Boards is becoming a Ghost Town

smash

blackwhite wrote: »

AFAIK, the "Originally posted by" is simply a text record of whatever the quoted username was at the time the post was quoted. The post number is also stored in the qouting post as text, but also contains a lookup link to the database.

The quote function would need to be re-written to now contain a live link/lookup of the database for whatever the new iteration of the username is, which I'd imagine would add quite a lot of new/incremental strain on the servers.

Like I said, the site would need to be down for a few hours just to run the queries. This would mainly be to cater for the quoted posts which are really the only major obstacle to the exercise.

smash

BMMachine wrote: »

*I've asked people who aren't really on boards or rarely post what they think of the site. "Moderators.ie" was a name used by one. All their answers pretty much said how its moderated into the ground (exaggeration imo) or mentioned the moderators in one way shape or form.

When the majority of the bans seem to be as a result of "Banned for ignoring mod instruction." is it any wonder that people would see it like this?

K-9

intheclouds wrote: »

But there is a time frame whereby users can delete their posts and ruin the flow of threads already in place. I think its 2 days?

So thats not really a solid argument seeing as it already happens.

I think that is there to facilitate correction of posts though, basically it serves a different purpose to deletion.

Esel

K-9 wrote: »

I think that is there to facilitate correction of posts though, basically it serves a different purpose to deletion.

There is a delete option there.

K-9

Good post BM, the problem for mods with less visibility, more pm's etc. is there are many (on this very thread too) who want more transparency, and that's a contradiction. We inevitability find ourselves going down the middle rather than going in one direction or the other.

K-9

Esel wrote: »

There is a delete option there.

Yeah, for 2 days, so people can't go back months or years.

I remember a couple of posters having a strop and deleting posts within the 2 days, hilarity ensued!

intheclouds

K-9 wrote: »

Yeah, for 2 days, so people can't go back months or years.

I remember a couple of posters having a strop and deleting posts within the 2 days, hilarity ensued!

So the point holds - users can already mess up threads by deleting their posts within 2 days.

So why not just take the time restriction off it?

K-9

Just on too visible modding, the worst eyesore on the whole site mod wise is maybe 4 b]Mod warning in OP[/b threads on the first page of a forum, I bloody detest it but there's a demand for it.

I've always tried to avoid them in politics general and when the cafe started up and you know what, rarely was an issue.
It's too much like babysitting posters for me.

K-9

intheclouds wrote: »

So the point holds - users can already mess up threads by deleting their posts within 2 days.

So why not just take the time restriction off it?

I've explained it, it's to facilitate correcting or maybe adding content.

As for the wider deletion issue, There's no point in you and me going over it yet again, our positions are well established at this stage. We've both made our points.

Esel

K-9 wrote: »

I've explained it, it's to facilitate correcting or maybe adding content.

The point is that it also facilitates deletion.

intheclouds

K-9 wrote: »

I've explained it, it's to facilitate correcting or maybe adding content.

As for the wider deletion issue, There's no point in you and me going over it yet again, our positions are well established at this stage. We've both made our points.

Yes, and there is a delete option also.

Your point seems to be that deletion is ok within 2 days but after that it ruins a thread?

K-9

Esel wrote: »

The point is that it also facilitates deletion.

I assume it's a software thing, one goes with the other.

Beasty

I rarely see posts deleted by posters unless it's perhaps a duplicate. Generally though if such a post is part of the flow of a topic someone will have quoted it or part of it anyway so the flow remains.

Going back and deleting wholesale would in my view destroy a lot of one of the strengths of this site. Basically you can look back and get a feel for how things developed as it happened. It may be rare that someone wants to do that but if they do and large chunks of the discussion are missing it would be a very negative step in my view.

Ultimately we should all accept responsibility for what we post. If someone then wants to trawl back 5 years to find something to hold against another poster it reflects far more badly on the poster doing the trawling so far as I am concerned.

Eugene Norman

intheclouds wrote: »

Yes, and there is a delete option also.

Your point seems to be that deletion is ok within 2 days but after that it ruins a thread?

People don't use that delete function to delete all their posts from a running thread. Therefore not the same.

Maireadio

intheclouds wrote: »

I think that people should be allowed to say/upload things and then have those things deleted later if they wish.

It would be so crap looking back on old threads that have posts and any associated posts deleted.

Maireadio

Wibbs wrote: »

Facebook does and users think they have a "safe space". Right, with your name photos and all your "friends" and "tags" and "likes" for others to see. Unless you have your account nailed down to friends only rendering it pretty limited.

You mustn't use Facebook! Most people have their Facebook profile completely locked down to just friends.

smash wrote: »

I still don't understand why people are so precious about holding on to old content. It's just hoarding for the sake of it.

Because associated posts would also have to be deleted and that completely messes up the archive. How are people not getting this? And the person who quoted you might want all their posts to remain. They generated content too and it's not their problem if you want what you said removed.

Maireadio

Tipperary Fairy wrote: »

Plus the majority of closed accounts only appear in dug up threads, so there's hardly any flow to ruin is there

That makes no sense. It doesn't matter if some of the accounts on the thread are closed. The flow of it doesn't change because of that.

smash

Maireadio wrote: »

Because associated posts would also have to be deleted and that completely messes up the archive. How are people not getting this? And the person who quoted you might want all their posts to remain. They generated content too and it's not their problem if you want what you said removed.

And how much traffic do you think old threads generate? I'd guess that 90%+ of historical threads would get less than 3% of the site traffic annually.

Maireadio

smash wrote: »

And how much traffic do you think old threads generate? I'd guess that 90%+ of historical threads would get less than 3% of the site traffic annually.

And? It's still worthwhile keeping them IMO. I love looking at old threads.

RDM_83 again

smash wrote: »

And how much traffic do you think old threads generate? I'd guess that 90%+ of historical threads would get less than 3% of the site traffic annually.

Old threads might not generate much content generation but outside the chat forums they probably generate traffic because they often contain useful information.

While I get the need/desire to get rid of personal information, I'm not sure views and opinions should be removed, part of the appeal of somewhere like this is you can chat in a way thats (partially) not linked to your real life but also has a level of consistency because posters are tied to what they previously said.
Maybe going back a couple of years is ridiculous but if somebody has said X on a previous thread with one dynamic but now says Y because the current thread has a different dynamic is it so bad calling them out on it?
To those that disagree with this automatically think of that thread with the heat about the women wearing make-up thread, should the OP's previous posting not be taken into account (using this as an example because some of the posters on that side of the argument have reacted strongly against their previous posts being pointed out).

intheclouds

Eugene Norman wrote: »

People don't use that delete function to delete all their posts from a running thread. Therefore not the same.

I have seen it on more than one occasion. Because it can only be done within 2 days you don't see it much. If it was allowed with no time limit you'd see it a lot more.

intheclouds

Maireadio wrote: »

And? It's still worthwhile keeping them IMO. I love looking at old threads.

Great. I don't. And?

Maireadio

intheclouds wrote: »

Great. I don't. And?

Clearly boards deems it valuble to have past posts there as an archive. And so do I and others.

What exactly are people posting that they want to delete? Yes, people's views change but why would you want to erase your views from a different point in your life? If you don't think those things now, what's the problem? It's highly unlikely anyone is going to identify you, especially a potential employer. How would that happen? It happens if people overshare, that's all really. And even then, I would think it highly unlikely that a potential employer will have a spidey sense about you being a user on boards from ten years ago that they don't share views with on a certain issue. That's a bit unlikely, isn't it?

You posted those views, now stand by them or explain how your views have changed if someone challenges you on them on-site. Is that such a big problem?

intheclouds

Maireadio wrote: »

Clearly boards deems it valuble to have past posts there as an archive. And so do I and others.

What exactly are people posting that they want to delete? Yes, people's views change but why would you want to erase your views from a different point in your life? If you don't think those things now, what's the problem? It's highly unlikely anyone is going to identify you, especially a potential employer. How would that happen? It happens if people overshare, that's all really. And even then, I would think it highly unlikely that a potential employer will have a spidey sense about you being a user on boards from ten years ago that they don't share views with on a certain issue. That's a bit unlikely, isn't it?

You posted those views, now stand by them or explain how your views have changed if someone challenges you on them on-site. Is that such a big problem?

I believe that people should have the right to remove content they generate online.

It's nothing to do with any of the vaguely paranoid notions you post about above. It's about retaining the ability to close an account and remove all traces of oneself when you do so.

You know why boards don't want it? Because so many people would avail of it.

I know you must understand the idea of it at least a bit, seeing as your Maireadio account is a rereg.

Maireadio

intheclouds wrote: »

I believe that people should have the right to remove content they generate online.

It's nothing to do with any of the vaguely paranoid notions you post about above.

That's not something I think myself but one poster has mentioned potential employers seeing posts as a reason. If you'e not worried about identification then, why would you want posts deleted? Boards is not the same as social media sites in this regard. And I don't believe it has much to do with the decreasing popularity of the site.

One eyed Jack

Maireadio wrote: »

Clearly boards deems it valuble to have past posts there as an archive. And so do I and others.

What exactly are people posting that they want to delete? Yes, people's views change but why would you want to erase your views from a different point in your life? If you don't think those things now, what's the problem? It's highly unlikely anyone is going to identify you, especially a potential employer. How would that happen? It happens if people overshare, that's all really. And even then, I would think it highly unlikely that a potential employer will have a spidey sense about you being a user on boards from ten years ago that they don't share views with on a certain issue. That's a bit unlikely, isn't it?

Have you been following the last few pages about posters privacy being invaded and their identities exposed? As for highly unlikely? I would suggest you're either being purposely disingenuous, or incredibly naive. It really shouldn't surprise you what people do and don't remember about who posts what on here, and it's all searchable, shareable, and downloadable.

You posted those views, now stand by them or explain how your views have changed if someone challenges you on them on-site. Is that such a big problem?

What, explain my change in views to some random stranger who is using a carefully crafted effort from years ago to undermine my current opinion? I'd sooner just feel they should get knotted tbh.

The community feel is gone from Boards donkeys years ago. The site expanded and now people are more aware about protecting themselves and their privacy. That means there's less content for Boards, because there aren't too many interested in sharing any more. They just post their opinions among people they do know, and when they want to leave it behind them, they simply delete and start again. They have much more control over their privacy, their safety, their reputation and their data, than Boards is willing to afford them.

Why should they feel they owe Boards anything then? It's absolutely not the community discussion hosting forum site it once was. Times changed, technology changed. If people want to get nostalgic and sentimental for the days of the good old discussions, they're gone. They're not coming back. People are changing the way they communicate with each other, and Boards either changes and keeps up with modern trends in social media, or it continues to fill up it's pages with advertisements and padding and fancy pastel colours, to make up for the embarrassing lack of content.

RDM_83 again

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Have you been following the last few pages about posters privacy being invaded and their identities exposed? As for highly unlikely? I would suggest you're either being purposely disingenuous, or incredibly naive. It really shouldn't surprise you what people do and don't remember about who posts what on here, and it's all searchable, shareable, and downloadable.

Didn't most of the people who had their identities exposed post pics of themselves online, its sh-tty it happened to them but not exactly doxxing as I understand it? People should be able to close their accounts but the argument about identity is a bit redundant in terms of site traffic when people are willing to post lots of stuff under their real name and pictures on Facebook.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

What, explain my change in views to some random stranger who is using a carefully crafted effort from years ago to undermine my current opinion? I'd sooner just feel they should get knotted tbh.

This is a personal attack but in a sense but has a wider point to this thread, you have been called out by multiple posters (including myself) for constantly changing your opinion on stuff depending on the thread, to me as a poster I like knowing if somebody is saying something is n't just being said because of the thread thats in it.
If having ones own posts thrown back at you is a problem maybe that says more about how someone posts rather than the fact other posters can do that (Peoples lives change and they have different opinions but peoples views don't tend to change very fast particularly after their teens).


In general though is this an issue for the wider community of Boards or is it an issue for a handful of power posters.

Insect Overlord

Seriously lads, think about it for a moment. How on earth would the ability to delete everything lead to an increase in meaningful content on the site?

Esel

Maireadio wrote: »

... I would think it highly unlikely that a potential employer will have a spidey sense about you being a user on boards from ten years ago that they don't share views with on a certain issue. That's a bit unlikely, isn't it?

Replace 'potential' with 'current' or 'future' employer. How many users post from a work device? Your username is easily available to your employer in that scenario; then your entire posting history is available to them.

One eyed Jack

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Didn't most of the people who had their identities exposed post pics of themselves online, its sh-tty it happened to them but not exactly doxxing as I understand it? People should be able to close their accounts but the argument about identity is a bit redundant in terms of site traffic when people are willing to post lots of stuff under their real name and pictures on Facebook.

You said it RDM - it's shìtty when it happens, and they have every right to protect themselves as and how they see fit, without explaining anything about their social media activities to anyone else. In that way, it's not a redundant argument to say people are interested only in protecting themselves, because Boards appears to be desperate to archive content rather than encouraging current users to create content, yet it offers users very little in the way of ROI.

This is a personal attack but in a sense but has a wider point to this thread, you have been called out by multiple posters (including myself) for constantly changing your opinion on stuff depending on the thread, to me as a poster I like knowing if somebody is saying something is n't just being said because of the thread thats in it.
If having ones own posts thrown back at you is a problem maybe that says more about how someone posts rather than the fact other posters can do that (Peoples lives change and they have different opinions but peoples views don't tend to change very fast particularly after their teens).

Perhaps best we leave it there then RDM, this thread has been used to air enough personal grudge matches already.

In general though is this an issue for the wider community of Boards or is it an issue for a handful of power posters.

The issue of people wanting to protect themselves seems to be a site-wide issue, with even "power posters" (that's a thing?) wanting the Close Account feature disabled. Hotel California stuff right there - give people even less control over their own data, and that's what has them abandoning the site in the first place - less and less people are bothering coming back each time there's a hack.