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
The problem with Feedback
Options
-
09-01-2009 4:38pm#1I've been thinking about this for a while, I hope the admins will take the time to read this and let us know what they think.
I do love boards in many ways but I've gotta say I think the feedback mechanism for this site (i.e. this forum, Feedback) is somewhat lacking. This is not a rant, this is an observation which I've been thinking about for some time and I hope it can be constructive.
Most websites have a means of communicating feedback to the site operators. Usually via an email address. It rarely takes the form of something that allows any member (any old joe soap) to chip in with their 2 cents by replying to the feedback. This is how it happens on boards.ie and this, in my opinion, has resulted in a culture of veiled slight hostility to many feedback threads in this forum. Some of them maybe deserve it but many of them don't - I think this may discourage people from delivering genuine constructive feedback. I feel that this is bad for boards.ie and it is at odds with how customer service systems/feedback mechanisms/whatever you want to call them.
Many items of Feedback are picked over and torn to pieces by people who do not have any interest in improving the site, many of whom are moderators who are not employed or authorised by the owners to reply to feedback on behalf of the owners. Yet to an inexperienced user, any moderator might be taken as the "official" voice of boards.ie.
This culture of hostility to feedback from users has also resulted in those tiresome "Have you PMed the mods?" and "Links/examples please?" replies. Sometimes they are necessary, but by and large they tend to establish an immediate air of suspicion about someone's feedback which is frequently not deserved. They also add to the impression that any joe soap, moderator or otherwise, is qualified to make judgements or otherwise act on feedback to the site, which is not the case. They are at odds with an air of professionalism which would be expected from most large websites such as this.
I might appear to run the risk of drowning in my own negativity, so here is my suggestion as to how the above problems could be remedied: Reverse the roles of the Help Desk and Feedback forums, and clarify and enforce the distinction between each forum. This is how it would work:
-Open the Help Desk so everyone can reply. If someone has a query as to how the place is run, they can turn to the Help Desk where many members will probably be happy to help them out. This site is full of helpful people after all. Strictly no grievances/rants/ban appeals allowed here, only people looking for some assistance of some sort.
-Close the Feedback forum so anyone can start a thread containing feedback on how the site is run, but only admins/smods (or maybe even admins only) can reply. If someone has a grievance, it goes here. Obviously, trolls and nuisance users should not be tolerated but I think people delivering genuine constructive feedback should not be discouraged from doing so by a general air of negativity. Perhaps a "suggestion box" mechanism whereby feedback could be sent invisibly (but not anonymously) could be looked into, maybe something like the Reported Posts forum.
We all love a good debate on this site and lot of us secretly love a big trainwreck of a thread. But I don't think the feedback mechanism for a company is the place for this. I think some changes in how feedback is delivered to the people who run the site would be a very positive thing for boards.ie. My key point is that every user/moderator does not have the ability to constructively act on feedback delivered to the site and therefore should not be given the ability to reply to that feedback - feedback should be read by the site owners, it can be ignored if necessary, but it should not be open to debate.
We've seen some positive changes since this forum was actively moderated (although part of me misses the lolcats) but I think more changes are necessary. Maybe this could be carefully looked into when the Community Manager is taken on. Thanks for reading
Post edited by Shield on9
Comments
-
Most websites have a means of communicating feedback to the site operators. Usually via an email address. It rarely takes the form of something that allows any member (any old joe soap) to chip in with their 2 cents by replying to the feedback. This is how it happens on boards.ie and this, in my opinion, has resulted in a culture of veiled slight hostility to many feedback threads in this forum. Some of them maybe deserve it but many of them don't - I think this may discourage people from delivering genuine constructive feedback. I feel that this is bad for boards.ie and it is at odds with how customer service systems/feedback mechanisms/whatever you want to call them.
Other forums I frequent utilise public and private feedback options. Might be the way to go? Although for all I know there is already an alternative feedback route that I am unaware of...Many items of Feedback are picked over and torn to pieces by people who do not have any interest in improving the site, many of whom are moderators who are not employed or authorised by the owners to reply to feedback on behalf of the owners. Yet to an inexperienced user, any moderator might be taken as the "official" voice of boards.ie.
:eek: I thought mods were 'authorities'
This culture of hostility to feedback from users has also resulted in those tiresome "Have you PMed the mods?" and "Links/examples please?" replies. Sometimes they are necessary, but by and large they tend to establish an immediate air of suspicion about someone's feedback which is frequently not deserved. They also add to the impression that any joe soap, moderator or otherwise, is qualified to make judgements or otherwise act on feedback to the site, which is not the case. They are at odds with an air of professionalism which would be expected from most large websites such as this.
Ppl do get away with a bit in these thread alright.
Two questions:
How often do things requiring real 'feedback' come up?
Do site admins actually care?
(Thoughtful post btw, gj)0 -
-
-
Other forums I frequent utilise public and private feedback options. Might be the way to go? Although for all I know there is already an alternative feedback route that I am unaware of...
Nope, unless maybe you could get hold of the email address of one of the admins and email them, although that is definitely not an official way of making feedback:eek: I thought mods were 'authorities'
In a way, but only in whatever little corner of boards they moderate. They can make policies for their own forums but do not have any say in how the site as a whole is run.Two questions:
How often do things requiring real 'feedback' come up?
Good question - I reckon more feedback, and higher-quality constructive feedback, would be made if some changes were implemented.Do site admins actually care?
I don't know, I'm sure they do, I think it would certainly be in their interest to care and to take good feedback into account.(Thoughtful post btw, gj)
Cheers :cool:0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Earthhorse wrote: »I agree but I can't think of the last time I saw a good, genuinely thought out idea derided in Feedback. Honestly, I can't. Feedback was, and still sometimes is, quite a brutal place but I think posters often only have themselves to blame. When people are polite in their posts they are usually responded to in kind.
Translation: "Links/examples please?"
:D 0 -
-
Translation: "Links/examples please?":D
Ha, ha. I was going to post that but I didn't want to make cornbb mad. It's called diplomacy!Its true that the longer people have been here, the wiser and more helpful they tend to get, but experience alone does not qualify users/mods to speak on behalf of the site.
They speak on behalf of the community which is the most valuable part of the site.0 -
-
-
Earthhorse wrote: »Ha, ha. I was going to post that but I didn't want to make cornbb mad. It's called diplomacy!
I expected "Links??" to be the first reply to the thread tbhThey speak on behalf of the community which is the most valuable part of the site.
It is true that the opinions of very experienced users tend to carry more weight, and its true that its important to take into account the wishes of the community, but I think sometimes its more appropriate for the admins to make "executive decisions". I don't think this happens enough, or at least its not visible enough.In my experience, these types of threads rarely have a positive outcome because of what Earthhorse describes here:
The vast majority of threads which get derided in feedback tend to be just steam-letting. If you ask the poster to put their thoughts into the form of a suggestion or constructive feedback, they're largely unwilling or sometimes incapable of doing this.
Which is why I suggest that the person who is privately dealing with the feedback can talk to the person directly and tease out exactly what it is that the person is trying to achieve and help them put it into a format which doesn't just sound like a 1500-word rant.
This is a good point. Even if one assigned person is privately dealing with feedback it can still be ignored and laughed at if it is deemed to be unconstructive. I don't think "the mob" has the ability to separate the good stuff from the bad stuff a lot of the time.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
Advertisement