Why is Boards so quiet?

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Mod warning on the "catelyn jenner" thread in AH to call him/her by their correct pro-noun or else there will be bans is just another PC driven stupid decision. It's after hours ffs. Remember it used be fun? Not anymore. Make sure you call the guy who was born a man and is still biologically a man and as far as I know still even has male genatia...well now he's a woman because he says so and if you don't like it you'll be banned.

Science? Forget science.
Fun? You can forget that too.

ancapailldorcha

KyussBeeshop wrote: »

It's notable that it's almost always mods who are the ones mounting that kind of arrogant dismissal of negative feedback, too - if anything it comes across as some mods treating their position on the site, as some kind of privileged 'club', where they mount a kneejerk defence of the status quo (even if that is presently destructive to the site), to maintain their standing.

But a good chunk of what's been provided in this thread isn't feedback, it's just axe-grinding and insults. What response to those would you suggest?

KyussBeeshop

The very term 'axe grinding' that gets thrown about, is used very frequently for dismissing negative feedback - it can be used to dismiss pretty much anyone who has ever had a run-in with mods before, or who has repeated a criticism more than once - there's a bunch of different terms/labels like that which mods use for dismissing feedback.

pjohnson

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

But a good chunk of what's been provided in this thread isn't feedback, it's just axe-grinding and insults. What response to those would you suggest?

The general feedback consensus regards overmoderation with then various examples and issues being raised regarding moderation issues. That seems like feedback to me.

ancapailldorcha

KyussBeeshop wrote: »

The very term 'axe grinding' that gets thrown about, is used very frequently for dismissing negative feedback - it can be used to dismiss pretty much anyone who has ever had a run-in with mods before, or who has repeated a criticism more than once - there are a ton of different terms/labels like that which mods use for dismissing feedback.

I'm not dismissing feedback and I freely admit to making mistakes as a mod. I've reversed several cards and bans over the years. My point is that throwing insults at the site on the Feedback forum isn't feedback. Someone mentioned that they feel that they're not comfortable posting conservative opinion on the site. That's feedback.

ancapailldorcha

pjohnson wrote: »

The general feedback consensus regards overmoderation with then various examples and issues being raised regarding moderation issues. That seems like feedback to me.

I've never claimed that the place isn't overmoderated or that posts saying that were somehow invalid.

ThisRegard

I've been around since 2001 as a member, perused before that. Biggest problem front what I can see send to stem from politics. They're a haven for trolls, **** stirrers and to put it bluntly, people who don't really know better. Probably should have been left in AH were they can be left as **** fests and spill over from the serious threads.


But there's no getting around moderation issues such as premature closing of threads, the overly strict application of the stay on topic rule (suited to some forums better than others) and some mods regularly ignoring the don't be a dick rule themselves. One in particular seems to enjoy muddying the waters as to why posters receive a ban, and to wind people up over it while they can't reply, and conveniently close the thread so the poster loses the right to reply before the ban is served.

It must be acknowledged that it's a crappy role and takes a lot of personal time too.

As for what people think of here over on Reddit, really, why care?

KyussBeeshop

ThisRegard wrote: »

As for what people think of here over on Reddit, really, why care?

It's valid outside feedback from a site with a significant Irish userbase, and tbh even if it's prone to being an echo-chamber, it easily rivals AH in terms of humour/'craic'.

Even if people don't like the site (for years I intensely disliked its interface, and still dislike the effect upvotes/downvotes have on discussion), it's widely used and the Irish userbase there can't really be dismissed easily.

Spanish Eyes

Card the offenders not the entire thread please. That would be a GREAT start.

Wouldn't it?

iguot

Niamh never bothers to reply to these threads/or say anything of note if she does, Mark didn't know about a bug that was posted in Feedback a few days before it came up again in another thread so he doesn't even read this Forum.

Where's CEO (Sean is it?), Never bothered to reply to weeks of the last feedback thread, if they can't be even bothering acknowledgeing these, what's the point of this forum???

Just close it up.

Lock this thread now, stop wasting people's time and let someone who can actually do something with what's posted here open it if they can be bothered.

harry Bailey esq

Boards is often accused of being cliquey,after hours in particular.When I opened my account ah was kinda like the thunderdome lite,lots of hilarious back and forths done in good nature.There were 'personalities', lots of in jokes,and dare I say it,some of the finest comedians in the land.It did become over moderated for a time and a lot of those regular posters closed their accounts,never to return.There are still some personalities and characters from that time, but only a fraction of the full cast.If I'm scrolling down through the the front page and see a known wind up merchant was the last poster in a thread I'll always click in, even if the subject of the thread isn't of any interest to me.
End of the road would be a good example,I've seen that fella make people have full blown meltdowns over something really trivial and then quick as a flash do a full 180 on his opinion! All for laughs of course but only posters who are familiar with his handywork(long time posters and certain ah mods) appreciate it for what it's worth.Then,you have the 'feminists' who are anything but,riling lads up and then luring people into buying into their holier than thou 'ideology' and then knocking their prey flat on their backs with some of the crudest,straight from the gutter innuendos I've heard in my life,stuff that would make a sailor blush.Again like end of the road its all for laughs and only the posters that have been around a while appreciate it .Another sub set,The chauvinist boors,lack the subtlety of their feminist counterparts and use shock value to incapacitate their targets,with alleged sexual conquests involving people's mothers being a common theme. These two pairings are the main players,often working in tandem on set ups and take downs,and often leaping to each others defence.This is especially true when an unfamiliar poster takes personal offence to a humorous quip fired at them when clearly there is no malicious intent.This can give the appearance of a closed shop,which isn't the case.
The supporting roles are led by the social justice warriors,although always having had a presence,have swelled their ranks of late and now make up a significant part of the cast,although they are like shifting sands and are infiltrated at all levels by informants and double agents,often by members of the faux feminist outfit.They are universally held in contempt,and only a handful of stalwarts last the distance.This is similar to the armchair republicans,they lurk in the shadows most of the week,and usually have their show of strength on Friday and Saturday nights after closing time.They are very fractious by nature and are also generally looked upon with scorn,and can only boast one or two members with any inkling of history.They are ably kept at bay by the tiny British garrison,comprising of a chap by the name of Fred and a nobleman called Sutch.The stoners are a constant fixture,but have no structure per se,and lack in direction.Members are transient and drift in and out from right across the spectrum,so love them or hate them the stoners will always be well represented.The odd few religious nuts and some militant gays pop up from time to time but they have their own private battles amongst themselves and as such don't have much sway.
The moderation is becoming more benevolent,with over zealous renegades cast aside in favour of a more pragmatic regime under the guidance of a few level headed silverbacks.A positive shake up from my perspective.
The forum had become a bit too high brow for most peoples liking for a time but lately it's beginning to resemble the after hours of old again,threads are making it past two or three pages without fizzling out.Long may it last.
If I was to make a suggestion of my own,it would be that new threads be vetted before hitting the screen.
For example,threads constantly pop up on all aspects of peoples bathroom habits,some of them can be fairly amusing,but the whole front page shouldn't be toilet based threads.This worked well in the past when an extremely inquisitive poster called kneemos was given his own thread to ask his questions and satisfy his unquenchable desire for knowledge.I feel a similar system would raise the bar and freshen things up,separate the wheat from the chaff and attract posters from other,lesser forums.Surely it warrants a mention at the very least among the powers that be.
The forum has often provided me with some much needed comic relief during trying times,and I doubt I'm alone on that sentiment.
Let's make after hours great again sleazeballs.

MRnotlob606

Boards is an anomaly. Mods try to enforce stupid rules. There's the collective punishment if one idiot derails a thread.I honestly think the users should inform how the forum is run. Why should there be a top down organisation?. I have always found the modding over-excessive and very petulant to be honest. Certain topics no-goes.


I have outlined my feedback.

Stheno

MRnotlob606 wrote: »

Boards is an anomaly. Mods try to enforce stupid rules. There's the collective punishment if one idiot derails a thread.I honestly think the users should inform how the forum is run. Why should there be a top down organisation?. I have always found the modding over-excessive and very petulant to be honest. Certain topics no-goes.


I have outlined my feedback.

We are running a feedback thread in politics cafe asking users to outline how they believe the forum should be moderated and it's going quite well.

Thargor

Yeah the modding is the problem, its just gone insane in the last year, every few posts in any trending thread theres a "MOD:.." warning, its completely headwrecking. Look at the join dates on peoples posts, many of us are coming up on a decade or more of posting meaning we're probably in our thirties or older, you cant be curtailing grown adults free speech like that the way a teacher would in a secondary school, it just pisses people off and makes them post less or give up and go to Reddit. Regional forums like Galway City are absolutely infuriating for this, let people debate ffs.

Wibbs

MRnotlob606 wrote: »

There's the collective punishment if one idiot derails a thread.

I'm with you on that one and well put.

ThisRegard wrote: »

But there's no getting around moderation issues such as premature closing of threads, the overly strict application of the stay on topic rule (suited to some forums better than others)

Yeah that's kinda topic/forum specific alright, but I do agree in the more freewheeling threads. In Real Life people go off topic all the time.

As for what people think of here over on Reddit, really, why care?

I dunno, yes and no for me. I did have a read of the Reddit link from KB. Again for me an outside take from people not on a clear windup can be useful. Fresh angles and all that and TBH a few posters I would be in some agreement with. If one person tells you that you're smelly, you can ignore it, if ten do, buy soap sorta thing. And I discovered I'm an "obnoxious wanker". In fairness... I may have to buy soap at this stage.

harry Bailey esq

Wibbs wrote: »

I dunno, yes and no for me. I did have a read of the Reddit link from KB. Again for me an outside take from people not on a clear windup can be useful. Fresh angles and all that and TBH a few posters I would be in some agreement with. If one person tells you that you're smelly, you can ignore it, if ten do, buy soap sorta thing. And I discovered I'm an "obnoxious wanker". In fairness... I may have to buy soap at this stage.

Your a bit of a bousy alright,obnoxious wanker is a bit of a stretch though.Id say that was one of the rare posters that you rubbed up the wrong way,maybe due to some perceived slight who knows.I had a look at the link myself,plenty of valid points made in fairness,not all negative ones either.One or two clearly had personal agendas.

KyussBeeshop

Ah yea I'd say the 'obnoxious wanker' bit is definitely in the "If one person tells you, you can ignore it..." category There'd be innumerable more posters/non-posters with positive things to say, there - over the years.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Wibbs

I'm still buying soap, as a precaution. I have found I have learned far more in my life from those who gave me good reason for considering me a wanker, than those who thought me faultless.

Stheno

Wibbs wrote: »

I'm still buying soap, as a precaution. I have found I have learned far more in my life from those who gave me good reason for considering me a wanker, than those who thought me faultless.

You have faults?

I've always revered you!

iguot

I see on that Reddit thread why wots his name got banned over in health and fitness - linked to his blog. I'd wondered what happened.

How do the rest of mods stand over a stupid decision like that done to a long time helpful user?

hullaballoo

Having thought about this a bit, it seems to me that the problem boards faces at a very high level is that the polarisation of opinion as a result of echo chamber type sites elsewhere has caused a serious issue with people's capacity to maintain a discussion. It's a discussion board, so obviously that's not a good thing.

I agree that there is over-moderation but tbh, worse than that is the reputation of over-moderation.

Other factors come in to play too: most of the posts on this site are and always have been people being negative in some way or another about whatever the subject matter is. That's fine and really, it's how we are as humans (or as Irish people maybe?) but over the course of a long time, it gets draining. (The recession has had a big effect on this and the general mood in Ireland.) It's a rarity now to see a post get lots of thanks when is full of light, optimism and rainbows. Mostly, the curmudgeons are prevailing.

Last thing, teens and early twenty-somethings are different. Millenials is a misnomer that's applies to them but that incorrectly includes late twenty-somethings and early thirty-somethings. The more junior ones are amongst the most narcissistic of people you'll ever meet. Without exploring their culture too far, it's enough to say that they don't see the allure of posting anonymously on a message board because it doesn't get them follows or likes or whatever else you're having.

Basically, this site is seen as one for older, curmudgeonly people where mods will ban you for your first post on the basis of a set of unknowable rules.

The echo chambers are more accessible.

testaccount123

Stheno wrote: »

We are running a feedback thread in politics cafe asking users to outline how they believe the forum should be moderated and it's going quite well.

You really dont get it do you? You ACTUALLY think people are looking for an opportunity to plead with the mods to delete fewer of their posts and lock fewer of their threads, and you think you are doing them a favour by listening to them. Of course there are no promises of the mods actually implementing any suggestions, in fact we all know what will happen - mostly nothing. Yet its the other social media on the internet which are 'echo chambers' - lol!

The lack of self-awareness of the mod team when handing out their schoolteacher-esque condescending dictats is utterly cringeworthy. Who on earth do people expect to actually enjoy an environment like this?

People are less and less interested in posting on a site where threads and posts are locked and disappear due to the whims of the cliquey cabal of internet nobodies running this website.

They are mostly just bewildered that some internet man is giving them a warning or a direction to read some 'charter' which changes every other week and is completely different depending on what forum you are in and sure the one which applies can even change when they move your thread to some other forum or a yellow card or posting a mod warning in the thread title or posting a second mod warning in post #6544 or moving their thread to another forum or deleting their post for violating item 258 of the knitting forum charter or referring them to feedback or prison or the helpdesk or dispute resolution or the feedback thread in the forum they are in or sending them a PM or deleting their post because its not nice to be mean to Muslims even ones who behead people sure they are just misunderstood or giving them a red card or telling them to PM a CMOD for arbitration or banning them for asking a question about all of this ridiculous complicated **** in the wrong place.

Thats the bottom line folks.

Boards had a good run, Ive been here since 2001, on and off. It was really, really good for a period. Its decline has been like a fascinating social experiment gone horribly wrong. Id say there are lots of us just hanging around to see the ship go down at this stage.

Turtyturd

testaccount123 wrote: »

You really dont get it do you? You ACTUALLY think people are looking for an opportunity to plead with the mods to delete fewer of their posts and lock fewer of their threads, and you think you are doing them a favour by listening to them. Of course there are no promises of the mods actually implementing any suggestions, in fact we all know what will happen - mostly nothing. Yet its the other social media on the internet which are 'echo chambers' - lol!
.

Came in to post the same thing. Can't comment on the Politics Cafe mods as I don't frequent the forum and they might be of a higher standard but another forum has an annual one of these and it's pretty much a box ticking exercise. There may be some token changes but the thread is prefaced with a warning not to mention any mod or decisions ensuring that major issues remain unaddressed.

It's actually such a non event that 2 years ago it was 6 months afterwards before it was addressed, and the one from last year still hasn't been addressed and the last mention of it was a Cmod telling a poster not to bring it up again.

darced

This post has been deleted.

ThisRegard

testaccount123 wrote: »

Thats the bottom line folks.

Boards had a good run, Ive been here since 2001, on and off. It was really, really good for a period. Its decline has been like a fascinating social experiment gone horribly wrong. Id say there are lots of us just hanging around to see the ship go down at this stage.

I wouldn't agree. It's still an invaluable source of information and entertainment.

Jobs OXO

The Gearbest debacle was a low point. It's awful the way some posters are still banned

stereo_steve

I have two issues with boards which has moved most of my attention elsewhere...

1) Each iteration of the UI updates over the years has drastically reduced my use of the site. For me to find a forum I have to leave boards, go to Google and search for something like ... "Boards.ie after hours". This means I am restricted to a few forums that I know about. The mobile interface in my opinion is terrible. I found this thread via Reddit.

2) I cannot post a message if I log in with my Google account. I get authenticated and login successfully, I just can't post a message. Boards is the only site that I have ever had difficulty with using my Google account. To post a message I have to fire up LastPass on my phone and that is just a step that often puts me off commenting.

iguot

darced wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057669281&page=78

This is the type of stuff that gets peoples backs up, here we had a Cmod jump into a thread and start acting like they were some sort of demi-god. The mma forum is very well modded by the way but this example stuck in my head of how mods should not behave. Banned for a week with a smiley face and attitude.

That's 'em, I mentioned that carry on earlier, cleaned out aviation with his steading hand and smiley faces, has been at that for a long time so.....the picking of mods is a problem on here.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Lads. The moderation is a big part of it, like it or not. Defend it, take the piss out of the people criticising it, blame it on the sunshine, moonlight or good times; it won't change the fact that one of the most valuable answers to the question "why is the site so quiet?" is "people don't like the moderation".

And I'm saying that as someone with ten years here and no bans. There's a huge variation in the behaviour and attitudes of mods, it's blatantly clear from this thread: some people are clearly doing the best they can in good faith, and are listening. Some are just popping up every page or so with an obnoxious snide comment.

Not that it particularly matters, because even if every mod here was willing to implement the changes being suggested we know from experience that nobody actually drawing a salary from boards gives one **** about feedback from the user base.