Ranting and raving forum

Galvasean

So basically, the arguments against R&R boil down to, "I don't personally like this forum... kill it!"

AlmightyCushion

copacetic wrote: »

Well personally I don't think saying it's no worse than some other forum is a good enough reason to have it. Is that really all we've got?

This thread is about the R&R forum, not about any of the others, if someone started a thread on them I'd jump in with my opinion. Or maybe not, that'd be up to me. Unless of course, the thread was in R&R. Then your opinion would only be allowed if you agreed with whatever the OP said.

It was just the way you said it. To me it seemed that you thought all that R&R was the only forum dragging boards down. You said who thought we could get any lower. So it seemed to me you were saying R&R is the worst of the worst so I was just defending it in that regards.

Some people hate R&R, some people love it. I just can't see why the people who hate it just don't go into the forum. Same with every other forum that they hate.

copacetic

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

It was just the way you said it. To me it seemed that you thought all that R&R was the only forum dragging boards down. You said who thought we could get any lower. So it seemed to me you were saying R&R is the worst of the worst so I was just defending it in that regards.

Some people hate R&R, some people love it. I just can't see why the people who hate it just don't go into the forum. Same with every other forum that they hate.

For me at least I know if I wanted to get involved in an all out vitrolic slanging match in the thunderdome then I could. It's the policy of no debate on R&R thats the killer for me. Thats what I meant by going lower, for me R&R is After Hours without the high level debate. Which is what I meant by saying it was worse that it.

I try to avoid the forum, but it comes up on the front page a lot and the topics are usually those that aren't obviously R&R topics. They are often topics that belong in other forums. Personally I've clicked in on quite a few before I've realised they were in R&R.

So yep, I if I was in charge I'd close the forum in a heartbeat. If it just didn't appear on the frontpage or new posts I'd be happy enough too I guess.

Nerin

copacetic wrote: »

For me at least I know if I wanted to get involved in an all out vitrolic slanging match in the thunderdome then I could. It's the policy of no debate on R&R thats the killer for me. Thats what I meant by going lower, for me R&R is After Hours without the high level debate. Which is what I meant by saying it was worse that it.

I try to avoid the forum, but it comes up on the front page a lot and the topics are usually those that aren't obviously R&R topics. They are often topics that belong in other forums. Personally I've clicked in on quite a few before I've realised they were in R&R.

So yep, I if I was in charge I'd close the forum in a heartbeat. If it just didn't appear on the frontpage or new posts I'd be happy enough too I guess.

change your front page to subbed forums.
its what i do.
you can sort it in the user cp, then sub to all the forums youre into.

AlmightyCushion

copacetic wrote: »

For me at least I know if I wanted to get involved in an all out vitrolic slanging match in the thunderdome then I could. It's the policy of no debate on R&R thats the killer for me. Thats what I meant by going lower, for me R&R is After Hours without the high level debate. Which is what I meant by saying it was worse that it.

I try to avoid the forum, but it comes up on the front page a lot and the topics are usually those that aren't obviously R&R topics. They are often topics that belong in other forums. Personally I've clicked in on quite a few before I've realised they were in R&R.

So yep, I if I was in charge I'd close the forum in a heartbeat. If it just didn't appear on the frontpage or new posts I'd be happy enough too I guess.

I know a forum can be made so that it's posts don't appear on the frontpage, not sure about new posts though. I personally don't have a problem with it's posts being removed from the front page and new posts. I can't speak for everyone but if doing this is something that keeps the people who hate R&R happy then I think it would make a nice compromise. Allowing counter rants would just make the forum pointless (It may as well just be after hours) and the reason we stopped allowing counter rants was because a lot of the community there wanted it so I really don't think allowing counter rants is a feasible option.

copacetic

Nerin wrote: »

change your front page to subbed forums.
its what i do.
you can sort it in the user cp, then sub to all the forums youre into.

I don't like to avoid the rest of boards, often you see something in a forum you don't frequent that interests you.

I'd have to sub to every forum except for R&R for that to work.

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

I know a forum can be made so that it's posts don't appear on the frontpage, not sure about new posts though. I personally don't have a problem with it's posts being removed from the front page and new posts. I can't speak for everyone but if doing this is something that keeps the people who hate R&R happy then I think it would make a nice compromise. Allowing counter rants would just make the forum pointless (It may as well just be after hours) and the reason we stopped allowing counter rants was because a lot of the community there wanted it so I really don't think allowing counter rants is a feasible option.

I'm not sure I agree with this, the forum was created without that rule. If it was then found to be pointless then it should have been closed. For me it's a little less pointless if debate is at least allowed. I can see it is a moderation nightmare though. The community wanting no counter rants is imo a sign of exactly what I'm saying, they want to have childish, cowardly 'rants' with no comeback. Then, I would say that I guess.

Ponster

There is no debate. As 5starpool said....

It is one of the most pointless forums of Boards.ie but all you have to do is ignore the topics and life goes on happily as before...

While I may respect the R&R mods...I'd enjoy seeing any of them actually defend the existence of the forum as defined by the current charter.

Galvasean

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

I know a forum can be made so that it's posts don't appear on the frontpage, not sure about new posts though. I personally don't have a problem with it's posts being removed from the front page and new posts. I can't speak for everyone but if doing this is something that keeps the people who hate R&R happy then I think it would make a nice compromise.

I'd actually be quite pleased with this. R&R has had time to establish a core group of users and subscribers. They could (and do) reccomend it to like minded users. It could help keep out the trollsa and the begrudgers.

AlmightyCushion

Ponster wrote: »

While I may respect the R&R mods...I'd enjoy seeing any of them actually defend the existence of the forum as defined by the current charter.

Isn't that what we are doing here?

orestes

Jesus bloody hell, has it really come to mods calling each others forums pointless and challenging them to defend their mere existance? Am I the only one who thinks this is getting ridiculous?

If you don't like a forum just ignore it, how hard is that, seriously?

Slidey

No. Its petty and pointless.

There is numerous other forums that I consider pure shyte but would stay out of them and mind my own business

Ponster

Nope. R&R is a forum that goes against the whole idea of what Boards.ie is *suppose* to be.

The idea of having public forum where someone can post a rant/complaint and no-body has the right to counter that 'rant' just seems 'anti-boards' and I'd love to see our founders opinion on this matter.

Fine...let people rant. But if they are wrong then let others have the right to point out their mistakes.

I understand that a forum where people can vent could be useful, but the moderation of such a forum needs to be much more strict than it is today as the whole idea that people can't object to a rant is just petty.

Ponster

orestes wrote: »

Jesus bloody hell, has it really come to mods calling each others forums pointless...

Just because some comes up with an idea of a forum and then is made mod of said forum doesn't mean that the forum is any good nor that the member is a good mod.

Feedback is supposed to give the site admins an idea of what people think about Boards, its forums and mods.

Nerin

Ponster wrote: »

Nope. R&R is a forum that goes against the whole idea of what Boards.ie is *suppose* to be.

We should let the admins make such sweeping statements like this, since it pisses me off no end when other people tell ME what the Noc forum is or was supposed to be.

If i was DeV and i read that i'd pour myself a drink and close firefox and return to my expensive bedroom filled with expensive concubines.

orestes

Ponster wrote: »

Nope. R&R is a forum that goes against the whole idea of what Boards.ie is *suppose* to be.

The idea of having public forum where someone can post a rant/complaint and no-body has the right to counter that 'rant' just seems 'anti-boards' and I'd love to see our founders opinion on this matter.

Fine...let people rant. But if they are wrong then let others have the right to point out their mistakes.

I understand that a forum where people can vent could be useful but the moderation of such a forum needs to be much, much more strict than it is today as the whole idea that people can't object to a rant is petty.

People expressing themselves is anti-boards? I get where you're coming from about the not being allowed to counter-rant, but that is the entire point of the forum, if people wanted debate they would post in any other forum on boards. As has been pointed out here dozens of times already, if people were allowed to counter-rant it would just be AH2. There are threads in there that I don't agree with so I just don't read them, simple.

It's one forum with a very specific purpose, what's the harm in it?

Ponster

Nerin....What gets to me is that R&R is the only public forum to my knowledge that you can post something and not have to defend, support or backup what you post.

It seems like a free for all though I know it's modded as best as possible and anyone who steps outside of the charter pays the price, but it still to me seems strange that such a forum exists here.

AlmightyCushion

Ponster wrote: »

Nope. R&R is a forum that goes against the whole idea of what Boards.ie is *suppose* to be.

The idea of having public forum where someone can post a rant/complaint and no-body has the right to counter that 'rant' just seems 'anti-boards' and I'd love to see our founders opinion on this matter.

Fine...let people rant. But if they are wrong then let others have the right to point out their mistakes.

I understand that a forum where people can vent could be useful, but the moderation of such a forum needs to be much more strict than it is today as the whole idea that people can't object to a rant is just petty.

Well that depends on what you consider the idea of boards to be. Surely this differs from person to person. I believe DeV wants boards to be the centre point of all online discussion in ireland (or something like that). A lot of people from what I've seen seem to think boards is all about discussion which is fair enough. And R&R is about discussion despite some people thinking otherwise. I can't remember who said it above but in R&R consider the rant the topic and going against the rant is being off topic. There is still discussion in R&R. As for what you consider boards to be then I guess R&R goes against that.

Ponster

orestes wrote: »

It's one forum with a very specific purpose, what's the harm in it?

What stops me though from ranting against something in R&R that would be closed in other forums because it wouldn't be allowed?

Drunkenness stops me from finding concrete examples but I'd like to get back to the OP who saw a rant and decided that the rant was wrong but had no means to show the other side of the story without breaking the forum rules.

Could there ever be a R&R forum where a 'stupid' rant could be countered?

Galvasean

Ponster wrote: »

Nerin....What gets to me is that R&R is the only public forum to my knowledge that you can post something and not have to defend, support or backup what you post.

It's unique. So what?

Ponster wrote:

It seems like a free for all though. I know it's modded as best as possible and anyone who steps outside of the charter pays the price, but it still to me seems strange that such a forum exists here.

No disrespect intended, but I don't think you are fully aware of how the forum works. It's not a free for all as threads are pre-moderated and there are specific rules (outlined in the charter) to stop things getting out of hand.
Strange? I think the Mustard forum (not picking on them, its just an interesting example) is strange, but I don't go out of my way to get rid of it.

Ponster

> And R&R is about discussion despite some people thinking otherwise.

AC...I'd love to be proven wrong here but where exactly is R&R about discussion if you don't agree withe the Rant ?

AlmightyCushion

Ponster wrote: »

What stops me though from ranting against something in R&R that would be closed in other forums because it wouldn't be allowed?

Drunkenness stops me from finding concrete examples but I'd like to get back to the OP who saw a rant and decided that the rant was wrong but had no means to show the other side of the story without breaking the forum rules.

Could there ever be a R&R forum where a 'stupid' rant could be countered?

What's acceptable in after hours might not be acceptable in various other forums for example. But if you manage to come up with some examples I'd love to hear them. I tried to think of some but like yourself the drunkeness is starting to kick in (I love my stella ).

Galvasean

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

I can't remember who said it above but in R&R consider the rant the topic and going against the rant is being off topic.

I said it on this thread, but was paraphrasing Javaboy.

Ponster wrote: »

What stops me though from ranting against something in R&R that would be closed in other forums because it wouldn't be allowed?

Certain things are not allowed in all forums. Something tells me that starting a thread about dinosaurs in Motors would not be allowed.

Ponster wrote:

Drunkenness stops me from finding concrete examples

You're not sober? You probably shouldn't be having this discussion so.

Ponster wrote:

but I'd like to get back to the OP who saw a rant and decided that the rant was wrong but had no means to show the other side of the story without breaking the forum rules.

Actually she had/has every right to start her own thread.

Ponster wrote:

Could there ever be a R&R forum where a 'stupid' rant could be countered?

Most other boards forums?

star-pants

Just my 2c in this,

R&R was created for the 'omg i'm so annoyed about X , rant rant rant', without having someone come in and go 'well actually .. you're wrong, blah blah blah'. You want to get something off your chest and I go in there myself. I've vented in there before, I've started threads. If I see a thread I didn't like I don't go in. End of story.

I don't want to go 'I HATE that poo at pauls ad' and someone saying 'well it's rather a good ad acutally because XYZ'. I don't care.
It's more a rant and people jump on the bandwagon (once it doesn't get out of control).
Perhaps it should be removed from the front page if it offends people. TBH I find stuff in AH offensive, or I don't like, but it is what it is and people who like it go in there.
If R&R had 'intelligent' debate like AH, then infact, it would be just that, AH, minus the stupid comments.

There are lots of forums I don't care for or don't like what's said in them, but I just stay out. I can see peoples POV of 'why a rant, just get a blog', but the thing is that there was a need for people who liked to rant, stop them posting crap elsewhere surely.

In fairness Boards.ie is a hell of a lot more than it ever started out so saying what it's 'supposed' to be for doesn't always apply. I get that people have issues with the forum, then maybe make it a private forum with a less exclusive guest list than most. Or review the charter (although that has been done before).

AlmightyCushion

Ponster wrote: »

> And R&R is about discussion despite some people thinking otherwise.

AC...I'd love to be proven wrong here but where exactly is R&R about discussion if you don't agree withe the Rant ?

Have you never had a bit of a bitch about something with someone else. Then they join in with how that pisses them off especially when blah blah blah does such and such. I hate constantly showing this as a good example but the cries of retail thread shows just how you can rant and discuss the rant at the same time.

Ponster

Galvasean wrote: »

It's unique. So what?


Because it doesn't seem to fit in with the rest of the site works, that's all.

To me R&R seems as strange as a Feedback forum where mods/admins weren't allowed reply because members were allowed rant about their grievances.

Galvasean wrote:

No disrespect intended, but I don't think you are fully aware of how the forum works. It's not a free for all as threads are pre-moderated and there are specific rules (outlined in the charter) to stop things getting out of hand.it.

I think that after AH, the R&R mods have one of the most difficult jobs here but this all comes down to the OP.
In a pre-moderated forum why was this comment allowed to pass where the charter says that there can be no argument against :

It must be considered a form of child-abuse. The parents are either lazy or just plain twisted.

Slidey

That wasnt against the rant.

Its only the OP over there that is pre-modded

Galvasean

Ponster wrote: »

In a pre-moderated forum why was this comment allowed to pass where the charter says that there can be no argument against :

The threads ere pre-moderated, not each individual post. The quotation you provided was not in the OP and as such not subject to pre-moderation review.
A forum as busy as R&R where every last thread had to be approved would simply not be workable.

Ponster

Galvasean wrote: »

You're not sober? You probably shouldn't be having this discussion so.

It's the only way to mod man :pac:


AC... Is it the case that if someone really doesn't agree with a rant (as in the case of the OP) then they should start a counter-rant in a new thread against the original rant ?

I'd be cool with that.

Slidey

That is already the case and has being done numerous times already

AlmightyCushion

Ponster wrote: »

It's the only way to mod man :pac:


AC... Is it the case that if someone really doesn't agree with a rant (as in the case of the OP) then they should start a counter-rant in a new thread against the original rant ?

I'd be cool with that.

Well that depends. For example we had a case where there was a rant about computer illiterate people. The thread was ranting about people who were useless with computers and how they frustrated people who were good with computers. This ended up getting locked because a lot of people started ranting about computer geniuses who told them to restart their pc every time they had a problem. This ended turning into a bit of a **** storm and the thread got locked. If a second thread was started about computer geniuses giving telling people to do the same crap every bloody time they have a problem with their pc and everyone stayed to their thread and didn't try to counter rant the other thread everything would be grand in this situation. I can't guarantee that starting a new thread to counter rant an existing thread would be fine though. In most cases it would but there would be the odd occasion it wouldn't.