Boards Ethical Policy

Corsendonk

This might be not the right place so feel free to move.


Has boards.ie got an Official Ethical Policy? I tried PM Darragh as he I assume has the "A" for this but he has his account blocked to Pms. Perhaps the person responsible for ethical issues can contact me.

Thanks
Corsendonk

Shield

Is there anything in particular you want to know about that us Help Desk moderators might be able to answer? For example, our Terms of Use covers a lot that would be deemed ethical and moral.

If you can narrow the scope of your question down, I might be able to answer it myself, or point you in the right direction if I can't.

Thanks.

Corsendonk

psni wrote: »

Is there anything in particular you want to know about that us Help Desk moderators might be able to answer? For example, our Terms of Use covers a lot that would be deemed ethical and moral.

If you can narrow the scope of your question down, I might be able to answer it myself, or point you in the right direction if I can't.

Thanks.

OK, I will PM you but it sounds like you don't have an Official Ethical Policy, you think upu might have enough. Quite surprised by that since an increasing amount of forward thinking companies have Ethical Policies in place and expect the same standards from their suppliers.

Corsendonk

I emailed them Wednesday as you instructed me in Pm, got the regulation we will reply in 48 hours!! reply and still nothing. Do they work weekends? This is beginning to show that I don't think Boards ever considered having an ethics policy.

Darragh

Moved to Feedback.

Corsendonk, I got your email about this. Would you like to post up the full query here or would you mind if I did? Just so others who need to join in the conversation can do so?

Darragh

Corsendonk

Darragh wrote: »

Moved to Feedback.

Corsendonk, I got your email about this. Would you like to post up the full query here or would you mind if I did? Just so others who need to join in the conversation can do so?

Darragh

Go ahead Darragh, I be interested in the different viewpoints. Thanks for getting back. I hope the holidays went well.

Tom Dunne

I am curious as to why you would think a discussion site such as Boards.ie should have an ethical policy.

Darragh

Hi Corsendonk, this is your query (via email):

This mail is addressed to Darragh as the Communications Manager in most organisations would have responsibility for ethical issues that arise.

I was going to start a thread on this topic in AH or politics but thought I would treat it seriously and get the Boards official line instead.

Boards represents a wide spectrum of Irish life, in the past one or two posters on Boards.ie were elected officials that seem to me used Boards.ie as a tool to get their names know out in the local region forums outside their own ward areas.

Now I had a slight ethical issue with this as it allowed a platform for future electioneering to the Dail but hey they were only local cllrs but now with the recent election these posters have progressed to higher profile postings as TDs and I would say their boards profile helped in no small part. They have resummed posting in the regions since the election.

I should point out that the TDs use their own names as login nicks so are quite easily identified in posts. I know boards frowns on posters using nicks that advertise so this seems an extension of this.

I am aware that anyone can sign up to Boards so competing candidates can do so but is not Boards.ie in danger of becoming an election platform for certain political candidates and parties if they continue allow them to post in regional forums? Ethically it seems very dodgy ground to me.

So what is the official boards policy in relation to this ? I should say I have no problem with boards inviting TDs for question and answer threads in politics were they can be grilled and the debate controlled by experienced mods.

I have noticed that some regional posters have voiced concerns in threads after the politicians posts but of course naturally they were just told to get back on thread.

I could have pmmed the category mods or forum mods but I find that when it comes to ethics in an organisation the "A" rests with one person in the organisation so better to go to the top and I assume that the communications Manager is the "A" on Boards.ie

Looking forward to your reply
Corsendonk

P.S. I am not a member of any political party but I have done courses on ethics and how brands can protect their image in the past so its always an interest to me.

Sparks

Ethical policy?
What kind of person is so berefit of a sense of right and wrong that they need an actual written policy document to set out what is defined as right and wrong?
Yeesh.

(Not to mention, that original query is asking about an advertising policy, just using the wrong terminology...)

seamus

I don't see the issue.

Politician signs up to boards.ie and discusses political issues with other posters.

That's more communication than I've seen from most politicians.

Using boards.ie as a platform for canvassing is an issue of advertising and such advertisements should be removed by the moderator when it's reported to them.

If you're concerned that a politician that you don't like, seems to be doing well for himself by interacting on boards.ie, then it's up to you to encourage your preferred candidate to do likewise.

Morlar

seamus wrote: »

I don't see the issue.

Politician signs up to boards.ie and discusses political issues with other posters.

That's more communication than I've seen from most politicians.

Using boards.ie as a platform for canvassing is an issue of advertising and such advertisements should be removed by the moderator when it's reported to them.

If you're concerned that a politician that you don't like, seems to be doing well for himself by interacting on boards.ie, then it's up to you to encourage your preferred candidate to do likewise.

I'd like to see politicians userID profiles tagged in much the same way that a commercial representive is tagged (look in 'boards.ie-Biz-Talk To;' the representatives are marked to be easily identifiable). Politicians should also be tagged to identify that a) they are politicians standing for re-election, and b) the name of the party they are propagandising in favour of.

Darragh

Would I be fair in thinking that

Corsendonk wrote: »

is not Boards.ie in danger of becoming an election platform for certain political candidates and parties if they continue allow them to post in regional forums?

is your main question here?

If so, I can only answer from *my* perspective as an employee - you'd also need DeVore as founder of the site, along with Dav as Community Manager and perhaps, the Admins who are part of the steering group of Boards.ie. It's not a policy I, alone, have control over.

For me the main part of this is the word

platform

That's always been what I've based my work on Boards.ie on - that it's a plaform for discussion that is open to everyone, as long as they abide by the rules and guidelines.

I also feel that the forum moderators, for the most part, dictate what happens in their forums. We in the office actually have relatively little input/interference in these - we currently have approximately 880 active forums and 549 moderators on site. Each moderator should be helping drive their forum by judging what works best for that forum's users/posters and removing things that either break our terms or are against the rules/charter.

Personally I think politicians engaging openly and transparently is a good thing. They don't (shouldn't) get any special treatment - a moderator should feel that they can ban/infract a politician same as any other poster. They should all be verified representatives though - as in, name in red with their photo or party logo so you know who you're dealing with and under what basis.

If posters have any problems with any other posts they're invited to report them so the moderators can take action on them. If the moderators or other members don't have a problem with the posts, for the most part neither do we.

I understand your concern by the way, but I do think the only way Boards.ie is going to grow is to allow everyone to discuss on its site, to the benefit of everyone else.

What do you think of the above?

Darragh

Darragh

Morlar wrote: »

I'd like to see politicians userID profiles tagged in much the same way that a commercial representive is tagged (look in 'boards.ie-Biz-Talk To;' the representatives are marked to be easily identifiable). Politicians should also be tagged to identify that a) they are politicians standing for re-election, and b) the name of the party they are propagandising in favour of.

Agreed. This should definitely happen.

seamus

Morlar wrote: »

I'd like to see politicians userID profiles tagged in much the same way that a commercial representive is tagged (look in 'boards.ie-Biz-Talk To;' the representatives are marked to be easily identifiable). Politicians should also be tagged to identify that a) they are politicians standing for re-election, and b) the name of the party they are propagandising in favour of.

Agreed, I too would like to see people being verified in the same way that twitter verifies high-profile accounts.

This not only protects the individual themselves from a smear campaign, but also clearly tells other users who it is they're talking to.

I always thought boards.ie ethical policy was simply, 'don't be a dick'.
That would extend to advertising, in a few cases, advertising is ok, with the moderators approval. So, if you ask the mod, you're not being a dick. If you post an ad without asking the mod, you are being a dick.
Same way people like getting in touch with their local representative, if their local representative joins boards, and takes part in discussion, he's not being a dick. He's putting down a written record of where he stands on issues.

Corsendonk

Sparks wrote: »

Ethical policy?
What kind of person is so berefit of a sense of right and wrong that they need an actual written policy document to set out what is defined as right and wrong?
Yeesh.

(Not to mention, that original query is asking about an advertising policy, just using the wrong terminology...)

Most progressive companies have them now, they do provide a paper trail that you are actually dealing with people that do know right from wrong and are actually doing what they say, not giving you the answer you want to hear.

Yes your right I used the wrong term but it does raise the question does Boards need an ethical policy?

Corsendonk

Darragh wrote: »

Would I be fair in thinking that



is your main question here?

If so, I can only answer from *my* perspective as an employee - you'd also need DeVore as founder of the site, along with Dav as Community Manager and perhaps, the Admins who are part of the steering group of Boards.ie. It's not a policy I, alone, have control over.

For me the main part of this is the word

platform

That's always been what I've based my work on Boards.ie on - that it's a plaform for discussion that is open to everyone, as long as they abide by the rules and guidelines.

I also feel that the forum moderators, for the most part, dictate what happens in their forums. We in the office actually have relatively little input/interference in these - we currently have approximately 880 active forums and 549 moderators on site. Each moderator should be helping drive their forum by judging what works best for that forum's users/posters and removing things that either break our terms or are against the rules/charter.

Personally I think politicians engaging openly and transparently is a good thing. They don't (shouldn't) get any special treatment - a moderator should feel that they can ban/infract a politician same as any other poster. They should all be verified representatives though - as in, name in red with their photo or party logo so you know who you're dealing with and under what basis.

If posters have any problems with any other posts they're invited to report them so the moderators can take action on them. If the moderators or other members don't have a problem with the posts, for the most part neither do we.

I understand your concern by the way, but I do think the only way Boards.ie is going to grow is to allow everyone to discuss on its site, to the benefit of everyone else.

What do you think of the above?

Darragh

Yes sounds good, I like Morlar idea to flag them in red like other advertisers as thats basically what they are using boards for. Mostly politicians in the regional forums don't actually engage in any meaningful debate just post what I like to call "Kissing babies posts".

Discussion forums like this help a local politician get their name know among other posters within the local Dail constituency that might not have know them and some people do give a 2nd or 3rd choice vote to people they have a connection with. I know it's extremely hard to mod so the red advertiser feature with ID verification is probably the best course of action.

Sparks

Corsendonk wrote: »

Most progressive companies have them now, they do provide a paper trail that you are actually dealing with people that do know right from wrong and are actually doing what they say, not giving you the answer you want to hear.

No, they don't. They're the ultimate exercise in giving you an official answer you want to hear while freeing up the people involved from needing to actually have any ethics.

Yes your right I used the wrong term but it does raise the question does Boards need an ethical policy?

But that question's not what this thread is really about, so (a) you really need a new thread, (b) you need to rename this thread, and (c) you need a better set of examples to show that such a policy would be needed. And given the history of the people who run boards, I think you'd find that it'd be a retrograde step, going from personal ethics to a piece of paper in a filing cabinet somewhere that says to everyone "yeah, we have ethics" while ignoring actions on the basis that "oh, they went against company policy when they burnt down your house, sorry 'bout that, but we're not liable, obviously".

Corsendonk

Tom Dunne wrote: »

I am curious as to why you would think a discussion site such as Boards.ie should have an ethical policy.

Ok, well you know how the site has had an ongoing debate on the questionable ethics of the company contracted for the census and the CSO took serious flak here. Lets say Dev or Devore got a great deal on some hardware that met spec but later it came to light that it was manufactured in a plant in China using child or prison slave labour. Would Boards be any different from the CSO?

Sparks

Corsendonk wrote: »

Ok, well you know how the site has had an ongoing debate on the questionable ethics of the company contracted for the census and the CSO took serious flak here. Lets say Dev or Devore got a great deal on some hardware that met spec but later it came to light that it was manufactured in a plant in China using child or prison slave labour. Would Boards be any different from the CSO?

Yes, because you've just said that it would have come to light after the purchase, while the CSO chose their subcontractor while the knowledge was in the public domain.

Corsendonk

Sparks wrote: »

No, they don't. They're the ultimate exercise in giving you an official answer you want to hear while freeing up the people involved from needing to actually have any ethics.


"[/I].

Even if it is monitored by an independent third party who audit?

Corsendonk

Sparks wrote: »

Yes, because you've just said that it would have come to light after the purchase, while the CSO chose their subcontractor while the knowledge was in the public domain.

Does that make it anymore right? Shouldn't a proactive policy be in place. Of course I mean an actual working policy not one hung on the wall or on the bottom of a cabinet last looked at by someone who left the company 4 years ago.

Sparks

Corsendonk wrote: »

Even if it is monitored by an independent third party who audit?

What independent third party?
It's an ethical policy, not statute law. Nobody can enforce its application, it's completely down to the company to enforce adherence to it, and no company is going to fire an employee for deviation from that policy if it benefits the company not to do so.

Does that make it anymore right?

That wasn't the question you asked. You asked was there a difference - the answer is yes, there's a significant fundamental difference in that the CSO had knowledge before the decision and in your hypothetical example, boards.ie had knowledge only after the decision was made and implemented.

(a), (b) and (c) above are all still valid.

Corsendonk

Sparks wrote: »

What independent third party?
It's an ethical policy, not statute law. Nobody can enforce its application, it's completely down to the company to enforce adherence to it, and no company is going to fire an employee for deviation from that policy if it benefits the company not to do so.
.

This is one of the main ones

http://www.sedex.org.uk/sedex/go.asp?u=/WebSite/Home&pm=6&location=Home

Countries are rated by risk, and questionnaires are secretly weighted and the results rate sites for audits which involves one on one interviews with staff. Suppliers have an option to make visible their site scores and audits to their customers online so supplier information can be constantly viewed and it also means that multipe customers can see that info. Due to the potential damage to a business reputation should an "ethical issue arise" you will find maybe cynically that businesses use sites like Sedex as a due diligence defence system. Whatever money you might make cutting corners ethically ain't worth it if you get caught.

Sparks

And if you think that that actually works anywhere outside of an Ayn Rand novel, I've a bridge to sell you...

Darragh

Okay, to get this back on track -

All members who are representing an organisation - even if that's themselves - should be verified by hello@boards.ie. The moderators have been waiting for the office to confirm rules and structure around this - we have it "on the list" for ages - but it's due soon and when it is we can go from there

Hope that helps!

Darragh

AckwelFoley

Yes and no to this question in my opinion


If i want to represent Brian Geraghty, Political candidate and be known by a username Brian Geraghty, yes, verfication is a great idea


If i want to be snyper, i doubt i will get elected, but dont feel that i should be obliged to make it known to boards.ie that i am running in a political election.

We all use boards.ie as a platform for opinion, if i want to get elected on that opinion, so be it - people will read my opinions and ideas on their merit.. its not a matter of brainwashing iits just another form of media.