Boards is becoming a Ghost Town

Godge

Gordon wrote: »

There will always be differing opinions on what the truth is, as people see things from different points of views, with different histories, and different levels of access. If you think that I perceive everything to be the way you state in your quote above - I disagree, there are varying levels of thought from the demographic you mention.

I completely agree, there will always be differing opinions on what the truth is, and as the recent exchange demonstrates, people with different histories see things differently.

Gordon wrote: »

OK so you are saying that if boards continues doing the things you perceive to be wrong - it should shut down. That's not what you said previously which was - boards should shut down now.

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

an attempt (albeit seemingly falling on the ears of a person with his fingers firmly stuck into them shouting lalalalalalla nothappening everything is fine lalalalalalala) to get someone, anyone, to acknowledge that the direction the site/management/office/owners have gone, since pretty much Boards was targetted for "commercial development" has, at almost every turn, been a step away from the community ethos, the ethos that actually made this site look like a site that could be developed in such a way.

Gordon wrote: »

No, that's not how I read his analogy. Maybe he can explain.

I think this recent exchange about gandalf's point perfectly illustrates this and explains why many ordinary posters believe their views are falling on deaf ears because of the different history of those who have had long association with boards has created wildly different perspectives of the current issues.

kneemos

Gordon wrote: »

He initially said that boards should shut down now. The racehorse analogy stated this, but now his position is one that you mention.

Pointless arguments should be a bannable offence.

droidman123

LexieOnRale wrote: »

The "higher ups" might do well to treat the users of the site with a bit more respect. The way some of them speak to users, well the regular poster would be banned for it. It seems it's a case of do as we say and not as we do.

Couldnt agree more,the culture of the cowards mentality on the prison forum is a prime example,bullying and humiliating some of the posters there,disgusting.i touched on this in this forum about 2 weeks ago and i am still waiting to hear if it is going to be addressed.

Lovely Bloke

Gordon wrote: »

I don't get that vibe. Maybe you are directing your remark at me, as I fit the first generation or two of Admins, but I'm not sure because you are talking in general terms.

I'm not sure what constructive point you're trying to make, unless it's to attempt to stir up reactions. There will always be differing opinions on what the truth is, as people see things from different points of views, with different histories, and different levels of access. If you think that I perceive everything to be the way you state in your quote above - I disagree, there are varying levels of thought from the demographic you mention.

And that's a fair enough comment, you are on the "inside" as it where.

Look, this is going to sound hamfisted or something, but I reckon you'll get the general jist of it.

Nobody who's been in your position or "higher" for as long as you have been (give or take), ever seems to publically come out on anything other than the side of, what seems to be, "everything is fine, stop complaining, the people complaining are only malcontented loudmouths in anyway, so shut up". That's a perception.

I don't know if you are doing it purposely in that post above but your line about "stirring up reactions" is typical of it. Make a statement like that to discredit the person complaining so you don't have to actually take the complaints on board and can pass them off as the ramblings of a ne'er do well.

Gordon

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

And that's a fair enough comment, you are on the "inside" as it where.

Look, this is going to sound hamfisted or something, but I reckon you'll get the general jist of it.

Nobody who's been in your position or "higher" for as long as you have been (give or take), ever seems to publically come out on anything other than the side of, what seems to be, "everything is fine, stop complaining, the people complaining are only malcontented loudmouths in anyway, so shut up". That's a perception.

It always will be a perception when you have a large entity like this unfortunately. In reality there are more things happening in the background, that general viewers won't see as I'm sure you can imagine. That many people don't air thoughts on places where you see 'publically'? Well, even at mod level, when mods make comments here they can be attacked for 'circling the wagons' to name just one detractor. When it comes to public perception, I imagine some would prefer to put their constructive criticism on a platform of negligible lambasting, where they aren't attacked for their thoughts. Discussion that takes in other discussions, and works toward a constructive goal.

I don't know if you are doing it purposely in that post above but your line about "stirring up reactions" is typical of it. Make a statement like that to discredit the person complaining so you don't have to actually take the complaints on board and can pass them off as the ramblings of a ne'er do well.

Not sure why you think I'm trying to discredit you, if I can't see a constructive suggestion, but instead something that I perceive to be one that is to stir reactions - I state it. Just like if you see a vibe of 'There always seems to be this underlying "the people who are complaining are wrong" vibe', you state it. No?

If we are all here using this platform, and do not want it to die, then we are all here for a common goal.

Lovely Bloke

But the difference, whether you like it or not, you (and people like you) are in the position of "influencer" on this site, I am not.

Your posts automatically "carry more weight" due to your tagline and bold and italics username. So, when you, and others in your position, don't ever post those concerns publicly and either post "pro-Boards" or post put-downs or discrediting posts of the people who have no other legitimite avenue to express their "anti-the current situation" thoughts then it absolutely screams "us over here, we think it's great, meanwhile you plebs over there who just sit and throw rocks and complain all the time can stfu and get on with it, or gtfo".

Can you see the imbalance? Can you see the apparent frustration? There's a near constant diatribe from the "top" that people who don't like the current situation, and who have been vocal about that for what is getting on to many years now, are just people who hold some huge grudge against the site, the people who run it or the volunteer Admin, CMods and Mods. There is nothing further from the truth, but when the people charged with protecting, shaping and running this community of communities don't ever seem to empathise with the concerns then that will and does cause friction.

smash

Gordon wrote: »

Not sure why you think I'm trying to discredit you, if I can't see a constructive suggestion, but instead something that I perceive to be one that is to stir reactions - I state it.

But your perception is different, as you've stated. To the user, your perception can come across as one of not being able to see the wood for the trees because in some ways you're in a position where you're institutionalised.

In saying that, the same can be said for those of us who don't like the new design. Although there's a big difference between not wanting a UI upgrade and not wanting a site management reform.

Gordon

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

But the difference, whether you like it or not, you (and people like you) are in the position of "influencer" on this site, I am not.

Your posts automatically "carry more weight" due to your tagline and bold and italics username. So, when you, and others in your position, don't ever post those concerns publicly and either post "pro-Boards" or post put-downs or discrediting posts of the people who have no other legitimite avenue to express their "anti-the current situation" thoughts then it absolutely screams "us over here, we think it's great, meanwhile you plebs over there who just sit and throw rocks and complain all the time can stfu and get on with it, or gtfo".

Can you see the imbalance? Can you see the apparent frustration? There's a near constant diatribe from the "top" that people who don't like the current situation, and who have been vocal about that for what is getting on to many years now, are just people who hold some huge grudge against the site, the people who run it or the volunteer Admin, CMods and Mods. There is nothing further from the truth, but when the people charged with protecting, shaping and running this community of communities don't ever seem to empathise with the concerns then that will and does cause friction.

Well, I empathise.

dudara

droidman123 wrote: »

Couldnt agree more,the culture of the cowards mentality on the prison forum is a prime example,bullying and humiliating some of the posters there,disgusting.i touched on this in this forum about 2 weeks ago and i am still waiting to hear if it is going to be addressed.

I'm going to have to comment on this. As someone who has relatively recently become an Admin, the Prison forum has proven very illuminating to me. It is truly amazing how many people continuously re-reg on this site, and then act surprised when banned again. There is a small, but significant, cohort of serial re-reggers who absorb a lot of time from the mods. These are not blushing innocent vestal virgins. They've seen more action than an Amsterdam lady of the night. They know the game.

In my experience, anyone who comes to Prison with a genuine ban and speaks their case honestly and politely gets a fair hearing. And in a lot of the honest cases, the bans are lifted.

wokingvoter

I found myself in the prison forum making a case for myself and was very satisfied with the way I was dealt with.
If you casually browse the forum it may appear that cruel and unusual punishment is being meted out but trolls and shills and rereggers have to be weeded out or the whole thing would be unmanageable
If you take the time to follow some of the quite long threads you will see that posters who start out appearing "puzzled" as to their banning and anxious to please, soon become threatening and goading when it becomes obvious that they have been rumbled.

trout

I've read every post in this thread, and followed it since the start ... but have stayed quiet thus far, as I am struggling to come up with any (for want of a better word) ... solutions.

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

But the difference, whether you like it or not, you (and people like you) are in the position of "influencer" on this site, I am not.

I disagree. By dint of time invested, posts made, and opinions stated, you are very much an "influencer" on this site.

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

Your posts automatically "carry more weight" due to your tagline and bold and italics username. So, when you, and others in your position, don't ever post those concerns publicly and either post "pro-Boards" or post put-downs or discrediting posts of the people who have no other legitimite avenue to express their "anti-the current situation" thoughts then it absolutely screams "us over here, we think it's great, meanwhile you plebs over there who just sit and throw rocks and complain all the time can stfu and get on with it, or gtfo".

Colours to the mast. I share several concerns expressed in this thread. Personally, I really dislike the new GUI ... so I use the old one, the one I like. Personally, I am uneasy about how the Gearbest issue was handled ... but I also understand that the hamsters have to be fed and bills must be paid.

I don't believe you are a pleb. I don't have it in me to put you down or discredit your posts. I don't want you to stfu or gtfo ... but I do want you to help with (again, for want of a better word) solutions.

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

Can you see the imbalance? Can you see the apparent frustration?

I'm not sure if I understand the imbalance, maybe I don't want to see this as a combative or us & them conflict. The frustration is very clear, not apparent at all.

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

There's a near constant diatribe from the "top" that people who don't like the current situation, and who have been vocal about that for what is getting on to many years now, are just people who hold some huge grudge against the site, the people who run it or the volunteer Admin, CMods and Mods. There is nothing further from the truth, but when the people charged with protecting, shaping and running this community of communities don't ever seem to empathise with the concerns then that will and does cause friction.

Leaving the emotions to one side, I don't imagine for one second that posters like you describe have a grudge ... clearly you are invested in the site. So am I. I'm not all that vocal about it, but that's OK ... it takes all sorts.

tl;dr ... I do empathise. I hear your concerns ... but I'm still not sure how to make things better, with respect to (a) GUI (b) Gearbest and (c) imbalance

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

We're told that if there's a problem with a post then the correct procedure is to report the post and move on. So imagine my surprise last June when I recieved quite a rude and frankly aggressive pm from an admin stating that if I reported another post belonging to a person following me from thread to thread insinuating I was unfaithful in my relationship that I would recieve a site ban and that not to bother replying to the PM as he wasn't going to discuss it.

We were told not to bring our "real life drama" to boards but I only knew of this poster on boards, thankfully. I had nothing to do with her outside of this forum, and she continued to try engage me, and was eventually banned about 5 months later for harassing another poster.

I was told at the time me reporting posts was a time sink to mods. Another poster was accidently site banned as the admin mistakenly thought they were the ones they had warned and they'd reported a post from this other poster.

Great way to deal with problems arising on the site.

droidman123

dudara wrote: »

I'm going to have to comment on this. As someone who has relatively recently become an Admin, the Prison forum has proven very illuminating to me. It is truly amazing how many people continuously re-reg on this site, and then act surprised when banned again. There is a small, but significant, cohort of serial re-reggers who absorb a lot of time from the mods. These are not blushing innocent vestal virgins. They've seen more action than an Amsterdam lady of the night. They know the game.

In my experience, anyone who comes to Prison with a genuine ban and speaks their case honestly and politely gets a fair hearing. And in a lot of the honest cases, the bans are lifted.

As i said in my previous posts about this,the behaviour of the banned posters is completely irrelevant,reason being is that the admins have their little control panel so they can edit/delete whatever they want,an obvious distinct advantage.if a person is banned,fair enough,let them appeal,they are either successful or not.the part i dont like is when some of the admins start to bully/humiliate/ridicule the poster.its cowardly and as i stated before,if the prison forum wasnt public they wouldnt do it because they would have no crowd to play to.i doubt in real life they would talk to people like that,so hiding behind a pc and having a control panel to put a cabaret on for all and sundry to have a cheap laugh is not entertaining to me nor do i find it illuminating.did you ever read some of the prison forum threads when admins from all over the place come on and start getting in on the act? Its cringeworthy and i almost feel embarressed for them.this behaviour has to stop.

Gordon

LexieOnRale wrote: »

We're told that if there's a problem with a post then the correct procedure is to report the post and move on. So imagine my surprise last June when I recieved quite a rude and frankly aggressive pm from an admin stating that if I reported another post belonging to a person following me from thread to thread insinuating I was unfaithful in my relationship that I would recieve a site ban and that not to bother replying to the PM as he wasn't going to discuss it.

We were told not to bring our "real life drama" to boards but I only knew of this poster on boards, thankfully. I had nothing to do with her outside of this forum, and she continued to try engage me, and was eventually banned about 5 months later for harassing another poster.

I was told at the time me reporting posts was a time sink to mods. Another poster was accidently site banned as the admin mistakenly thought they were the ones they had warned and they'd reported a post from this other poster.

Great way to deal with problems arising on the site.

I seem to recall what happened was that you and this other user were constantly at odds, the Admins were notified due to reports, an Admin told you both to put each other on ignore, and I believe neither of you put each other on ignore.

When we get reported PMs from people, both sides, if both sides of the conversation are harassing each other, giving as good as they get, but not to the point of sitebannable offences - we step in and tell both parties to ignore each other. This is also true when both parties are constantly sniping at each other, generating reported posts from both parties, and other parties. If two people want to have it out with each other, we'd rather it didn't start or take place on boards. We'd also rather if your back and forth arguments didn't break the thread discussion, and generate many reported posts, which enables our mods to act on genuine moderation tasks.

intheclouds

The lack of transparency with reported posts has led to me very very rarely reporting a post these days.

Renegade Mechanic

Gordon wrote: »

I seem to recall what happened was that you and this other user were constantly at odds, the Admins were notified due to reports, an Admin told you both to put each other on ignore, and I believe neither of you put each other on ignore.

When we get reported PMs from people, both sides, if both sides of the conversation are harassing each other, giving as good as they get, but not to the point of sitebannable offences - we step in and tell both parties to ignore each other. This is also true when both parties are constantly sniping at each other, generating reported posts from both parties, and other parties. If two people want to have it out with each other, we'd rather it didn't start or take place on boards. We'd also rather if your back and forth arguments didn't break the thread discussion, and generate many reported posts, which enables our mods to act on genuine moderation tasks.

In fairness, the problem there is similar to the problem killing soccer. It's no longer about outclassing the other, it's about getting them sent off...

I'd wager the amount of reports in lieu of arguments on this site is eyebrow raising.

Penn

intheclouds wrote: »

The lack of transparency with reported posts has led to me very very rarely reporting a post these days.

What transparency is required with regards reported posts?

Michael D Not Higgins

intheclouds wrote: »

The lack of transparency with reported posts has led to me very very rarely reporting a post these days.

I would suggest a PM to a mod if you feel a reported post has not been actioned in a way you feel is correct. They can then explain the reasoning.

intheclouds

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

I would suggest a PM to a mod if you feel a reported post has not been actioned in a way you feel is correct. They can then explain the reasoning.

Ive had curt responses on this in the past, or no response, or the suggestion that I am being impatient. Or indeed the response that although nothing is visible it is being "dealt with" - but nothing is visible so I dont know if it is.

Just not worth it tbh. I have only had a couple of positive responses from mods in her over the years so I wouldnt be quick to pm a mod.

Also its extremely subjective. If I have a problem with a post someone else may not. So I really dont see the point.

intheclouds

Penn wrote: »

What transparency is required with regards reported posts?

Just that reporting them feels like sending an email into a black hole as you never know if anything was actually done about it.

TherapyBoy

trout wrote:

Colours to the mast. I share several concerns expressed in this thread. Personally, I really dislike the new GUI ... so I use the old one, the one I like. Personally, I am uneasy about how the Gearbest issue was handled ... but I also understand that the hamsters have to be fed and bills must be paid.

Hearing admins talk about their concerns like these, on this thread, would immediately address any perceived imbalance or default to a pro-boards point of view.

dudara

intheclouds wrote: »

Just that reporting them feels like sending an email into a black hole as you never know if anything was actually done about it.

Mods are volunteers and if they had to update each and every Reported Post with commentary of decision taken, we'd probably spend more time typing notes, rather than actually dealing with the problems. I'd shudder to think of the impact on the busier forums such as AH or Politics Cafe.

As a mod, I like the Reported Post system. Reports often bring things to my attention that I would otherwise have overlooked or missed. And I'm grateful to posters for taking some responsibility and interest in the site. I don't always decide in favour of the Reported Post, but it does make me look at potential issues and have a think.

gandalf

Gordon wrote: »

OK so you are saying that if boards continues doing the things you perceive to be wrong - it should shut down. That's not what you said previously which was - boards should shut down now.

Based on the last few years Gordon I sincerely doubt there will be a change in the engagement style or management and if that is the case then yes it should be shut down.

How do feel things are being handled? Do you think that the powers that be are doing a slap bang job of keeping the community engaged or even together? I'd genuinely be interested in your honest opinion.

KomradeBishop

Gordon wrote: »

I seem to recall what happened was that you and this other user were constantly at odds, the Admins were notified due to reports, an Admin told you both to put each other on ignore, and I believe neither of you put each other on ignore.

When we get reported PMs from people, both sides, if both sides of the conversation are harassing each other, giving as good as they get, but not to the point of sitebannable offences - we step in and tell both parties to ignore each other. This is also true when both parties are constantly sniping at each other, generating reported posts from both parties, and other parties. If two people want to have it out with each other, we'd rather it didn't start or take place on boards. We'd also rather if your back and forth arguments didn't break the thread discussion, and generate many reported posts, which enables our mods to act on genuine moderation tasks.

This is a bad way to deal with problems. You can't just put posters on ignore, and that's the end of it - it's extremely easy for posters to hook you into replying, just by completely straw-manning/misrepresenting what you say (or if harassing, saying something disreputable), in a way that will fool/convince other posters - thus mandating a reply from you so other posters aren't misled.

So, when you take a "both of you cut it out, you're both to blame..." approach to this, that just means that the troll can eventually pull the victim into receiving mod action, if they are persistent enough.

That's also the same dynamic, that can lead to minority viewpoints being excluded from the forum - by posters responding vehemently enough to that minority viewpoint, in large enough numbers, and dragging the discussion standards down so low that the minority side eventually gets marked as the 'common denominator' (mods own words) i.e. 'troublemaker', and excluded.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Gordon wrote: »

I seem to recall what happened was that you and this other user were constantly at odds, the Admins were notified due to reports, an Admin told you both to put each other on ignore, and I believe neither of you put each other on ignore.

When we get reported PMs from people, both sides, if both sides of the conversation are harassing each other, giving as good as they get, but not to the point of sitebannable offences - we step in and tell both parties to ignore each other. This is also true when both parties are constantly sniping at each other, generating reported posts from both parties, and other parties. If two people want to have it out with each other, we'd rather it didn't start or take place on boards. We'd also rather if your back and forth arguments didn't break the thread discussion, and generate many reported posts, which enables our mods to act on genuine moderation tasks.

We were at odds because I was called out on more than one occasion for being unfaithful in my relationship and I was told to leave our real life differences aside. I didn't know this poster in real life, thank god. She was harassing me on boards. Now, the first I heard of putting her on ignore was when your good self sent that PM, which I did afterwards, I didn't engage at all with the poster but understand she still went ahead with her accusations, and her trying to engage me. I believe it took a suicide threat or some sort of breakdown to actually have the admins take her behaviour seriously.

The only interaction I had with any mods/admins prior to your pm Gordon was a pm from an AH mod who was very nice and was just trying to find out why I had reported the posts as they were very subtle but constant and that was the morning before I got your message.

I wouldn't be having it out with her if it wasn't for boards and her erratic obsessive behaviour, I had never met her and she was never my friend. She got it into her head I was having an affair with someone she had "feelings" for on boards (not true) and had sent me a flurry of pms asking me really weird questions, and then took it off pm and onto threads.

You eventually had to handle it when it blew up even more. But completely ignored it and threathened a site ban for me when i followed the procedure that was in place.

osarusan

Just on the Reported Post issue, I've sometimes seen mods say that they clicked on 'Thanks' on a reported post as a way to let the other mods know they'd had a look at the post.

Given that we have all seen posts long the lines of 'And that post was thanked by a mod. THANKED by a MOD!' there is surely a better way of letting the other mods know that a reported post has been viewed.

dudara

dudara wrote: »

Mods are volunteers and if they had to update each and every Reported Post with commentary of decision taken, we'd probably spend more time typing notes, rather than actually dealing with the problems. I'd shudder to think of the impact on the busier forums such as AH or Politics Cafe.

As a mod, I like the Reported Post system. Reports often bring things to my attention that I would otherwise have overlooked or missed. And I'm grateful to posters for taking some responsibility and interest in the site. I don't always decide in favour of the Reported Post, but it does make me look at potential issues and have a think.

I'm not sure if posters actually know what happens specifically when you click report post? Thread created in reported posts forum , notification to mods etc?

Might help if they knew some of that maybe.

intheclouds

dudara wrote: »

Mods are volunteers and if they had to update each and every Reported Post with commentary of decision taken, we'd probably spend more time typing notes, rather than actually dealing with the problems. I'd shudder to think of the impact on the busier forums such as AH or Politics Cafe.

I dont disagree with this although the "mods are volunteers" comment always makes me groan inwardly. We KNOW mods are volunteers, we are regularly TOLD that mods are volunteers, we dont need to constantly be REMINDED that mods are volunteers. The thing is, for reporting posts, users are volunteers too.

Itd be nice if there was an automatic system with more transparency for post reporting.

As Ive said, previous negative interactions coupled with lack of transparency have more or less killed my volunteer work on it - unless I am directly personally attacked.

dudara wrote: »

As a mod, I like the Reported Post system. Reports often bring things to my attention that I would otherwise have overlooked or missed. And I'm grateful to posters for taking some responsibility and interest in the site. I don't always decide in favour of the Reported Post, but it does make me look at potential issues and have a think.

Which is exactly why transparency would be nice, so that users who take responsibility and interest actually see that their report didnt just go to the black hole of reported posts in the sky.

Michael D Not Higgins

intheclouds wrote: »

Ive had curt responses on this in the past, or no response, or the suggestion that I am being impatient. Or indeed the response that although nothing is visible it is being "dealt with" - but nothing is visible so I dont know if it is.

Just not worth it tbh. I have only had a couple of positive responses from mods in her over the years so I wouldnt be quick to pm a mod.

Also its extremely subjective. If I have a problem with a post someone else may not. So I really dont see the point.

This is all very general, as I don't know your specific experiences. Mods can be busy at times so actions aren't always immediate, especially overnight, at weekends, etc. Also be aware that mods are people too. I expect those in the busier forums get dozens of reported posts and PMs a day.

Bear in mind that all the mods can see the reported post, not just the one you're talking to. The action can range from a ban or card all the way down to ignoring it if nothing is required. From my own forum I can tell you we post our assessment and action of the reported post which is visible for the other mods and Cmods of our forum. (This is of course easier for smaller forums to manage)

Some of the non visible actions you won't be aware of are PMs to the user or just a note to the other mods to keep an eye on a particular poster if they're acting up but not crossing the line.

I have a lot of faith in the reported post function. The regular users are usually the first to see the posts on a thread, not the mod. It's part of the community that we all work together to identify the problem posts and take action against them as required. So don't stop reporting the posts and if you're ever in A&P and need to report a post, don't hesitate to PM me and I'll be sure to respond.

Michael D Not Higgins

osarusan wrote: »

Just on the Reported Post issue, I've sometimes seen mods say that they clicked on 'Thanks' on a reported post as a way to let the other mods know they'd had a look at the post.

Given that we have all seen posts long the lines of 'And that post was thanked by a mod. THANKED by a MOD!' there is surely a better way of letting the other mods know that a reported post has been viewed.

There's a reported post forum where each reported post gets its own thread. For busier forums, a mod will thank the post created there, not the post that was reported. In my own forum we don't get as many reported posts so we can usually spare a minute to give a brief note rather than just a thanks.