DailyIreland.org.uk???

I’ve heard of some strange hi-jacking of URL’s but this one beats them all so far. It’s a new(-ish) Loyalist discussion site, which goes under the URL of dailyireland.org.uk. The offical title of the site is The Way Forward. It would seem derived from a joint document from the British and Irish governments in July 1999 in an early attempt to unlock the impasse between Unionists and Sinn Fein over the IRA’s arms. Via Shitty First Draft!

  • Overhere

    I think this in their opening statement says it all

    Membership is restricted solely to members of the P.U.L community.

    so not much real discussion going on there then, just themselves agreeing with each other

  • My favourite URL hi jacking is

    http://www.ianpaisley.co.uk

    I thought you had to wait until the person was dead before you named things like this after someone.

  • Animus

    All you have to do is stump up the cash to purchase the domain name.

  • TL

    The kick is that if you go there and look who’s online it appears as though it is just us (aka little sluggers) checking it out…that’s a hell of a debate site it is!
    TL

  • fair_deal

    TL

    “The kick is that if you go there…”

    The site is about a week old and participation is on a vouched for basis hence the low number of members so far.

  • TL

    Fair,
    I wondered about that, do you know how you are “vouched” for?
    TL

  • fair_deal

    The developers of the website appear to a email list they started with to tell people about the site. It would appear if you are on that list you can join or if someone from that list vouches for you.

    I presume this approach is followed as it is primarily about internal debate and secondly to avoid the difficulties Love Ulster found itself in with republicans joing up and putting porn links etc on it.

  • TL

    However, they did leave it open for others “In exceptional circumstances the admin may permit users that are deemed to be a constructive addition”…. I wonder who that might be?
    TL

  • TAFKABO

    I just registered and joined, no questions asked.

    Maybe they have some clever software that determined how close together my eyes are ?

  • Of course it’s open to others, it’s open to anyone who agrees with what the founder says.

    Technically they are ‘others’.

  • Having seen the experience of previous similar sites, I’d guess they want to avoid the pointless insults and slagging off sessions.

    And to be honest, if they’re serious about,
    “defining a long term strategy and tactical approach for the future of Ulster Loyalism” then there’s not great deal of point including people in the debate whose long term-strategy is the destruction of loyalism!

    If it can avoid the sectarian crap that infested the Love Ulster site, then it just might be a useful forum for loyalists/working-class Unionists to exchange views and ideas about how they wish the political process to develop. Big “if” though.

  • TAFKABO

    Oops, spoke too soon.

    They’ve asked for an introductory message to admin before posting.

    That seems fair enough to me.in my experience, the best sites are the ones where admin keep a tight rein on basic courtesy rules.

  • Mick Fealty

    We’ve seen a fair amount of spoiling tactics on Slugger, so they have my sympathy. The owner is in a real bind though. We had a hideous locking system called TypeKey. It’s intention was to keep out comment spam, but in effect it kept out occasional visitors, and accordingly the scope and provenance of the discussions on Slugger gradually fell.

    Drawing in expert opinion is one of things that still happens on Slugger. It enriches the otherwise generalist conversation no end. Making it difficult to register or use the site keeps precisely that kind of contributor out. But then so does the kind low level sniping and distructive systematic attacking that apparently did for the Love Ulster site.

    Mick Fealty

  • TL

    TAFKABO,
    let us know if you make the cut!
    TL

  • sohnlein

    When Big Ian goes they will be naming the airport after him!

  • TL

    What does that have to do with anything?
    TL

  • They already have named the airport after him

    http://www.ianpaisley.co.uk

  • I can assure you that the site is most definetly NOT named after the joint document from the British and Irish governments in July 1999. Thanks.

  • Well you obviously forgot that there was a way forward document already published.

    Silly boy.

  • missfitz

    I got nervous about signing up, thought I might be recognised! Anyway, does everyone remember the controversy several years back when marymcaleese.com and bertieahern.com were both found to be pron sites.
    To save you all the trouble, i checked. Bertie has changed all domains associated with his name into offical sites and our Mary seems to have bloked anyhting with her name attahced. This is in answer to who ever thought you had to be dead before your site could be nicked

  • I was being facetious..ffs..

    I just thought it was funny that somebody has redirected http://www.ianpaisley.co.uk to Belfast International Airport.

    I mean, why?

    And more importantly, does Belfast International Airport know about this?

  • TAFKABO

    OK.

    Here’s how it went.

    They requested an introductory private message to admin.
    So I sent them this message.

    “I consider myself a very leftwing liberal unionist.I rarely find much to agree with when it comes to other unionists, apart from the fact that I support the union.
    Here’s wishing you the best of luck on the launch of your site.
    I hope it provides some interesting discussions.

    If you know SluggerO’Toole, you’ll recognise my username from there.

    Slàn.

    I just checked and they replied with this message.

    Thanks you for your registration.

    The Way Forward’s verification process would normally require more information (including referee) than you have provided however the admin accept your introductory statement as being truthful.

    However given the derogortary (sic) nature of your initial views of the site, posted elsewhere on-line, the Admin does not feel you would be either a constructive or trustworthy addition to serious debate.

    Your membership will be deleted automatically. Feel free to post within the Open Forum.

    Thanks again for your interest

    So, there you have it.
    I have been judged and found wanting.
    It would appear that our friends are reading this thread, so with that in mind I shall say this to them.
    I have no intention of contributing to any forum where I have some second class status (I mean a place where people have special privelages determined by how well they fit the establishment credentials ferfuxsake, it’s hardly looking forward if you start off by repeating the mistakes of the past, is it?)

    I still wish you guys all the best of luck, only now I think you’re really going to need it.

  • TL

    Well TAFKABO that gave me a hell of a laugh! Thanks!
    It’s their loss i’d say.

    TL

  • tb

    Dont post on slugger, more of a watcher, but as a quasi-nationalist (i think with some common sense) after looking at this site i actually have a bit of respect for who ever is doing it. There is nothing about the look of the site or its purported goal that is intrinsically bad. To back up the comments of overhere and paul above look at the open forum they provided now- those intelligent people contributing to debate within the site would have been a real help wouldnt they? Why are some people rubbishing this? If Loyalism had tried this years ago we could be in a different country today. And to be truthful TAFKABO how could they court debate among a group of people that have a fair amount of paranoia by adding you, knowing full well that any comment or remark you dont like will be posted here and anywhere else the notion takes. If you seriously wanted to have any role within that site it wouldnt have a running commentary here.
    This topic has justified their stance. Definetly. Good luck to them.

  • TAFKABO

    Overhere.

    I think you misunderstand my position.
    I initially said that they were right to set out strict conditions for membership.
    I didn’t post anything over here until I had been rejected as a member (for what I consider rather trivial reasons).
    I would have been happy to abide by any rules they laid out, just as I try to abide by the rules of this site.
    I repeat that I think a site which is strictly moderated tends to be a better place for debate, but you can take it too far.

  • P

    The point of it is to be a secure forum for debate. They only want sensible debate and sensible membership. Too many forums have been hijacked and turned into slagging matches. The security may be a bit stringent but there is no 2nd class citizenship involved. people have the right to debate in private away from prying eyes