Why is Boards so quiet?

Calhoun

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I think what you have to bear in mind, especially someone with beliefs as atypical of the average Irish person as yourself is that this site is mainly populated with younger-middle aged Irish people who'd be of a predominantly left-centrist persuasion so the opinions of your average American Conservative would be very much an anachronism.

On the subject of Trump threads, a lot of the discussion happened in the main Politics forum which was odd. Unsurprisingly, most of the posters were anti-Trump. We did have some pro-Trump posters and some of them caused issues. I'm not saying their counterparts on the other side didn't but those counterparts were much more vigilant when it came to calling out the other side by reporting posts.

I haven't noticed any cracks at Israelis here to be honest but I've not noticed too many threads on the subject. Then again, I tend to spend a lot of time in the main (?) Politics forum.



No worries. I know that. Feedback is feedback.



I think sites like this where opinions aren't protected is the answer. I have no interest in protecting anyone or any group from criticism. The issues arise in the manner in which specific opinions are put across.

What about the incident in AH some time back where an Israeli was treated very poorly. Dogs on the street know you can't be seen to talk about It rationally other than hate. Why is it ok to hate one group but not be able to have a rational discussion about the other ?

Calhoun

Just to clarify my last post it was actually an Irish lady who volunteered in Israel and was essentially chased off of boards.

I done a bit of searching on it and it was so bad she the thread has been deleted. The only evidence of it is the politics thread which isnt much better it was closed after 4 pages.

Admittedly that was in 2010, we are a good 7 years on from it but the roots of where we are now were sewn back then. That attitude of putting certain groups on pedestal while others are demonized still remains.

Turtyturd

Have said it before but I think boards' function has changed (at least for me) from discussion to providing information. On the discussion front it's pretty much a second rate Reddit with topics just ripped from there and posted here two days later. Where it is still useful is forums like work and jobs for following the progress of a competition or legal advice for finding past topics similar to a query you might have.

Just on a couple of things mentioned already. I do think that Boards' unwillingness to change or listen to the ideas/concerns of it's members is a major factor in people turning away. There have been several topics in feedback about moderation and they have been shut down with a vague statement about things being 'taken on board for consideration',and then ignored rather than addressed. Most mods do a decent job but the few biased mods/C mods tarnish the rest. Just because they do it for free shouldn't translate into them being infallible. Admit you've made mistakes, cut away the bad and you might see an increase in traffic.

Re-regs are a pain for regular users especially when they are just trolling but the mods/cmods I've encountered don't seem to find them an issue and are happy to let them post.

Calhoun

Turtyturd wrote: »

Have said it before but I think boards' function has changed (at least for me) from discussion to providing information.

I agree with you on that i think it did change, some time ago when one of the founding admins used it as a social justice platform. I don't think its been quite right since then.

I cannot comment on the reddit stuff as i dont read the Irish reddit.

Yourself isit

There's a confusion about the term "echo chamber" here. It's not a too and fro between two opposing sides but where one side dominates entirely, each post echoing the next. There's quite a few threads like that in politics, as it happens - interminable boring monomaniacal postings - generally about Russians. The new McCarthyites.


Let's ban the word "alt right". It's another Americanised phrase that doesn't apply here ( and barely applies there).

Calhoun

Yourself isit wrote: »

There's a confusion about the term "echo chamber" here. It's not a too and fro between two opposing sides but where one side dominates entirely, each post echoing the next. There's quite a few threads like that in politics, as it happens - interminable boring monomaniacal postings - generally about Russians. The new McCarthyites.


Let's ban the word "alt right". It's another Americanised phrase that doesn't apply here ( and barely applies there).

Labelling is a tactic used to shut down debate that is not liked, i think we should ban it on both sides.

Wibbs

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

A while back there Boards (AH in particular) seemed to be picking up again and it felt as if there was a concerted effort to do whatever it took to keep discussions going, to moderate threads without bias and to not infract users for posts which might offend (heaven forbid) but I have to say that of late it seems to be slipping back again, particularly with regard to threads being needlessly locked.

The 'Hirsute Women - Yay or Nay?' thread is one example and the 'Madeleine McCann' thread another. Both of those threads should still be open. When a thread is no longer wanted by the userbase, it will fall off the front page naturally. Until such time, it has not run it's course. If users are attacking one another on a personal level on those threads and turning them into being about them rather than the topic (which I appreciate is an issue) then they should receive warnings to stay on topic, to attack the post and not the poster.... if they don't heed such directions, ban those users from posting on those threads.

What I don't think is being considered is how the other users (the ones who can take part in threads, stick to topic, and without getting personal with one another) feel when such threads get locked.

This very much mirrors my own long held view. Too often Boards can moderators mistake nannying for moderation. I've been guilty of it myself. Too often some mods have had a humour/nuance bypass. Too often mods action a post or thread just because it got a reported post in their inbox*. Too often mods close down threads because they're more work to look after. I hate to have to spell this out, but that's our role. Moderation in everything, especially in moderation of forums. To be fair this is really only an issue in the more divisive forums/threads, but it is having an impact IMH.

A light hand on the tiller is needed more than ever. Things have changed and as OP notes if this site is looking to thrive, or stay relevant it needs to take this on board. It's not as if it hasn't been like that before. When I joined up, in the general forums like AH and beyond moderation was generally more human. Flaws and all. Now it's more by rote, middle management, a little distant TBH. And TBH part II, I've seen more and more of that kind of thinking in the recent past.

If a thread is active and ongoing leave it alone. If there are troublemakers, action them, don't close the thread. That has become too much the norm IMH. There's not much we as posters, mods/cmods/admins or not can do about the (IMHO frankly mystifying) top down changes to the site. we're all here by choice and invitation, but we can at least seek to change what we can change for the better.

As for banning Right, Left, Whatever viewpoint you're having yourself, the plain fact is these ideas are being discussed, even if it seems a minority. Better to actually have a discussion than closing down same. It's supposed to be a discussion site after all. And no I don't think such discussion and discussion sites are going extinct for good. I have the feeling that with the right and light hand applied more and more people will get bored with the echo chambers of Arsebook, Reddit and elsewhere and will want an alternative.





*I'll admit I tended to that in the past, but these days while I obviously look at the reported post and consider it, I also look at those doing the reporting. Some I think "let's really look at this more closely, because these posters tend to go off on one/have skin in the game" and act, or not act accordingly. I can think of about five off the top of my head that report posts because they have a slant going in.

foxtrot101

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You keep making assertions about Donald Trump threads that bears no resemblance to the actual threads. The treads in question are mostly made up of reactions to ongoing events. The only people who get carded or banned are those who break the rules as set out by the charter of whatever forum the thread is in.

Spouting vitriol is bound to end up in action being taken no matter what side of an argument you're on.

Yourself isit

Calhoun wrote: »

Labelling is a tactic used to shut down debate that is not liked, i think we should ban it on both sides.

Yeh. Snowflake too.

Yourself isit

foxtrot101 wrote: »

You keep making assertions about Donald Trump threads that bears no resemblance to the actual threads. The treads in question are mostly made up of reactions to ongoing events. The only people who get carded or banned are those who break the rules as set out by the charter of whatever forum the thread is in.

Spouting vitriol is bound to end up in action being taken no matter what side of an argument you're on.

The trump thread is the epitome of an echo chamber. And it's basically a duplicate of the "alt right and Russian interference in the American elections thread". Both largely same people parrotting each other.

Threads with different opinions are less likely to survive.

ThisRegard

Turtyturd wrote: »

On the discussion front it's pretty much a second rate Reddit

Might be a generalisation thing here but there is no discussion on Reddit, it's generally an ego boosting exercise in back slapping and reach arounds. (Excluding the occasions when it genuinely does good for society).

It's the online equivalent of collectively sticking you're fingers in your ears to avoid listening to the unpopular options as they get downvoted to oblivion, never to be seen by those late to the thread.

Insect Overlord

Books4you wrote: »

Honestly I think it's this kind of attitude from mods that is killing Boards. They seem to knock anyone down who stand up to them any little bit. I'm not a big poster but i am here a lot but for me reddit is the place to be.

I understand it in some cases but other times (quite a lot of the time) it just seems to be certain mods on a power trip. I do respect the mods but from an outsider looking in a lot that's what i see. Just my opinion on it.

Tell me, have you read many of the OP's posts elsewhere on this site? Have a quick look at their recent contributions to After Hours, for example, and then think again about what kind of content you really want to see here on Boards.

Calhoun

Yourself isit wrote: »

Yeh. Snowflake too.

Indeed, allot of us including myself is guilty of it and we shouldn't really as we are basically shutting down argument.

Calhoun

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Tell me, have you read many of the OP's posts elsewhere on this site? Have a quick look at their recent contributions to After Hours, for example, and then think again about what kind of content you really want to see here on Boards.

Tell me, does an OP always mean you discredit everything else in a thread? or is it just the hard done by attitude?

Rather than tackle the subject matter at hand just ignore everything and attack the poster not the content of their post.

Books4you

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Tell me, have you read many of the OP's posts elsewhere on this site? Have a quick look at their recent contributions to After Hours, for example, and then think again about what kind of content you really want to see here on Boards.

While I might not agree with op's posts in AH or elsewhere he still has a valid point with this thread. And as you can see from the replies I'm not the only one who thinks the mods are too quick to close threads. But yet again in swoops a mod to knock me down for having an opinion. I'm shocked, shocked I tell you! Tbh I'm surprised this thread is even still open.

foxtrot101

Yourself isit wrote: »

The trump thread is the epitome of an echo chamber. And it's basically a duplicate of the "alt right and Russian interference in the American elections thread". Both largely same people parrotting each other.

Threads with different opinions are less likely to survive.

Looks like I was quoting a phantom post. which i assume disappeared because it was dragging the thread off-topic. So I don't see much point in continuing with this, other than to say - I don't think how the place is being moderated is the reason why "Boards is so quiet".

Jobs OXO

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Tell me, have you read many of the OP's posts elsewhere on this site? Have a quick look at their recent contributions to After Hours, for example, and then think again about what kind of content you really want to see here on Boards.

Wow just wow ! The paranoia & bitterness is strong in this one....

As a Mod you should really know better.

Undermining me as OP - and I have had a few lighthearted posts in AH like we used to do in the good old days (so what BTW !) - and derailing this tread should not be acceptable.

Annasopra

Jobs OXO wrote: »

What? 30 accounts ?

I reckon there are a few obsessive banned account holders who have reregistered hundreds of accounts.

Conor Bourke

Jurgen Klopp wrote: »

This place is like the bloody Guardian at this stage, demonising everyone that strays from the "correct" ways of thinking and wondering then why the custom base is dwindling​.

Next thing they'll be begging for donations like the Guardian is now.

Technically that's already long been happening in the form of subscribing.

I subbed once a few years ago to change my name and decided to keep it up afterwards as I liked the increased PM allowance and being able to PM up to 15 people at once which was handy as a hmod when attending to forum housekeeping.

Something happened to the payment system over a year ago and while our payments were being collected, our subscriptions were not being renewed automatically. A thread was started in feedback and is still running, the problem still isn't fixed. In theory, if you did a one-off non-recurring one month sub and weren't aware of the issue, your money would be collected but if you never actually asked then for your sub to be activated you'll just have given boards a fiver for absolutely nothing.

Someone here mentioned the "distant, middle management feel" and that's what I get from that thread- every time anyone asks the community managers why the issue hasn't been sorted, a bland corporate response is given. I cancelled my sub a few months ago on principle because I felt like boards.ie are more than happy to take my money but aren't in the slightest bit interested in addressing such a basic issue and that speaks volumes to me.

Insect Overlord

Books4you wrote: »

While I might not agree with op's posts in AH or elsewhere he still has a valid point with this thread. And as you can see from the replies I'm not the only one who thinks the mods are too quick to close threads. But yet again in swoops a mod to knock me down for having an opinion. I'm shocked, shocked I tell you! Tbh I'm surprised this thread is even still open.

I am merely suggesting that you consider your opinion. To quote one of my favourite poets, "...changing your mind is one of the best ways
of finding out whether or not you still have one." I cannot help it if you feel that being asked to think about how you feel equates to being knocked down.

Jobs OXO wrote: »

Wow just wow ! The paranoia & bitterness is strong in this one....

As a Mod you should really know better.

Undermining me as OP - and I have had a few lighthearted posts in AH like we used to do in the good old days (so what BTW !) - and derailing this tread should not be acceptable.

Ye both seem to be missing a very important point - I am not posting here as "a mod". My status as the caretaker of two very quiet niche forums has nothing to do with this discussion.

I am me. I am posting my opinion.

And my opinion is that a) it's an incredible coincidence that a self-confessed re-reg posted a thread almost identical to one that was started in the same calendar week one year ago and b) the kind of character who posts repeatedly about "sex sticks", "vageens", and his "lass/biatch" is not one to be taken too seriously.

Ineedaname

Cornelius Crow wrote: »

Technically that's already long been happening in the form of subscribing.

I subbed once a few years ago to change my name and decided to keep it up afterwards as I liked the increased PM allowance and being able to PM up to 15 people at once which was handy as a hmod when attending to forum housekeeping.

Something happened to the payment system over a year ago and while our payments were being collected, our subscriptions were not being renewed automatically. A thread was started in feedback and is still running, the problem still isn't fixed. In theory, if you did a one-off non-recurring one month sub and weren't aware of the issue, your money would be collected but if you never actually asked then for your sub to be activated you'll just have given boards a fiver for absolutely nothing.

Someone here mentioned the "distant, middle management feel" and that's what I get from that thread- every time anyone asks the community managers why the issue hasn't been sorted, a bland corporate response is given. I cancelled my sub a few months ago on principle because I felt like boards.ie are more than happy to take my money but aren't in the slightest bit interested in addressing such a basic issue and that speaks volumes to me.

This

The casual attitude to what is basically theft is shocking. I've subscribed a few times in the past but definitely won't be doing it again.

Jobs OXO

Insect Overlord wrote: »

I am merely suggesting that you consider your opinion. To quote one of my favourite poets, "...changing your mind is one of the best ways
of finding out whether or not you still have one." I cannot help it if you feel that being asked to think about how you feel equates to being knocked down.



Ye both seem to be missing a very important point - I am not posting here as "a mod". My status as the caretaker of two very quiet niche forums has nothing to do with this discussion.

I am me. I am posting my opinion.

And my opinion is that a) it's an incredible coincidence that a self-confessed re-reg posted a thread almost identical to one that was started in the same calendar week one year ago and b) the kind of character who posts repeatedly about "sex sticks", "vageens", and his "lass/biatch" is not one to be taken too seriously.

Wow (again!) - there's no need to be so obsessive and review my posting history is there? Many others have taken the issue seriously but you can't.

GLaDOS

Wibbs wrote: »

This very much mirrors my own long held view. Too often Boards can moderators mistake nannying for moderation. I've been guilty of it myself. Too often some mods have had a humour/nuance bypass. Too often mods action a post or thread just because it got a reported post in their inbox*. Too often mods close down threads because they're more work to look after. I hate to have to spell this out, but that's our role. Moderation in everything, especially in moderation of forums. To be fair this is really only an issue in the more divisive forums/threads, but it is having an impact IMH.

A light hand on the tiller is needed more than ever. Things have changed and as OP notes if this site is looking to thrive, or stay relevant it needs to take this on board. It's not as if it hasn't been like that before. When I joined up, in the general forums like AH and beyond moderation was generally more human. Flaws and all. Now it's more by rote, middle management, a little distant TBH. And TBH part II, I've seen more and more of that kind of thinking in the recent past.

If a thread is active and ongoing leave it alone. If there are troublemakers, action them, don't close the thread. That has become too much the norm IMH. There's not much we as posters, mods/cmods/admins or not can do about the (IMHO frankly mystifying) top down changes to the site. we're all here by choice and invitation, but we can at least seek to change what we can change for the better.

I agree with what you've posted here, but from my time modding AH, I found if you go with the soft touch approach, you'll get complaints about how threads full of hate are allowed to continue and nothing is being done. So you go with the hardline approach, and you're nazis that are censoring free speech. You try to mod with a human touch (which is the correct way I believe) and you get feedback threads saying we're too inconsistent. So you apply a blanket rule and you get lambasted for being unfeeling robots hiding behind the rules.

Now, it will be pointed out, not incorrectly, that mods are always going to come in for some flack and we need to have a brass neck to a certain extent. But, I gotta tell you, it gets seriously draining. You feel like nothing you do is right. You start to second guess your instincts, which is what got you selected as a mod in the first place. Sometimes you just get sick of the forum, and sick of moderating it. It sucks the joy out of something you had a real passion for initially. And we've lost some damn good mods over the years for the reason. At one point it felt like we had a revolving door of new mods in AH cause we just couldn't hold onto them long enough.

Some people will scoff, but I know the AH team is genuinely very perceptive to feedback about moderation and tries to incorporate it as best they can. No doubt the likes of the politics fora are much the same. The problem is you've have a huge spectrum what people actually want from moderation, it's just not possible to please everyone.

I'm not trying to excuse bad moderation, and I'm not trying to blame the userbase. But sometimes a bit of patience is needed on both sides. It's not uncommon to see snide remarks about mods on the likes of feedback, help desk and DRP. I've seen outright abuse of mods off site which obviously there's little to be done about. It gets to the point we're people just cannot be arsed putting themselves in the firing line. So we lose good mods, hell we lose good posters.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is the mods are human too. You pull them every which way in terms of feedback and you get "middle-management" style modding as a result. I'm not sure what the solution to this is really though, because as I have said, you are never going to please everyone, so you ended up only half-pleasing as many people as possible. The way of the internet these days is people feel they should be able to post whatever they want no matter how vile or abusive and nothing short of complete absence of moderation will please this cohort.

*This isn't directly specifically at you Wibbs! You just brought up a relevant issue so I quoted your post.

KyussBeeshop

Yea I have to say, mods closing down threads just because they're a nuisance - to the mods - is a relatively new and quite stifling thing.

The mods who do this usually don't even have enough respect to the forum posters, to say that that's why they're closing the thread - they just say 'closed for review', and just never open it again or even edit the mod comment to say why.

Hate that kind of bureaucratic doublespeak - it's just insulting to all posters.


There are definitely some discussions that mods/admins would rather just not allow, rather than deal with the fallout from them - many of those discussions are pretty relevant to the day as well.


I can agree with the distant middle-management feel to the site as well. When DeVore ran things, he was involved with the community and had a stake in it - the current managers seem to have a primary stake in getting paid corporate subscribers tbh, and fobbing off community feedback with bland PR responses.

The owners need to accept that Boards will never turn a profit - that it costs money to cater to the community - and to not kill the golden goose by trying to monetize the site in ways that piss off the userbase.
Any benefits felt for the owners, from Boards, will and must be side-benefits, not direct monetary ones - if you push too far with the latter, you start to kill the community.

Wibbs

GLaDOS wrote: »

I agree with what you've posted here, but from my time modding AH, I found if you go with the soft touch approach, you'll get complaints about how threads full of hate are allowed to continue and nothing is being done. So you go with the hardline approach, and you're nazis that are censoring free speech.

Sure G, I get that, but of those two options surely the former is the better one for discussion? Action individual posts that cross a line and leave the threads alone. There are more than a few threads in AH and elsewhere that have been closed for no good bloody reason and it sends a bad signal. The immigration thread(s) an obvious one. One of the biggest stories to hit Europe and Ireland(and elsewhere) and it seems it can't be discussed on the site. That's beyond idiotic. And before the "it attracts trolls etc". Deal with them, that's the job. In nigh on every "controversial" thread there are only a handful of such posts/posters, but shutting down all discussion now seems to be the go to option.

Today this thread first showed up in AH about Ireland's ""nanny state" index and it was locked, disappeared from AH, then moved to the PC and locked again(edit I see it's been reopened). No redirect from AH either and unless AH is different to other forums, leaving a redirect is automatic, a mod has to choose the option not to. And it's not unusual. I rarely see redirects from AH. And we're trying to reignite smaller forums, but leave few redirects to same when they show up and are moved from the biggest forum on Boards? What daftness is that? I really do shake my head sometimes at some of the thinking behind such actions. Oh and in before the "oh that's a politics thread", there are usually a fair few AH threads that could easily live elsewhere on the site. Some days the majority could. Here's a current thread directly discussing state legislation and it's going fine in AH(and PC). There's a good example of headscratching inconsistency and that's just from today.

Though as an aside IMH close the PC, leave man in the pub style "politics" in AH. The "serious" Politics forum seems to have withered. A rejig might work there. It worked for Sex and Sexuality(though it took seven years to implement).

Some people will scoff, but I know the AH team is genuinely very perceptive to feedback about moderation and tries to incorporate it as best they can. No doubt the likes of the politics fora are much the same. The problem is you've have a huge spectrum what people actually want from moderation, it's just not possible to please everyone.

Indeed G, but it would be my feeling and an increasing one, that there exists a particular culture of Moderation, one that is not doing discussion or the community any good.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is the mods are human too. You pull them every which way in terms of feedback and you get "middle-management" style modding as a result. I'm not sure what the solution to this is really though, because as I have said, you are never going to please everyone, so you ended up only half-pleasing as many people as possible. The way of the internet these days is people feel they should be able to post whatever they want no matter how vile or abusive and nothing short of complete absence of moderation will please this cohort.

I certainly wouldn't want the place to go to a free for all, but it would be my humble that the fear of the place going that way has left too many mods and the mod culture overreacting.

*This isn't directly specifically at you Wibbs! You just brought up a relevant issue so I quoted your post.

Ah I know that G.

Calhoun

Insect Overlord wrote: »

I am merely suggesting that you consider your opinion. To quote one of my favourite poets, "...changing your mind is one of the best ways
of finding out whether or not you still have one." I cannot help it if you feel that being asked to think about how you feel equates to being knocked down.



Ye both seem to be missing a very important point - I am not posting here as "a mod". My status as the caretaker of two very quiet niche forums has nothing to do with this discussion.

I am me. I am posting my opinion.

And my opinion is that a) it's an incredible coincidence that a self-confessed re-reg posted a thread almost identical to one that was started in the same calendar week one year ago and b) the kind of character who posts repeatedly about "sex sticks", "vageens", and his "lass/biatch" is not one to be taken too seriously.

Regardless of you being a mod of this forum or others, you do understand the general principle of boards of attack the post not the poster? You are being cynical if you think otherwise.

Is that rule only good enough when it suits you?

Insect Overlord

Calhoun wrote: »

Regardless of you being a mod of this forum or others, you do understand the general principle of boards of attack the post not the poster? You are being cynical if you think otherwise.

Is that rule only good enough when it suits you?

Of course I'm cynical. Anyone who peppers forums with utter rubbish, and then runs to Feedback to complain about the lack of good content across the website, is obviously on a wind-up mission. To suggest that pointing out the OP's hypocrisy is some sort of "personal attack" is laughable.

Jobs OXO

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Of course I'm cynical. Anyone who peppers forums with utter rubbish, and then runs to Feedback to complain about the lack of good content across the website, is obviously on a wind-up mission. To suggest that pointing out the OP's hypocrisy is some sort of "personal attack" is laughable.

Utter rubbish ? Not at all. Lighthearted AH sheets and giggles which might actually drive traffic rather than the heavy handed staid approach that might satisfy you. I wasn't complaining about the lack of good content rather the low traffic of posts - but why let the truth get in the way of your rant?

Calhoun

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Of course I'm cynical. Anyone who peppers forums with utter rubbish, and then runs to Feedback to complain about the lack of good content across the website, is obviously on a wind-up mission. To suggest that pointing out the OP's hypocrisy is some sort of "personal attack" is laughable.

No its not actually you are attacking the post and not the poster, rather than discussing the content of what has been discussed you go and attack their character.

This is prime example of whats wrong with boards, a mod who knows very well the concept of attacking the post and not the poster does just that. The ends justify the means however so its ok in this case.

You basically disregard all other posts after the OP because your smug in the knowledge that its only a wind up thread.

Insect Overlord

Calhoun wrote: »

This is prime example of whats wrong with boards, a mod who knows very well the concept of attacking the post and not the poster does just that. The ends justify the means however so its ok in this case.

This isn't some abstract philosophical exercise in objectivity. The reality is that context is important.