The slow death of forums *see OP for Admin warning and update 28/02/18*

Ken.

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

What exactly is a troll?

A troll is someone who signs up to a site to basically be as big an arsehole as they possibly can. I banned one earlier and he rereged with this delightful name. Not the first time its happened to us mods/cmods/admins and its by no means the worst one thats been directed at me personally. I'm actually quite flattered.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/member.php?u=875027

Conspectus Sucks Tranny Cock

Be warned the user name contains bad words.

Discodog

Beasty wrote: »

Have you not read what I said?

I indicated we should have regular forum feedback threads in most forums. However there are maybe 500 forums across this site and the vast majority of them really don't need a feedback thread. They are often posted in by a small number of regulars that get on with each other and are perfectly happy with the way things are. So, for example, what problems have you seen in the Rugby League forum that warrants a feedback thread every couple of years? What about Yoga and Pilates, All Things Retro, Christmas?

I said if posters feel one is warranted approach the mods, and then the CMods. I said that if all that fails start a thread in the Help Desk? I said a number of forums already have a number of feedback stickies

So what more do you want?

I originally suggested them because it actually makes the Mods job much easier - everything is in one place & the posters would tend to moderate themselves. If someone posts that Beasty eats children then hopefully others would post & oppose that view. Plus no necessity for PMs. If someone posts & gets lots of thanks it helps the Mods to assess how popular the idea is.
It's also a space where Mods can ask for opinions on ideas, suggestions etc.

Again you are saying that, if we want to express an opinion, ask a Mod first either to create a feedback sticky or post in the helpdesk or is it feedback ?
If fora are all happiness & light then the feedback sticky will be unused - except that there may be helpful suggestions which should be welcome. If it isn't used what's wrong with it still being there ? One extra line won't ruin a forum & it invites comment. It should be a simple easy addition to virtually every forum.

Discodog

Conspectus wrote: »

A troll is someone who signs up to a site to basically be as big an arsehole as they possibly can. I banned one earlier and he rereged with this delightful name. Not the first time its happened to us mods/cmods/admins and its by no means the worst one thats been directed at me personally. I'm actually quite flattered.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/member.php?u=875027

Conspectus Sucks Tranny Cock

Be warned the user name contains bad words.

Thank you. Hopefully Beasty will accept that I am not a Troll & neither are the others that voice a different opinion. We aren't posting to be arseholes. We are posting because this is our site that we have used for years & want to genuinely improve.

jimmycrackcorm

Conspectus wrote:

I'll let you in on a little secret. I have absolutely no fücking idea what the difference is between left wing and right wing and even less of a desire to find out.

Seriously?

Lefty loosey, righty tighty.

Beasty

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

What exactly is a troll?

Just to clarify - what Conspectus described above was a re-reg troll

This site includes within its FAQs a definition of what is considered trolling on this site

An "Internet troll" or "Forum Troll" is a person who posts outrageous message to bait people to answer. A Forum Troll delights in sowing discord on the forums. A troll is someone who inspires flaming rhetoric, someone who is purposely provoking and pulling people into flaming discussion. Flaming discussions usually end with name calling and a flame war. Trolling is the act of posting these sorts of messages which are deliberately designed to annoy other users of the site.

Beasty

We then have "low-level trolls" - these are users who deliberately tread a fine line trying to keep just inside the rules and in doing so look to wind up other posters into a reaction. They are difficult to sanction because there is usually no specific rule broken, but a pattern tends to emerge based on posting across various topics/forums/threads

_Kaiser_

Beasty wrote: »

We then have "low-level trolls" - these are users who deliberately tread a fine line trying to keep just inside the rules and in doing so look to wind up other posters into a reaction. They are difficult to sanction because there is usually no specific rule broken, but a pattern tends to emerge based on posting across various topics/forums/threads

This happens quite a bit to be honest, particularly when it comes to politics/economics/welfare/immigration discussions, yet they always seem to escape sanction for their baiting whereas those who respond to it are sanctioned.

Without naming names or giving specific examples (no need anyway as I'm sure the local Mods know the pattern too), but it's always the same handful too and they seem to follow each other around.
It's very disruptive to a thread and very annoying as someone who tries not to get bogged down in their efforts.

I'm sure a simple "no trolling - this INCLUDES baiting of others, especially on what may be controversial/heated topics" rule + enforcement would address it though?

limnam

pjohnson wrote: »

It was done before I think for the gay marriage thing but could ye stick the banned users in the OP? Might help mobile/touch users spot them when we dont see if its a new reg or not?

After Hours should be like soccer.

minimum post count / length of registration before posting.

It's rife with re-reg BS

Ken.

limnam wrote: »

After Hours should be like soccer.

minimum post count / length of registration before posting.

It's rife with re-reg BS

Totally not for this thread but maybe mention that in the current ongoing feedback thread in AH.

The only problem I see is that if we do install a minimum post count for AH then the trolls will post in a less popular forum with fewer mods and over run the place.

Us mods of AH take a lot of stick but one think we can say is with 9 mods, 3 C-mods and all the admins monitoring AH the trolls don't last too long around here.

pjohnson

Conspectus wrote: »

Totally not for this thread but maybe mention that in the current ongoing feedback thread in AH.

The only problem I see is that if we do install a minimum post count for AH then the trolls will post in a less popular forum with fewer mods and over run the place.

Us mods of AH take a lot of stick but one think we can say is with 9 mods, 3 C-mods and all the admins monitoring AH the trolls don't last too long around here.

Doesn't politics also have a post limit aswell? They'd have no juicy place to troll if AH was closed.

Ken.

Few posts moved from the looting thread to here so we don't derail it.

Beasty

pjohnson wrote: »

Doesn't politics also have a post limit aswell? They'd have no juicy place to troll if AH was closed.

No minimum postcount in Politics, which is a totally open forum but has very strictly enforced rules on standards of posting (see the Forum Charter for details)

Politics Café does re require pre-approval of users before they can post there with an access system similar to that operated for Soccer. However that access system has been criticised for a large fall-off of non-regular posters in the forum, which is a point that has already been raised in this thread

The underlying issue, I think (and to be clear I rarely venture into either Politics forum, although I have extensive experience of Cafés, it's the Costa variety that I frequent:)), is AH was the original "go to" place for casual politics discussions, but I understand that became very difficult to manage (imagine for example the problems arising with any big political story or election with shouting matches between posters and mods being accused of bias whatever actions they took). Hence the Café was borne to take that political discussion away from AH into a more "controlled" environment, but unfortunately even with stricter posting guidelines we still experienced the same sorts of problems seen previously in AH.

All of this is my own summation by the way, and I've not been close to any of the decisions on the Café (I only became an Admin after the current format was introduced), so I'm more than happy to be corrected on any of this

Beasty

Conspectus wrote: »

Few posts moved from the looting thread to here so we don't derail it.

You've a thread on Luton? Jeez - I knew Eric Morecambe was a fan, but I've never come across one in Ireland:pac:

Kivaro

Quick mention of Conspectus and the modding of the Lidl looting thread.
After pretty much reading the whole thread since it was started, Conspectus managed the thread in an excellent manner.

This type of modding is what Beasty is suggesting on this thread, and something that the majority of us would be quite happy with.

Kudos to Conspectus in 'trying' conditions.

Ken.

Thank you very much Kivaro.

Beasty

Kivaro wrote: »

Kudos to Conspectus in 'trying' conditions.

I would echo this, and also say that unfortunately the AH mods regularly have things like this suddenly blow up, with some speculating what happened, others blaming certain elements of the community when things are simply not clear. Indeed there was some fake news flying round about a fire at the Lidl store which turned out to be from an incident in Germany several years ago. You can imagine the amount of reports these threads generate and before you've had time to deal with one the whole discussion has moved on to something more contentious

I would also add here that the AH mods in particular have been looking at this thread and refining their approach to recognise some of the issues highlighted. It's usually a fine balance though and often their actions in one area may not be understood by or perhaps approved by some users, but you can rest assured they are all looking at what's good for the site, and trying to avoid personal views influencing their actions (which can be incredibly difficult as often Mods, CMods and indeed Admins may overcompensate to avoid such accusations, resulting in dissatisfaction from other posters)

Thrill

This site used to be fairly good, now it's just utter garbage.

Kivaro

Thrill wrote: »

This site used to be fairly good, now it's just utter garbage.

You obviously have not been reading the poetic prose over in the "Sex party, have you ever been?" thread then.

KyussB

Regarding political discussion - it's not hard to see from anyone who has taken part in political discussion regularly on the site over the years, that Boards is pretty much dead in terms of political discussion now - it's not even a shadow of what it used to be.

More than that, I would say many people would judge Boards as being a place that it is impossible to have many political discussions on - that there is a very severe constraint on the discussion, particularly the range of discussion that is deemed 'acceptable' in one way or another.

In fact I would even say that some of the most important political discussions of our day are only barely possible on the site - and the parts of the forum where the negative effects of such areas of policy are most evident, shun such discussion to parts of the site where discussion is so constrained as to barely be possible, and almost certainly not worth the hassle for the average user.

It took a long time for things to get to this point, but it's been a gradual downturn - and there are no signs of a reversal in this. Many users of Boards are on it for the laugh mainly, but those who might also want to discuss more political things, I think have left it in droves - as it's just not worth the hassle, unless their views fit within a loose, politically 'acceptable' range of discussion.

10000maniacs

KyussB wrote: »

Regarding political discussion - it's not hard to see from anyone who has taken part in political discussion regularly on the site over the years, that Boards is pretty much dead in terms of political discussion now - it's not even a shadow of what it used to be.

More than that, I would say many people would judge Boards as being a place that it is impossible to have many political discussions on - that there is a very severe constraint on the discussion, particularly the range of discussion that is deemed 'acceptable' in one way or another.

In fact I would even say that some of the most important political discussions of our day are only barely possible on the site - and the parts of the forum where the negative effects of such areas of policy are most evident, shun such discussion to parts of the site where discussion is so constrained as to barely be possible, and almost certainly not worth the hassle for the average user.

It took a long time for things to get to this point, but it's been a gradual downturn - and there are no signs of a reversal in this. Many users of Boards are on it for the laugh mainly, but those who might also want to discuss more political things, I think have left it in droves - as it's just not worth the hassle, unless their views fit within a loose, politically 'acceptable' range of discussion.

Going back to the "looting" thread, once it was realised there was a certain ethnic element involved, it became a hot potato here. A hot potato for RTE too. It received more coverage on BBC and Sky news than RTE. I was watching the RTE 1:00 extended news and there was a one sentence reference to the incident at the very end.

KyussB

They were nearly all natives from the area.

When I talk about limited range of political discussion, I sure as hell am not talking about those kind of topics. Hate the way that is always shoehorned in - just detracts from the point by making it seem like the only discussion being pushed out, is racist discussion and the like.

10000maniacs

KyussB wrote: »

They were nearly all natives from the area.

When I talk about limited range of political discussion, I sure as hell am not talking about those kind of topics. Hate the way that is always shoehorned in - just detracts from the point by making it seem like the only discussion being pushed out, is racist discussion and the like.

I despise some of the right wing and racist comments in that thread too. But the incident is a hot topic and people want to discuss it here but cannot.
People also want to see adequate media coverage on it too.

sdanseo

Just a stat for those that think forums are dead: 20,000 posts related to the snow and 4,000,000 views.

Boards isn't irrelevant yet!

Beasty

sdanseo wrote: »

Just a stat for those that think forums are dead: 20,000 posts related to the snow and 4,000,000 views.

Boards isn't irrelevant yet!

Posters here look at AH and one or two other forums

Obviously the Weather forum is getting a lot of attention now, and that's (in my view) largely down to one very knowledgeable and popular poster

Other forums burst to life at certain times in the year (I know that with the sports forums for example), and despite the views of some, places like politics and indeed some of the regional forums get a lot more activity around general elections

I've posted already in this thread, the site remains a lot bigger with a lot more activity than it ever had before the recession hit 11 or 12 years ago. The recession itself and the triggers behind it caused a lot of activity and the fact a lot of people had a lot more time on their hands as a result of the recession

Others have quite rightly pointed out that "discussion" seems to be less of a from of communication for some of the younger elements of the population in this digital age. The suggestion is that Boards needs to adapt to survive. To date though it has evolved, rather than undergoing any fundamental changes. Even now we face criticism for changing things at the same time as getting criticism when we do change things

Many believe there remains a place for a site like Boards, and recent events highlight there is a need, with a number of new posters signing up to get involved in discussions on the weather. We need to retain some of those posters.

One of the things we do need to address is site navigation (and I've already suggested some streamlining of topics) without losing posters who have grown up with the evolution and may find any "revolution" a bit more offputting

sdanseo

Beasty wrote: »

Posters here look at AH and one or two other forums

Obviously the Weather forum is getting a lot of attention now, and that's (in my view) largely down to one very knowledgeable and popular poster

Other forums burst to life at certain times in the year (I know that with the sports forums for example), and despite the views of some, places like politics and indeed some of the regional forums get a lot more activity around general elections

I've posted already in this thread, the site remains a lot bigger with a lot more activity than it ever had before the recession hit 11 or 12 years ago. The recession itself and the triggers behind it caused a lot of activity and the fact a lot of people had a lot more time on their hands as a result of the recession

Others have quite rightly pointed out that "discussion" seems to be less of a from of communication for some of the younger elements of the population in this digital age. The suggestion is that Boards needs to adapt to survive. To date though it has evolved, rather than undergoing any fundamental changes. Even now we face criticism for changing things at the same time as getting criticism when we do change things

Many believe there remains a place for a site like Boards, and recent events highlight there is a need, with a number of new posters signing up to get involved in discussions on the weather. We need to retain some of those posters.

One of the things we do need to address is site navigation (and I've already suggested some streamlining of topics) without losing posters who have grown up with the evolution and may find any "revolution" a bit more offputting

I continue to think the one single change that would bring the millenials in en masse is a decent and engaging app. The number of times in the last few weeks with the mad weather where I've gone and grabbed my laptop instead of checking boards on my phone has taught me that.

The rest will follow but bottom line is the young ones have their head in their phones and want ease of use. And frankly if we can get the 15-25's actually discussing things rather than the 200-character smartasery that personifies twitter, then we'll be doing the world a favour!

Beasty

sdanseo wrote: »

The rest will follow but bottom line is the young ones have their head in their phones and want ease of use. And frankly if we can get the 15-25's actually discussing things rather than the 200-character smartasery that personifies twitter, then we'll be doing the world a favour!

We will, but that's one helluva challenge!

Beasty

Actually, thinking about it. We have an Irish along with various other language forums. Maybe we should add a txtspk one to draw them in....

...I'm not volunteering to mod it though

Beasty

Beasty wrote: »

. Maybe we should add a txtspk one to draw them in....

We could call it the bebo forum :pac:

Zipppy

On the subject matter..of forums going out of fashion..can anyone recommend a good easy to set up and administer forum software? doesn't need to be free but stable and reliable and affordable...

Pepefrogok

Are boards now closing threads relevant to crimes in other countries using the before the courts excuse?

KERSPLAT!

Pepefrogok wrote: »

Are boards now closing threads relevant to crimes in other countries using the before the courts excuse?

I was sure it was Ireland only but apparently it's UK too. If that's correct then fair enough.

KERSPLAT!

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

I was sure it was Ireland only but apparently it's UK too. If that's correct then fair enough.

I think that the legal position is something to do with falsely influencing potential jury members with speculation of what was done by whom, when and when.

In other words someone reading a boards thread hay be called to jury service in the trial of these people and remember the speculation seen here and may have a false impression of the accused.

KERSPLAT!

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I think that the legal position is something to do with falsely influencing potential jury members with speculation of what was done by whom, when and when.

In other words someone reading a boards thread hay be called to jury service in the trial of these people and remember the speculation seen here and may have a false impression of the accused.

In that case it would be global, no?

KERSPLAT!

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

In that it would be global, no?

Technically, yes, but I don't see the government of North Korea trying to stop a thread about speculation on criminal cases in their country.

I seem to remember that a few years ago there was a case in Ireland that Irish media were banned from discussing but the injunction didn't extend to the UK media so anyone with access to the UK media got the full story.
edit: or was it the other way round?

pleas advice

I thought it would have rightly applied in relation to the ongoing case in the North, but not for cases in the rest of the UK?

KERSPLAT!

Technically is good enough for me

Would be good for boards to clear it up, or maybe it already has been!?

Ireland and UK are no go but everywhere else is fine... Europe is a no but outside is fine... English speaking is a no go but elsewhere is fine...? I dunno.

KERSPLAT!

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Technically, yes, but I don't see the government of North Korea trying to stop a thread about speculation on criminal cases in their country.

I seem to remember that a few years ago there was a case in Ireland that Irish media were banned from discussing but the injunction didn't extend to the UK media so anyone with access to the UK media got the full story.
edit: or was it the other way round?

So only if there's an injunction?

The Rape of Lucretia

Deleted User wrote: »

I think that the legal position is something to do with falsely influencing potential jury members with speculation of what was done by whom, when and when.

In other words someone reading a boards thread hay be called to jury service in the trial of these people and remember the speculation seen here and may have a false impression of the accused.

How come its anything goes on politics.ie though ?

KERSPLAT!

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

So only if there's an injunction?

In this particular case i seem to remember that there was an injunction "gagging" the media as it was a civil as opposed to a criminal case.
A whose been sleeping in my bed type of a story.

KERSPLAT!

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

How come its anything goes on politics.ie though ?

In fairness, it's for boards mods/admin to worry about boards. Let elsewhere do what they like. I understand your question but I don't think it's a fair question to put to anyone here.

KERSPLAT!

[Deleted User] wrote: »

In this particular case i seem to remember that there was an injunction "gagging" the media as it was a civil as opposed to a criminal case.
A whose been sleeping in my bed type of a story.

Ryan Giggs?

tayto lover

Any post with a bit of humour should not cause a ban even in serious discussions. I know some posters can take offence but a bit of a laugh can also diffuse situations
Sometimes the modding and the rules are far too serious.

The Rape of Lucretia

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

In fairness, it's for boards mods/admin to worry about boards. Let elsewhere do what they like. I understand your question but I don't think it's a fair question to put to anyone here.

True, but I phrased poorly, and didnt mean for boards to justify the decisions of politics.ie.
But it does suggest the boards wariness is possibly excessive on matters legal foreign, when the rational doesnt really seem stand up given the lack of issues for other media outlets in Eire.

KERSPLAT!

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

Ryan Giggs?

Possibly..

I don't remember for sure.

KERSPLAT!

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

True, but I phrased poorly, and didnt mean for boards to justify the decisions of politics.ie.
But it does suggest the boards wariness is possibly excessive on matters legal foreign, when the rational doesnt really seem stand up given the lack of issues for other media outlets in Eire.

Yep I know what you mean. I'd be of the same opinion as the office though when it comes to legal matters, best stay on the side of caution. One case could shut the site down, win or lose.

I don't think it's generally a big issue anyway but it would be good to have clarity for future reference.

Ken.

Hey Ker, Check out Your most recent RP.

The Rape of Lucretia

Discodog wrote: »

Thank you. Hopefully Beasty will accept that I am not a Troll & neither are the others that voice a different opinion. We aren't posting to be arseholes. We are posting because this is our site that we have used for years & want to genuinely improve.

Some sub forums are far too troll jumpy though - there is a difference between trolling and positing a viewpoint that the majority will likely not agree with. Just because the majority jump on the post - doesnt mean the poster was baiting them.
The re-reg trolls starting endless garbage threads must be weeded out. Sympathy to the mods tidying those up. Deletion is the only place for them. But just because its is clear a post will get the backs up of some other posters - well that isnt trolling. Thats disagreement and debate (and/or argument).

KERSPLAT!

Yep, I have and I'm more confused now than before. Will reply there now

Pepefrogok

So is the "Breaking - massive explosion in Leicester" going to stay closed and any other threads about crime in the UK at the legal stage i.e as soon as arrests made also closed? I mean it's just this seems new? There are hundreds of threads discussing events in the UK well into the legal stage.

Pepefrogok

Pepefrogok wrote: »

So is the "Breaking - massive explosion in Leicester" going to stay closed and any other threads about crime in the UK at the legal stage i.e as soon as arrests made also closed? I mean it's just this seems new? There are hundreds of threads discussing events in the UK well into the legal stage.

As has been quoted by police in Leicester, they don't want speculation to prejudice a future trial.

A spokesperson for Leicestershire Police said: "Throughout this complex investigation we have been urging journalists and members of the public not to speculate about the cause of the explosion.

"With three people now charged and due in court, it becomes even more important, for legal reasons, that this message is heeded.
"A continuance of such ill-informed and speculative commentary threatens to jeopardise this investigation and serves only to cause further distress to the families of those killed and injured."

Speculating about cases like this in the local pub is one thing, speculating on an internet forum that can be accessed globally is another.