Boards is becoming a Ghost Town

Cathy.C

Eugene Norman wrote: »

Backseat modding almost never goes on. It's immediately banned.

Calling someone a troll is backseat modding as far as I' concerned, that's the point. It adds nothing to the discussion and is just attacking them and/or their motivations for posting, rather than trying to retort whatever it is that they have said. If you don't feel that it is worth retorting, then move on to the next post. I fail to see why it so important for anyone to call out users that they think are trolls. Personally I see lots of users posting things which I think is trolling and I report it as such.

Troll makes trollish comment. Is called an idiot. Troll reports being called an idiot. The mod then looks and says "fair comment" and either does nothing or bans the troll.

In other words some ad hominems are valid.

No they're not. Boards is a discussion forum. Do ad hominem attacks help discussions in real life? No and so why would you feel that they would online ones? What possible good could come of it? At worst what happens is it turns the thread into an argument between you (or many users) and the troll and at very best it results in a few users all backslapping one another as they take pot shots at them. Tbh, that is the kind of crap I see cliques at on Boards all the time and it boils my blood.

Attack the post and not the poster is something which I feel needs to be more consistent on Boards. Established users and moderators get away attacking posters all the time. Mods have a bad name on this site and mostly they deserve it but the userbase doesn't exactly have the best reputation online either and that too, imo, is very well deserved. Far too many self righteous users on Boards chomping at the bit each and every God damn day looking to find fault with people or nit pick things which they have done so they can have some kind of gotcha moment. 'Attack the post and not the poster' is really the only surefire defense against it. As one user said earlier in this thread though, that should be upgraded to 'Attack the post, not the poster nor their motivations' as all too often this is exactly what happens and for damn sure I can see how that would make people want to log out of here and never log back in.

I'm not saying that we should wrap every snowflake up in cotton wool, don't get me wrong on that and yeah, if someone has posted something about personal about themselves and / or something they have done, of course they and what they have done is now open to criticism. What I am referring to though are the times when people really haven't done either of those things and the armchair sleuths start tearing them apart and questioning the very reason why they posted to begin with, when there was very little justification for doing so. Accusations of trolling come under that for me as it really is not the average user's business if someone is trolling tbh. Too often when I see it being said it's really just done to undermine that user's opinion in an all too obvious attempt at discrediting them and/or their views.

Imo, if that was addressed more, I think Boards would seem a more friendly environment to post in.

Esel

Trolls be trolling. Users be calling. It's the way of the internet.

'Call the cops' is good advice though.

BMMachine

Eugene Norman wrote: »

If that was Dav he had a good poInt on not being hard on questioning moderators.

The other fixes should be.

1) except for egregious violations a friendly (but stern) PM should be sent rather than a visible infraction for any first violation on a thread. People don't like the yellow cards at all.
2) after that warning and with another violation a banning from the thread for a day or two, next PM warning when he's back warns that he will be banned for longer next time.
3) when infractions run out hide them from mods. Long term posters collecting infractions and getting banned after a long time collecting inevitable warnings is bad news. (Admins can see them maybe.)


I also think that a bit more sense in the handling of trolls wouldn't go amiss. I saw today a guy get infracted for calling the poster of a clear trollish comment an idiot. Presumably this comment was reported by the troll. The proper response should be "stop trolling, troll".

from what I can see, if someone is trolling the "right" person than the mods are okay with it. Its what I said earlier about moderator culture, a lot of it is quite stagnant and old circles have formed where certain people are protected (posts deleted, allowed to troll and have mods to back them up when called on it by infracting the person who calls it). Reporting is half and half, it really just depends on who it is thats been reported - subjectivity.
I agree 100% with Dav that it needs a facelift and imo old circles and this tiered posting system need to go. If this means its less open than I think thats a good thing. clarity and conciseness

Lovely Bloke

Yeah, that last paragraph of gandalf's post. It could be any number of people who've closed accounts, moved on or simply stopped posting on this website.

gandalf wrote: »

I have made some really good friends on this site

(I've met my wife, and now have a son).

I've got pissed with a number (some on this thread),

gone to meet some overseas,

had drunken meals with others,

spent weekends away with groups of them,

some went to my wedding,

I went to others weddings

and unfortunately I attended the funeral of one last year.

Boards has opened me up to meeting people who in the normal run of things I never would have engaged with and my life has been richer as a result. This community that has given me so much is now under threat and the biggest threat imho is the actual management of the site.

My condolences on the loss of your friend

KomradeBishop

Cathy.C wrote: »

No they're not. Boards is a discussion forum. Do ad hominem attacks help discussions in real life? No and so why would you feel that they would online ones? What possible good could come of it? At worst what happens is it turns the thread into an argument between you (or many users) and the troll and at very best it results in a few users all backslapping one another as they take pot shots at them. Tbh, that is the kind of crap I see cliques at on Boards all the time and it boils my blood.

Unfortunately Cathy, it's the exact opposite way around - the trolls arrive to back up posters on select topics, and posters then start backslapping the troll and participating with the troll to drag the quality of discussion down to the lowest level - I've seen longtime regular users and mods/cmods backslap with obvious trolls like this (and they - particularly the cmods - know these are trolls...it's the 'rereg following exact same posting style as before' pattern).

It is precisely cliquey - as it's usually the type of discussion where when the troll and the regular posters hold the same view, a clique automatically forms (turning discussion effectively into Us vs Them trench warfare) - except it happens on the trolls side, in the trolls favour.

This is always a rereg troll - and one which is always obvious, following the same posting pattern as the last one - which mods often don't have a chance to act upon until the discussion is already irrecoverable.

It's so predictable on certain topics, that it looks a lot like a regular poster sockpuppeting.


There should be a lot of leniency on calling out obvious trolls - especially of the rereg variety - as trolls; a poster should not be held back from putting out their opinion, that e.g. the 2nd/3rd/4th recent rereg on the same topic (after a precedent of previously banned reregs), is a troll.

It's not just trolls that try to use that rule to land posters with a card, it's regular posters too - by backslapping/legitimizing obvious trolls, whenever they are part of the same 'tribe'/side-of-the-debate.

I consciously try to avoid acknowledging/legitimizing any new posters, who look like potential reregs, for this reason.

Esel

rjpf1980 wrote: »

... this tiered posting system need to go.

Never heard that term before.

What does it mean in your country?

Edit: Your ninja delete was too late. Sayonara, or Hasta la vista, or See ya. Whatever.

Polo_Mint

I checked the new site and youve hidden all the topics to replace them with Adverts


Run Free Topics, Run Free

KomradeBishop

Cathy.C wrote: »

Attack the post and not the poster is something which I feel needs to be more consistent on Boards. Established users and moderators get away attacking posters all the time. Mods have a bad name on this site and mostly they deserve it but the userbase doesn't exactly have the best reputation online either and that too, imo, is very well deserved. Far too many self righteous users on Boards chomping at the bit each and every God damn day looking to find fault with people or nit pick things which they have done so they can have some kind of gotcha moment. 'Attack the post and not the poster' is really the only surefire defense against it. As one user said earlier in this thread though, that should be upgraded to 'Attack the post, not the poster nor their motivations' as all too often this is exactly what happens and for damn sure I can see how that would make people want to log out of here and never log back in.

On a separate note from the same post, this also lands in trolls favour: If that were the rule, then you couldn't call out a troll on an obvious wind-up, as trying to wind you up...

Motivations absolutely should be allowed to be pointed out - there are a handful of posters I can think of offhand, who can get away with effectively trolling, just because they can superficially hide their motivation, to waste posters time and fúck around with them by constantly knowingly engaging in the most facile level of argument against them - particularly roping them into replying constantly, by throwing constant straw-men at them that are wrapped up in enough fluff, to make them superficially plausible to other posters (thus which will successfully fool other posters into thinking you represent the straw-men, unless you constantly engage/rebut the troll).

Mods can't do anything about this, because it is not against the rules, if the poster 'plays dumb' and does it subtly enough - this is an area where you should not be able to call out someone as a troll, but where it would be ridiculous if you could get carded for stating that you feel the poster is on a wind-up.

These posters are a greater harm to the quality of debate, than any of the obvious rereg trolls imo - usually their go-to argument, is a 'tu quoque', an appeal to hypocrisy - just reflexively accusing you of the same tactics, in an attempt to legitimize their use of these tactics against you, when that is not true and no effort is made to back that up with e.g. quotes.

It really feels like there isn't a community on boards like there was ages ago. It got taken over by trigger enthusiasts, tumbr-style posters, and just a real sense of cliqueiness. Added to that moderation that is always in favour of the loudest groups more than anything else. And it's just lost so much. Look at the individual forums - the Galway forum, for example, was a bastion for "having the craic"ness and people just being incredibly tongue-in-cheek. Now it's populated by people who are out to be offended, so get offended by everything, by blowhards and tryhards, and by people who just complain far too much. Same thing with AH. And numerous other places.

I don't think it's to do with the moderation or the way the site is run, because it's always been the same, really, but more to do with the community that is bleeding in.

RDM_83 again

Deleted User wrote: »

It really feels like there isn't a community on boards like there was ages ago. It got taken over by trigger enthusiasts, tumbr-style posters, and just a real sense of cliqueiness. Added to that moderation that is always in favour of the loudest groups more than anything else. And it's just lost so much. Look at the individual forums - the Galway forum, for example, was a bastion for "having the craic"ness and people just being incredibly tongue-in-cheek. Now it's populated by people who are out to be offended, so get offended by everything, by blowhards and tryhards, and by people who just complain far too much. Same thing with AH. And numerous other places.

I don't think it's to do with the moderation or the way the site is run, because it's always been the same, really, but more to do with the community that is bleeding in.

Could expound on this but I think the thing is the " right" /brogressives has learned the tactics of the "left"/ sjw's and are kicking back. This has happened everywhere online and in real life too.
I'm not sure what the answer is (I am one of those posters myself) but it should be noted this is a response to change not something initiated and by making statements that " right wing opinion is now more dangerous" Boards.ie management has nailed its colours firmly to the mast.
Places like Reddit to some extent work because they allow posters to find spaces they are comfortable in, Boards views the success of a light moderation "un-pc" forum (the Politics Cafe) as a failure when its succeeded in giving what a lot of posters clear want. Why not do the same for a "social" forum, its clearly wanted and needed (and AH was that until a couple of years ago, the posters complaining aren',t wanting something new they want something old back)

Cathy.C

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Unfortunately Cathy, it's the exact opposite way around - the trolls arrive to back up posters on select topics, and posters then start backslapping the troll and participating with the troll to drag the quality of discussion down to the lowest level - I've seen longtime regular users and mods/cmods backslap with obvious trolls like this (and they - particularly the cmods - know these are trolls...it's the 'rereg following exact same posting style as before' pattern).

Well, if that is the case, then it is a moderation issue. The solution is not for users to call out the troll as then the thread would just turn to shiit.

It is precisely cliquey - as it's usually the type of discussion where when the troll and the regular posters hold the same view, a clique automatically forms (turning discussion effectively into Us vs Them trench warfare) - except it happens on the trolls side, in the trolls favour.

Fine, but calling out the troll would not help matters, only make them worse.

It's so predictable on certain topics, that it looks a lot like a regular poster sockpuppeting.

The solution is better moderation, not a free-for-all though.

There should be a lot of leniency on calling out obvious trolls - especially of the rereg variety - as trolls; a poster should not be held back from putting out their opinion, that e.g. the 2nd/3rd/4th recent rereg on the same topic (after a precedent of previously banned reregs), is a troll.

Look, you might be legit in your motives for calling out a troll, many might me, but sooo many are not, that is the point. They use it as a way of dismissing and discrediting a user. It's a way of attacking them and not what they are saying.

It's not just trolls that try to use that rule to land posters with a card, it's regular posters too - by backslapping/legitimizing obvious trolls, whenever they are part of the same 'tribe'/side-of-the-debate.

I don't see anything wrong with that. If the "troll" has expressed an opinion which gets back slapped, tough. That's not your concern. I have seen this time and again where a new user will have got some thanks and then it annoys the other side of the debate and so they all start calling them a troll. Again, it turns a thread to shiit and in no way helps the situation even if people are correct in thinking that the person is a a troll. There's a report button. People should use it more.

I consciously try to avoid acknowledging/legitimizing any new posters, who look like potential reregs, for this reason.

And so you should as it is not your business, or mine, nor anyone else's.

KomradeBishop wrote: »

On a separate note from the same post, this also lands in trolls favour: If that were the rule, then you couldn't call out a troll on an obvious wind-up, as trying to wind you up...

Eh, so what? What good does that do? As far as I am concerned if you think a user is on a wind up, then same thing.. report the user/thread. There was a user recently who wound everyone up about his dog being killed. I pretty much knew he was on a wind up and so posted a joke as the second post in the thread (I later deleted it as I thought someone might quote my joke and say it was in poor taste considering the topic) but what I didn't do is post and say "Ah here, I don't believe a word of this" as it's not my position to do so. I had no proof and so all that would have done was derail the thread. Better five users report the OP as possibly being a wind up than five users all calling the OP a troll on the thread. It's not helpful even when they are right.

Motivations absolutely should be allowed to be pointed out - there are a handful of posters I can think of offhand, who can get away with effectively trolling, just because they can superficially hide their motivation, to waste posters time and fúck around with them by constantly knowingly engaging in the most facile level of argument against them - particularly roping them into replying constantly, by throwing constant straw-men at them that are wrapped up in enough fluff, to make them superficially plausible to other posters (thus which will successfully fool other posters into thinking you represent the straw-men, unless you constantly engage/rebut the troll).

I couldn't agree with you more. I can think of a few users off hand myself that post strawman arguments in almost every single thread. I don't see anything wrong with calling out that though, as that is something you can quote and outline just precisely why that is your call. It's quite easily done in fact. No harm reporting that crap too as mods can miss users that are constantly doing it and if you keep pointing it out, they will eventually get the picture. Calling out strawmanning is not the same as just blindly calling someone a troll though, which is what I am saying shouldn't be tolerated.

Mods can't do anything about this, because it is not against the rules, if the poster 'plays dumb' and does it subtly enough - this is an area where you should not be able to call out someone as a troll, but where it would be ridiculous if you could get carded for stating that you feel the poster is on a wind-up.

I disagree. Mods can do something about it, they just don't anywhere near often enough. I have seen moderators post on threads and tell users that what they are suggesting other users have argued, they have not argued at all, and ask them to quit wasting everyone's time doing it. I believe a 'Repeated incidents of strawmanning will result in your access to the forum being removed' is something which should be added to almost all forum charters on Boards.

These posters are a greater harm to the quality of debate, than any of the obvious rereg trolls imo - usually their go-to argument, is a 'tu quoque', an appeal to hypocrisy - just reflexively accusing you of the same tactics, in an attempt to legitimize their use of these tactics against you, when that is not true and no effort is made to back that up with e.g. quotes.

I agree with you. If you can show that a user is doing any of the above by use of quotes, then go for it. I do it myself. That is not what I am talking about though. It's the no-effort calling out of users as trolls and wind-up merchants without any basis which I am against. If you find a user contradicting themselves, having one a opinion one day and another a next, for example, then I see nothing at all wrong with calling out such users. I encourage it in fact.

KomradeBishop

Fair enough, interesting to hear another side to that, even if I don't agree fully - I agree though, that the lack of moderator intervention in many of those circumstances, is a problem - it's just something I don't see as resolvable in all cases, because it kind of fits in the borderline area of stuff that mods often can't act on.

Totally agree on the straw-manning rule idea - not sure how practical it would be to implement, but it'd be good to see that method of false argument, removed from peoples toolkit - would do a lot to improve quality of discussion in many topics. Definitely, wind-ups/straw-mans and such, should only be called out where provable through quotes.

Eugene Norman

I used to mod a Apple centric technology site. We allowed criticism of Apple but trolls would be banned fairly quickly, otherwise the site would become android centric. We didn't ban calling trolls trolls.

If someone one an Irish centric site says of the Irish:

"it would certainly be nice if Ireland apologized for exporting terrorism"

And isn't banned, and instead you infract the posters who call this idiot an idiot you might find yourselves with the kind of people who agree with this D4 anti Irish ****e, enough to fill a small snug in ballsbridge but not enough to pay the bills and davs house stare rental.

Start banning trolls.

BMMachine

heres an interesting one. On the page for Gearbest, there are three posts criticising boards' decision and policy - heavily thanks. Interesting to note that out of all the 'thanks' there was only one mod who thanked any of the posts.
close ranks, know where your bread is buttered. This is just another example I believe of mod culture and how self contained it is. I'm sure I'll be told how there is nothing in that but everything stacks up. If they want to change the perceived image, like Dav said, then they have to make actual changes and destroy this moderating culture which is rife on the site

Insect Overlord

BMMachine wrote: »

heres an interesting one. On the page for Gearbest, there are three posts criticising boards' decision and policy - heavily thanks. Interesting to note that out of all the 'thanks' there was only one mod who thanked any of the posts.
close ranks, know where your bread is buttered. This is just another example I believe of mod culture and how self contained it is. I'm sure I'll be told how there is nothing in that but everything stacks up. If they want to change the perceived image, like Dav said, then they have to make actual changes and destroy this moderating culture which is rife on the site

Or maybe the rest of us are going about our daily lives and don't have the time or interest in reading the new forum in the first place? I've been between Dublin, Galway, Athlone and Limerick over the last few days, but you assume because a post hasn't been thanked by more mods that there must be some sort of wagon circling conspiracy? Feck off with that nonsense.

El Weirdo

BMMachine wrote: »

heres an interesting one. On the page for Gearbest, there are three posts criticising boards' decision and policy - heavily thanks. Interesting to note that out of all the 'thanks' there was only one mod who thanked any of the posts.
close ranks, know where your bread is buttered. This is just another example I believe of mod culture and how self contained it is. I'm sure I'll be told how there is nothing in that but everything stacks up. If they want to change the perceived image, like Dav said, then they have to make actual changes and destroy this moderating culture which is rife on the site

Never mind that shite, open your fucking PMs.

Deank

An File wrote: »

Or maybe the rest of us are going about our daily lives and don't have the time or interest in reading the new forum in the first place? I've been between Dublin, Galway, Athlone and Limerick over the last few days, but you assume because a post hasn't been thanked by more mods that there must be some sort of wagon circling conspiracy? Feck off with that nonsense.

Utter b0llox tbh, even a long standing admin has voiced disdain at the gearbest debacle.

Wagon circling is common place.

LoLth wrote: »

I like the simpsons based string of event post

However I would prefer to imagine it as:

(note: I have been afk for a long time so my view of events may be missing some elements. Also **NOT POSTING AS AN ADMIN**NOT OFFICIAL STANCE**).

Gearbest-CEO: how do we advertise on the interwebs for cheap?

Gearbest-marketing: I have no soul! we encourage established users to promote our products thus building on their good reputation and taking advantage of the people that trust them

Gearbest-CEO: isnt that a bit....evil

Gearbest-marketing: your point being?

Gearbest-CEO: you got me there

---

Gearbest: Greetings trusted and respected user of internet forum 1001 on our list. Here is stuff, please lie to those that trust you and we will give you more of this stuff. Its not a big lie, just a little one

User: but I signed a terms of use agreement to not do exactly that

Gearbest: User of internet forum 1001 on our list, we have stuff. you want stuff. you would like your friends and followers and minions to want stuff you have. we want them to have stuff like stuff you have. let us give you stuff

User: stuuuuuuuuuufffffffff

User: Shill! Shill! Shill everything!

Boards: No Shill! bad shill! die shill!

User: oh noes. no fair. all I wantses is stuffs.

Boards: but you signed an agreement to not do that.

User: Was not I, Was Gearbest

Boards: we dont have an agreement with them if they want to advertise let them buy a banner or pay for an account. In the meantime, you broke the agreement you made with boards.

User: Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Boards: Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees!

Boards: Gearbest, you gits. we dont like the way you do things.

Gearbest: really?

Boards: really. If you want to advertise here you must X Y Z blah blah blah blah

Gearbest: Really? if only we had known then we would not have corrupted poor innocent users. They obviously were unaware of their agreement with Internet Forum 1001 on our list or they would have refused our offer of stuff

Boards: pretty sure they would have said something

Gearbest: ah well. Not Gearbest's problem we have no agreement with Internet Forum 1001 on our list. But you say such agreement is possible?

Boards: yup.

Gearbest: we give you money as requested, we post everywhere we want! no more users required. no more intermediaries. let the post posts commence. muhahahhhahahaha the End is Nigh!

Boards: emm what?

Gearbest: The End. its a new product and we want to sell it. its coming soon.

Boards: ok, not weird at all.

Gearbest: really?

Boards: have you not read After hours?

Gearbest: No. not yet. let me....Oh dear God!

AHmod: ah here. thats not fair LoLth. you're always doing that.

LoLth: oops. habit. sorry AH mods and users! <-- yes, that's deadpool levels of meta going on right there. In text form. Take that Ryan Renolds!

Gearbest: ahem. If I may continue..... we shall make all the posts!

Boards: emm, not all the posts. you can post in a dedicated rep forum where users can ask you questions about your products and services

Gearbest: but we want to show users our stuff

Boards: you can buy a banner ad.

Gearbest: "baaaannn nerrrrr aaaaad". what is this banner ad you speak of...

Boards: its a picture that people see and..

Gearbest: it move under their mouse so they click on it and it autodownloads digital shiny stuff ads?

Boards: no

Gearbest: it melts their RFID shielding on their wallets so we can then...

Boards: no

Gearbest: Its a picture

Boards: with a link

Gearbest: to what?

Boards: you

Gearbest: 1 sec

---

Gearbest-CEO: what you think Dark minion?

Gearbest-marketing: I want to post stuuuuff

Gearbest-CEO: yeah, but picture. with link.

Gearbest-marketing: stuuuuuuuuuuuuf!

Gearbest-CEO: ok ok.

---

Gearbest: Ok Boards. How can we post stuff?

Boards: how about you buy a forum from us? But you can ONLY post stuff in that forum and you cannot corrupt users and you have to obey rules...

Gearbest: how much will this cost?

Boards: $$€£

Gearbest: done

Boards: now you know you are signing an agreement. you will need to obey it.

Gearbest: Take our money now!

Boards: ok. lets see how this goes.

Users: emmm WTF?

Boards: what?

Users: you hate Gearbest!

Boards: we did. when they were attacking us

Users: but they paid you off...

Boards: we've always said shills can buy advertising if they want to advertise. always. even after they shill.

Users: so you'll unban the users that shilled?

Boards: How can we? they broke their user agreement and shilled.

Users: but Gearbest...thats a double standard!

Boards: no. Gearbest had no agreement with boards. The users did. that's two different sets of rules right there and there's nothing we can do about that. Gearbest now have an agreement with boards and they will have to abide by it. NOW Gearbest is in the same set of rules as the users that shilled.

Users: but but... that doesnt feel right

Boards: I know, right? its freaky! Its exactly what we have always said we would like to happen, minus the banned users, but a shill becomes a paying supporter of the community

Users: but.. users vs corporate

Boards: emmm, we're corporate and we support users. ok we dont always see eye to eye but we do ultimately provide a platform for users. It does need to be paid for somehow though. families to feed, servers to power, bandwidth to provision, data protection to maintain. It all costs.

Users: ok, but the banned users

Boards: were banned for breach of the terms of use that everyone agreed to.

Users: but Gearbest!

Boards: did not agree to the terms of use and had not actually posts.

Users: aha! they did! that account..

Boards: was banned.

Users: we're not happy about this

Boards: we can see that. Its unfortunate but all that has happened here is that the rules got applied as we have always said they would be. Is this not the consistency that users have posted about in feedback when they feel it is missing?

Users: well yes but...ethics!

Boards: from an online marketing strategy? really? they didnt try to destroy boards, they sought to use it. Now they can, in the way WE want them to use it.

and then LoLth returned from his wanderings and posted a post in feedback that ushered in the golden age of civility and mutual respectful deliberation of opposing opinions ans all milk turned to chocolate and all chocolate turned to milk and , after the mops were cleaned, much rejoicing was had throughout the land. Except for the cows. they were just very confused. And the biologists. They had to re-study all their stuff. They hated LoLth for this and set about exacting their revenge by first sending an email to the head of the international coagulation of marshmallow producing entrepenuers . but thats a story for another day.

A side note: I dont like Gearbest's advertising practices. I really dont. Thankfully, with their posts confined to a single sub-forum its actually going to take more effort for me to see their ads than it will be to ignore them

A. B. Username

An File wrote: »

Or maybe the rest of us are going about our daily lives and don't have the time or interest in reading the new forum in the first place? I've been between Dublin, Galway, Athlone and Limerick over the last few days, but you assume because a post hasn't been thanked by more mods that there must be some sort of wagon circling conspiracy? Feck off with that nonsense.

Bollocks.

Insect Overlord

A. B. Username wrote: »

Bollocks.

Awesome first post.

BMMachine

ha its thread subscriptions but yes! that needs a clean

Pawwed Rig

The biggest change to my use is that 80% of my boards use is now via mobile.
I tend now towards shorter more direct posts than I used to mainly because typing long narratives on a phone just takes too bloody long.
Not boards fault either but a change that has to be dealt with by them as I doubt I am unique.

In addition doing any kind of moderating activity is next to impossible on mobile.

Mr. CooL ICE

BMMachine wrote: »

heres an interesting one. On the page for Gearbest, there are three posts criticising boards' decision and policy - heavily thanks. Interesting to note that out of all the 'thanks' there was only one mod who thanked any of the posts.
close ranks, know where your bread is buttered. This is just another example I believe of mod culture and how self contained it is. I'm sure I'll be told how there is nothing in that but everything stacks up. If they want to change the perceived image, like Dav said, then they have to make actual changes and destroy this moderating culture which is rife on the site

Dude, you're connecting the dots when there aren't any.

Polo_Mint

BMMachine wrote: »

heres an interesting one. On the page for Gearbest, there are three posts criticising boards' decision and policy - heavily thanks. Interesting to note that out of all the 'thanks' there was only one mod who thanked any of the posts.
close ranks, know where your bread is buttered. This is just another example I believe of mod culture and how self contained it is. I'm sure I'll be told how there is nothing in that but everything stacks up. If they want to change the perceived image, like Dav said, then they have to make actual changes and destroy this moderating culture which is rife on the site

You havent read the threads then

I have seen a few posts from mods criticizing the direction in which boards.ie is going from why its becoming a ghost town to the gearbest thread.

Some even questioning there position on being a Mod in the future.

The only issues I have currently with boards are 3 things.

1. Why on the new site they are hiding the forums behind clicks to make way for adverts.

2. Why bring in companies like Gearbest that clearly abused the community.

3. Why are admins in the prison forum banding together to troll people who are banned, when they could act "professionally " and conduct the Prison forum correctly.

Amalgam

Polo_Mint wrote: »

3. Why are admins in the prison forum banding together to troll people who are banned, when they could act "professionally " and conduct the Prison forum correctly.

I'm surprised this doesn't get brought up more often by members, I've read countless threads there and you really feel for someone with a couple of thousand posts, a person is, 'leaving behind' a bit of themselves on the site, just to be dragged about by Dav verbally, often under the pretense that there is room to maneuver, with a view to staying on the site. Dav seems oblivious to how that could wind someone up offline.

If you want civil behaviour, it has to be uniform, not just from the overwrought, precious snowflakes.

DeadHand

An File wrote: »

Or maybe the rest of us are going about our daily lives and don't have the time or interest in reading the new forum in the first place? I've been between Dublin, Galway, Athlone and Limerick over the last few days, but you assume because a post hasn't been thanked by more mods that there must be some sort of wagon circling conspiracy? Feck off with that nonsense.

Utter bollox.

You still found the time to thank the few snide, wagon circling posts by mods and admins at the start of Canadel's thread despite your hectic lifestyle.

I mean, if you feel the need to stick up for your friends or have loyalty to the company for letting you feel you have authority over people- grand that's understandable even if it is wrong.

Just don't be dishonest about it and take the rest of us for idiots.

Insect Overlord

DeadHand wrote: »

Utter bollox.

You still found the time to thank the few snide, wagon circling posts by mods and admins at the start of Canadel's thread despite your hectic lifestyle.

I mean, if you feel the need to stick up for your friends or have loyalty to the company for letting you feel you have authority over people- grand that's understandable even if it is wrong.

Just don't be dishonest about it and take the rest of us for idiots.

Authority? What fucking authority? I look after two forums that get about a hundred posts between them in a good month, in a language that gets mercilessly ripped apart in After Hours every season when people have forgotten the last 1000 post cliché-ridden "Peig Sayers and Irish taxpayers' money and Nazi teachers" bullshit from a few months previous. I get nothing at all from modding here.

So yeah, I make time to read the threads that interest me. I thank a few posts that I agree with (sometimes because they highlight the utter stupidity or dishonesty of another poster and save me the bother of having to point it out myself) and I don't thank some others. That's my choice. It has fuck all to do with being a moderator. There is no conspiracy. The handful of mods who I do consider my friends haven't posted in Feedback in (literally) years.

So take your "utter bollocks" comments and save them for figuring out why people keep disagreeing with most of what you post.

DeadHand

Horrible language there.

Will it be sanctioned?

One eyed Jack

DeadHand wrote: »

Horrible language there.

Will it be sanctioned?

Beam in your own eye there horse :pac:

DeadHand wrote: »

Utter bollox.

And it's that sort of precious attitude and conspiracy theory nonsense is the reason why some posters points simply aren't taken seriously. It's supposed to be feedback, constructive feedback, not a thread for what you so aptly describe as utter bollocks.

polluxspiky

One eyed Jack wrote: »

conspiracy theory

Is there any phrase on the internet that more loudly signals "I can't make a cogent argument" than "conspiracy theory"?

polluxspiky

DeadHand wrote: »

Horrible language there.

Will it be sanctioned?

Hahaha, as if. It's laughable seeing mods and clique whining about over-sensitivity when you look at the Dispute forum and see what people outside the circle are getting banned for.