My News AH thread closure?

El Guapo!

Where To wrote: »

My News did have a topic though, it was post your news. When I was at school I didn't write

My News

I won't write my news because it is cliquey, flirty and off topic and the influx of kids with Facebook on their phones has lowered the tone of the class and I won't stand for it.

Copybook Locked.

That Was My News

Where To

I agree the idea of that thread was great. But it was just people posting what they did that day and other people responding to said "news". That IS basically a chat thread. And some of the conversations would drag on for a few pages.
The thread started off great, but it changes from people posting kind of interesting stuff, to people basically putting up Facebook statuses.

K-9

P_1 wrote: »

I'm of the opinion that clamping down on threads going ot is a bad thing, if it goes ot just ignore it, it will get back on topic naturally

Well we'd generally give leeway on AH in that regard, unless it is taking over the thread or a poster doesn't stop. Politics would be stricter to avoid soap boxing, agenda posters, stuff like that.

My impression is they often don't get back on topic, plus people can always start their own thread on whatever OT subject they want to discuss.

Where To

El Guapo! wrote: »

I agree the idea of that thread was great. But it was just people posting what they did that day and other people responding to said "news". That IS basically a chat thread. And some of the conversations would drag on for a few pages.
The thread started off great, but it changes from people posting kind of interesting stuff, to people basically putting up Facebook statuses.

Posts like this you mean?



For clarification, I'm not having a go at LizT, and I apologise if it seems that I am.

keith16

K-9 wrote: »

Well we'd generally give leeway on AH in that regard, unless it is taking over the thread or a poster doesn't stop. Politics would be stricter to avoid soap boxing, agenda posters, stuff like that.

My impression is they often don't get back on topic, plus people can always start their own thread on whatever OT subject they want to discuss.

So why no leeway here K-9? It went from no mod intervention to locked. From nowhere.

keith16

El Guapo! wrote: »

I agree the idea of that thread was great. But it was just people posting what they did that day and other people responding to said "news". That IS basically a chat thread. And some of the conversations would drag on for a few pages.
The thread started off great, but it changes from people posting kind of interesting stuff, to people basically putting up Facebook statuses.

Sorry Deano mate, but it was more than a chat thread.

TouchingVirus

Where To wrote: »

My News did have a topic though, it was post your news. When I was at school I didn't write

My News

I won't write my news because it is cliquey, flirty and off topic and the influx of kids with Facebook on their phones has lowered the tone of the class and I won't stand for it.

Copybook Locked.

That Was My News

Where To

No, you didn't. Did the other kids take your News copybook, skip over your news, draw lovehearts and write rhymes to each other? I'll bet they didn't.

For those who think it wouldn't turn into a chat thread - 1,342 replies before closure, 853 of them by 35 people with individual tallies ranging from 100 posts down to 10. The distribution was never going to change, the thread was chat city.

Where To wrote: »

Posts like this you mean?

The smear tactics you're trying with the mods with are doing you no favours

El Guapo!

Where To wrote: »

Posts like this you mean?

I don't think it matters who made the posts. The fact is that's the way the thread was heading and it was probably closed for the best. It was a really good thread. Ill admit that. I enjoyed it. But I think maybe its popularity destroyed it. It got too big for AH and was only headed one way.

Pighead

Gummy Panda wrote: »

I don't agree with this. I learned my cliquey posting from boards long before Facebook was popular.

Would have to agree. There have been cliquey, flirty, chat threads for as long as Pighead's been posting here. You can't blame Facebook for everything!

El Guapo!

keith16 wrote: »

Sorry Deano mate, but it was more than a chat thread.

It was heading down that route though. You have to admit, there was a lot of Facebook style posts and general nonsense chat?

K-9

Where To wrote: »

A thread that is cliquey, flirty, and full of boring status updates, the very things you accuse My News of being, yet is posted in daily by the After Hours Mods that made a joint decision to close the thread.

That's got nothing to do with the decision and tbh I haven't a clue why you repeatedly bring it up.

The mod posts in a form that allows these type of threads, she mods a forum that doesn't as a rule, what are you not getting in that pretty simple bit of logic? Are you suggesting she shouldn't post in it or shouldn't have moded the news thread, and if you are, why?

Sorry for the direct post, but I'm at a loss as to its relevance and you repeatedly pointing it out.

TouchingVirus

Pighead wrote: »

Would have to agree. There have been cliquey, flirty, chat threads for as long as Pighead's been posting here. You can't blame Facebook for everything!

Not recently in AH though Pighead? The great AH cleanup of the last few years has made it less of a wild place

keith16

El Guapo! wrote: »

It was heading down that route though. You have to admit, there was a lot of Facebook style posts and general nonsense chat?

I do admit there was chat etc.

But my point is this: The thread is now being unfairly labelled as a chat / FB thread which is not the spirit it was started in. Lots of people spotted, nobody wanted to be a back seat mod...

It got to this point because as humanji said, the mods missed it. I think they have to put their hand up here because it's not the threads fault it developed into that.

Pighead

TouchingVirus wrote: »

Not recently in AH though Pighead? The great AH cleanup of the last few years has made it less of a wild place

Haven't been posting much in AH recently so that may well be. Pighead was refuting Zaph's suggestion that this all started in recent years due to the explosion of facebook.

Don't think facebook has much to do with it to be honest. There's been chat/cliquey/flirty whatever you want to call them threads in AH forever.

K-9

keith16 wrote: »

So why no leeway here K-9? It went from no mod intervention to locked. From nowhere.

A couple of us did say it went under the radar, I don't think there was many reported posts and nobody was keeping an eye on it.

Look, I'm not saying there is no room for it in AH, but we don't allow flirting, OT chat and discussing my day type posts in AH, so I'm wondering where it fits in? in that scenario.

I just think by its nature posters will want to talk about the posts and it will lead to chat, I'm not a fan of these type of threads so I'm a bit biased. As I said, there's a forum that was exactly set up for this, for AH posters interested in that.

TouchingVirus

keith16 wrote: »

I do admit there was chat etc.

But my point is this: The thread is now being unfairly labelled as a chat / FB thread which is not the spirit it was started in. Lots of people spotted, nobody wanted to be a back seat mod...

It got to this point because as humanji said, the mods missed it. I think they have to put their hand up here because it's not the threads fault it developed into that.

What'll that achieve?The fact is nobody really saw a problem with the chat except the mods who closed the thread since it was too far gone. Reporting a post isn't back-seat modding by the way.

Your compromise is that you want some moderator to spend their own time cleaning up the thread, and then the team of AH mods to babysit that thread keeping an eye for any more chat/flirting so you (and 35 others) can continue to post your news and have it sprinkled with the odd post here and there from other users. Is there not enough to moderate in AH already?

By the way it will be babysitting, make no mistake about it because if the mods slip up with My News and some time later close another chat thread we'll be back in here for My Pet's News or whatever where people like Where To will throw stuff from My News at them claiming hypocrisy. Is it not a headache best left to some other forum, group, website, set of willing moderators?

K-9

Pighead wrote: »

Haven't been posting much in AH recently so that may well be. Pighead was refuting Zaph's suggestion that this all started in recent years due to the explosion of facebook.

Don't think facebook has much to do with it to be honest. There's been chat/cliquey/flirty whatever you want to call them threads in AH forever.

I think that's a different point to what he was making. I think there is more demand for chatty type threads these days because of the success of facebook, I don't think that isn't a reasonable opinion to hold. Facebook is a phenomenon and a bit like text speak, it starts to permeate the rest of the net. It doesn't mean Boards or AH has to entertain it, just because FB and text speak are popular doesn't mean we have to change to meet it.

Its a bit like people who give out about boards censorship, we have our way of doing things, nothing is stopping you going to other sites that will allow you post what you want. We aren't censoring the net, just defining and giving parameters for this particular site on the net.

Penn

keith16 wrote: »

I do admit there was chat etc.

But my point is this: The thread is now being unfairly labelled as a chat / FB thread which is not the spirit it was started in. Lots of people spotted, nobody wanted to be a back seat mod...

It got to this point because as humanji said, the mods missed it. I think they have to put their hand up here because it's not the threads fault it developed into that.

Sorry but, how is it the mods' fault that people were posting chatty status-type posts? Surely that's the posters' fault?

The mods, whether by not checking the thread enough or by letting the thread run to see how it would turn out, gave the thread a chance. And what the thread proved was that if let run, it would turn into what would largely be considered an off-topic thread. That type of thread is simply not in the best interests of the forum, and it's the responsibility of the mods to make those decisions, and mods are chosen on their ability to do so. It might not be a popular decision, but it's one they made in what they consider to be in the best interests of the forum.

Besides which, some of the best threads in AH history have come from the smallest origins. Someone posting something simple, but which kicks off a huge thread and some great laughs. With a 'My News' thread, chances are a post which would have had great potential to kick off a legendary thread would be posted there instead and would get lost in the number of (taking posts from a random page of the thread to use as examples) "My back hurts" "My 2 year old has a blocked nose and is crying" "My team won, I had a beer"(coupled with all the replies about how to solve the back pain etc)

I honestly hadn't read the thread before just now and took those from one random page. This type of thread simply does not suit After Hours.

NegativeCreep

What I'm getting from this thread is that the moderators didn't want to have to moderate this thread. Why be a moderator then?

If a thread has no infractions and no bans, then why not just leave it?
I assume no one actually complained that there was a cliquey nature to the thread (which I don't agree with) since it stayed open for so long.

I found it to be one of the least cliquey thread in ah. It was a fun and lighthearted thread that anyone could post in. Ah has become a fairly boring and depressing place without it.

Lyssa

This thread is just going around in circles.... The mods saw fit to close the thread, they see much more than us mere posters... To be completely honest, when the My News thread started, I enjoyed reading it, thought it was a nice, light-hearted AH thread.. however, I unsubscribed about 3 weeks ago, it had gotten too chatty and very samey and it was annoying... I'm sorry if that offends anyone, but AH is for discussion, threads like My News exist in most of the other public (and probably private forums) on Boards, not AH.

I think it's time to close this thread too tbh, there's never gonna be a resolution to this... (not back-seat-modding, just an observation!)

ashers222

Czarcasm wrote: »

Just to preface my opinion by saying that I was reluctant to voice my opinion on this issue as I understand Mods will always see a bigger picture than ordinary members and Admins even moreso, but when I hear the above coming from an admin, it just beggars belief tbh.

Zaph you seem to have forgotten the roots of boards.ie which grew out of a clique of quake players back in the days of dial-up. To say there were no cliquey chat filled threads back then is completely disingenuous, when that is exactly how boards started!

Boards has since evolved into almost monster like proportions and become far less about community and more about commerce than it would like it's users to believe.

I actually detest the likes of facebook, twitter et al with a passion, cannot stand them, cannot stand unsociable networking in general, so when boards started with all it's follow forum nonsense and thanks efforts, I got a pain in my face about it, but got over it, then the recent changes in the overall look of both the desktop site and the touch site, to make them as close a format to facebook without breaching copyright and trademark laws, to then try and look down your nose and say boards is not facebook? It's far bloody more like it than you'd care to admit.

That's even before we get to the content posted within facebook's ginger haired cousin. Threads like somebody finding a safe in a shìthole get a sticky all of their own, because that was fierce important to the community... seriously?

Then we have the classic self perpetuating threads like things that annoy you, things people say that annoy you, look what some hack in the "sindo" wrote today, lets all be outraged and pìssed off together.

The My News thread was an absolute tonic compared to some of the mundane perpetual bullshìt threads in AH and I don't know about anyone else but I personally went back over it many times and enjoyed some truly inspiring posts from other posters, and the truly creative thinking that went into most of the posts on that thread, you'll notice in the WHOLE thread there is not ONE spelling or grammar nazi gets a look in, whereas in AH as a whole, despite there being numerous mod warnings on the issue, there's always some smart àrse within the first few posts of a new thread looking to validate their smug bastard intellect with their grammar and spelling abilities.

Fùck it I could go on all night about why it was one thread in AH I really enjoyed, a thread that was open and accessible to all posters, but I don't think there's any point when it'd just be falling on deaf ears.

Now, lets get back to discussing issues that only perpetuate misery, negativity, begrudgery and depression, somebody's got to feed the new generation of faux intellectuals, superiority filled, thanks whoring, grammar and spelling correcting, self important smug bastards.

Think that's the best post I've read all week.
(I've been a boards member since 2004 and I've watched the site develop over the last decade too. I'm also not an fb user)

I just had a giggle reading back over the thread, I can see toward the end where it becomes more like an ot thread than it was originally intended but it did serve a purpose, I just don't think the purpose is wanted in this instance as it might interfere with the your ma and blast it with pi£s type mentality which is the acceptable norm in the forum. Can only imagine what would happen if AH suddenly had a broader user base to contend with. (cuz y'know that's never happened before)

keith16

TouchingVirus wrote: »

What'll that achieve?The fact is nobody really saw a problem with the chat except the mods who closed the thread since it was too far gone. Reporting a post isn't back-seat modding by the way.

Well what's the problem with the thread then? Not to a lot of peoples taste I'll admit but no-one was forced to read it.

Your compromise is that you want some moderator to spend their own time cleaning up the thread, and then the team of AH mods to babysit that thread keeping an eye for any more chat/flirting so you (and 35 others) can continue to post your news and have it sprinkled with the odd post here and there from other users. Is there not enough to moderate in AH already?

That's not my compromise at all. I suggested re-opening with a strict proviso that further OT chat will result in a perma-lock. I think it deserves that courtesy. A mod warning on flirting / OT chat is usually given on other threads.

In any case, moderators volunteer for exactly that type of work, without them boards wouldn't work but no-one is under the impression that deleting / posts & monitoring isn't part of the role

And what of the stats? 35 regular contributors is a decent number.

Bottom line is the thread turned into something it shouldn't have but wasn't given a single infraction / warning. All of a sudden it will require baby-sitting? There is definitely a middle ground here.

TouchingVirus

NegativeCreep wrote: »

I found it to be one of the least cliquey thread in ah. It was a fun and lighthearted thread that anyone could post in. Ah has become a fairly boring and depressing place without it.

You've a pretty low opinion of AH then if a thread that wasn't even 3 months old gets removed and you claim AH is boring/depressing without it.

The reason it was in AH was because it's got the highest footfall and the thread has the highest chance of survival - we all do it from time to time, put stuff in AH that doesn't really belong there and hope it gets some legs. That doesn't mean it gets to stay automatically, neither does the fact it had no warnings/infractions. It's a very strange line of defence that one.

I'm going to guess mods don't become mods to have to sift through inane crap with the rule book. Their core aim is to grow their forum, take it to the next level in terms of engagement, visitor numbers, and foster a sense of community. A few years ago AH was wild, and I mean wild. Many of you won't even know how bad it was. Since that free-for-all it's been cleaned up, mods are trying to stamp out the flirting, sexism, racism and the low level trolls and it's all a work in progress with varying degrees of success.

For various reasons My News isn't good for AH, and the moderation is just one thing

K-9

NegativeCreep wrote: »

What I'm getting from this thread is that the moderators didn't want to have to moderate this thread. Why be a moderator then?

I'm lost. We can't read every thread, unless we are paid FT AH mods.

ashers222 wrote: »

just don't think the purpose is wanted in this instance as it might interfere with the your ma and blast it with pi£s type mentality which is the acceptable norm in the forum.

Huh? I'm lost.

ashers222

keith16 wrote: »

And what of the stats? 35 regular contributors is a decent number.

Bottom line is the thread turned into something it shouldn't have but wasn't given a single infraction / warning. All of a sudden it will require baby-sitting? There is definitely a middle ground here.

As far as I can make out 35 unique users shared 800 odd or so posts he was referencing, which conveniently didn't take into account the remaining 300 or so posts attributed to random contributors.

Your OP in the thread asked the question "Does anyone else think we should have a 'My News' thread on AH?"
155 people seemed to think so.

keith16

Penn wrote: »

Sorry but, how is it the mods' fault that people were posting chatty status-type posts? Surely that's the posters' fault?

Just to clarify, I'm not saying it is entirely the mods fault. K-9 and humanji have both said this slipped under the radar - fair enough, completely understandable.

But, it is not entirely posters fault either. The thread started out great, have a read of the first few pages. It did admittedly get worse from there - my point is there was not one warning given for FOUR months. It must be ok then right?

Wrong. But at least delete some of the crap and give a stern warning before locking it. That is normally what we see. Not in this case...why???? It's a simple courtesy and nothing "baby-sitting" about it.

I don't think we would be having this discussion now if that was the case.

Pighead

K-9 wrote: »

I think that's a different point to what he was making. I think there is more demand for chatty type threads these days because of the success of facebook, I don't think that isn't a reasonable opinion to hold.

How is it a different point to what Zaph was saying? It's perfectly clear what he said.

Those sort of cliquey, chat-filled threads in AH (and other forums) are a relatively new phenomenon, spawned from an influxof posters whose introduction to the internet has been via Facebook. They never existed when I joined Boards and they have only really become an issue for mods in the last couple of years.

That is blatantly wrong. Of course they existed when he joined boards. Are you saying they haven't?

K-9 wrote: »

Facebook is a phenomenon and a bit like text speak, it starts to permeate the rest of the net. It doesn't mean Boards or AH has to entertain it, just because FB and text speak are popular doesn't mean we have to change to meet it.

Its a bit like people who give out about boards censorship, we have our way of doing things, nothing is stopping you going to other sites that will allow you post what you want. We aren't censoring the net, just defining and giving parameters for this particular site on the net.

The big message from the AH mods over the past couple of years seems to have been to listen to the users more. It seems in this case that the users were enjoying that thread and it was closed even though it seems to be a borderline case.

If the thread were a blatant flirty/chat thread ie every single post being inane, Pighead's quite sure that the majority would agree with the mod's decision but this thread wasn't quite so blatant as that. If it's a borderline decision it's probably a better idea to err on the side of the users.

ashers222

K-9 wrote: »

I'm lost. We can't read every thread, unless we are paid FT AH mods.



Huh? I'm lost.

There are so many other long term running threads in AH that turn into chat. (or more deliberately, argument) The unpopular opinions thread consists of several pages of discussion and deliberation between posters defending their unpopular opinions. How is it that if a thread which stays on topic and doesn't generate negativity can be closed? Because it's too close to facebook style narrative? It gives the impression that it is as how Zaph has stated, that unless a thread is generating argument or debate it does not fall within the remit of boards directive.

keith16

Pighead wrote: »

The big message from the AH mods over the past couple of years seems to have been to listen to the users more. It seems in this case that the users were enjoying that thread and it was closed even though it seems to be a borderline case.

If the thread were a blatant flirty/chat thread ie every single post being inane, Pighead's quite sure that the majority would agree with the mod's decision but this thread wasn't quite so blatant as that. If it's a borderline decision it's probably a better idea to err on the side of the users.

This sums it up perfectly Pighead.

Yes there was some of that stuff...but not nearly as bad as being made out here.

Night all

K-9

Pighead wrote: »

How is it a different point to what Zaph was saying? It's perfectly clear what he said.

Those sort of cliquey, chat-filled threads in AH (and other forums) are a relatively new phenomenon, spawned from an influxof posters whose introduction to the internet has been via Facebook. They never existed when I joined Boards and they have only really become an issue for mods in the last couple of years.

That is blatantly wrong. Of course they existed when he joined boards. Are you saying they haven't?

Tbh I don't know what you are getting at, cliques existed before facebook, they also existed before the internet. I think Facebook has made a certain type of post more acceptable on the web, 10 years ago I don't think "I got a new hoover today" type posts would have been the norm, now it is. That's my point. You don't seem interested in that, you failed to comment on my post so I'll let you and Zaph comment, you don't seem to want to comment on my points, so I'll leave you to your tete to tete with Zaph.

The big message from the AH mods over the past couple of years seems to have been to listen to the users more. It seems in this case that the users were enjoying that thread and it was closed even though it seems to be a borderline case.

If the thread were a blatant flirty/chat thread ie every single post being inane, Pighead's quite sure that the majority would agree with the mod's decision but this thread wasn't quite so blatant as that. If it's a borderline decision it's probably a better idea to err on the side of the users.

35 users, now wait a minute, lets be honest here and not drama llamas. 35 posters, about 10 regular posters. 10 posters doesn't suggest a high demand in AH given the stats on AH. Given the traffic on AH 10 posters for such a long running thread, is frankly, poor.

I'm open to the idea of the thread, usage stats aren't convincing me.

Where To

K-9 wrote: »

That's got nothing to do with the decision and tbh I haven't a clue why you repeatedly bring it up.

The mod posts in a form that allows these type of threads, she mods a forum that doesn't as a rule, what are you not getting in that pretty simple bit of logic? Are you suggesting she shouldn't post in it or shouldn't have moded the news thread, and if you are, why?

Sorry for the direct post, but I'm at a loss as to its relevance and you repeatedly pointing it out.

I'm not objecting to the closing of the thread, I could see the writing was on the wall long before it was closed, it was good while it lasted, reopening it would merely be a pyrrhic victory.

However, I am objecting to the patronising and contemptible tones in some of the replies in this thread, and pointing out that the very same 'degeneration' of the boards that we are being accused of is being carried out elsewhere on the site by our accusers.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.