Boards is becoming a Ghost Town

Wibbs

andekwarhola wrote: »

I like Smash's idea of scrambling a user name - if it's technically feasible - and thinks it's a good compromise between saving content and giving people a opt out.

It's been a suggestion that has done the rounds before(IIRC Trojan came up with it) and it does seem to be the best compromise alright. Though I suspect unless it's a case of flipping a switch it's unlikely to happen any time soon.

And in the context of this discussion, we can clearly see that if a changing userbase want something in large enough numbers and are essentially being told to suck it down (or given a solemn lecture about their own content as 'social history' - presumably by people who emerged from the womb in sensible middle age) they'll just jump ship to one of the many services that will provide what they want.

Aye. I tend to agree TBH. Cards on the table; I do support the idea of it being a snapshot of Irish life and being reserved as such. However times change and so must the site. Plus it was mostly only ever a snapshot of a particular and narrow demographic(overwhelmingly male, overwhelmingly "nerdy", overwhelmingly under 30 and more left leaning than background)at least until the late noughties when there was more of a general audience uptake.

K-9

Would scrambling really work though? It's the content that is important, the name is just a tag really.

Wibbs

K-9 wrote: »

It's the content that is important, the name is just a tag really.

That's the point K. Scrambling the username removes the connection for the ex member who doesn't want it to be linked to them, but preserves the content.

smash

K-9 wrote: »

Would scrambling really work though? It's the content that is important, the name is just a tag really.

Scrambling saves the content and removes an association with the user so it would work well for all sides.

K-9

Right, so the posts remain, but if an account has 6,000 posts they each individually get reassigned a different scrambled name.

intheclouds

K-9 wrote: »

Right, so the posts remain, but if an account has 6,000 posts they each individually get reassigned a different scrambled name.

I think a single generic name should be used for ALL posts by ALL users who request it done.

So any old account where the user has requested account/post associations be removed should just have the username "user" (or some generic name) assigned.

Neyite

K-9 wrote: »

Right, so the posts remain, but if an account has 6,000 posts they each individually get reassigned a different scrambled name.

No, scrambled to a particular name - so say you close your account then all the posts for K-9 become posts for ID12345.

I close my account so all my posts become posts for ID12346.

But the thread content remains untouched.

Tilly

Wibbs wrote: »

What BC said. I would only add that mods can't see the IP addresses themselves, only (I presume) Admins can. Though when I started modding in 06 I think, you could, but that changed very soon after. Boards is very proactive as far as internal protection of members privacy.

Reading back through the thread I dunno what the solution is TBH, or if there even is one. My personal thoughts would be along the lines of:

Drop the new site layout entirely. Unless it replicates the current and older user experience of Boards it will kill numbers even more. Cut losses there.

The search needs fixing. It's shíte and has been for years. If it's too much overhead in time and money, fair enough, set up a google search for members.

Amalgamate more forums. Close ones that have run their course(the sex & sexuality forum I help mod for one. That's been pining for the fjords for years now and if ye can't sell sex….). Create an Archive area and throw them in there.

Remove mods/cmods/admins who aren't active, unless they have specifically requested a break which is fine.

Amalgamate the DRP and Helpdesk into one forum. Archive and bury the Feedforward stuff in Feedback.

Get rid of the yellow/red infractions cards middle management nonsense. This is not, nor should be a corporate environment or the civil service and it's all a bit David Brent. It should be a respite from that guff.

Unless there are legal issues or it's descended into nastiness, leave threads run. Let threads go "off topic" more, it's called conversation folks. No need to go Sheldon Cooper about it.

Leave zombie threads alone. So what if they're reopened? Shutting them down and suggesting the poster opens a new thread is stupid, because they almost never do, especially newbies. No wonder as their first experiences of Boards is some muppet admonishing them after they found the subject on Google. Well done you've stopped conversation and pissed off a potential member and that crap builds up until the place is regarded as Mods.ie.

Oh and mea culpa, I've done all of the above, I have been that muppet, but I now see how swivel eyed retarded I was. That culture needs to change.

This pretty much sums up everything that needs fixing. Well done, Sir Wibbs

K-9

Neyite wrote: »

No, scrambled to a particular name - so say you close your account then all the posts for K-9 become posts for ID12345.

I close my account so all my posts become posts for ID12346.

But the thread content remains untouched.

But that's useless really, which was my original point.

Whether I'm K-9 or User123456 isn't that important, what matters is the views, opinions and details in my posts.

Take a re-reg now, other posters often spot them because of turns of phrases, spelling, views etc. Somebody who wants to trawl through previous threads will be able to spot who user123456 is.

So, I'm wondering what's the advantage of basically giving my posts a different name?

Winterlong

Could we just put Wibbs in charge?

Wibbs

Tilly wrote: »

This pretty much sums up everything that needs fixing. Well done, Sir Wibbs

*Paypal sent*

K-9 wrote: »

So, I'm wondering what's the advantage of basically giving my posts a different name?

Some distancing from an account, but mostly optics. The latter not to be underestimated.

Wibbs

Winterlong wrote: »

Could we just put Wibbs in charge?

*paypal sent. Again* Christ I'm running outa cash here FFS. :mad::D

K-9

Wibbs wrote: »

*Paypal sent*

Some distancing from an account, but mostly optics. The latter not to be underestimated.

Nah, that's just introducing something for the sake of it Wibbs, not something I go for in general..

A bit like yellow cards and other stuff you listed, there's no point introducing something that in 12 months time we'll be back here again saying that was pointless or a mistake!

Change for the sake of change or to be seen doing something.

andekwarhola

K-9 wrote: »

Right, so the posts remain, but if an account has 6,000 posts they each individually get reassigned a different scrambled name.

No I assumed it would be the same generic name or number, otherwise you're just essentially assigning another unique name with which to group posts together.

Again, dunno how technically feasible that is.

smash

Neyite wrote: »

No, scrambled to a particular name - so say you close your account then all the posts for K-9 become posts for ID12345.

I close my account so all my posts become posts for ID12346.

But the thread content remains untouched.

This isn't scrambling. This is just renaming the account, which is pointless.

Scrambling can work in a few ways:

All closed accounts get set to, say "User404". So posts can't be tied to an individual user.
All closed accounts get assigned user1, user2, user3 etc. on a thread by thread basis. So posts can't be tied to a profile, but the user's are consistent in each thread.

Esel

K-9 wrote: »

But that's useless really, which was my original point.

Whether I'm K-9 or User123456 isn't that important, what matters is the views, opinions and details in my posts.

Take a re-reg now, other posters often spot them because of turns of phrases, spelling, views etc. Somebody who wants to trawl through previous threads will be able to spot who user123456 is.

So, I'm wondering what's the advantage of basically giving my posts a different name?

Ah here. If all the posts were attributed to 'Ex-user', that would really screw the understanding of threads.

There could be say 10 ex-users in one thread - how would that read if all their posts appeared to be by the same poster? What if one ex-user quoted another ex-user, or multi-quoted a few ex-users. Who could make a thesis out of that?

Esel

smash wrote: »

This isn't scrambling. This is just renaming the account, which is pointless.

Scrambling can work in a few ways:

All closed accounts get set to, say "User404". So posts can't be tied to an individual user.
All closed accounts get assigned user1, user2, user3 etc. on a thread by thread basis. So posts can't be tied to a profile, but the user's are consistent in each thread.

Nice idea, but is it feasible? Even with a conveyor belt providing an infinite supply of hamsters?

K-9

Esel wrote: »

Ah here. If all the posts were attributed to 'Ex-user', that would really screw the understanding of threads.

There could be say 10 ex-users in one thread - how would that read if all their posts appeared to be by the same poster? What if one ex-user quoted another ex-user, or multi-quoted a few ex-users. Who could make a thesis out of that?

If it can't be done for technical or logical reasons like above fair enough.

But there's no point just changing a username as that's pointless.

smash

Esel wrote: »

Nice idea, but is it feasible? Even with a conveyor belt providing an infinite supply of hamsters?

It's all feasible. Just a matter of whether boards want to provide the sevice. It could be done during times of low traffic with users in a queue.

andekwarhola

Esel wrote: »

Ah here. If all the posts were attributed to 'Ex-user', that would really screw the understanding of threads.

There could be say 10 ex-users in one thread - how would that read if all their posts appeared to be by the same poster? What if one ex-user quoted another ex-user, or multi-quoted a few ex-users. Who could make a thesis out of that?

Somebody retarded, if they're using unattributed quotes from nutters in random Internet discussions for their thesis.

Esel

K-9 wrote: »

If it can't be done for technical or logical reasons like above fair enough.

But there's no point just changing a username as that's pointless.

Maybe smash's idea then - unique random names per thread. It would still be possible (but much harder) to identify a particular ex-user's posts.

Esel

andekwarhola wrote: »

Somebody retarded, if they're using unattributed quotes from nutters in random Internet discussions for their thesis.

But - but - but we are adding to a priceless archive for future generations to wonder over. A book has been published already!

riffmongous

Regarding scrambling, won't quoted posts show the original name still though? As they currently do for people who have changed their username through subscription

Esel

riffmongous wrote: »

Regarding scrambling, won't quoted posts show the original name still though? As they currently do for people who have changed their username through subscription

The hamsters will take care of that. It will take a lot of them - think the Western Front for the next n millennia.

intheclouds

Esel wrote: »

Ah here. If all the posts were attributed to 'Ex-user', that would really screw the understanding of threads.

There could be say 10 ex-users in one thread - how would that read if all their posts appeared to be by the same poster? What if one ex-user quoted another ex-user, or multi-quoted a few ex-users. Who could make a thesis out of that?

Why would it screw the understanding?

Its the content that matters (apparently), not who said it.

ancapailldorcha

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You wouldn't have any links would you?

Chorus_suck

This post has been deleted.

Esel

intheclouds wrote: »

Why would it screw the understanding?

Its the content that matters (apparently), not who said it.

If every post by every ex-user was attributed to a single Username: Ex-User, it would be a total clusterfunk.

Dav

You mean this update that I posted on Friday (as promised)....

seamus

intheclouds wrote: »

Why would it screw the understanding?

Its the content that matters (apparently), not who said it.

Yes and no. If someone is reviewing a thread, it will become very difficult to follow if 90% of the names in the thread are "[Deleted]".

Same if every single post received a random username, back-and-forths would look like one user having an argument with 20 others.

There are technical solutions here, no doubt about it. Scale is part of the problem;

1. Rename deleted accounts as [Deleted] and suddenly when you do a search for the "[Deleted]" user you get back half a million posts and bring the site down.
2. Rename all posts randomly and when someone with 20,000 posts deletes their account, the system grinds to a halt trying to sort it.


Even just renaming a user is a system-intensive task that as far as I can see still has to be done at early hours to prevent the system slowing down. Yes, these are things that can be overcome, but require effort for very little return in the long run. So when it comes to "stuff that needs developing", they'll stay low on the list.