- Status
ubiquitous
Registered User
- Messages
- 3,782
I thought Gene Kerrigan's article yesterday was an excellent, and not unsympathetic, assessment of Lawlor's career in public life.
Lawlor himself would never have claimed to be a saint, nor was he. On the other hand, for all his many faults, he was never the ogre that some people made him out to be. He was certainly a long way from being the worst politician of our era, and even at his worst, his shenanigans pale into comparision against those of his peers who were (or are??) involved in and/or supported organised campaigns of murder, extortion, gun-running & racketeering on this island.
Lawlor himself would never have claimed to be a saint, nor was he. On the other hand, for all his many faults, he was never the ogre that some people made him out to be. He was certainly a long way from being the worst politician of our era, and even at his worst, his shenanigans pale into comparision against those of his peers who were (or are??) involved in and/or supported organised campaigns of murder, extortion, gun-running & racketeering on this island.
ubiquitous said:
And for this we should be grateful?
The man was a bad, bad egg, whose lack of ethics and regard for the community he was elected to serve impacted on the lives of thousands. My only pity is that by dying, he will never be held accountable for his hideous and corrupt actions.
If the upside of his existence is that he wasn't as bad as some others, it speaks volumes for the type of person he was.
D
daltonr
Guest
I don't want to open a discussion about Moderating Decisions, but it really was a bit silly locking this thread. It was balanced and respectful and it's not like the rest of the country wasn't discussing the issue.
We're all adults here. AAM had criticism of Independant Newspapers long before the rest of the Media started hammering them. AAM basically ended up having no discussion on what was a hugely serious issue for the country, The Need for a A Press Council, The right's wrongs of publishing unchecked facts. The rights of family members in cases of posthumus reporting.
Not to mention the right of people who live daily in the reality of bad planning in Dublin to discuss one of the Architects of the Dublin Landscape as we know it.
I'm sure the thread could have been moderated better than your average Sunday Independant Column and could only have helped raise the standard of public discussion about Mr Lawlor.
I suspect the moment is gone now, so I'm not sure if any of these issues will get the discussion they might have gotten last week.
Just my 2c
-Rd
We're all adults here. AAM had criticism of Independant Newspapers long before the rest of the Media started hammering them. AAM basically ended up having no discussion on what was a hugely serious issue for the country, The Need for a A Press Council, The right's wrongs of publishing unchecked facts. The rights of family members in cases of posthumus reporting.
Not to mention the right of people who live daily in the reality of bad planning in Dublin to discuss one of the Architects of the Dublin Landscape as we know it.
I'm sure the thread could have been moderated better than your average Sunday Independant Column and could only have helped raise the standard of public discussion about Mr Lawlor.
I suspect the moment is gone now, so I'm not sure if any of these issues will get the discussion they might have gotten last week.
Just my 2c
-Rd
With all due respect, you didn't see the comment that was deleted & led to my decision to close the thread. In the week that a family was burying a husband/father, I'm just not going to let such comments sit in the public domain, or risk further such comments arising.
If these issues really were important 7 days ago, they are still important now. Let the debate on LL roll on...
If these issues really were important 7 days ago, they are still important now. Let the debate on LL roll on...
D
daltonr
Guest
>you didn't see the comment that was deleted
Isn't that the point of moderator's? Sounds to me like you moderated the thread perfectly before closing it.
Anyway. Forget it, As I said I'm not going to argue about it. I thought it was overkill to lock it. What's done is done. I only posted in the hope that in future you might be more reluctant to lock threads like this. End of Issue.
-Rd
Isn't that the point of moderator's? Sounds to me like you moderated the thread perfectly before closing it.
Anyway. Forget it, As I said I'm not going to argue about it. I thought it was overkill to lock it. What's done is done. I only posted in the hope that in future you might be more reluctant to lock threads like this. End of Issue.
-Rd
As the person who made the offending comment, I accept the moderators right to remove it. While I wasn't overcome with grief at Lawlor's passing, I accept that it could have upset those who were.
That said, the thread had resumed and was proceding along the lines of discussing the man's legacy. While not exactly flattering, it represpented the views of those who chose to contribute. To suggest thatthe thread was closed because of the offending comment, therefore, is simply untrue. I suspect their are other factors at play as to why the thread was dropped.
A question for the moderators - do you regard this site as so important and high profile that the it's something the Lawlor family would have been drawn to in the week they were having?
And why shouldn't DaltonR (and others) continue to challenge the moderators' actions where they're regarded as being excessive. Surely a right of reply is a fundamental right of any civilised society. DaltonR and others should be entitled to make their feelings known without being shouted down each time with a curt referemnce to the rules. I accept that rules exit for a reason, but it doesn't mean they're always right.
That said, the thread had resumed and was proceding along the lines of discussing the man's legacy. While not exactly flattering, it represpented the views of those who chose to contribute. To suggest thatthe thread was closed because of the offending comment, therefore, is simply untrue. I suspect their are other factors at play as to why the thread was dropped.
A question for the moderators - do you regard this site as so important and high profile that the it's something the Lawlor family would have been drawn to in the week they were having?
And why shouldn't DaltonR (and others) continue to challenge the moderators' actions where they're regarded as being excessive. Surely a right of reply is a fundamental right of any civilised society. DaltonR and others should be entitled to make their feelings known without being shouted down each time with a curt referemnce to the rules. I accept that rules exit for a reason, but it doesn't mean they're always right.
D
daltonr
Guest
Magoo,
Just to be fair to Rainyday in this instance, there is no problem with me passing comment on a Moderator's decision. AAM is very good in terms of right to reply.
All the Mods ask is that they be allowed to moderate the site without having to explain their decision, and I agree with that. Otherwise the site would be nothing but arguments over Mod Decisions.
As I said above I didn't want to get into a discussion of the rights and wrongs of this particular decision, I didn't want Rainyday to explain himself. I just wanted to make the comment so that in future we could possibly leave threads like this open. It was feedback more than argument, if that makes sense.
-Rd
Just to be fair to Rainyday in this instance, there is no problem with me passing comment on a Moderator's decision. AAM is very good in terms of right to reply.
All the Mods ask is that they be allowed to moderate the site without having to explain their decision, and I agree with that. Otherwise the site would be nothing but arguments over Mod Decisions.
As I said above I didn't want to get into a discussion of the rights and wrongs of this particular decision, I didn't want Rainyday to explain himself. I just wanted to make the comment so that in future we could possibly leave threads like this open. It was feedback more than argument, if that makes sense.
-Rd
Hi Magoo - Are you telepathic? Unless you are able to read my mind, I don't see how you can state that "To suggest thatthe thread was closed because of the offending comment, therefore, is simply untrue". Why don't you get your suspicions of other factors up on the table for all to see?
I accept that it is fairly unlikely, though not impossible that the Lawlor family would have seen the comments on the site. However, that small risk is not worth taking. I had seen other threads about Lawlor over on boards.ie descend into scurrilous abuse with no supporting evidence.
Let me turn your 'so important & high profile' question around the other direction. Do you regard your ability to post nasty comment on the recently deceased on this little site so important as to be worth the small risk of offending a grieving family?
And if you want a good reason for the general rule as to why we don't discuss moderation decisions, have a look at the Feedback forum over at boards.ie where they get involved in interminable bouts of whinging & moaning about the why's and the wherefore's. We all have better things to do with our time.
I accept that it is fairly unlikely, though not impossible that the Lawlor family would have seen the comments on the site. However, that small risk is not worth taking. I had seen other threads about Lawlor over on boards.ie descend into scurrilous abuse with no supporting evidence.
Let me turn your 'so important & high profile' question around the other direction. Do you regard your ability to post nasty comment on the recently deceased on this little site so important as to be worth the small risk of offending a grieving family?
And if you want a good reason for the general rule as to why we don't discuss moderation decisions, have a look at the Feedback forum over at boards.ie where they get involved in interminable bouts of whinging & moaning about the why's and the wherefore's. We all have better things to do with our time.
D
daltonr
Guest
Rainyday, you could have just left it, why did you have to go posting that last post?
Remarks about people being telepathic is just provocative and doesn't help.
-Rd
Remarks about people being telepathic is just provocative and doesn't help.
-Rd
Hi RD - Thanks for proving exactly why we don't get into discussion of moderator decisions. It inevitably descends into this kind of farce. Maybe my response was intemperate, but I take some offence at being told (incorrectly) what is going on inside my own head.
So before it goes any further, I'm closing the thread (again).
So before it goes any further, I'm closing the thread (again).
- Status