Aggressive nature of the Personal Issues forum.

CaptainInsano

I wandered into the Personal Issues forum and have to say I was disturbed by the nature in which people seeking advice are "dealt with."

There is the same group of regulars posting on everything, scratching each other's backs with "thanks" and in some cases going to town on OPs. How is "you sound awful" an acceptable response to someone seeking advice?

Given the sensitive nature of some the topics being discussed followed by the judgemental, condescending and sometimes insulting "advice" I'm surprised anyone would post there at all.

andekwarhola

It's the only place on boards you can essentially enjoy unbridled finger wagging under the pretence of altruism.

seamus

Tbh, it's always been like that and it's not a bad thing.

A lot of people post online not looking for help, but looking for validation. They want to air their grievances and have respondents validate their feelings and tell them they're dead right about everything.

PI has never been about being a warm and cuddly space for people to feel validated. It's always been somewhere that you can expect honest responses, for better or worse.

Sometimes, "You sound awful" is an acceptable response - if someone has typed out a huge post and the primary response is, "you sound like an awful person", then maybe that's a home truth they need to hear?

LuckyLloyd

Tone of the forum is fine imo, and the very active mod team are excellent at removing posts that aren't fine or off topic.

Saipanne

One of the few forums with quality modding, IMO.

looksee

I go in there occasionally and it seems to me that the responses are thoughtful and caring. Just occasionally someone doesn't get the sympathy they expect but generally that is appropriate too. Offensive or irrelevant posts are usually removed very quickly. Did you report the answers you felt were not appropriate?

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

I'd agree to a certain extent. Don't think I can link to specific threads but I do recall specific incidents where the OP has been about how they know thoughts they're having or behaviours they're engaging in are problematic and are looking for advice on how to deal with it and all they get is 'those thoughts and behaviours are a problem, bad! You should feel bad!'

Certain topics are lightning rods for it, particularly anything where a woman's sexual past is the issue.

I agree that a lot of people just come there looking for validation but it can still get very gang-uppy; regardless of whether someone is in the wrong in a situation or not, everybody telling them that they're awful without offering any actual advice seems like an odd MO for a forum of that nature. There seems to be a very low rate of OPs returning in threads that go that way so I'd question how useful it is except for validation for the replying posters tbh.

There are some great posters and great advice given there though, that can't be denied.

kneemos

Always had doubts about that forum. Unqualified people giving advice they've just made up or applying personal experience to some else's situation is dodgy at best.

For all the people that go there looking for validation I reackon most of the posters are there for the same reason.

Angel Crow

There's definitely an equal element of regular posters seeking validation as the people starting the threads. Why post on nearly every thread if not? And posting big long stories about their own troubles as a reply.
I also think the logic that "maybe they need a kick up the bum" is deeply flawed. You can't possibly tell what is in a person's head and it's wholly irresponsible to attack someone's character based on a thread that they've posted in a forum called Personal Issues, regardless of how their post reads. And it's certainly no one's right to decide what's best for a person based on a few posts.
Some great posters in there but an awful lot of self righteousness and ego.

I think a removal of the thanks feature in there would lead to better quality of posting.

topmanamillion

I have to say I generally agree with the tone of the threads on PIs.
More often than not people are looking for advice on whether their outlook is right or wrong.
If anyone posts in there they have to be prepared that the answer they will get back is "the problem is on your end".

osarusan

Don't really think that there is an aggressive nature to the forum. As somebody else said, posters really do come on there looking for validation. When a post is something like "my partner treats me terribly so is it okay for me to have an affair?", you know they're looking for validation. The amount of times that, after a thread starter has been criticised, they then reveal previously unmentioned and unsavoury aspects of their partner's behaviour/character, is huge.

What always surprises me is how quickly posters will say "just break up with them" but I guess that's a sign of the times.

Goya

Yes there are people who post there only looking for answers they like or a pity party, and there are those who deserve to be told to cop on or that they're being unreasonable.

But I see what the opening poster means - there can also be cases of people being ganged up on for mistakes they made, or behaviour which they acknowledge was wrong or irresponsible or stupid but they want to make things right and know full well their culpability but they would like advice. What's the point in admonishing them when they know they did wrong and when they ask for advice? Sometimes people think "You're not going to get just replies you like" applies in those situations but that surely only applies if the person does not admit their culpability.

Also I have seen (now it's a while so maybe things have changed) people get nastily dismissed over problems which they were upset about (and which were not trivial) and explained in detail and took into account both sides/balance. Told to get over it and similar crap. That's just being mean, and their detractors seemed to enjoy lecturing them rather than wanting to give advice.

Dial Hard

I have to say, I don't see any of the behaviours mentioned above. PI is one of the most heavily-modded forums on the site.

Angel Crow

Dial Hard wrote: »

I have to say, I don't see any of the behaviours mentioned above. PI is one of the most heavily-modded forums on the site.

I don't think it's a modding issue. It's what's deemed as acceptable in there is very debatable I think. There was a very recent thread which clearly highlights these behaviours. Whether or not you agree with the behaviour is one thing, but there's undeniable evidence of it.

Robineen

I think the suggestion to disable the 'Thanks' facility in that forum is a great one. It's inappropriate to have it there.

Angel Crow

Robineen wrote: »

I think the suggestion to disable the 'Thanks' facility in that forum is a great one. It's inappropriate to have it there.

It would be a worthwhile experiment and might lead to more genuine responses. If someone's sole motivation is to offer advice then surely there can be no damage done with removing it?

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Robineen wrote: »

I think the suggestion to disable the 'Thanks' facility in that forum is a great one. It's inappropriate to have it there.

Actually on a related note it stops posts from there from showing up in the 'Thanks' tab on the homepage.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Robineen

Angel Crow wrote: »

It would be a worthwhile experiment and might lead to more genuine responses. If someone's sole motivation is to offer advice then surely there can be no damage done with removing it?

Yes, I think it could be trialled. There are other fora where you can't thank the post so it's possible and I think it makes sense here.

Imagine going to Personal Issues with a problem. Imagine the first few responses are admonitions with little in the way of helpful suggestions and not only that but are heavily thanked. That is so off-putting. Even if there is an element of the OP only wanting to be backed up - that's human nature. Often people deep down know when they are in the wrong and it doesn't take long for them to realise that. But heavy-handed sanctimony with back-up isn't the way to go about it and will just drive people away. Take away the ability to thank posts and then maybe people can point out where the OP is wrong in a way that the OP might actually stick around to read. And Personal Issues is probably going to attract a high amount of people who like to put the world to rights and as someone pointed out, nobody here is an expert so there should be safeguards against backslapping cliques forming.

When I think about it, I'm surprised thanking posts is allowed in PI.

seamus

I guess the main issue with removing the thanks feature is that it makes all advice equal.

This is not necessarily a good thing. If you have one post saying "you need to sort your **** out, you're a mess", and a second post saying, "Nah, you're grand, bull on", then the person looking for advice is far more likely to go with confirmation bias and ignore the critical post.

If the critical post is heavily thanked and the other one is not, then it may help tip the balance towards the better advice. PI is in effect looking for advice by consensus, and the Thanks button provides that consensus. It's easy to scan past posts and ignore them when they're walls of text. Harder to pretend you can't see that a post has been thanked by fifty people.

One thing that might be useful, is an auto-disclaimer post that appears as the first reply in every PI thread; this tells the OP and viewers simple thing like the fact that all opinions are just that, and that posts may be brutally honest, but sanctimonious or abusive responses will be deleted.

topmanamillion

Also, id say the main reason for having the thank button on the site is to stop repetition and over quoting.
For example if someone clicks into a thread and sees a topic and underneath it advice they agree with all they have to do is thank it as opposed to either quoting it and putting a +1 underneath it and/or giving the same advice only phrased in their own words.

kneemos

seamus wrote: »

I guess the main issue with removing the thanks feature is that it makes all advice equal.

This is not necessarily a good thing. If you have one post saying "you need to sort your **** out, you're a mess", and a second post saying, "Nah, you're grand, bull on", then the person looking for advice is far more likely to go with confirmation bias and ignore the critical post.

If the critical post is heavily thanked and the other one is not, then it may help tip the balance towards the better advice. PI is in effect looking for advice by consensus, and the Thanks button provides that consensus. It's easy to scan past posts and ignore them when they're walls of text. Harder to pretend you can't see that a post has been thanked by fifty people.

One thing that might be useful, is an auto-disclaimer post that appears as the first reply in every PI thread; this tells the OP and viewers simple thing like the fact that all opinions are just that, and that posts may be brutally honest, but sanctimonious or abusive responses will be deleted.

Depends if the motivation is to give advice or give the same responses to similar problems for thanks.
From what I gather it's the same people posting in every thread,they're either incredibly knowledgeable and altruistic or they're there for more selfish reasons.

Neyite

seamus wrote: »

Tbh, it's always been like that and it's not a bad thing.

A lot of people post online not looking for help, but looking for validation. They want to air their grievances and have respondents validate their feelings and tell them they're dead right about everything.

PI has never been about being a warm and cuddly space for people to feel validated. It's always been somewhere that you can expect honest responses, for better or worse.

I and my fellow mods might disagree with you Seamus. I joined the mod team there in 2012 and we are always asking ourselves if there are ways that we can make the forum better. Even since I've joined, we've made a lot of changes to the way we mod the forum, our charter and how we interact with posters - we are always willing to consider ways in which PI can be a better place.

I agree that some people do come looking for an echo chamber, but there are others who come genuinely looking for advice, and how can you tell the difference until the OP responds to replies and by that point the first few posts have done the damage and the tone of the thread goes from there and it's a train wreck by the time one of us gets to it.

A lot of newer posters come to boards by way of PI. They might post one of their issues, get good feedback, read a few more threads, click on a few more topics and decide to sign up and become a member. If the first taste of the boards community they encounter is sanctimony from someone who's been here and has a few hundred or thousand posts, then that will turn them off the whole site. And if that was the acceptable standard in PI, I'd have stepped down long ago.

wrote:

Sometimes, "You sound awful" is an acceptable response - if someone has typed out a huge post and the primary response is, "you sound like an awful person", then maybe that's a home truth they need to hear?

I can and do action those kind of responses - they have not been an acceptable standard in PI for some time now - they would incur at the very least an on thread nudge from a mod to keep it civil and constructive.

Those posts do nothing in PI. All they do is alienate the OP, encourage similar and worse posts of the same flavour, derail the thread because responders decide to argue amongst themselves, and cause a flurry of reported posts. And eventually, those who were fond of dishing out the 'home truths' eventually get enough cards and bans that we ban them for good.

There are ways to tell most of the op's if they are being unreasonable, and explain in a nice way where you think they are going wrong - and more importantly, where you think they could fix things without resorting to insults and if posters are unable to do that, then to be honest, I'd prefer they didn't post at all.

PI is an advice forum. People would not post there unless something was weighing on their mind. It might be trivial to you or me, but not for the person living it. And a bit of consideration for them and their feelings would not go astray.

Robineen

seamus wrote: »

One thing that might be useful, is an auto-disclaimer post that appears as the first reply in every PI thread; this tells the OP and viewers simple thing like the fact that all opinions are just that, and that posts may be brutally honest, but sanctimonious or abusive responses will be deleted.

There is a lot of moderator support for posts in this thread that say that there isn't a problem with sanctimony in PI responses. So a disclaimer saying the bolded wouldn't inspire confidence that action would be taken against such posts. It would just read a bit half-assed, really.

EDIT: Though Neyite's response is more encouraging.

Angel Crow

seamus wrote: »

I guess the main issue with removing the thanks feature is that it makes all advice equal.

This is not necessarily a good thing. If you have one post saying "you need to sort your **** out, you're a mess", and a second post saying, "Nah, you're grand, bull on", then the person looking for advice is far more likely to go with confirmation bias and ignore the critical post.

If the critical post is heavily thanked and the other one is not, then it may help tip the balance towards the better advice. .

I'm not sure the amount of 'thanks' can determine good or bad advice. 20 people can support bad advice as easily as one. In fact 'thanks" proves nothing at all.

A more productive way would be for people to simply post, if you agree with an above post try to offer alternate reasons why you think this advice is sound. If you don't have alternate reasons and if your opinion echoes exactly that of an above post then don't bother.

I know it's cynical, but I genuinely believe that there are posters in there that judge the tone of the thread and post in that manner to get thanks and feel validated themselves.

Wibbs

Robineen wrote: »

I think the suggestion to disable the 'Thanks' facility in that forum is a great one. It's inappropriate to have it there.

I dunno R. I remember it not having thanks and it not making much if any of a difference. It's one of those solutions that sounds like a good plan, but IMH it's more like doing something for the sake of it. It did tend to lend itself to people quoting other's posts and adding a "+1". Not ideal.

Neyite wrote: »

I can and do action those kind of responses - they have not been an acceptable standard in PI for some time now - they would incur at the very least an on thread nudge from a mod to keep it civil and constructive.

+1. Way back when I was one of the mods there I/we would have nuked such responses with extreme prejudice. And did. It was never, nor should be an acceptable response to what may be a heartfelt question.

Questions about PI and its tone and even its very validity as a forum have been going since the year dot. I joined the mod team in 06 IIRC and it came up on the regular in my tenure there until I left in 10/11?. I didn't and don't see that as necessarily a bad thing either BTW. It kept the mods on their toes and open to suggestions and all mods eager to improve the place in every way we could. Clearly the current team are just as eager to keep the forum(s) to the same high quality as ever. IMHO and not wishing to step on anybody's toes, it's about the best run forum on Boards. I may be slightly biased of course.

Robineen

Wibbs wrote: »

I dunno R. I remember it not having thanks and it not making much if any of a difference. It's one of those solutions that sounds like a good plan, but IMH it's more like doing something for the sake of it. It did tend to lend itself to people quoting other's posts and adding a "+1". Not ideal.

There is no harm trying it. The forum might be a different place now than it was then. It's easy to see how it can be construed as ganging up to a jittery OP.

And I know the bias thing was a joke but that could be a factor in the lack of criticism from some people on this thread. We are all susceptible to bias.

Angel Crow

Maybe actively advise against +1 posting and remove them. People would get the message soon enough.