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

AH Modding vs Cowan

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    ch750536
    Registered Users Posts: 3,736 ✭✭✭ch750536


    aidan_walsh wrote: »
    As is your continued attempt to have AH reflooded with political threads to the vocal majority of its users, who said time and time again that they don't want politics being all that the forum is.

    There are dedicated forums for these topics where people will be more than happy to discuss the issues and your viewpoints with you. It doesn't need to be in AH.

    Show me where the majority of AH users said they did not want these threads, I have looked and found nothing of the sort.


  • Options
    #63
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    ch750536 wrote: »
    If you see that as unfounded, paranoid accusations I suggest you stay indoors and close the curtains, there may be nasty clouds out there with corners.
    Will do - thanks for the tip.


  • Options
    #64
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    ch750536 wrote: »
    Show me where the majority of AH users said they did not want these threads, I have looked and found nothing of the sort.
    Show us where they said they did want them. So far, there's a couple of people who want AH flooded with political threads and loads who don't. Shouldn't democracy be heeded?

    There's little reason to have loads of threads on the exact same thing. Sure even the racism and drugs threads are only brought out on a monthly basis.

    I like the idea mentioned before for a couple of mega threads on politics, the economy etc. No point making them stickies, as they'll stay to the front if they're popular.


  • Options
    #65
    Dav
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,840 ✭✭✭Dav


    AH is *not* the place for *any* of these discussions, but disappointingly, people don't seem to want to engage in proper discussion on these issues (which is what our Politics and Economics forums are here for), so we give some leeway on what we allow in AH on these subjects. However, to have the forum dominated by these subjects is completely out of order and merging threads like the mods have done is a much better practice.

    At this stage I have had to refund site subscriptions because AH, which was someone's last refuge from the current doom and gloom Ireland faces, has turned into politics and economics based noise and they're no longer willing to spend as much time here because of it. I'm not saying that because it has any actual relevance on the decision, I'm sharing it because this is how strongly people are feeling about threads of this nature cluttering up the place they came to Boards to enjoy.

    So, for what it's worth, I think the AH mods have definitely made the right decision.


  • Options
    #66
    ch750536
    Registered Users Posts: 3,736 ✭✭✭ch750536


    humanji wrote: »
    Show us where they said they did want them. So far, there's a couple of people who want AH flooded with political threads and loads who don't. Shouldn't democracy be heeded?

    There's little reason to have loads of threads on the exact same thing. Sure even the racism and drugs threads are only brought out on a monthly basis.

    I like the idea mentioned before for a couple of mega threads on politics, the economy etc. No point making them stickies, as they'll stay to the front if they're popular.

    So you agree that at no point did a majority of AH users say they want politics\economy threads removed? I have to ask as it has been stated as fact many times.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    AlmightyCushion
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,078 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    ch750536 wrote: »
    So you agree that at no point did a majority of AH users say they want politics\economy threads removed? I have to ask as it has been stated as fact many times.

    We don't have referendums in After Hours but there was a lot of complaining about them. Every economy thread had loads of people bitching about it, there were threads started bitching about it, there was a charter sticky where people were bitching about it. Then we decide to craic down and we have a thread in feedback where only a few people are bitching about it. Therefore, most people are happy with it.


  • Options
    #68
    OutlawPete
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    ch750536 wrote: »
    So you agree that at no point did a majority of AH users say they want politics\economy threads removed? I have to ask as it has been stated as fact many times.

    AH users voiced their opinions on the issue and majority of those that did, wanted something done about it and so it was.


  • Options
    #69
    ch750536
    Registered Users Posts: 3,736 ✭✭✭ch750536


    humanji wrote: »
    Show us where they said they did want them. So far, there's a couple of people who want AH flooded with political threads and loads who don't. Shouldn't democracy be heeded?

    There's little reason to have loads of threads on the exact same thing. Sure even the racism and drugs threads are only brought out on a monthly basis.

    I like the idea mentioned before for a couple of mega threads on politics, the economy etc. No point making them stickies, as they'll stay to the front if they're popular.

    Make your mind up. Earlier it was stated that loads of different threads were started, are you saying they were all started by the same small group of people?


  • Options
    #70
    ch750536
    Registered Users Posts: 3,736 ✭✭✭ch750536


    Thing is, you can do as you wish, you're mods and this is not a democracy. Thats fine, I can accept that. What I don't like is being told that it is what the majority wanted. That is clearly not the case.
    It was the people of AH who asked for it in the 1st place!
    People in the forum asked for it. Everytime a thread popped up people complained about it ruining to forum and making it depressing. We're listening to the people and like I said if you want you are free to use the Irish Economy forum.
    When those topics start pissing most of the people
    Lots of people don't want 10 separate threads about very similar topics
    This was a decision by popular demand.
    who said time and time again that they don't want politics being all that the forum is.
    You suggested the people of AH decide - they did
    So far, there's a couple of people who want AH flooded with political threads and loads who don't
    At this stage I have had to refund site subscriptions because AH, which was someone's last refuge from the current doom and gloom Ireland faces, has turned into politics and economics based noise and they're no longer willing to spend as much time here because of it.
    AH users voiced their opinions on the issue and majority of those that did, wanted something done and so it was

    I think a vociferous minority of people kicked up a fuss, stating this by looking at the number of people involved in the discussions vs the number of people complaining about them, comes to just over 10%. That is for every 10 people (not posts, individual posters) in a 'political' thread in the 10 day period before the merge there is 1 person complaining.

    The mods want to do what they did, fine. Don't say it was done for the majority because it wasnt. It was done because those who shouted loudest were the ones who didn't like it, including a few of the mods too.


  • Options
    #71
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Well then those who wanted the threads kept in AH should have been more vocal and pro-active. So what if some of those who wanted a clampdown on doom threads are mods? They're regular users in the forums they don't mod.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    OutlawPete
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    ch750536 wrote: »
    Don't say it was done for the majority because it wasnt. It was done because those who shouted loudest were the ones who didn't like it, including a few of the mods too.

    You make no sense.

    Thousands of people use After Hours.

    The majority of them never say anything, does that mean that nothing ever should be changed because it's always just a minority complaining?

    Of course not ..

    What happens (or what hopefully should happen and seems to be more so lately than it ever did before, thankfully) is that opinions expressed in Feedback by After Hours users are listened too and if the majority consensus think that a change would be a positive thing and the moderators agree, then action is taken.

    On the other hand, many times users have come to After Hours complaining about one thing or another but the majority of AH users that took part in those debates DID NOT agree that something was wrong and needed to change and so nothing was done, on this occasion the opposite happened and that should be seen as a positive thing, that moderators are not ignoring users.

    You may feel that your opinion is not being acted on but that is only because it represents only a small minority of those that have felt the need to speak out on this particular issue.

    As I said earlier, political threads are still allowed in AH, when fresh and current and not just the same rant or point that has a hundred threads started on it already.

    Seriously, this is a non-issue at this point.


  • Options
    #73
    AlmightyCushion
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,078 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    ch750536 wrote: »
    The mods want to do what they did, fine. Don't say it was done for the majority because it wasnt. It was done because those who shouted loudest were the ones who didn't like it, including a few of the mods too.

    If more people were put out by this then why aren't they complaining about it? There was more people complaining about the threads being there then there are people complaining about them not being there. There's your majority.


  • Options
    #74
    FoxT
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,204 ✭✭✭FoxT


    Phew! Just back from Tescos....amazing how busy this thread has been!


  • Options
    #75
    ch750536
    Registered Users Posts: 3,736 ✭✭✭ch750536


    Dudess wrote: »
    Well then those who wanted the threads kept in AH should have been more vocal and pro-active. So what if some of those who wanted a clampdown on doom threads are mods? They're regular users in the forums they don't mod.

    I am.


  • Options
    #76
    ch750536
    Registered Users Posts: 3,736 ✭✭✭ch750536


    OutlawPete wrote: »
    You make no sense.

    Thousands of people use After Hours.

    The majority of them never say anything, does that mean that nothing ever should be changed because it's always just a minority complaining?

    Of course not ..

    What happens (or what hopefully should happen and seems to be more so lately than it ever did before, thankfully) is that opinions expressed in Feedback by After Hours users are listened too and if the majority consensus think that a change would be a positive thing and the moderators agree, then action is taken.

    On the other hand, many times users have come to After Hours complaining about one thing or another but the majority of AH users that took part in those debates DID NOT agree that something was wrong and needed to change and so nothing was done, on this occasion the opposite happened and that should be seen as a positive thing, that moderators are not ignoring users.

    You may feel that your opinion is not being acted on but that is only because it represents only a small minority of those that have felt the need to speak out on this particular issue.

    As I said earlier, political threads are still allowed in AH, when fresh and current and not just the same rant or point that has a hundred threads started on it already.

    Seriously, this is a non-issue at this point.

    Absolutely not true
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056084545

    Look at the posts in there, only 1 person says a megathread would be good (a mod btw) all other proposals are subforum, several megathreads.

    Like I said, argue with facts not fiction or show me the facts. show me the forum where this was discussed and the majroity wanted 1 megathread as a resolution to the problem.

    For the record it is stated a number of times in that thread that the threads started in AH are not suitable for the politics forum.

    Someone give me some evidence please, you all state it, I need to see it.


  • Options
    #77
    4zn76tysfajdxp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,944 ✭✭✭✭4zn76tysfajdxp


    Dav wrote: »
    At this stage I have had to refund site subscriptions because AH, which was someone's last refuge from the current doom and gloom Ireland faces, has turned into politics and economics based noise and they're no longer willing to spend as much time here because of it.

    In fairness, that can't be true. I think someone was telling you porkies, Dav.


  • Options
    #78
    My name is URL
    Registered Users Posts: 25,069 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    ch750536 wrote: »
    Absolutely not true
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056084545

    Look at the posts in there, only 1 person says a megathread would be good (a mod btw) all other proposals are subforum, several megathreads.

    To be fair, I started that thread when there were literally more threads related to politics than not in AH. I said that a mega merge thread probably wouldn't work because of the amount of posts that were being made, but the way the Mods are dealing with it now seems to be working really well. There's a few mega threads discussing different aspects of things and they are closed after a few days to make room for new threads.

    I don't really get why there's a sticky in AH full of merged & closed threads though, mind =p


  • Options
    #79
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    ch750536 wrote: »
    I am.
    I said "should have been" - referring to in the past, back before the clampdown was decided upon.


  • Options
    #80
    ch750536
    Registered Users Posts: 3,736 ✭✭✭ch750536


    ch750536 wrote: »
    Absolutely not true
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056084545

    Look at the posts in there, only 1 person says a megathread would be good (a mod btw) all other proposals are subforum, several megathreads.

    Like I said, argue with facts not fiction or show me the facts. show me the forum where this was discussed and the majroity wanted 1 megathread as a resolution to the problem.

    For the record it is stated a number of times in that thread that the threads started in AH are not suitable for the politics forum.

    Someone give me some evidence please, you all state it, I need to see it.
    :(


  • Options
    #81
    Micky Dolenz
    Registered Users Posts: 44,080 ✭✭✭✭Micky Dolenz


    My name is URL wrote: »

    I don't really get why there's a sticky in AH full of merged & closed threads though, mind =p


    Completely my fault, Every time I wanted to merge to it I couldn't find it, so I stuck it, easy to find that way :p

    That's the truth and the only reason it is a sticky.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    ch750536
    Registered Users Posts: 3,736 ✭✭✭ch750536


    ch750536 wrote: »
    Absolutely not true
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056084545

    Look at the posts in there, only 1 person says a megathread would be good (a mod btw) all other proposals are subforum, several megathreads.

    Like I said, argue with facts not fiction or show me the facts. show me the forum where this was discussed and the majroity wanted 1 megathread as a resolution to the problem.

    For the record it is stated a number of times in that thread that the threads started in AH are not suitable for the politics forum.

    Someone give me some evidence please, you all state it, I need to see it.
    :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #83
    AlmightyCushion
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,078 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    I gave you your evidence. You're the only person who is put out enough to complain about the threads not being there. More than one person was complaining (and is complaining in this thread) about them being there.


  • Options
    #84
    ch750536
    Registered Users Posts: 3,736 ✭✭✭ch750536


    AlmightyCushion wrote: »
    I gave you your evidence. You're the only person who is put out enough to complain about the threads not being there. More than one person was complaining (and is complaining in this thread) about them being there.

    Completely unrelated evidence but thanks anyway. I was told it was discussed in a thread and majority vote and all that but I can find no evidence at all.

    The only thread I can find is the one where it is stated several times that a megathread is a bad idea and that these threads are not suitable for the politics forum.

    Can anyone point me to the thread where it was discussed and the majority opinion followed or was that made up?


  • Options
    #85
    OutlawPete
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    ch750536 wrote: »
    I was told it was discussed in a thread and majority vote and all that but I can find no evidence at all.

    Go back through all the replies and you'll see the majority expressed opinions that either Politics had no place in After Hours, or that something needed to be done about the amount of Political moaning.
    ch750536 wrote: »
    Can anyone point me to the thread where it was discussed and the majority opinion followed or was that made up?

    Well you've got this thread you are posting on now for a start.

    Or how about this thread:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056089246

    Or this Sticky where the issue came up quite a bit:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056026459

    Or this one:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=69136821#post69136821

    Or this one:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056084545

    Or this one:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056085392


    The only threads being merged / locked, are the ones that don't need to be started in the first place.

    Where they are / were - just the same repetitive crap about IMF / Cowen / FF.

    I'd be the first one on your side if I thought you were right.

    I love having a good bash at AH Mods tongue.gif

    Seriously though, as far as I can see, you can still start political threads in After Hours, I don't see the issue here.


  • Options
    #86
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    Why aren't all those who agree with you flocking to this thread OP?


  • Options
    #87
    ch750536
    Registered Users Posts: 3,736 ✭✭✭ch750536


    OutlawPete wrote: »
    Go back through all the replies and you'll see the majority expressed opinions that either Politics had no place in After Hours, or that something needed to be done about the amount of Political moaning.
    Well you've got this thread you are posting on now for a start.
    No I havent. This is not a thread discussing what should happen about politics in AH, its a thread about what did happen.
    OutlawPete wrote: »
    Or how about this thread:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056089246
    Go back and re-read it, 2 things you will note:
    1. Its a bollocks thread. 82% of the posts are unrelated to the OP.
    2. Its a poll in AH. Wrong place for starters.
    OutlawPete wrote: »
    Or this Sticky where the issue came up quite a bit:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056026459
    Now that is a good discussion on the subject. Reading it the obvious point that is made is that the discussion should not be banned there just needs to be a better way \ solution. I agree with this. I don't agree that it is a megathread, as 2 people pointed out in that discussion a megathread suits one topic and politics\economy\etc is not one topic but many. Have you tried reading the megathread, it is impossible.
    OutlawPete wrote: »
    Or this one:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=69136821#post69136821
    Yep, thanks for more evidence that megathread was a bad idea, more calls for subforum.
    OutlawPete wrote: »
    Or this one:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056084545
    Already commented on this thread. Politics mods say they dont want AH style threads in politics, can we make a subforum & 1 person backing a megathread.
    OutlawPete wrote: »
    Or this one:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056085392
    Not a serious thread. Not at all.
    OutlawPete wrote: »
    The only threads being merged / locked, are the ones that don't need to be started in the first place.
    Not true, by who's opinion?
    OutlawPete wrote: »
    Where they are / were - just the same repetitive crap about IMF / Cowen / FF.
    I'd be the first one on your side if I thought you were right.
    I love having a good bash at AH Mods tongue.gif
    Seriously though, as far as I can see, you can still start political threads in After Hours, I don't see the issue here.
    This isn't a bash the mods thing. Its a giving a damn thing.
    Its like having a car. If I didnt care about it I wouldnt care if the mechanics scratched the car when they repaired it. If I did care I would kick up a fuss and make sure they fixed the problem.
    In my opinion a megathread damages AH, a subforum would be a much better solution. Look at the above threads and you will agree that this is what the majority were asking for.
    I would say it broke down to something like:
    20% Outright ban on the discussions
    30% Go somewhere else <not actually an option as Politics mods have stated>
    49% Make a subforum.
    1% Make a megathread.

    The evidence is there to see if you read those threads. The evidence is also there to see in the complete lack of discussion going on. It may be that everybody decided they dont want to talk about it anymore but I dont think it was coincidence that discussion ceased at the same time as the megathread.

    I'm not here to make anyone 'fess up' or reverse the decision, I think there is a need for people to discuss these things right now and there is nowhere to discuss it. As I stated in the OP, one thread for all does not work.


  • Options
    #88
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    There's 5 threads on the first 2 pages on the budget, FF etc. Only 3/4 threads have been moved to the Super thread in the last week, as far as I can see.

    I don't see the problem at all. No doubt there'll be more threads for the budget tomorrow but politics has a subforum set up for it as well.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #89
    ch750536
    Registered Users Posts: 3,736 ✭✭✭ch750536


    Think they saw that, only the megathread now.


  • Options
    #90
    OutlawPete
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    ch750536 wrote: »
    I don't agree that it is a megathread, as 2 people pointed out in that discussion a megathread suits one topic and politics\economy\etc is not one topic but many. Have you tried reading the megathread, it is impossible.

    I agree, I wouldn't vote for one either.

    If it was anything to do with me (which it isn't) and I had a choice - I'd lock the threads that are being merged and PM the OP of them as each new one was started, with a link to a thread that already exists in the forum where they can air their views.

    However, a merged thread is what was chosen and it sure is better now than it was two weeks back, that's for sure.
    ch750536 wrote: »
    This isn't a bash the mods thing.

    I was only kidding.
    ch750536 wrote: »
    In my opinion a megathread damages AH, a subforum would be a much better solution.

    I don't agree for reasons I said earlier in the thread.

    That would be a permanent solution, to a temporary problem.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    ch750536
    Registered Users Posts: 3,736 ✭✭✭ch750536


    OutlawPete wrote: »
    I agree, I wouldn't vote for one either.

    If it was anything to do with me (which it isn't) and I had a choice - I'd lock the threads that are being merged and PM the OP of them as each new one was started, with a link to a thread that already exists in the forum where they can air their views.

    However, a merged thread is what was chosen and it sure is better now than it was two weeks back, that's for sure.



    I was only kidding.



    I don't agree for reasons I said earlier in the thread.

    That would be a permanent solution, to a temporary problem.

    I think you'll find it will be here for a while.


Advertisement