Boards is becoming a Ghost Town

Faith

Bambi wrote: »

How would one go about this

Control Panel -> Edit Options -> Forum Skin.

Change to something other than "Beta".

Spanish Eyes

OK, so...

Should certain topics be merged and more transparent?

Well in my innocence I think they should. There are so many interesting things hidden that I only found out by accident!

And the front page should have the Topic/Board/latest post/ on the left IMO. But that's just me.

And sure who am I? Just a poster who may keep the place alive at the end of the day.

Although I sail close to the wind sometimes, I know this. Mea Culpa.

K-9

Toto Wolfcastle wrote: »

I don't agree that moderation is killing the place, but there are certainly mods who take moderation way way too seriously. There are mods who suck the fun out of the forum by enforcing the 'no off-topic posts' rule completely with no room for a bit of common sense. I don't think this is done out of badness, just eagerness. And if you're a new user who happens to post in one of these forums and the first reply you get is from a mod giving out to you in bold, why would you bother to come back? It also pushes existing users away. I post almost exclusively in one forum these days, but I used to at least read a lot of others that I don't go near now.

I've no major problem with off topic posts. There are certain posters you can trust to go off topic and when you come back, there isn't carnage everywhere. Others...

Inconsistent? Maybe. Common sense? 100%.

kneemos

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Fear of saying something out of line (moderation policy) is killing this place.

Don't think it's for fear of saying something put of line,but they've taken away the element of self regulation that exists on other sites,if something is out of line or idiotic people will respond accordingly.
It used to be like that here more so but now it's left to the mods to control and it's turned bland and nit picky.
Less moderation doesn't mean it will turn into a monster of some sort,reddit for example works fine with little or none,as do most others I'm sure.
There's a definite overbearing feel about the place.

Cookie_Monster

kneemos wrote: »

Don't think it's for fear of saying something put of line,but they've taken away the element of self regulation that exists on other sites,if something is out of line or idiotic people will respond accordingly.
It used to be like that here more so but now it's left to the mods to control and it's turned bland and nit picky.
Less moderation doesn't mean it will turn into a monster of some sort,reddit for example works fine with little or none,as do most others I'm sure.
There's a definite overbearing feel about the place.

that's a good description. Some forum have had all the fun sucked out by over modding killing any kind of off topic or witty responses or even 'bad words' in favour of rigidly sticking to topic

LizT

intheclouds wrote: »

Ah lads, why cant we just go back to this - so much info on screen! No ads!

https://web.archive.org/web/20110505195603/http://www.boards.ie/

I'd forgotten the site used to look like that. I miss it.
Using that look, the first time you click onto boards, you get around 50 thread titles displayed on the front page.
Using the legacy site, you get about 25 (and you can click for more, so it's taking twice as many clicks to get the same amount of threads. I know it technically loads more threads as you get 3 pages of them but it takes more clicks)
Using the beta site you get 12 threads displayed (and the first one you see is a "sponsored post"), at least I do anyway.

Am I the only one who doesn't see the sense in this? I'm far more likely to use the home page if I have 50 threads available to me to click into, if I only have 12 there's a much higher possibility that none of them will appeal to me and you've lost my interest right there. Why is it that every redesign is resulting in users having to make more clicks to get to where they want to go? What ever about the design, admittedly the site looks a little bit dated in that screenshot but there are ways to modernize it without impacting on the content.

Mountainsandh

LizT wrote: »

I'd forgotten the site used to look like that. I miss it.
Using that look, the first time you click onto boards, you get around 50 thread titles displayed on the front page.
Using the legacy site, you get about 25 (and you can click for more, so it's taking twice as many clicks to get the same amount of threads. I know it technically loads more threads as you get 3 pages of them but it takes more clicks)
Using the beta site you get 12 threads displayed (and the first one you see is a "sponsored post"), at least I do anyway.

Am I the only one who doesn't see the sense in this? I'm far more likely to use the home page if I have 50 threads available to me to click into.

Same here, so much to offer with 50 threads on display. Any forum I've ever read has had a similar, simple, accessible layout. I don't have the motivation and/or time to click to see what's inside a forum with a succinct front page. But if a thread title titillates my curiosity, I'll find the time.

And the variety of threads that used to be displayed meant there could be 4 or 5 I'd be interested in; now I'd be lucky if there's one.

Melodeon

Faith wrote: »

Control Panel -> Edit Options -> Forum Skin.

Change to something other than "Beta".

Clickity-click

SQUEAL!

25 threads on the Front Page!
The beloved pop-out top menu!

Oh joy, oh rapture!!!

Wibbs

Toto Wolfcastle wrote: »

I don't agree that moderation is killing the place, but there are certainly mods who take moderation way way too seriously. There are mods who suck the fun out of the forum by enforcing the 'no off-topic posts' rule completely with no room for a bit of common sense. I don't think this is done out of badness, just eagerness.

Then IMH name them. Do it in the mod forum. No need for witch hunts. Though I look quite fetching in either a flaming torch or a pointy hat.

gandalf wrote: »

Imho one of the biggest strengths of boards is the fact it is moderated. Personally as an ex-mod I think the DRP process has weakened this. I would be oldskool and an advocate of the Judge Dredd line of moderating "I am the Law".

I agree with the rest of your post G, but not this. It kinda worked when it was a smaller community, but more than once a couple of mods went a bit rogue too. And it increased the gap between posters and mods. That's still an issue on Boards and there are/have been mods who are over zealous(see above), no need to encourage it.

LizT wrote: »

I'd forgotten the site used to look like that.

I've just switched back. It's a bit clunky looking, but by god it's easier to move around in and the site feels bigger too.

Why is it that every redesign is resulting in users having to make more clicks to get to where they want to go?

Design consultants in search of streamlining, by building visually streamlined items, but leaving usability as streamlined as a housebrick. As you note the old site looks dated, but it does work better. Design is always a minefield. Fashion is involved for a start and as Wilde said about fashion it's so awful they have to change it every six months. Secondly designers are coming from the visuals, even GUI designers, so if it looks "modern" and "slick" it's fine. Thirdly design leaves far more wriggle room for bullshít. The folks who coded the new beta can't BS. Their code either works or it doesn't. It's a "hard" science and bullshítters tend to get called out early. I've known more than a few designers and coders. The coders were variable in talent, but they could all code, the designers were also variable in talent, but there were quite a few who actually couldn't design to save their lives. One trick ponies and if that was the trick you were after then great, but otherwise… They survived, even thrived in their careers because most management types are somewhat in awe/scared of design. Few enough of the general public have a visual eye as it were so even when they don't like something they find it hard to express why they don't. BS thrives in that environment.

intheclouds

Faith wrote: »

Control Panel -> Edit Options -> Forum Skin.

Change to something other than "Beta".

OMG!!!! New Posts front and centre like it should be!!!

Halloween Jack

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Same here, so much to offer with 50 threads on display. Any forum I've ever read has had a similar, simple, accessible layout. I don't have the motivation and/or time to click to see what's inside a forum with a succinct front page. But if a thread title titillates my curiosity, I'll find the time.

And the variety of threads that used to be displayed meant there could be 4 or 5 I'd be interested in; now I'd be lucky if there's one.

I used to see interesting threads on the homepage frequently, these days however threads that seem to visible from the homepage are the ones that dismay/annoy me most, the ones with 2 entrenched sides, having cyclical arguments which last forever.

gandalf

Wibbs wrote: »

I agree with the rest of your post G, but not this. It kinda worked when it was a smaller community, but more than once a couple of mods went a bit rogue too. And it increased the gap between posters and mods. That's still an issue on Boards and there are/have been mods who are over zealous(see above), no need to encourage it.

Whoops did I leave the smilie off that bit

I still think that the DRP is a failure, having attempted a couple of them in my time I felt it was like masturbation without the benefits. A lot of effort and noise without satisfying end result for the user. If anything it strengthened the "them" and "us" divide.

Myrddin

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

So much this. As was pointed out before, so many posters, mods and cmods, in this thread and others, are providing constructive feedback but it doesn't seem like it will be taken on board. They'll plough on until it's too late.

I've been reading this thread from the beginning, I've agreed with some of the points raised, & I've disagreed with other points made. I've taken all of the core points raised so far, & have started a discussion in the Admin forum regarding them. That's not a guarantee of anything, but the feedback is being taken on board for discussion

Esel

Do the admin have any clout in the business side of Boards though?

gandalf

Esel wrote: »

Do the admin have any clout in the business side of Boards though?

In reality I don't believe they do any longer.

Wibbs

Faith wrote: »

The thing that really frustrates me is the concrete thinking in Boards HQ. It's like they can't possibly look at a situation in more than one way. For months (years?) we've had posters complaining about new layouts, and all HQ ever respond with is "Well, yeah, but this is how we're doing it". They've poured so much money into this redesign that they're terrified to admit they were wrong, so they're plowing ahead with it despite vocal, reasoned opposition.

What you're seeing F is "management". Back in the old days, pre Daft, Boards was pretty much run by the guys who founded it, it was more grass roots, which of course brings its own problems. However that grass roots aspect was very much a part of and in touch with the community. To be fair Daft were cool and came from a very similar place as far as the founding notion was, so were a good fit.

However companies get to a point where the money and risk becomes a tipping point and then the "professional corporate" types come in. It's designed that way. And who does the designing? They need a purpose to justify themselves after all(and I'm no hippie BTW). That's what we're seeing here. From what I can recall Boards got a new CEO or CFO or CSO or some muy importante collection of three letters a couple of years back. Again IIRC there was some one off "introduction" and after that silence. I know he's a he, beyond that I know jack. Hell, he might be gone and they're now a she, or a thatched cottage in Mayo called Phillip. Who knows. There's your disconnect right there. I could say that's no reflection on the chap, but sorry, yeah it is. If your job is sustaining a community - which if anyone needs reminding is why Talk to and Adverts even exist - frankly your silence means you're not helping.

In say 2006 I knew who the people running the place were and those people were engaged in the place. Today? Today we're getting the dribbled down secondhand missives from on high. Missives that are increasingly at odds and daft(no pun) with the community they're tasked in fostering.

This recent rollout at I'm quite sure great expense in manpower and money is the perfect and wasteful example of the above. The category rejig another, though lesser example.

BTW and to be very bloody clear here, our Dav - and I think I'm long enough here to see him as our Dav - can come in for some stick and is often the focus of our various grievances. As the Community manager he's in that biz hierarchy and that's a small but PITA part of his role. And he takes his role seriously. FWIW I can tell you that if you cut Dav he would bleed Boards blood. Blue corpuscles with two goggly eyes. Now you're bleeding. He really would. Honestly, though sometimes this fascist here thinks him a wet liberal yahoo and have disagreed with the man on a couple of occasions, the guy works like a bloody trojan for this community and has been here doing so from the very start.

Esel wrote:

Do the admin have any clout in the business side of Boards though?

Outside the couple of Boards employees that are admins, the rest are user volunteers like any of the mods. Sure they'd have more "clout" to some degree and would be closer to the ears who do, but only to a point and I doubt the site rejigs would be in the mix. It's been many a year since the admins were the business/office side of Boards.ie

ThisRegard

gandalf wrote: »

Touch was ****e

I actually use the Touch site on all my mobile devices, I actually think it's pretty usable.

KomradeBishop

Yea similar 'Management' is what came close to killing Slashdot a couple of times, once they were sold on between different companies - recently though, they seem to have gotten their shít together - but their community is far smaller now as well.

Maybe worth Boards management reaching out to Slashdot - if there'd even be a reply - and try and learn a few lessons from them, because the mistakes being made here, are eerily similar to the Slashdot Beta disaster (pushing a new UI that the community hated, and which was eventually completely abandoned), and the 'management'-style hard-headedness that site took in pushing its changes through.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

smash

Wibbs wrote: »

Secondly designers are coming from the visuals, even GUI designers, so if it looks "modern" and "slick" it's fine. Thirdly design leaves far more wriggle room for bullshít.

UX/XD... Something for which HQ have stated they had 3 separate designers working on. Either they didn't hire UX/XD designers, or they hired interns. Either way it's glaringly obvious that the designers in question don't use forums, and made no effort to empathise with the users of forums. What's also clear is that there were far too many managerial decisions forced on the design for revenue purposes.

smash

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Boards.ie is also quite hard to find your way around; something that Coughlan acknowledges and wants to improve. At the moment boards is free to use and makes its money through advertising and “Talk To” forums, where companies like Bank of Ireland and UPC, to give just two examples, set-up their own forums and get customer feedback on their companies and services.

For the ordinary user, Coughlan says, “I want to find ways to increase ease of access. And then there are conversations happening on boards.ie which are very relevant to what’s going on in Ireland . . . There is the potential to shape those conversations and inform people about them.”

Well that went well, didn't it?

Dyr

We found our problem, let's pitchfork this guy.

I think forums died because they were run by enthusiast communities and big business realised us muggles were spending our time online in a way they couldn't monetize.

Wibbs

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Going on current evidence no, he doesn't have "good ideas". Reads like the usual business puff piece to me. And reading it it seems he's the one pushing for the recent changes and his "ideas" come across as more puff. EG from the article;

"Boards.ie is also quite hard to find your way around; something that Coughlan acknowledges and wants to improve."

Eh no. No it's not and for future reference a good maxim to follow; Almost never listen to an industry journalist about anything. These are the sort of muppets that it seems Boards management were listening to. However in the rush to Do Something About This(™). They have decreased ease of access and the numbers dropping and dying forums prove this. As does the recent overwhelming negative reaction to the redesign. Well done. *slow handclap*.

I know this may come as a shock to those who get the horn for Meetings(™), but y'know the users that have built the site from the ground up and were there at the very crest of the Boards wave had no issue finding their way around. "Improvements" come along and they do? This really isn't rocket science, but apparently it is. But hey, seeing to be doing something is good too I suppose.

kneemos

smash wrote: »

Well that went well, didn't it?

Don't know about "shaping conversations".Less interference and letting people get on with it might work,as would giving them what they want rather than telling them what they're getting.

The Moldy Gowl

Hard to get around me hole.

What's so difficult about the navigation of old? Load of bollox really.

smash

Wibbs wrote: »

Going on current evidence no, he doesn't have "good ideas". Reads like the usual business puff piece to me.

but, but, but....
"Whether that sharing of information would happen on commercial basis or just by what he calls “putting it out there”, he doesn’t say. But he’s very clear that he’s moving back into what he calls the “for-profit” sector"

:rolleyes:

I think what sums it up nicely is this statement: Coughlan seems to have a mystical attachment to the word entrepreneur.

LuckyLloyd

Leaving aside the debate about the design direction, there's the more straightforward question of competent delivery. I volunteered to test a beta version of the iOS app and didn't bother beyond a half hour or so after receiving it - it was just way too far away at that point. The new website also is in that vein - it's too undercooked to be out in the wild just yet. And that doesn't help perceptions when people are going to be resistant to change to begin with.

The test and dev side of things doesn't seem right and that's probably no reflection on the individual employees involved - I've been there, someone sets a date and you have to try and hit it no matter how unachievable

smash

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Leaving aside the debate about the design direction, there's the more straightforward question of competent delivery. I volunteered to test a beta version of the iOS app and didn't bother beyond a half hour or so after receiving it

Same as me. I was hitting major bugs within 10-15 seconds and then informed that they didn't have any iOS devices in house for testing their app.

Lurkio

smash wrote: »

...............
:rolleyes:

I think what sums it up nicely is this statement: Coughlan seems to have a mystical attachment to the word entrepreneur.

O God jesus no.....

Links234

I've mentioned earlier about how the sense of community is being killed off, and there's definitely something to be said for the place being 'managed' into the ground, but something that strikes me is, what's happened to all the boards beers? It used to be the case that there would be quite regular meetups and all that, organized by each different community on boards, but that's all but disappeared it seems. What's the story there? Have they been discouraged, or are people just not that interested any more?