Charter

retro:electro

So we make you feel unwelcome and then you get salty about being invited to start a thread. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Suit yourself.

SpillingTheTea

Graham wrote: »

anna080 wrote: »

Why don't you start a thread on a topic that interests you so, Graham?

WhiteRoses wrote: »

I second this.

The reasons for my hesitance have already been stated. There is undoubtedly a cohort that leave us helicopters with the impression we're not welcome or that we "don't know any facts" because we might disagree with the general consensus.

Thanks for inviting a helicopter like me to start a thread though, it's great to see regulars go out of their way to make new posters feel welcome.

As baby and crumble stated, we need to stop going around in circles here. Sorry if you don’t feel welcome, but I can only speak for myself (even though I know that I can speak for most) but you are more than welcome to start topics and enter into conversations etc. Not everyone will agree with each other but isn’t that life?

I hope to see you in various topics/threads

baby and crumble

Graham & Ana080, like I said above, please stop going around in circles.

Thanks.

LizT

Just my personal feelings on some things, and I don’t assume to speak on behalf of the mod team.

Trying to get the balance right is tricky. The whole move to reddit was prompted because people felt that the forum was over moderated. Yet in this thread people have said that the forum is not modded at all and they don’t think we give a sh1t, while others feel there should be little to no moderation because users can sort arguments out themselves. We’re obviously not getting the balance right at the minute and it’s impossible to please all of the people all of the time but it is frustrating. I enjoy posting in this forum and I don’t want to stop.

A forum is obviously made up of its active posters and without all of you campaigning for the opening of the forum and your continued support, we know we’d have no forum. But there are also members of boards that enjoy reading the forum and just because they don’t post that frequently, it shouldn’t mean they should have no say in the direction of the forum.

I personally would prefer to have to post as few mod warnings as possibly because I hate doing it and disrupting the flow of a thread. But it’s just really hard to see where the line should be. People report stuff and then if we action it, people report our posts saying we’re being too harsh. We obviously just need clearer rules in the charter so everyone knows where they stand.

SusieBlue

Thanks for your input LizT, it makes sense and is appreciated.

I just wanted to clarify because I was one of the people who made comments about the moderation - I feel that when regular contributors stepped out of line, particularly when the forum just began, mod warnings were thrown out left right and centre. There was constant reminders to stay on topic and threads were locked a couple of times too.
Yet when someone who isn't a regular, or some of the less vocal members, comes in and calls us nasty and bullies and b*tches amongst other things, there is no moderation to be seen apart from a warning to stay on topic.
In my own experience this week another male made no reply to a comment I made only to 'pull me up' on my choice of word and nothing appears to have been done about this either.
This has happened more than a few times and is very frustrating.

I agree about striking a balance but it seems that Mods come down heavy on those who post often and are nowhere to be seen when other members are taking the p*ss out of us.

Just also want to clarify that none of this is directed at you Liz, or any Mod in particular. It's just my general feel for how things are right now.

Dave147

WhiteRoses wrote: »

Thanks for your input LizT, it makes sense and is appreciated.

I just wanted to clarify because I was one of the people who made comments about the moderation - I feel that when regular contributors stepped out of line, particularly when the forum just began, mod warnings were thrown out left right and centre. There was constant reminders to stay on topic and threads were locked a couple of times too.
Yet when someone who isn't a regular, or some of the less vocal members, comes in and calls us nasty and bullies and b*tches amongst other things, there is no moderation to be seen apart from a warning to stay on topic.
In my own experience this week another male made no reply to a comment I made only to 'pull me up' on my choice of word and nothing appears to have been done about this either.
This has happened more than a few times and is very frustrating.

I agree about striking a balance but it seems that Mods come down heavy on those who post often and are nowhere to be seen when other members are taking the p*ss out of us.

Just also want to clarify that none of this is directed at you Liz, or any Mod in particular. It's just my general feel for how things are right now.

I'm the male that didn't bother replying, the reason is because you're an absolute nightmare and it isn't worth the grief dealing with you. I also note you use the exact same words "pulled up" about other posters who say mean things. I realise the irony of me now replying but you've constantly brought it up, I didn't attack you or say anything personal, I showed my distaste for a stupid and demeaning word and you went on the offensive. You can reply with whatever you like but I'm unfollowing the thread and that's all I have to say on it.

retro:electro

SusieBlue

Dave147 wrote: »

I'm the male that didn't bother replying, the reason is because you're an absolute nightmare and it isn't worth the grief dealing with you. I also note you use the exact same words "pulled up" about other posters who say mean things. I realise the irony of me now replying but you've constantly brought it up, I didn't attack you or say anything personal, I showed my distaste for a stupid and demeaning word and you went on the offensive. You can reply with whatever you like but I'm unfollowing the thread and that's all I have to say on it.

I actually couldn't care less about anything you have to say. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

baby and crumble

Last warning please- I really don’t want to have to start handing out infractions but everyone needs to stay on topic which ideally is issues around he charter. No personal attack’s or jibes in the rest of the thread. That goes for everyone.

Thanks.

wyrn

You know, I never realised this was a new forum!

I was there in the early days over in F&A when we couldn't name the bloggers. There was Ibiza/horse blogger, popular blogger and Cork blogger. There was that massive thread and then limbo. Until I found threads over in blogs/wiki/social media and the conversation picked up. It wasn't as big and slowly names were revealed. Then there was Biko and the putting down of handbags and with that I left. I pretty much rage quit because I could feel the contempt from the posts.

Until one day randomly I spotted on the front page (which I rarely look at now since the new [a couples of iterations ago] front page layout turned up) and I spotted blogger threads here. Until this forum, I had thought we were still in w/b/sm. I was actually wondering if Biko had stepped down. I missed the whole Helpdesk debacle and the Request for this forum.

Anyway, my point being - I've seen these blogger threads in many different forms and forums. I actually I like this version the best. It seems, for the most part calm. Not sure if that's the right word. Most claims have some sort of credible back up. No wild random claims. There was a couple of closed threads that I did raise an eyebrow at but compared to previous closures, it wasn't as galling. Annoying, yes but not helpdesk bad. I like the mix of posts and I hope we see more of the likes of posts about how to get more organic traffic and SEO help. I love that there's an introduce and plug yourself thread. I've gone and checked all of the posters out. I found the post about blogger insurance very illuminating and that explains an awful lot.

How to improve the charter? I'm not sure. I'd be in favour of keeping the 50 post / 3 month rule or even lowering the limits but I do think a limit needs to be kept. Maybe we need to include a new rule about not asking certain questions like "if you don't like the blogger then don't follow them". There was something similar in the Radio forum chater

• "Off-topic" posts may be edited (to remove off-topic content) or deleted by moderators at their discretion. Offenders may be infracted or banned depending on the severity of the offense. Posts and threads considered off-topic include (but are not restricted to):
  • those of the “if you don’t like it, change the channel” variety
• Both pro- and anti- show opinions are equally welcome. Therefore, anyone who greets a post praising [Presenter X] with "Hi [Presenter X]" gets a one day ban - no exceptions.

In regards to a couple of these threads being an echo chamber, I kinda get why that could be seen but on the other hand, I find it refreshing. I know some of us are members of certain groups on FB and they can be very much an echo chamber. These threads tend to be the mirror image of those posts which I don't think is intentional. Those posts might be posting about a new product and it seems that the praise is based on the name attached to it rather than quality. Whereas posters here tend to be a bit more critical. I do think most posters here are very open minded to hearing alternative view points.

If we've learned anything from this forum, it's where to buy a €5 knock off of Jo Malone candles!

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Just on the point of new users/50 posts/three months rule, i think if that's to be applied then it's across the board without special allowances being made for select posters.

noaddedsugar

Sariyah Poor Suspicion wrote: »

Just on the point of new users/50 posts/three months rule, i think if that's to be applied then it's across the board without special allowances being made for select posters.

I think it is a little different when you are the blogger that people are talking about. Personally I think that if the blogger/person being talked about wants the right to reply they should be allowed it. It's unfair imo to allow a bunch of people to speculate about someones life but not allow the actual person to put their side across because they haven't got the arbitrary 50 posts.

SpillingTheTea

noaddedsugar wrote: »

Sariyah Poor Suspicion wrote: »

Just on the point of new users/50 posts/three months rule, i think if that's to be applied then it's across the board without special allowances being made for select posters.

I think it is a little different when you are the blogger that people are talking about. Personally I think that if the blogger/person being talked about wants the right to reply they should be allowed it. It's unfair imo to allow a bunch of people to speculate about someones life but not allow the actual person to put their side across because they haven't got the arbitrary 50 posts.

Well the rules need to be the same for everyone regardless. What’s to prove that they are who they say they are?

noaddedsugar

SpillingTheTea wrote: »

Well the rules need to be the same for everyone regardless. What’s to prove that they are who they say they are?

That would be up to them to prove to the mods. In your opinion the rules need to be the same for everyone, I feel that if you want to talk about someone on a public forum the least you could do is allow them to reply to it if they want to.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

noaddedsugar wrote: »

I think it is a little different when you are the blogger that people are talking about. Personally I think that if the blogger/person being talked about wants the right to reply they should be allowed it. It's unfair imo to allow a bunch of people to speculate about someones life but not allow the actual person to put their side across because they haven't got the arbitrary 50 posts.

There's the required amount on her original account, which anyone else would be sitevanned for FYI

SpillingTheTea

noaddedsugar wrote: »

SpillingTheTea wrote: »

Well the rules need to be the same for everyone regardless. What’s to prove that they are who they say they are?

That would be up to them to prove to the mods. In your opinion the rules need to be the same for everyone, I feel that if you want to talk about someone on a public forum the least you could do is allow them to reply to it if they want to.

Yes... when they have been on boards for 3 months and have at least 50 posts. It works. Tbh, I would actually appreciate and like if some bloggers/influencers were to come in and clarify a lot of issues raised and I think it should be encouraged, but if we just make one rule for them and another for others, then it’s not fair.

In the sake of fairness and to keep the social media/blogging threads from descending into chaos, this rule should be kept as is.

Graham

noaddedsugar wrote: »

I feel that if you want to talk about someone on a public forum the least you could do is allow them to reply to it if they want to.

+1

If the mods are satisfied in a new posters credentials I don't see anything at all wrong with allowing them to participate regardless of any catch-all rules. That's particularly important if that person is the subject of discussion.

retro:electro

Let's be honest, there's only one blogger (or whatever her profession is this week) who ever joins the discussion here. She has had three or four accounts over the years, and bizzarly makes a new account every time she wants to say something, when her old accounts are perfectly viable and have the minimum posting requirements. If it's 50 posts minimum rule for one, then it should be a 50 posts minimum for all.

noaddedsugar

Sariyah Poor Suspicion wrote: »

There's the required amount on her original account, which anyone else would be sitevanned for FYI

You appear to be talking about a specific person. I am not. I am talking in general, I don't think it is fair not to allow people the right to reply when you are talking about them.

I am coming at it from a place of someone who runs social media pages and has just started a blog. Although my niche is not something that is ever going to generate any controversy or discussion of me as a person because it isn't a personal type website, I know if I came across people discussing me/my business I would appreciate being able to give my side. You can disagree with this, the mods can disagree with this, I don't mind.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

If I want to talk about my furniture company on boards or use boards to gain exposure, I would be directed to the office and given rates I could pay in order to do so. I can't just join up and start talking with my customers and my potential customers with a "business" account.

If a bloggers business/profession is excluded then fair enough but the rules should apply to everyone instead of giving preferential treatment to one industry over another.

If there is a registered account with the required posts and time frame then why are new accounts belonging to the same person being excluded from the rules? AFAIK boards has a one account at a time policy.

Graham

anna080 wrote: »

If it's 50 posts minimum rule for one, then it should be a 50 posts minimum for all.

I'm not particularly a fan of the 50 post minimum but understand some limited restrictions may be necessary, that said I don't understand why we would want to exclude anyone from responding if they have identified themselves to the satisfaction of the mods.

retro:electro

Graham wrote: »

I'm not particularly a fan of the 50 post minimum but understand some limited restrictions may be necessary, that said I don't understand why we would want to exclude anyone from responding if they have identified themselves to the satisfaction of the mods.

Nothing is stopping them for taking to other platforms to clarify things if that's what they want to do. Or from setting up an account now and getting active so if they ever need to clarify anything they meet the threshold. I think the 50 minimum posts should stay. It's the only way to keep the one post wonders from rocking in and causing a shlt storm. These are usually posters who are completely unfamiliar with boards posting ethos and usually call us all jealous bltches and at times a lot worse.

Graham

Sariyah Poor Suspicion wrote: »

If a bloggers business/profession is excluded then fair enough but the rules should apply to everyone instead of giving preferential treatment to one industry over another.

Most bloggers blog under their own name and much of the discussion on boards is personal about the bloggers, that warrants an exception from the commercial interaction rules in my opinion.

Graham

anna080 wrote: »

Nothing is stopping them for taking to other platforms to clarify things if that's what they want to do.

I don't get that. Why would we want to force them to another platform?

Why would we want to exclude them?

What would boards or its members gain from excluding them?

retro:electro

Graham wrote: »

I don't get that. Why would we want to force them to another platform?

Why would we want to exclude them?

What would boards or its members gain from excluding them?

Sorry, why am I getting quizzed here? I'm giving my opinion on the charter and how I'd like the posting requirements to stay as is. I dont owe you an explanation as to why that is. You don't have to agree with me. I don't really care.

noaddedsugar

Sariyah Poor Suspicion wrote: »

If I want to talk about my furniture company on boards or use boards to gain exposure, I would be directed to the office and given rates I could pay in order to do so. I can't just join up and start talking with my customers and my potential customers with a "business" account.

If a bloggers business/profession is excluded then fair enough but the rules should apply to everyone instead of giving preferential treatment to one industry over another.

If there is a registered account with the required posts and time frame then why are new accounts belonging to the same person being excluded from the rules? AFAIK boards has a one account at a time policy.

You obviously feel very strongly on this issue and are determined to make it about one particular person,fair enough that's your prerogative.

I find listening to all sides interesting. I'm on a UK website where there was a large thread about UK bloggers, some of the bloggers themselves joined in and it was a very interesting read to hear things from their side too. Personally I'd hate to see an arbitrary 50 posts get in the way of that if a blogger did want join in. Anyway, I've said how I feel on it, you've said how you feel, I don't see the point in talking in circles.

Graham

anna080 wrote: »

Sorry, why am I getting quizzed here? I'm giving my opinion on the charter and how I'd like the posting requirements to stay as is. I dont owe you an explanation as to why that is. You don't have to agree with me. I don't really care.

I'm attempting to discuss the proposed changes to the charter and understand why some of the proposed elements are necessary?

If you don't want to discuss it, that's ok.

SusieBlue

noaddedsugar wrote: »

You obviously feel very strongly on this issue and are determined to make it about one particular person,fair enough that's your prerogative.

I find listening to all sides interesting. I'm on a UK website where there was a large thread about UK bloggers, some of the bloggers themselves joined in and it was a very interesting read to hear things from their side too. Personally I'd hate to see an arbitrary 50 posts get in the way of that if a blogger did want join in. Anyway, I've said how I feel on it, you've said how you feel, I don't see the point in talking in circles.

Its being made about one particular person because only one particular blogger has ever posted here, albeit using multiple different accounts each time.

wyrn

The 50 posts and 3 month old account is unique to this Social Media & Blogging forum, it's in other forums too. So it's not about posters here being defensive (I know no one has used that term but I just want to clarify that it's a commonly used tool on boards).

If a business wants to defend their actions or despite a post in say, the Consumer Issues forum - they are directed to get in contact with boards and register a business account. Bloggers don't have to do this even the ones who are self employed (and I personally don't mind that).

I'd be in favour of keeping the 50 post / 3 month rule after seeing what some of the bigger blogger followers act like (e.g. being flying monkeys and sending horrible messages to the blogger's ex partner). Wouldn't like to see the same happen here. I don't think it has but it could be a potential future issue.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Graham wrote: »

Most bloggers blog under their own name and much of the discussion on boards is personal about the bloggers, that warrants an exception from the commercial interaction rules in my opinion.

I think anything personal shouldn't be allowed. Anything they choose to disclose on a public platform is fair game but anything that isn't, shouldn't be up for discussion

retro:electro

Graham wrote: »

I'm attempting to discuss the proposed changes to the charter and understand why some of the proposed elements are necessary?

If you don't want to discuss it, that's ok.

I've addressed my reasons why I feel they're necessary.
If you want to ignore them, that's okay.
I've no desire to engage in a running dialogue of "but whyyyyy" with you.

wyrn

Graham wrote: »

Most bloggers blog under their own name and much of the discussion on boards is personal about the bloggers, that warrants an exception from the commercial interaction rules in my opinion.

What's to stop them from contacting the mods and asking them to post a response on their behalf?

Also I'd be wary of letting a blogger being able to flout the rule if they saw a post that was disparaging about them. They'd naturally want to refute it but in doing so, they might not have read the whole thread and this could exasperate things. Take the products from Ali Express thread - that was a thread that evolved from people finding so many different things about certain bloggers (it wasn't all just "they're ripping us off") there was the names & country on the order list visible on the website, there was the many articles which were subsequently edited months later etc... it wasn't just a bunch of people ranting (which is probably what it would look to an outsider who hadn't read everything) it was so much more.

SusieBlue

Graham wrote: »

I'm attempting to discuss the proposed changes to the charter and understand why some of the proposed elements are necessary?

If you don't want to discuss it, that's ok.

I'll preface this by saying I'm not trying to be argumentative or passive aggressive in any way, but I'm genuinely so curious as to why you are so passionate about the charter of a forum you had never posted in till last week?

I honestly had never seen your username so much as thank a post in the whole time I've been reading this forum until you posted here last week.
So I'm just wondering what suddenly piqued your interest?

wyrn

Would a compromise be acceptable to the mods?

How about 1 megathread where anyone can post regardless of when you signed up and how many posts you have. That way you won't lose any genuine new posters who might have signed up just to post on Social Media & Blogging - particularly those who might have a technical question and can't wait the 3 months e.g. how to check if followers are real? Ans use Social Blade. (I know that's not a time sensitive question but I couldn't think of any off hand)

Graham

wyrn wrote: »

What's to stop them from contacting the mods and asking them to post a response on their behalf?

I genuinely can't see the benefit to stifling responses from anyone, bloggers included.

One of the great things about boards is it's open, it's inclusive. I'd like to see it stay that way. Many of the proposed rules are heading in the opposite direction:

Restrict posts.
No bloggers.
No newbies.
Self-moderation from the existing users.

Lead

wyrn wrote: »

Would a compromise be acceptable to the mods?

How about 1 megathread where anyone can post regardless of when you signed up and how many posts you have. That way you won't lose any genuine new posters who might have signed up just to post on Social Media & Blogging - particularly those who might have a technical question and can't wait the 3 months e.g. how to check if followers are real? Ans use Social Blade. (I know that's not a time sensitive question but I couldn't think of any off hand)

That's not a bad idea

wyrn

Graham wrote: »

I genuinely can't see the benefit to stifling responses from anyone, bloggers included.

One of the great things about boards is it's open, it's inclusive. I'd like to see it stay that way. Many of the proposed rules are heading in the opposite direction:

Restrict posts.
No bloggers.
No newbies.
Self-moderation from the existing users.

No, it's not. Sex & Sexuality used to be for subscribes only. I know there's more subscriber only forums. There's also invite only forums like Online Dating and Ranting & Raving. Then there's the read only forums and then there's the soccer forum. No clue what way it is now but it's been through so many iterations because of all the hassle they've had. Couldn't mention MCD at one stage. There's the website we're not allowed to speak their name. The banlist is now private.

Like it or not, boards has become quite restrictive. Boards HQ is the one that's stifling responses and conversations (and yes for good reason in many cases). It's not us in Social Media & Blogging who are trying to shut down posts. Just trying to make posting more constructive. Nothing that has been suggested here is radical or anyway new when compared to other sections on boards.

Graham

wyrn wrote: »

No, it's not. Sex & Sexuality used to be for subscribes only. I know there's more subscriber only forums. There's also invite only forums like Online Dating and Ranting & Raving. Then there's the read only forums and then there's the soccer forum. No clue what way it is now but it's been through so many iterations because of all the hassle they've had. Couldn't mention MCD at one stage. There's the website we're not allowed to speak their name. The banlist is now private.

Like it or not, boards has become quite restrictive. Boards HQ is the one that's stifling responses and conversations (and yes for good reason in many cases). It's not us in Social Media & Blogging who are trying to shut down posts. Just trying to make posting more constructive. Nothing that has been suggested here is radical or anyway new when compared to other sections on boards.

All of those have fairly justifiable reasons, participant privacy in the first 2 you mentioned, historical troublemaking for some of the others or private/affinity groups in yet more.

I'm not particularly trying to convince any of those that disagree with me to change their positions, I'd just like the least/less restrictive options to be considered in the new forum charter.

For the record, I'd be broadly supportive of anything that as you suggest makes posts more constructive.

SpillingTheTea

If bloggers/influencers want to comment, they should adhere to the rules like everyone else.
The fact of the matter is, since we’ve all fought hard to get Social Media/Blogging open, and the mods implemented the 3 month and 50 post rule, I feel as though it’s one aspect of the threads that has genuinely worked really well.
There has been none of the old ‘if you don’t like, don’t follow’ posts coming in from people only signing up to give us that great nugget of advice while simultaneously derailing topics, and that’s the reason why it’s set up.

wyrn

One nice thing about this forum is that you can say "I'm not that gone on product x selling for y price when you can buy the brand version for around the same price" or "I wonder what the quality is like".

You can't really ask those types of enquiring questions* on a bloggers social media or DMs because for the vast majority of times it seems people are just automatically blocked and branded haters**. Oh and all the negative comments are removed and only the positive are left. It's gotten to the stage where lawyers are being threatened***.

*Don't get me wrong, I know some people are out to cause trouble. I'm referring to the genuine people like myself who might be curious.

** Yes, not all bloggers do this but enough of them do it to make a serious worry about contacting them.

*** Obviously if anything defamatory is said then they should seek out legal advice. I'm talking about those who threaten legal action directed at negative posts (I haven't really seen that here on boards but certainly on Instagram & FB).

retro:electro

WhiteRoses wrote: »

I'll preface this by saying I'm not trying to be argumentative or passive aggressive in any way, but I'm genuinely so curious as to why you are so passionate about the charter of a forum you had never posted in till last week?

I honestly had never seen your username so much as thank a post in the whole time I've been reading this forum until you posted here last week.
So I'm just wondering what suddenly piqued your interest?

I'd like to know the answer to this also

Graham

anna080 wrote: »

I'd like to know the answer to this also

Thanks for asking but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be relevant to the charter discussion.

A discussion of members blogging interests would be a good topic for a thread though.

retro:electro

Graham wrote: »

Thanks for asking but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be relevant to the charter discussion.

A discussion of members blogging interests would be a good topic for a thread though.

I didn't ask it

You should start a thread so.

idunno78

Re bloggers posting! It’s a hard one to call! On one hand I think if they can prove they are genuine then they should be allowed post. But on the other it will just (more then liikly, depending on the blogger) run into big massive mess with no constructive chat! Let’s face it thTs what will happen!

I’d be very surprised if bloggers did join in this chat so I don’t think there is any need to actually make this happen!

I’d say if anything take away the 3 months and leave the 50 post!

Also new posters are always welcome just not the one post wonders posters!!! Just adding that bit!!

Lougarden

Quote idunno78 "I’d be very surprised if bloggers did join in this chat so I don’t think there is any need to actually make this happen!"

Has happened!

Lindy97

It has happened but I think the majority would rather go on snapchat or instagram with an inspiration meme about haters. They have no desire whatsoever to engage with anyone who isn't rammed up their arses

Neyite

Sariyah Poor Suspicion wrote: »

If I want to talk about my furniture company on boards or use boards to gain exposure, I would be directed to the office and given rates I could pay in order to do so. I can't just join up and start talking with my customers and my potential customers with a "business" account.

If a bloggers business/profession is excluded then fair enough but the rules should apply to everyone instead of giving preferential treatment to one industry over another.

If there is a registered account with the required posts and time frame then why are new accounts belonging to the same person being excluded from the rules? AFAIK boards has a one account at a time policy.

I'm a reader /lurker in this forum - I'm interested in the threads but don't feel I know enough to actually contribute, but I can expand on this bit.

Boards do allow a second account in certain cases - with prior mod permission and as long as you use it soley for that purpose. So, for example, posters might want to post a personal issue, or post about trying for a baby but not want others to know so as long as they keep the second account for that purpose, its usually fine with the mods.

I'd suggest that if a blogger wants to keep their boards account separate /private from their blogger persona, (and I can see that some might want to) that a verified account (like in the AMA forum) be set up by mods/office for a small fee if need be. That they get one dupe account for the purposes of the right of reply/rebuttal. And that the same rules apply to that account that they would expect on their private boards account. If they already are a poster elsewhere, then they know enough to read a charter and behave in accordance with that charter.

That way boards might benefit from increased traffic from followers following the blogger over here, blogger benefits from the right of reply/rebuttal of statements made, posters get mature discussion and points clarified and answered and it's good all around.

/goes back to lurking.

idunno78

Double post

idunno78

I’m talking the proper bloggers not the person your on about! I wouldn’t call her a blogger compared to the others ! A journalist not a blogger! Anyhow she isn’t a blogger anymore, right!!!???

dudara

Anyone who has a blog is a blogger. I’m a blogger, many people are bloggers. I know several other regular posters on Boards who write blogs.

What’s happened recently is that the perfectly acceptable noun “blogger” has become conflated and confused with this low level tedious celeb culture, when in fact, the term is much much broader.

EDIT: In fact, I personally wouldn’t consider these “influencers” to be bloggers for the most part. The manner in which the noun is currently used is demeaning or insulting to the many people who actually blog.

Speaking with my Admin hat on, about this 50 post thing. I may receive a report that someone is dual-accounting. I investigate and I see that the old account has stopped posting and is no longer active and has been replaced by a new account. I’m not going to take Admin action against someone for doing that. But their history might be considered when deciding what action to take.