post count is not allowed.
• Advertising, spamming and trolling is not allowed. This includes using the forum email and Private message system to spam other members.
• Please wait a reasonable amount of time before bumping posts. For style changes and general 'how-to' questions this should be 24 hours. For specific troubleshooting issues, use 12 hours as a guideline.
• We also do not allow posts that are sexual in nature or violate vBulletin community standards. The vBulletin team shall be the sole arbitrator of what does and what does not violate community standards.
• Discussion of illegal activities such as software and music piracy and other intellectual property violations are not allowed.
• Each member is allowed one login account. Registering with multiple accounts is not allowed.
• While we are quite happy to have constructive comparative conversations about competitor's products, we will not tolerate blatant adverts or the sort of 'ooh look, yet another bulletin board' threads. Also, we would appreciate it if you refrain from blatant bashing of other boards.
• We reserve the right to remove offensive posts without notice.
• If you are going to post non-English on these forums, please also post an English Translation of your post.
• Also while these rules cover most common situations, they cannot anticipate everything. Consequently we reserve the right to take any actions we deem appropriate to ensure these forums are not disrupted or abused in any way.
• You cannot post any affiliate or referral links, or post anything asking for a referral. Such posts will be subject to removal.
• You cannot post advertisements or notices for contests.
• We also reserve the right to ban anyone who wilfully violates the forum rules, as access to our support forums are a privilege and not a right. A banned customer is still entitled to support from the support system.
Any threads/posts of these types will be deleted.

Advertising Services and Solicitation

We do not allow people to post threads or to send private messages or emails to users here that advertise or solicit any products, services, funds or donations. Explicit advertising and solicitating in signatures is also prohibited.

We do not allow selling vBulletin installation or upgrade services, as we offer this already, and we can not condone this type of service offered from anyone on the forums because of the potential security problems it brings up. You should never give out your vBulletin customer number or password to anyone, and you should not disclose server logins and/or passwords to anyone except through the vBulletin support system. We can not take responsibility if you disclose this information to anyone else.

Links in Sigs

Links in signatures must follow these guidelines:
• Linking to a commercial product/service is fine, provided it is not a product or service that competes with a product or service offered by Jelsoft and it is not an affiliate program link for vBulletin or any other affiliate program.
• Promotional text for a commercial product or service is ok, provided there are no price(s) of product(s) or service(s) listed.
• A link and promotional text for a site that is not commercial and does not contain product(s) and/or service(s) is allowed, provided the site is not sexual or does not violate vBulletin community standards. The vBulletin team shall be the sole arbitrator of what does and what does not violate community standards. (Examples include sites about drugs and/or sex.)
• Duplicate links to the same URL in a signature are not allowed.
Avatars

Animated avatars are not allowed. Sorry.

Avatars that may be confused with official staff avatars are not allowed.

Licenses for Sale

We do not allow people to post that are looking to sell or buy a used vBulletin license. While you are allowed to sell and transfer your license to another owner, these forums are not the appropriate place to do this.

Affiliate Programs

The vBulletin affiliate program is designed to allow people to advertise vBulletin on their web site and earn a commission on all sales generated through that link. You are not allowed to post your affiliate link anywhere on the vBulletin forums, in your signature or send the link through private messages to other forum users. Anyone that does this may be removed from the affiliate program immediately without notice. This rule applies to all affiliate program links, not just the vBulletin program.

Signature Size Limits

All signatures should not exceed the following size limits, and you can't have both text and images
• For text signatures: 4 lines normal size, 8 lines small size and up to 90 chars per line. Font sizes above 2 are not allowed. (Blank lines count as lines.)
• Do not use images with large text to bypass the previous item
• For images in signatures: 1 image up to 300 pixels wide, 125 pixels tall and 20k in size
• Animated images in a signature are not allowed
We also have some rules that apply for certain forums:

Hosting Forum
• The hosting forum is for discussion of hosts and hosting options for vBulletin customers. Advertising of hosting services is not allowed. This includes any host or anyone with a financial interest in or a partnership relationship with a host from replying to questions or requests regarding hosting services. Any posts violating this rule will be removed.
• Because of the high rate of software piracy on 'free' hosts, discussion and questions regarding free hosting services are not appropriate for this forum. Please feel free to use this forum to discuss paid hosting services.
• The hosting forum cannot be used to promote specific hosts. We will moderate posts and users continuing to excessively promote or advertise any hosts. Anyone abusing this will lose their right to post in this forum.
Chit Chat forum

The Chit Chat forum is where vBulletin owners and fans can gather to chat about almost anything, technical or non-technical in nature. If you have a question that doesn't fit into any other forum, or just want to chat, this is the place.

Reporting a suspected pirated copy of vBulletin

Please do not post suspected copies of vBulletin on these forums. If you suspect that a forum is using an illegal copy of vBulletin, please email the full URL to the forums (not the site's home page) to http://www.vbulletin.com/piracy.php

All sites sent to this address will be added to our anti-piracy database and will be investigated. The name of the person submitting the report will always remain confidential.

We will be unable to respond with whether this site is properly licensed or not, or our actions, for privacy reasons.

Thanks!
__________________
Chris Schreiber || Fast 4GL Systems, Inc. || ProgressTalk.com Forums

* vBulletin Moderator (MySQL / Server Configuration) and Support

]

Part Two (Revenge of the Insomniacs)


Kate P wrote:Boys, you're all startlingly pass-remarkable today!

I'll put back on my schoolteacher's hat and say that I really, really don't like this business of making personal remarks about individual posters - ones we all know, even if they are not members here!

Bitch by pm by all means but doing it on a thread is a bit silly as well as a bit well, mean.

by notdevsson Yesterday at 11:37 pm
I used to post on wikipedia for about 3 years. It eventually hit a point where p.ie is now where a lot of people left because they found it becoming extremely negative, aggressive and stressful.

Ironically I think the problem was rules: there were not enough clear rules from day 1. Jimbo Wales, who ran the place, wanted it to develop organically. For a while it worked, but then as it got bigger more headbangers began joining, rules kept being changing, and posters would end up being attacked for breaking 'new' rules that some clique somewhere had come up with.

I think part of the problem with p.ie is the same. Things were not defined clearly enough. I hate the over-moderation on the boards. Sometimes p.ie goes to the other extreme and people get frustrated as personal attacks mount and no-one knows who is meant to rein the worst part of it in.

I was in a political meeting some weeks ago where someone I was surprised had even heard of p.ie (lets just say they are of an age where most of the people of their generation don't like computers much) turned out to be a big fan. But she told me that she thought it had 'turned', by which she meant that it had peaked and was now running into the problems where the initial idealism had been replaced by warring and oneupmanship.

In the last two weeks I have become more and more frustrated with p.ie. It reminds me of the way I felt when I finally left wikipedia. I found myself saying 'I really don't enjoy this anymore. It is getting to be annoying.'


by notdevsson Yesterday at 11:52 pm
ibis wrote:It's interesting - unregulated forums are virtual libertarian/anarchist communities. Most of those reach exactly this point as they grow, and either change or implode.


It is so true. The trouble is that being internet-based they can grow to great numbers, meaning that it becomes difficult at that point to stop them turning into warring factions. And imposing rules at that point to stop the warring becomes a nightmare because the factions won't agree. That's why I said that you really need from day 1 to have a basic structure that everyone from day 1 works in so there is a structured consensus. In Wikipedia, for example, having had a policy of articles on absolutely anything being allowed, they then began having votes on which articles were 'unencyclopaedic'. But it became hit-and-miss. I remember one day a ridiculous article about a minor cartoon character from the 1950s that only featured in a couple of cartoons before being scrapped, was voted as encyclopaedic, while an article on a breakaway sect from Catholicism with thousands of adherents and its own self-declared pope, was deemed unencyclopaedic! An article on a minor 19th century politician was deleted but an article on a cavalry officer in the confederate army in the civil war was voted to be saved. And if you think the rows over the Lisbon treaty on p.ie are bad, you should see the wikipedia rows over whether Ireland should be said to be part of the British isles, with extreme republicans going ballistic if it was included, and extreme British Tories going nuclear if it wasn't.


by 905 Yesterday at 2:34 pm
We should have a rule against anything terribly vulgar, like TheBear has been describing in P.ie with pics of young wans. What'ye think?

by EvotingMachine0197 Yesterday at 2:38 pm
Agree with crudity in both image and written form

References to events etc. before the courts. Is sub judice the word ?

Libel obviously

Agree with crudity in both image and written form

References to events etc. before the courts. Is sub judice the word ?

Libel obviously.


by EvotingMachine0197 Yesterday at 2:39 pm
johnfás wrote:As a general start - perhaps those who are interested might have a look at other similar websites and plagiarise. It is a general norm in the creation of disclaimers, terms and conditions, contracts, charters etc!

Good plan - we could link to good ones and then mish mash our own.


by ibis Yesterday at 2:39 pm
905 wrote:We should have a rule against anything terribly vulgar, like TheBear has been describing in P.ie with pics of young wans. What'ye think?

Agreed! It's not as if there aren't plenty of places online to get these things.

I'd call for one of the points NDS was making - politicians by given name. No "Magic Arse", no "Gormless". No nicknames.

I'd also call for a general rule against the kind of sneering "ooh yeah, they won't get reelected 'cos they're shite" trash-talk. It's one thing to analyse their transfers or the voting patterns at the last election and state your case, but just sneering is a waste of time, and one of the principal unpleasantnesses on p.ie.


by 905 Yesterday at 2:43 pm
Emm, someone mentioned vulgarity in written form? There has been a gentleman's agreement that cussin' was allowed, as long as it wasn't too fucking personal, you know what I mean?

Nicknames are a personal bete noir of mine but I don't know if they should be banned altogether. It would be a bit ironic considering our many pseudonyms

Auditor #9 Yesterday at 4:03 pm
I want to keep youngdan's names ! But if it upsets anyone ...

It's good that we're making an effort to decide these things - thanks for opening it up again 905. I will offer that crude language should be tolerated unless it is too frequent but more especially if it is used in anger. What happens then God knows.

Name calling of anyone is out. However, some names are more poetic than others and that is sometimes the job of the true poet - you 've said something similar yourself ibis - lampooning where necessary. Unfortunately that's a valid guerilla tactic in my book but I caution that if voted to be tolerated should be used with care, like a nuke.

youngdan's names seem to pose a problem but I think they are tolerable. Magic Arse may not be communicative about Brian Cowen but it is not insulting about him either - it is more comical and actually refers to a budget deficit we've hit this year which youngdan predicted last year when FF were saying there'd be no budget deficit... what do ye think of that?

I didn't know Little Prince High Heels referred to Bono until last week - these youngdan names are not so vicious and are certainly not in the league of "Gormless" or "John Brutal" which I'm going to ban rightaway unless anyone has any objections. I think YDs names have their own built-in ignore button so there.


by cactus flower Yesterday at 5:10 pm

Right on Auditor. Youngdan to me is a jewel in the crown of this site. Dean Swift is put in the happeny place. If essential, I suppose an ignore button would surely protect those who need protection from him. For me, a youngdan alert button would be more appropriate. I would then have no fear of missing one of his excoriating pieces of prose. This does not, of course mean that I share his conclusions - I just would not want to miss reading the way he reaches them.

I think we need to be careful both about having rules, and not having them. I posted some time back about my view that the site should have a standard warning for posters re untrue, damaging statements etc. I agree that the best way to start with that is to have a look at some reputable sites ( including Irish sites) and see what they say. I offer my services to make a start on that with whoever is interested to. He has been very forebearing on the issue, but both Auditor, as the begetter of the site, and posters, need some basic protection.

This site up until now has evolved with a culture that is very different to P.ie, and posters have not laid into each other. There have been excitable moments, particularly when P.ie issues have lead to posters putting stuff down that I felt might possible step over the mark. On those occasions I pm'd the poster, others spotted the same thing, and it was sorted.

We need to have an ethos as a site and a "charter" in my view solely so that our forum can continue to allow difference to co-exist and ideas be thrashed out without anyone being made to feel small or personally hurt, no matter how much their ideas are binned. I think too much big stick waving would undermine that seriously.
Modding, if numbers of posters and posting rates go, will certainly need to become as consistent, fair and unrestrictive as we can make it. We also need a contingency plan as to how to handle it if P.ie was closed for any reason and we got a large and sudden influx of new members.

In my mind, being illegal and hurting people's feeling through personal or racist abuse would be the lines in the sand that posts should not cross. TG, I don't think I have seen anything of that yet.

Quote :

[quote

[quote] youngdan Today at 6:45 am

Not the battery on me, the batteries on the auld camcorder. I will refrain from name calling of Irish politicians as well because even though his detracters think it is funny it is not my intention to irritate posters like Ibis who have given a lot here

ibis wrote:
cookiemonster wrote:
Apart from the many obvious barriers between that bloke and myself having any sort of physical relationship, his eyes are creepy. Very creepy.


You don't think he's cute? I think he's cute...cute but off-topic.

Ah now, there is no on-topic in machine nation.


It is wrong wrong wrong. Where is madura to help me out with her ability to be offended by things that don't remotely affect her. She'd help me glower.

Good work so far, cf.

Would it be worthwhile to put together a content team of sorts to work on a mod policy on a private forum and then present it for discussion? It's too much work for one person to do and will take forever if we go about building it in a very general way.

Already the site is mushrooming in terms of poster numbers, topics and posts and it would be a good idea to have something concrete ready fairly soon so that we all don't get fixed in what might become bad habits.

A couple of days could do a lot if we put our heads together. What think ye?

I'll volunteer my services anyway.

Kate P wrote:

Good work so far, cf.

Would it be worthwhile to put together a content team of sorts to work on a mod policy on a private forum and then present it for discussion? It's too much work for one person to do and will take forever if we go about building it in a very general way.

Already the site is mushrooming in terms of poster numbers, topics and posts and it would be a good idea to have something concrete ready fairly soon so that we all don't get fixed in what might become bad habits.

A couple of days could do a lot if we put our heads together. What think ye?

I'll volunteer my services anyway.

Agree, and willing to take part.

I think that the underlying ethos of a site is the most important thing in the end - whether its a particular agenda, or just the principle of open discussion.
This can come from the site owner, or if the site owner chooses, the posters I suppose. Also, the posters have their own ethos/agenda that might be the same or quite a bit different to the owner.

The more people put down of the views about this - notdevsson wrote a good post yesterday as did others I've quoted - the easier it would be to get a good result everyone will feel happy with.

Quote :

The more people put down of the views about this - notdevsson wrote a good post yesterday as did others I've quoted - the easier it would be to get a good result everyone will feel happy with.

With you 100% on that. A draft policy will have to come from somewhere centralised though - and this and other threads should feed into that directly.

The sooner that happens, the better. Things are moving very quickly here.

cactus flower wrote:

Kate P wrote:

Good work so far, cf.

Would it be worthwhile to put together a content team of sorts to work on a mod policy on a private forum and then present it for discussion? It's too much work for one person to do and will take forever if we go about building it in a very general way.

Already the site is mushrooming in terms of poster numbers, topics and posts and it would be a good idea to have something concrete ready fairly soon so that we all don't get fixed in what might become bad habits.

A couple of days could do a lot if we put our heads together. What think ye?

I'll volunteer my services anyway.

Agree, and willing to take part.

I think that the underlying ethos of a site is the most important thing in the end - whether its a particular agenda, or just the principle of open discussion.
This can come from the site owner, or if the site owner chooses, the posters I suppose. Also, the posters have their own ethos/agenda that might be the same or quite a bit different to the owner.

The more people put down of the views about this - notdevsson wrote a good post yesterday as did others I've quoted - the easier it would be to get a good result everyone will feel happy with.

So will I of course and very good posts there Kate. It's getting time
now to settle it a little and give it a bit of direction and some
focus. As you say, before bad habits take root.

I'm interested in perhaps working out focusing the content so if anyone has ideas or needs or flashes of inspiration please let me know.

Hermes wrote:

Nonsense? Because I disagree with you? What a sheltered existence you must lead.

Perhaps I am over-sensitive - but I had hoped to avoid reprising this aspect of p.ie, where posters feel free to respond with personal abuse (even mild as above).

ibis wrote:

Hermes wrote:

Nonsense? Because I disagree with you? What a sheltered existence you must lead.

Perhaps I am over-sensitive - but I had hoped to avoid reprising this aspect of p.ie, where posters feel free to respond with personal abuse (even mild as above).

What did you say to him, Ibis???
Seriously though, sometimes the site has days that are a little bit tetchier than the normal constructive vibe. Perhaps we need some kind of barometer in the portal to show when tensions (of various kinds) are building?

I also think that some form of "holding pen" that would allow posts to be held out of view temporarily whilst advice is taken would be very useful, if technically feasible. It would allow us to fire fight if we think the site might be getting into trouble with the option of restoring posts when things if that turns out to be the right thing to do.

The site owner is the most vulnerable person in all this: I think we need him to let us know if we should proceed as suggested by Kate.

I don't think you're over-senstive, ibis. The last part of what you quoted caught my eye too.

The Sandbox doesn't have a mod at the moment.

But as a case in point - and with respect to Hermes who didn't post it with the intention of having it discussed here, what's a good way to deal with something like this - even, as you say, mild as it is. I don't think it's in the spirit of MN.

And let me reaffirm that this is not about the poster but about the issues raised by the post.

Is sending a pm the way to respond? Asking politely (as an observer or the recipient of the post) for it to be removed as it's not in the spirit of MN where even mild personal assumptions and criticisms are discouraged.

Doing this by pm alerts the poster to something they may not have considered as particularly personal, gives them choice - which is really important in all negotiations - and avoids the pages-long narky posting that can ensue.

And I think mods should have a policy to delete a disputed post without warning or explanation where it is repeated or quoted by other posters.

Maybe cc ing a mod at the same time as pm ing the poster might not be a bad idea.

I got into a horrible twist with a poster on p.ie late one night and we agreed to delete our respective posts but then I had to ask several other posters to delete their quotes and their comments - which as it happens, were critical of my 'opponent' and not me. And they happily did that but it's messy.

Quote :

I also think that some form of "holding pen" that would allow posts to be held out of view temporarily whilst advice is taken would be very useful, if technically feasible. It would allow us to fire fight if we think the site might be getting into trouble with the option of restoring posts when things if that turns out to be the right thing to do.

(Does anyone else miss the old quote function, by the way?)

There is a 'basket' or holding place for disputed material - but that's not possible to implement in this instance because this forum doesn't have a mod. And may not have a mod online when something arises.

Which is why we need to have other ways of dealing with posts we are not happy with.

I'm glad actually that Hermes did include that line - not because it's critical of ibis, which I wouldn't wish, but because it is mild and at the same time gives a real context for discussion. I don't think there was any malice in it, just tetchiness, as you say.

I wasn't looking to start a flame war. I most certainly didn't intend to drag the thread of topic. However, I think my response was a lot milder and a lot less tetchy than the comment it answered.

I'm all for the idea of playing the ball and not the man. But I think if mild rebukes are scrubbed, resentments will build and long term disputes will arise to be fought out in out of context ways in unrelated threads. Others will join in and threads will become a mess with regard to moderation.

Possibly a solution to this would be for a moderator to jump into any such 'discusion' and referee such an exchange, so that no fatalities occur?

Hermes wrote:

I wasn't looking to start a flame war. I most certainly didn't intend to drag the thread of topic. However, I think my response was a lot milder and a lot less tetchy than the comment it answered.

I'm all for the idea of playing the ball and not the man. But I think if mild rebukes are scrubbed, resentments will build and long term disputes will arise to be fought out in out of context ways in unrelated threads. Others will join in and threads will become a mess with regard to moderation.

Possibly a solution to this would be for a moderator to jump into any such 'discusion' and referee such an exchange, so that no fatalities occur?

Ready to jump, Sir!

As a follow up to the above, formative moments are important: the nice cup of tea given to new members is I think very important and helps to set a tone.

Could the Sign in here please thread by made easier to spot for new members? and could we have a Nuts and Bolts advice technical section on how the site is works for users.

Here's the whole piece for context, if that's okay.

I think that ibis is tetchy but his focus is on the content of what Hermes wrote.

What you say about resentment building is important, Hermes but the difficulty is with a) whether there will always be a mod around to referee and b) whether that's desirable from the perspective of the site, the mod and the posters.

An aim would have to be, I think, to avoid others joining in and creating a moderatorship mess.

Quote :

by Hermes Today at 9:10 am

ibis wrote:
Hermes wrote:
Thanks for the info EVM, I didn't know any of that.

I'm not too surprised that Mr. Gormley wants electronic voting, it's the only hope he's got to ever get elected again, provided someone creatively programs the machines.

Sigh. I was rather hoping to avoid this kind of nonsense here. I voted for Gormley, and on his record so far, I see no reason not to do so again. Little nodding emoticons won't be making much difference.
Hermes wrote:
Isn't there another scandal to be followed regarding the huge cost of storing these machines? And isn't it the friend of a friend who owns the storage facility (if you get my drift)?

Lots of follow the money possibilities on this one.

The friend of a friend of John Gormley?Nonsense? Because I disagree with you? What a sheltered existence you must lead.

As for the use of emoticons: I used this to temper my remark, to show that it was overstated and meant to be taken lightly. If you don't like emoticons I suggest you start a campaign here to discontinue their use. Don't moan to me; I don't care.

And for the record, since it seems to matter: I'm not in the least impressed with Mr. Gormley and his alleged performance.

Regarding your last question, that asked if I was referring to Mr. Gormley: No. The friend of a friend of Martin Cullen (the minister responsible for the machines). The contract to store many of these machines was awarded to a company in Mr. Cullen's own constituency. The cost to store these machines was something close to five times what it woud have cost anywhere else. Here's a quote from the Waterford News & Star, that explains why this contract was awarded:

“The requirements for the winning tender outlined by the Waterford returning officer included insulation in the roof, walls and floors, two technical offices, universal access, car parking, a shower and a central location near Waterford courthouse.”

Hermes wrote:

I wasn't looking to start a flame war. I most certainly didn't intend to drag the thread of topic. However, I think my response was a lot milder and a lot less tetchy than the comment it answered.

I'm all for the idea of playing the ball and not the man. But I think if mild rebukes are scrubbed, resentments will build and long term disputes will arise to be fought out in out of context ways in unrelated threads. Others will join in and threads will become a mess with regard to moderation.

Actually, the reason I brought that specific comment up is that it is a good example of a purely personal remark.

The comments where this started look like this:

ibis wrote:

Hermes wrote:

I'm not too surprised that Mr. Gormley wants
electronic voting, it's the only hope he's got to ever get elected
again, provided someone creatively programs the machines.

Sigh.
I was rather hoping to avoid this kind of nonsense here. I voted for
Gormley, and on his record so far, I see no reason not to do so again.
Little nodding emoticons won't be making much difference.

And the response was as given previously.

I wouldn't have had any objection to a response to the effect that my comment was also rubbish. I don't have any problem with tetchiness. What I object to is the addendum - "what a sheltered life you must lead".

That's a pointless personal remark. You don't actually know whether I lead a sheltered life - and whether I do or not is entirely irrelevant.

Hermes wrote:

Possibly a solution to this would be for a moderator to jump into any such 'discusion' and referee such an exchange, so that no fatalities occur?

I'm beginning to agree with some of boards.ie's policies - indeed, I'm beginning to think the problem there is not their policies, but simpler abuses of power.

ibis wrote

Quote :

I'm beginning to agree with some of boards.ie's policies - indeed, I'm beginning to think the problem there is not their policies, but simpler abuses of power.

I'm not a regular boards user - or lurker even. What do you mean specifically, ibis?

Kate P wrote:

I'm glad actually that Hermes did include that line - not because it's critical of ibis, which I wouldn't wish, but because it is mild and at the same time gives a real context for discussion. I don't think there was any malice in it, just tetchiness, as you say.

It does give a real context to the concept that disagreement can (and should be) stated without getting personal. Though Lord knows I'm more guilty of that than anyone, especially after a half gallon of Tuborg.

So if Machine Nation has a constitution, maybe the affected user could make a post quoting the relevant Article, just like in real life?

E.g. If Auditor called me a rats ass, I could copy and paste the MNconstitution article which says I have a right not to be called a rats ass.?

If we get to an initial constitution, we could use the poll feature to change it by referendum ? With a minimum age eligible to vote = xxx posts ?

Maybe Auditor had foresight in calling the place Machine Nation. It is a Nation of sorts, and we are all citizens. Which means we all have a duty to make it a place worth living.

Kate P wrote:

ibis wrote

Quote :

I'm beginning to agree with some of boards.ie's policies - indeed, I'm beginning to think the problem there is not their policies, but simpler abuses of power.

I'm not a regular boards user - or lurker even. What do you mean specifically, ibis?

Part of their charter is "no personal remarks" - which seems relatively heavily (and consistently) policed.

Quote :

Maybe Auditor had foresight in calling the place Machine Nation. It is a Nation of sorts, and we are all citizens. Which means we all have a duty to make it a place worth living.

And maybe I am an anarcho-syndicalist after all.

But yes, it is a nation and I think every poster should accept the rights and responsibilities of citizenry.

Might be no harm to have a template for pms (which I think would be preferable to posts in this regard, EVM so as not to divert attention from the discussion at hand) so that the pms don't get out of hand.

Once we clarify what the process should be, I don't think there's any necessity for disputes to be public.

I also wouldn't be entirely comfortable with the equivalent of p.ie's Dev&Ed forum which has morphed into something that can be hijacked to attack or discuss individual posters. All of that should be done by pm, if it has to be done at all.

Kate P wrote:

Quote :

Maybe Auditor had foresight in calling the place Machine Nation. It is a Nation of sorts, and we are all citizens. Which means we all have a duty to make it a place worth living.

And maybe I am an anarcho-syndicalist after all.

But yes, it is a nation and I think every poster should accept the rights and responsibilities of citizenry.

Might be no harm to have a template for pms (which I think would be preferable to posts in this regard, EVM so as not to divert attention from the discussion at hand) so that the pms don't get out of hand.

Once we clarify what the process should be, I don't think there's any necessity for disputes to be public.

I also wouldn't be entirely comfortable with the equivalent of p.ie's Dev&Ed forum which has morphed into something that can be hijacked to attack or discuss individual posters. All of that should be done by pm, if it has to be done at all.

Personal example is very powerful: mods need to be courteous and considerate and not wield their power with visible glee.

There are some posters on this site with lovely manners (you know who you are) and who set the bench mark for civilised and creative discussion.

Kate P wrote:

Quote :

Maybe Auditor had foresight in calling the place Machine Nation. It is a Nation of sorts, and we are all citizens. Which means we all have a duty to make it a place worth living.

And maybe I am an anarcho-syndicalist after all.

But yes, it is a nation and I think every poster should accept the rights and responsibilities of citizenry.

Might be no harm to have a template for pms (which I think would be preferable to posts in this regard, EVM so as not to divert attention from the discussion at hand) so that the pms don't get out of hand.

Once we clarify what the process should be, I don't think there's any necessity for disputes to be public.

I also wouldn't be entirely comfortable with the equivalent of p.ie's Dev&Ed forum which has morphed into something that can be hijacked to attack or discuss individual posters. All of that should be done by pm, if it has to be done at all.

Hmm...so, say:

1. you PM the other poster
2. if the other poster does not respond, or tells you to stick it, you PM a moderator
3. moderator comes and has a look
4. at the moderator's discretion, the offending parts of the post are removed.

Appeals?