Boards is becoming a Ghost Town

intheclouds

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

I suppose, again, it's the same as penalty points. They are to act as a deterrent when there's a breach in the charter. Rack up enough "points" and soon enough will come a ban.Thread warnings, thread bans, cards and bans are all used. If you continue to receive warnings, cards and bans then they are, IMO, relevant. You, in the general sense, are not understanding the charter and are continuing to breach it. If you continue then it should be expected that actions will escalate.

As I said, I agree with a time limit on these cards.

The intention may be as you state above but there are cases in DRP where people are punished based on their history alone even when there hasnt been a specific rule break. And a couple of posters on this thread have given details where the history hasnt been used with the intention above either.

The way its currently set up is broken imo.

I actually thought there was a time limit on them - but even with that time limit old "out of date" ones are used as a stick to beat posters with.

KERSPLAT!

It could probably do with an overhaul, yes. For now it's what we've got.

I'm sure there are times where it isn't used 100%, correctly, it is open to interpretation.

RDM_83 again

My suggestion would be that everything thats should be carded thats against the rules, instead of mod warnings and PM's, at the same time the cards should expire quite quickly and possibly become invisible to Mods (Admins could view them).
I think that would iron out some of the inconsistencies and perceptions of bias.
I don't think the system would be very attractive to new users initially but on the flip side what is and is not acceptable would be much easier to grasp.

K-9

An expiration date on cards is something that came up in the mods forum, I'd hope something would be done on that as well.

Godge

Mr E wrote: »

Someone reported your post as abuse, so it was dealt with. Maybe that other similar post wasn't reported?

I don't want to sound like a broken record here, but if a post is abusive or offensive, REPORT IT.

I don't know your reason for taking the moral high ground and not wanting to report posts, but mods are not omniscient - report the post and if it's actionable, it will be dealt with (the same way your's was).

Quite often reported posts with clear personal abuse are not acted upon. Other times they lead to cards and bans. I don't think it is the principle that you are stating that is the problem - it is the practice.

To give one example, a thread in politics cafe (where else?) was swamped with personal abuse, which was reported, only a mod warning issued.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=100028325&postcount=244

Other cases of personal abuse in the same forum, as I know well, result in cards and bans.

Another more recent case in the same forum sees a new poster welcomed with

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=100031383&postcount=3413

and

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=100032595&postcount=3417

and

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=100032840&postcount=3421

resulting in a yellow card. Now the yellow card (at least) was thoroughly deserved, but why was the personal abuse on the other thread not similarly treated?

Mods have a difficult job, I fully accept that (I also fully accepted any action they took against me) but inconsistency is the issue.

Chorus_suck

This post has been deleted.

Outlaw Pete

Wibbs wrote: »

EG Outlawpete who has arisen. Looking back, where you excessively hounded, set out as an "example" and the mob escalated you to public enemy number one beyond reasonable? Yep IMHO you were in a helluva lot of ways and yes I was part of that mob and I was wrong and FWIW I apologise for my part in it.

Thanks, Wibbs. I appreciate you finally acknowledging that. Can't pretend I understand why it wasn't done sooner though.

My cards on the table P? Objectively speaking you were a cool member around the place and anyone who says otherwise is just judging your value on one thing/event, you added a helluva lot to the community. TBH I was actually surprised at the time. But, on this point, yes mods and Boards went OTT..

Again, appreciate you saying so. Cheers.

..but you went full retard on the subject at the time..

Ah come on, Wibbs. You were doing so well and all :P "At the time" I did nothing of the sort. After I received the ban I did exactly what any user is supposed to do. Sent the required PM, no reply, went to DR forum. My thread was immediately locked and I was told 'admin word was final'. Tried to start a discussion in FB asking why it was that 'first port of call moderation decisions by admin' can't be appealed appealed and that thread was locked too. Kept coming into contact with users, mods and members of admin that had been involved with all this (of which you were one) and not only were you all acting as if nothing you had done was wrong, but in fact that what had been done was warranted, so eventually I got tried of it all and decided to close my account. How you can refer to any of that as going "full retard" is beyond me. Lets be clear: Any decisions made at that time by mods and admin against me were made against a user that had no bans or infractions on any part of boards and who had attempted to follow the DR process to.the.letter. "Full retard"? You're having a laugh.

.. and even years later you're still grinding that axe P. At this stage you've ground it away to the point where you're left with a wooden handle. Yes you went OTT and yes Boards kicked back too much for all sorts of reasons, but FFS P let it go man. We've all got our hobby horses(and FB threads bring out the jockeys). Hell I have a stable of the buggers, but this one IMH is beneath you at this stage P. It really is.

You are, I suspect, now referring to things which happened after I closed my account. Now, I have no problem discussing those things (have done so in the prison forum in fact) but none of that could possibly be used as any kind of justification for decisions made regarding that permaban, as that all happened long after I closed my account.

Now, with regards to the 'axe grinding' and the contention that I should 'let it go': Wibbs, your post is the first time any mod, or member of admin, has ever admitted that I was 'excessively hounded' and that boards went 'over the top'. Let me ask you, had I 'let it go', do you think I would ever have got that apology? I think we both no the answer to that question. You see, I knew I was targeted. A fair few of admin knew I was, that I hadn't done certain things which I had been accused of, but yet instead of the mods/admin involved just acknowledging that (and saving us all a lot of time) they/you chose not to and instead personally abused and ridiculed me anytime that I posted in FB to highlight any of this. Oftentimes suggesting that I needed to seek professional mental help, as I was clearly losing it. Those posts, which I won't bother linking to, remain. Yet not once did I ever retaliate in kind. I stuck to my objective, which was quite simply to make it known that I had been targeted by certain mods and members of admin, permanently banned from a forum I hadn't so much as an infraction in and that it shouldn't have happened.

Nor should the way donfers, Jimmy Garlic, myself and others have been treated back in the day. Had you just came on donfers' thread and said 'Yeah, there might be something to what you were saying, I was only posting about that three weeks back, lets have discussion' then I think Dav would never have had to get involved as had he been alerted to the thread what he would have just then witnessed was a feedback thread working as it should work. Which brings me back to my point about mods/admin needing to respect issues users raise. If they have no merit that will become apparent. Jumping down people's throats just gets their backs up and threads just become yet another car crash. Feedback is like the customer service of boards. It looks bloody awful to see mods/admin being rude to users. Not that all mods/admin are like that, many of them are quite clearly not and are always courteous and respectful to users. Even at times when you'd excuse them not being so. I won't name them as an endorsement from me isn't worth all that much these days I expect.

For what it's worth though, to any mods/admin that had to deal with my constant reregging (or at least to the ones that have never attacked me on a personal level over the years - or thank posts which did so) I sincerely apologize for any hassle caused dealing with all that, but hope you can at least see where it was that I was coming from, even if you don't necessarily agree with my doing so. I like boards, always have and hope to be around for many years to come, under one username or another (..or maybe I'll just stick to this one now).

Stheno

Godge wrote: »

Quite often reported posts with clear personal abuse are not acted upon. Other times they lead to cards and bans. I don't think it is the principle that you are stating that is the problem - it is the practice.

To give one example, a thread in politics cafe (where else?) was swamped with personal abuse, which was reported, only a mod warning issued.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=100028325&postcount=244

.

You may be incorrect there Godge, one poster posted several posts which were out of line in this thread, and got a yellow, rather than a red. Yellows have to be reversed first before a red can be applied.

I also issued the warning which said "everyone" cut out the personal swipes, meaning everyone.

I've not seen the other threads you mention as being personal abuse as I've only gotten online in the past few minutes.

Hope that clears up your query on that thread I actioned.

Also be aware that it can take a while to action reported posts, particularly in the cafe where we get tens of reports every day.

_Tombstone_

Chorus_suck wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

This carry on isin't a rare thing on here, I've seen it mentioned many times over the years by different users.


Is Myddrin still following this thread, pretty much everything in here-->it's just the same stuff from years gone that no one has bothered to do anything about, all being brought up again.

Ya have to wonder whats the point of this Forum????

markupmales

Stheno wrote: »

I also issued the warning which said "everyone" cut out the personal swipes, meaning everyone.

I don't get the purpose of this "everyone" warning. If posts are abusive then card them. If one guy say "you're thick" and nobody answers he gets carded, but if two people say "you're thick" to each other they might just get the "everyone" message. It makes no sense and just adds more discretion which as we've already had amply demonstrated is far from even handed around here.

Timberrrrrrrr

markupmales wrote: »

I don't get the purpose of this "everyone" warning. If posts are abusive then card them. If one guy say "you're thick" and nobody answers he gets carded, but if two people say "you're thick" to each other they might just get the "everyone" message. It makes no sense and just adds more discretion which as we've already had amply demonstrated is far from even handed around here.

Apparently saying XPOSTER et al is now considered "personal abuse" and gets you a nice pm with a warning, and they wonder why the place is on its knees

Beasty

intheclouds wrote: »

So is the point of the card system just to use infractions against users as a historical stick to beat them with for months or years after a specific infraction?

Or what is it for exactly?

A couple of obvious reasons
1. It shows posters (in particular the one carded but also other users who may otherwise be tempted to do the same) the line has been crossed.
2. It helps build up a view over posterst that are troublesome eitehr within a forum or across the sitre, allowing escalation of penalties as appropriate.

Now the odd card here or there is unlikely to amount to much, but I've seen posters build up 20, 30, 40 and even 50+ mod actions across various forums. That sort of record is always going to be relevent whan considering future actions unless possibly someone has managed to keep their nose clean (while still posting) over a very extended period when older cards will generally fade in terms of their relevance to/influence on current actions

_Tombstone_

I look at the odd post that gets quoted in here from elsewhere on site that people are offended by (or whatever) and they wouldn't cause a stutter in my page scrolling.

Go away until you're able for the internet.

Timberrrrrrrr

_Tombstone_ wrote: »

I look at the odd post that gets quoted in here from elsewhere on site that people are offended by (or whatever) and they wouldn't cause a stutter in my page scrolling.

Go away until you're able for the internet.

It's the new boards.ie, Have to protect the precious snowflakes from the big bad world.

Beasty

markupmales wrote: »

I don't get the purpose of this "everyone" warning. If posts are abusive then card them. If one guy say "you're thick" and nobody answers he gets carded, but if two people say "you're thick" to each other they might just get the "everyone" message. It makes no sense and just adds more discretion which as we've already had amply demonstrated is far from even handed around here.

It's common practice. Forget about the specifics here. Threads can get heated. Posters cross the line. Mods can pile in dishing out cards, which may actually cause more ill-feeling within a forum.

An alternative is a mod may just ask everyone to calm down. That puts "everyone" on warning and no-one can complain if they end up on the receiving end of mod action if they subsequently cross the line (which by then has been clearly drawn by the mod)

It's called mod discretion and is one of the major strengths of the site in my view. I am sure there will be responses along the lines that consistency is more important. I just disagree with that view.

I would add though that most posters know damn well when they are treading the line between what is acceptable and what is not and can have no complaints when they get called out (and equally will in all likelihood be on the favourable side of mod discretion on occasions)

markupmales

Beasty wrote: »

I would add though that most posters know damn well when they are treading the line between what is acceptable and what is not and can have no complaints when they get called out (and equally will in all likelihood be on the favourable side of mod discretion on occasions)

They why not card them? You're honestly trying to tell me you're worried about hurting people's feelings by carding them for abusive posts?

Pelvis Parsley

I wouldn't argue it. Some people in this discussion remind me of the late and unlamented Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf.

Everything is fine, nothing is wrong, all is right with the world.

Stheno

markupmales wrote: »

They why not card them? You're honestly trying to tell me you're worried about hurting people's feelings by carding them for abusive posts?

IN the politics cafe which is very busy, one post can quickly lead to a slew of posts if people get a little heated.

Rather than carding say 10 plus posts putting in a general warning can often diffuse the situation.

Edward Hopper

Pelvis Parsley wrote: »

I wouldn't argue it. Some people in this discussion remind me of the late and unlamented Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf.

Everything is fine, nothing is wrong, all is right with the world.

Travesty what happened to him. He didn't make up any more lies than Blair and Bush did.

/off topic.

Beasty

markupmales wrote: »

They why not card them? You're honestly trying to tell me you're worried about hurting people's feelings by carding them for abusive posts?

That's where mod discretion comes in.

In the Soccer forum for example the rules are generally applied quite prescriptively because that's what the userbase has requested (via frequent feedback threads). That does not mean no mod discretion, but there is less there than in some other forums

However sometimes it's a lot more straightforward to draw a line over what has happened (and avoid trying to make too many judgement calls for posts that may be bordering on going too far) and simply warning everyone over their future behaviour

I would re-iterate I am not talking about the specifics quoted above - I've not even clicked on the links. I am simply referring to how the place is modded in practice, with different standards being applied dependent on the circumstances, the forum and indeed the mod dealing with something. Sometimes a mod has to judge intent (and there are many parallels with soccer referees here). They can take various bits of intelligence into account, including what they can see in a thread as well as a poster's wider record and posting history. So if someone reguarly comes into the Cycling forum to whinge about cyclists and add nothing constructive to the forum, I will take that into account if they do so again (and in a number of cases I have PM'd users to warn them I will take such an approach). In this case they benefit from mod discretion initially but know they cannot expect any more chances.

Pelvis Parsley

Actually I just googled him, and he's still alive (holed up in the UAE).

/even more off topic.

Anyway, as we were

Edward Hopper wrote: »

Travesty what happened to him. He didn't make up any more lies than Blair and Bush did.

/off topic.

markupmales

Stheno wrote: »

IN the politics cafe which is very busy, one post can quickly lead to a slew of posts if people get a little heated.

Rather than carding say 10 plus posts putting in a general warning can often diffuse the situation.

But these are the same posters over and over! Some of them have 1000s of posts. Some of them must have got 10s of these "everyone" warnings at this stage and no card because they were part of an abusive exchange instead of an isolated case.
Of course mods are all for maximum discretion. Why wouldn't they be. If you believe moderators who claim right wing opinions are dangerous or that Irish Republicans are whiners can possibly judge posts on their own merit you're only kidding yourself.

JRant

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

I suppose, again, it's the same as penalty points. They are to act as a deterrent when there's a breach in the charter. Rack up enough "points" and soon enough will come a ban.Thread warnings, thread bans, cards and bans are all used. If you continue to receive warnings, cards and bans then they are, IMO, relevant. You, in the general sense, are not understanding the charter and are continuing to breach it. If you continue then it should be expected that actions will escalate.

As I said, I agree with a time limit on these cards.

A penalty point type system would be a fantastic idea with each user able to see the points they've amassed and either ammend they're "driving" style or get banned.

Users would have a far clearer idea of where they stand, ie, right I have 8 points now if i keep acting the maggot i'm taking an enforced break.

I also don't particularly like the whole yellow/red card system either. It seems to mean different things to different people with no clear objective. It also seems to rub folks up the wrong way. If you get say 1 point for a yellow and knew if you kept your nose clean for 6 months that it would be erased then it would turn into such a big deal. As it is people with argue for days on the DRP getting yellows reviewed for minor things, wasting mods/Cmods and Admins time when a simplier system would be far more effective.

I also think a drop down menu when reporting posts would greatly help. In the same way mods can select from a list of offences then users could have the same option. Might also make it easier for mods to review posts as I'm sure people send in a wall of text with their reported posts.

Moderation across the whole site is not really an issue IMO. Some forums have become an omnishambles though. AH has become almost unreadable over the past 12 months and it's the same posters popping up all the time derailing threads with what seems complete impunity.

There also needs to be more consistency in there. It seems you can call someone transphobic, homophobic, (or insert 'ism here) with complete impunity and to be honest it's a real turn off.

Godge

Stheno wrote: »

You may be incorrect there Godge, one poster posted several posts which were out of line in this thread, and got a yellow, rather than a red. Yellows have to be reversed first before a red can be applied.

I also issued the warning which said "everyone" cut out the personal swipes, meaning everyone.

I've not seen the other threads you mention as being personal abuse as I've only gotten online in the past few minutes.

Hope that clears up your query on that thread I actioned.

Also be aware that it can take a while to action reported posts, particularly in the cafe where we get tens of reports every day.

As I said in my post, I am not having a go at the mods, I fully appreciate that especially in the cafe, it is a difficult place to mod.

I do not have a problem with mods cracking down on personal abuse, the only issue is that it is inconsistent. Maybe you are right, it may well be down to the tens of reports every day. However, I do suspect that there are groups of posters of a particular view that co-ordinate reporting of other posters as well as baiting them. Given the amount of traffic and posting in the cafe, it would be relatively simple for a group of posters, say supporters of the Green Party, to troll someone who disagrees with their stance, and bait that poster into responding in kind, and then with mass reporting to ensure that poster is sanctioned/banned while they escape unsanctioned.

Godge

Beasty wrote: »

It's common practice. Forget about the specifics here. Threads can get heated. Posters cross the line. Mods can pile in dishing out cards, which may actually cause more ill-feeling within a forum.

An alternative is a mod may just ask everyone to calm down. That puts "everyone" on warning and no-one can complain if they end up on the receiving end of mod action if they subsequently cross the line (which by then has been clearly drawn by the mod)

It's called mod discretion and is one of the major strengths of the site in my view. I am sure there will be responses along the lines that consistency is more important. I just disagree with that view.

I would add though that most posters know damn well when they are treading the line between what is acceptable and what is not and can have no complaints when they get called out (and equally will in all likelihood be on the favourable side of mod discretion on occasions)

One of the biggest issues, especially in the Cafe, is that a mod issues a warning, someone crosses the line very soon afterwards in order to have the last word on the subject and doesn't get sanctioned. Once a warning is issued, there should be a strong crackdown on anyone who crosses the line afterwards.

RDM_83 again

Godge wrote: »

One of the biggest issues, especially in the Cafe, is that a mod issues a warning, someone crosses the line very soon afterwards in order to have the last word on the subject and doesn't get sanctioned. Once a warning is issued, there should be a strong crackdown on anyone who crosses the line afterwards.

Are you sure thats the reason, I often reply to a post, type some of it, get distracted and hit reply a little later, so it can be 15-30 mins between when I last checked the thread, I might be the exception but I'm sure other people are like that.

J Mysterio

I am amazed at how quickly the contributions to Boards are dropping more generally. Even in the last fortnight there seems to have been a massive drop.

This thread is continuously on the top of the 'Latest' section and, it seems, is contributing to the flight of posters and an increase in apathy.

As I mentioned in a previous post, I don't know why the thread is not shut down as its sucking the life out of the place and replacing it with negativity and - in the last few days - becoming mods vs users.

I appreciate that its probably being kept going in the interests of transparency and to allow feedback but nothing is being achieved here.

Either the top brass (Dav or whoever that is) comes out and engages in the conversation and details responses to the issues raised or the thread should be shut down as its going nowhere but downhill.

Godge

J Mysterio wrote: »

I am amazed at how quickly the contributions to Boards are dropping more generally. Even in the last fortnight there seems to have been a massive drop.

This thread is continuously on the top of the 'Latest' section and, it seems, is contributing to the flight of posters and an increase in apathy.

As I mentioned in a previous post, I don't know why the thread is not shut down as its sucking the life out of the place and replacing it with negativity and - in the last few days - becoming mods vs users.

I appreciate that its probably being kept going in the interests of transparency and to allow feedback but nothing is being achieved here.

Either the top brass (Dav or whoever that is) comes out and engages in the conversation and details responses to the issues raised or the thread should be shut down as its going nowhere but downhill.

If this is top of the "Latest" section then people are posting in it. If you shut it down, then less people are posting and the vicious circle continues.

Two Tone

With regard to traffic decreasing on Boards: I would speculate that the divisive discussions leading to a very heated atmosphere in recent years - in terms of international affairs and also domestic ones - has led to people being driven away. I know there have been heated discussions on Boards for many years, but I think the past three years or so, with Irish Water, the Irish economy/government (e.g. JobBridge), the marriage equality debate, travellers, immigration, and further afield: islamic fundamentalism and the Rotherham sex abuse ring, the Jenner gender reassignment story leading to heated discussions about transgender and transphobia; Donald Trump, etc... has caused tension to boil over.

I think this has been bubbling under the surface for years, started to come to a head in about 2013/4, and by 2015 came to that explosive head, resulting in people no longer being bothered because of too much hostility - people of a very liberal persuasion being put off by very staunchly conservative views, and people of a very conservative persuasion being put off by excessive political correctness, unfounded accusations of bigotry and feeling the moderation supports this. That leaves the moderate voices drowned out, and the rest of us who are in the centre, and expressing a view which is right of centre getting shouted down as bigotry, and expressing a view that is left of centre getting shouted down as "SJW" and "PC fascism" and "feminazi" merely for expressing a dislike of extreme sexism... until moderates just cannot be bothered any more as there's just no point. The moderates are never going to shout the loudest.

I also think that, perhaps, discussion boards are not considered a relevant medium as much today. Many people who were regular contributors to discussion boards no longer bother with them now because of merely losing interest, and these people are not being replaced. Sure, people here are saying Facebook and Twitter are not really comparable as they use them for different purposes. I would agree with regard to Twitter, however Facebook I am not so sure: there are thousands of effective discussion forums on Facebook. Even if people here would not bother with them, many others go to them only for discussion and would not be aware of the likes of Boards. Then, outside of Facebook, you've got the comments sections on newspaper websites, some of which have significant traction, e.g. TheJournal.ie and The Guardian. There is also Tumblr. A 20-year-old in 2006 would have come to Boards and its ilk, but would a 20-year-old now? I don't think they would be anywhere near as likely, and would be more drawn to Snapchat, Facebook and Tumblr. Personally I like the discussion forum format, as it is the most conducive I think to constructive discussion, unlike Facebook which is just a sea of chatter getting lost, and no "quote" facility or moderators (like them or not, they are necessary if discussion is to be had, rather than just anarchy!) But there are new generations coming to online discourse now who barely know what a discussion forum is.

Then there is the account closure facility. Not saying it is a bad thing (I have obviously used it) but I guess it is leading to a change in dynamic. Whereas before, a person had one account, that was their online personality and if they were a regular poster, they would keep coming back. Now with the tool available to close your account you can opt out of the place for a while, then come back, then opt out, and so on... leading to less cohesiveness overall. So many people are using the button now - including people who I have seen say they would never do it (I was one of those people at one point too). I think, even as someone who has availed of "Close account", that the discontinuation of it might bode better for the community. But it has been established that this is not possible.

Pelvis Parsley

Or.

The allegations of censorship grow ever more strident. This thread should not and probably will not be shut down, unless it becomes pear shaped. What probably will happen, is that it will keep meandering.

What should happen, is a concerted effort at dialogue, not from volunteers (commendable and hard working as some of them are), but from the people who actually get paid for it. We're not all precious flowers here, and as oft reminded (mostly internally), we are the product, as opposed to the customer, and as such, need to be addressed, as there's something of a stock shortage in the offing.

Godge wrote: »

If this is top of the "Latest" section then people are posting in it. If you shut it down, then less people are posting and the vicious circle continues.