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

Stheno

tigerboon wrote: »

That's all ok but when it's moved there's a requirement for minimum post count, membership length and good behaviour. When all these are met you then are at the mercy of the mods and if they give you permission.
Why should any of this matter if there's a valid point being made and that point is legally sound and complies with the forum rules.

I agree it needs to change i said so earlier.

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

Discodog

Stheno wrote: »

A new solution is needed but i dont know what that is tbh.

Neither do I but at least I am willing to have a go at finding an answer. You can't easily modify human behaviour. AH has been getting more serious for years. Suddenly trying to change it won't work without an alternative.

The Cafe doesn't work so people post in AH. You close the posts & people go elsewhere. You move them to somewhere that's about Politics & half will run away. Why not try something new & make it easy to discuss the news - isn't that what Boards is for - or should be ?

Who knows, if you turn Boards into a respected news discussion site, it might start growing numbers.

Discodog

tigerboon wrote: »

That's all ok but when it's moved there's a requirement for minimum post count, membership length and good behaviour. When all these are met you then are at the mercy of the mods and if they give you permission.
Why should any of this matter if there's a valid point being made and that point is legally sound and complies with the forum rules.

You simply cannot invite people to join Boards, try to get new members & then say your opinion doesn't count until you meet these criteria

_Kaiser_

I genuinely don't see why Boards management (including mods, admins and staff under that) are so obsessed with trying to pigeon hole and redirect every other thread. Complaints that certain topics are too much effort for the mods is frankly ridiculous - that's the job is it not?

On the flip side are the agenda posters who seem to follow each other around the site and always show up in certain topics doing their best to bait, troll and derail from the topic at hand until such time as the mods DO have enough and lock it entirely - frustrating those posters who were actually trying to discuss it.

Then you have the realities.. AH is the most popular forum here, the user numbers are falling, and Irish society in general has become more politicised and polarised (reflecting trends elsewhere too) in the last few years and this is shown in the topics started in AH and elsewhere on the site.

Given that those other areas (where the management would prefer such topics to reside) are hampered by ridiculous access rules, notions of what is considered an "acceptable" level of debate, and heavy-handed moderation, it really shouldn't be a surprise that these subjects end up in AH.

There's also the perhaps uncomfortable truth that the remaining userbase is aging and with that comes more interest in current and political affairs rather than the fluff topics that dominated AH in the past.

A current affairs forum might be a good idea, but I don't think it'll do much for AH because of the above factors except to perhaps make the new/active thread lists shorter?

Discodog

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I genuinely don't see why Boards management (including mods, admins and staff under that) are so obsessed with trying to pigeon hole and redirect every other thread. Complaints that certain topics are too much effort for the mods is frankly ridiculous - that's the job is it not?

On the flip side are the agenda posters who seem to follow each other around the site and always show up in certain topics doing their best to bait, troll and derail from the topic at hand until such time as the mods DO have enough and lock it entirely - frustrating those posters who were actually trying to discuss it.

Then you have the realities.. AH is the most popular forum here, the user numbers are falling, and Irish society in general has become more politicised and polarised (reflecting trends elsewhere too) in the last few years and this is shown in the topics started in AH and elsewhere on the site.

Given that those other areas (which the management would prefer such topics to residents) are hampered by ridiculous access rules, notions of what is considered an "acceptable" level of debate, and heavy-handed moderation, it really shouldn't be a surprise that these subjects end up in AH.

There's also the perhaps uncomfortable truth that the remaining userbase is aging and with that comes more interest in current and political affairs rather than the fluff topics that dominated AH in the past.

A current affairs forum might be a good idea, but I don't think it'll do much for AH because of the above factors except to perhaps make the new/active thread lists shorter?

A good example is hunting, use of animals in circuses etc. The Animals & Pets forum ban such topics so posters have started threads in AH. The results have been really good discussions because, unlike in A&P, both sides can present their arguments.

_Kaiser_

Discodog wrote: »

A good example is hunting, use of animals in circuses etc. The Animals & Pets forum ban such topics so posters have started threads in AH. The results have been really good discussions because, unlike in A&P, both sides can present their arguments.

In my view, unless it's illegal or likely to result in legal difficulties for the site, no topics should be off limits for discussion.

Rather than mods taking action against the topic, simply sanction those who can't reasonably discuss the subject at hand.. There's more than enough tools to do so - cards, bans, thread edits etc

Also, stop pandering to the lowest common denominator. If you just don't agree with or have no interest in a topic, don't open it.. Or accept that you're likely to encounter opinions that may upset/anger you if you do.

Discodog

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

In my view, unless it's illegal or likely to result in legal difficulties for the site, no topics should be off limits for discussion.

Rather than mods taking action against the topic, simply sanction those who can't reasonably discuss the subject at hand.. There's more than enough tools to do so - cards, bans, thread edits etc

Also, stop pandering to the lowest common denominator. If you just don't agree with or have no interest in a topic, don't open it.. Or accept that you're likely to encounter opinions that may upset/anger you if you do.

That's far too common sense :pac:
Maybe make acceptance of this as part of signing up in the first place

10000maniacs

Stheno wrote: »

A new solution is needed but i dont know what that is tbh.

You could start by not using the word "dick" in the Cafe rules. It is profane and childish.

Stheno

10000maniacs wrote: »

You could start by not using the word "dick" in the Cafe rules. It is profane and childish.

Thats a rule across the whole of boards tbh

super_furry

ziggy wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Agreed, but I would argue that those starting these posts are almost exclusively on one side of the 'debate'. There's no-one creating posts decrying 'the patriarchy' or anything like that.

What it seems to be to me, is people reacting to inflammatory red-pill, PUA, nonsense.

10000maniacs

Stheno wrote: »

Thats a rule across the whole of boards tbh

You need to change it to "Express your point with manners and courtesy". Not "Don't be a dick" surely? Its a family forum.

end of the road

10000maniacs wrote: »

You could start by not using the word "dick" in the Cafe rules. It is profane and childish.

it also makes no sense because one man's dick isn't necessarily another man's dick. it's to much open to interpretation depending on the view of an individual.

Skylinehead

10000maniacs wrote: »

You need to change it to "Express your point with manners and courtesy". Not "Don't be a dick" surely? Its a family forum.

Is this what we're reduced to arguing? Little to be at.

Stheno

10000maniacs wrote: »

You need to change it to "Express your point with manners and courtesy". Not "Don't be a dick" surely? Its a family forum.

You could start a thread in feedback and ask for it to be changed sitewide?

I wouldnt say boards is a family forum you have to be 13 to sign up

dudara

10000maniacs wrote: »

You need to change it to "Express your point with manners and courtesy". Not "Don't be a dick" surely? Its a family forum.

To be fair “don’t be a d*ck” has been a core tenet of Boards for many years, and I don’t see a need to change it or sanitise the message. It’s a pretty simple way of summing up how to post

In terms of Boards being a family site, it’s actually not. Children under 13 are not permitted, and those between 13 & 18 are requested to have parental permission. In reality I’m well aware we have sub-18 year old posters, but I honestly don’t think “don’t be a d*ck” is a problem for them. If it is, they can tell Boards.

10000maniacs

dudara wrote: »

To be fair “don’t be a d*ck” has been a core tenet of Boards for many years, and I don’t see a need to change it or sanitise the message. It’s a pretty simple way of summing up how to post

In terms of Boards being a family site, it’s actually not. Children under 13 are not permitted, and those between 13 & 18 are requested to have parental permission. In reality I’m well aware we have sub-18 year old posters, but I honestly don’t think “don’t be a d*ck” is a problem for them. If it is, they can tell Boards.

"Don't be a dick" is a core tenet? LOL
I am literally folding up laughing here.

Discodog

10000maniacs wrote: »

"Don't be a dick" is a core tenet. LOL
I am literally folding up laughing here.

Friendly advice mate you are beginning to sound like a tenet

Jack Kanoff

dudara wrote: »

To be fair “don’t be a d*ck” has been a core tenet of Boards for many years, and I don’t see a need to change it or sanitise the message. It’s a pretty simple way of summing up how to post

In terms of Boards being a family site, it’s actually not. Children under 13 are not permitted, and those between 13 & 18 are requested to have parental permission. In reality I’m well aware we have sub-18 year old posters, but I honestly don’t think “don’t be a d*ck” is a problem for them. If it is, they can tell Boards.

When you tell someone to not be a dick..it's insulting.. argumentative...and will quite often have the opposite effect.... normally I find the individual using the term should perhaps take their own advice.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

dudara wrote: »

To be fair “don’t be a d*ck” has been a core tenet of Boards for many years, and I don’t see a need to change it or sanitise the message. It’s a pretty simple way of summing up how to post

In terms of Boards being a family site, it’s actually not. Children under 13 are not permitted, and those between 13 & 18 are requested to have parental permission. In reality I’m well aware we have sub-18 year old posters, but I honestly don’t think “don’t be a d*ck” is a problem for them. If it is, they can tell Boards.

I abhor the phrase and cringe when I see. It's confrontational and immature, as well as disrespectful.

dudara

Jack Kanoff wrote: »

When you tell someone to not be a dick..it's insulting.. argumentative...and will quite often have the opposite effect.... normally I find the individual using the term should perhaps take their own advice.

It’s not a term I’d hugely use myself, it’s not my personal style, but I do think it’s got a certain aptness at times. Some people are just... well d*cks.

For me, this point goes back to something I said earlier, the apparent increasing sanitation of Boards. Do posters really want that?

Jack Kanoff

dudara wrote: »

It’s not a term I’d hugely use myself, it’s not my personal style, but I do think it’s got a certain aptness at times. Some people are just... well d*cks.

For me, this point goes back to something I said earlier, the apparent increasing sanitation of Boards. Do posters really want that?

It's not sanitisation...it's totally counter productive...in this day and age it's an insult... nothing more... maybe it has had the desired effect in threads....I've not witnessed them personally....and tbh...it's not needed...
replace don't be a dick...with next time a card in bold... something that won't antagonise someone who's passions are inflamed already to make a mistake and rise to the insult of being called a dick

muffler

Maybe Im getting too old for all this shit but with some current proposals/suggestions combined with previous changes and possibly more to come Im getting a feeling that there is an attempted element of rejigging everything we have come to love and appreciate. Leaving legal issues etc aside (which needed changing) what was wrong or bad about Boards or the way it was run and modded going back 5, 10 or 15 years ago? Very little would be be my opinion. To pull a quote from Dermot Bannon - it worked!

Back in the day we stood up to the few trolls and clowns and give as good as we got and if they didnt tow the line or tone it down then we got rid of them where necessary and in doing so made the place more enjoyable for the many, many decent posters out there. Regular low level trolls had the feedback forum as their little play area and how did that end up? They got their way and the forum is all but closed. The genuine posters who not only would have a query, complaint, feedback etc but would need others to help put their case forward on occasions are denied this now because of the actions of a few.

Sure, there are some basic areas and situations where modding could and should be more streamlined but there is no one size fits all and I personally dont see any rule book covering every situation that could arise in every forum or come remotely close to it. I believe we are merely pandering to the whims of a few in attempting to make the changes they are looking for. Certainly, there would be the odd thing that needs brushed up on but are we really seeing the tail wagging the dog here?

Instead of the pandering I think that we should (in a lot of situations) take a more of a "our house, our rules" stand and in the nicest possible way just tell these whingers that if they're not happy they can feck off and find somewhere else to vent. Yes, thats a crude way to put it but the underlying message would be along the lines of "here's a privately owned discussion site (for sensible and respectful discussions) and if you play nice you are more than welcome to stay. Play nasty...well dont let the door hit you on the arse on the way out"

devnull

Zoey Famous Aftershave wrote: »

I abhor the phrase and cringe when I see. It's confrontational and immature, as well as disrespectful.

It's been there as long as I can remember using Boards and I don't see a huge problem with it myself, neither as a poster before I came a moderator, or a moderator as I am now.

It's pretty obvious what it means and I'm fairly sure that everyone knows what it means and they are not complying with the rules and that is the idea as far as I'm concerned.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

devnull wrote: »

It's been there as long as I can remember using Boards and I don't see a huge problem with it myself, neither as a poster before I came a moderator, or a moderator as I am now.

It's pretty obvious what it means and I'm fairly sure that everyone knows what it means and they are not complying with the rules and that is the idea as far as I'm concerned.

And the aim can be achieved without resorting to it, as well.

But, I'm not getting into an argument over it. It was a feedback on the phrase, that's all.


I wonder is feedback wanted at all at times.

devnull

Zoey Famous Aftershave wrote: »

I wonder is feedback wanted at all at times.

I have no problem with feedback whatsoever personally, although life experience has shown me that whilst some feedback is genuine and well meaning, others have an axe to grind for various reasons and are bitter or have a chip on their shoulder.

If I have feedback from a member who has 8 yellow, 4 reds and 2 bans and a poster who has not racked up any of these, I know which one I would place the most value in and it wouldn't be the one who has racked up the sanctions.

KERSPLAT!

Zoey Famous Aftershave wrote: »

And the aim can be achieved without resorting to it, as well.

But, I'm not getting into an argument over it. It was a feedback on the phrase, that's all.


I wonder is feedback wanted at all at times.

In fairness, if you provide feedback you can expect feedback or a rebuttal on that which is all that was done above.

I do agree with your point that at times it seems like feedback is unwanted but it's hardly the case in the above??

Discodog

Zoey Famous Aftershave wrote: »

And the aim can be achieved without resorting to it, as well.

But, I'm not getting into an argument over it. It was a feedback on the phrase, that's all.


I wonder is feedback wanted at all at times.

The whole point is that Boards said they wanted feedback. Contrary to some opinion a lot of the feedback has been from respected, long serving Boards members. Some of them held up little chance of any real change & maybe they were right.

Boards sound like Phillip & Liz being told that the monarchy need to open up the Palace & embrace social media. The thought of having to discuss things with dicks like us.

What has emerged is that Boards are a divided organisation. Some still see it as their private members club where people can either follow the rules or get lost. Others are realising that, heaven forbid, Boards needs customers - those adverts need clicks.

But whether we are dicks or not we are the enemy because we dare to suggest change. As dicks we are just doing this to cause trouble, it couldn't possibly be because we have contributed years to the site & want it to survive.

Boards will end up like the two old men in the Muppets reminiscing over the good old days when you just reached for the "Ban Hammer"

Franz Von Peppercorn

10000maniacs wrote: »

You need to change it to "Express your point with manners and courtesy". Not "Don't be a dick" surely? Its a family forum.

Is it a family site? News to me. A family site would indicate that the entire family peruses together.

Personally I’d prefer if there were an age limit, albeit hard to enforce. The problem with the don’t be a dick rule is it’s a pretty arbitrary rule, and can be applied inconsistently and with bias. And we are all biased.

Discodog

muffler wrote: »

Maybe Im getting too old for all this shit but with some current proposals/suggestions combined with previous changes and possibly more to come Im getting a feeling that there is an attempted element of rejigging everything we have come to love and appreciate. Leaving legal issues etc aside (which needed changing) what was wrong or bad about Boards or the way it was run and modded going back 5, 10 or 15 years ago? Very little would be be my opinion. To pull a quote from Dermot Bannon - it worked!

Back in the day we stood up to the few trolls and clowns and give as good as we got and if they didnt tow the line or tone it down then we got rid of them where necessary and in doing so made the place more enjoyable for the many, many decent posters out there. Regular low level trolls had the feedback forum as their little play area and how did that end up? They got their way and the forum is all but closed. The genuine posters who not only would have a query, complaint, feedback etc but would need others to help put their case forward on occasions are denied this now because of the actions of a few.

Sure, there are some basic areas and situations where modding could and should be more streamlined but there is no one size fits all and I personally dont see any rule book covering every situation that could arise in every forum or come remotely close to it. I believe we are merely pandering to the whims of a few in attempting to make the changes they are looking for. Certainly, there would be the odd thing that needs brushed up on but are we really seeing the tail wagging the dog here?

Instead of the pandering I think that we should (in a lot of situations) take a more of a "our house, our rules" stand and in the nicest possible way just tell these whingers that if they're not happy they can feck off and find somewhere else to vent. Yes, thats a crude way to put it but the underlying message would be along the lines of "here's a privately owned discussion site (for sensible and respectful discussions) and if you play nice you are more than welcome to stay. Play nasty...well dont let the door hit you on the arse on the way out"

Beasty. You thanked this post & you are the one who has been leading & guiding most of the feedback over the past three months. Do you believe that Boards are pandering to the whims of the few ? Do you believe that it's the tail wagging the dog ?

KyussB

devnull wrote: »

I have no problem with feedback whatsoever personally, although life experience has shown me that whilst some feedback is genuine and well meaning, others have an axe to grind for various reasons and are bitter or have a chip on their shoulder.

If I have feedback from a member who has 8 yellow, 4 reds and 2 bans and a poster who has not racked up any of these, I know which one I would place the most value in and it wouldn't be the one who has racked up the sanctions.

If we're talking about something over the course of 5-10+ years, with how easy it is to have mod run-ins on the site (the no.1 complaint being over-moderation...), then that doesn't say anything about how genuine feedback is. 1 year would be a different matter, mind.

Like I said earlier, when mods/admins come out with the axe grinding nonsense, posters don't have a way to differentiate where that's directed - and it just comes across as a general dismissal of feedback - if mods/admins are going to do that, at least have the balls to be direct about it, rather than breed paranoia and give a bad impression of themselves and managements attitude, like that.

Kuva

10000maniacs

KyussB wrote: »

If we're talking about something over the course of 5-10+ years, with how easy it is to have mod run-ins on the site (the no.1 complaint being over-moderation...), then that doesn't say anything about how genuine feedback is. 1 year would be a different matter, mind.

Like I said earlier, when mods/admins come out with the axe grinding nonsense, posters don't have a way to differentiate where that's directed - and it just comes across as a general dismissal of feedback - if mods/admins are going to do that, at least have the balls to be direct about it, rather than breed paranoia and give a bad impression of themselves and managements attitude, like that.

That is so very true.
Believe me, I posted today not out of malice or revenge. What an absurd suggestion. I have been a board member for 14 years. I had a few run ins with mods in that 14 years. Some cards/bans were fair and some were not.
But it is despicable for a mod to search a members 14 year history to score a point against him in that way.

devnull

KyussB wrote: »

Like I said earlier, when mods/admins come out with the axe grinding nonsense, posters don't have a way to differentiate where that's directed - and it just comes across as a general dismissal of feedback - if mods/admins are going to do that, at least have the balls to be direct about it, rather than breed paranoia and give a bad impression of themselves and managements attitude, like that.

Like it or not there are people on here who have an axe to grind, it's very few people but you are naive if you think such people do not exist because I have seen some of my fellow mods be victims of this kind of mentality and believe it or not it is not fair on volunteers who give up their free time and have to put up with a shed load of very personal abuse that a lot of people won't necessarily see.

There are some people on here who seem to think that whatever they give as feedback has to be implemented just because they said it and if it does not get implemented then they will almost say that is proof that things are unfair as boards didn't implement what they want. At the end of the day the Admins should and believe do listen to feedback, but ultimately Boards is a private website and the people in charge should have the final say.

10000maniacs wrote: »

That is so very true.
Believe me, I posted today not out of malice or revenge. What an absurd suggestion. I have been a board member for 14 years. I had a few run ins with mods in that 14 years. Some cards/bans were fair and some were not.
But it is despicable for a mod to search a members 14 year history to score a point against him in that way.

I don't think anyone is going to say someone with a minor number of infractions over 14 years is the same as someone with the same number of infractions over a 1 year period, because simply it isn't and if you think I am saying that I am simply not. But if someone has picked up a massive amount of infractions then obviously this is someone who has decided they do not wish to be bound by the rules of this site and if so why should we pander to them?

If you have an issue with a moderating action there is the Dispute Resolution Process which as a mod I'm a big fan of because it allows members who feel they have been wronged to have two avenues of appeal and it is all done publicly as well. I don't know of any other forum that has such a system as most will just ban you and any appeal has to be done in private.

KyussB

Okey, fair enough there will be some who have an axe to grind, of course - but please take on board the point that when mods/admins say that in the vague way they do (hinted accusation without specifics), and given the number of longtime members who've had mod run-ins at one point or another - it's pretty hard to differentiate where that's directed.

It may be true for some - but the way it's said is not constructive, and makes people feel like they're being fobbed off - even though that's not the mods/admins intent.

10000maniacs

devnull wrote: »

Like it or not there are people on here who have an axe to grind, it's very few people but you are naive if you think such people do not exist because I have seen some of my fellow mods be victims of this kind of mentality and believe it or not it is not fair on volunteers who give up their free time and have to put up with a shed load of very personal abuse that a lot of people won't necessarily see.

There are some people on here who seem to think that whatever they give as feedback has to be implemented just because they said it and if it does not get implemented then they will almost say that is proof that things are unfair as boards didn't implement what they want. At the end of the day the Admins should and believe do listen to feedback, but ultimately Boards is a private website and the people in charge should have the final say.



I don't think anyone is going to say someone with a minor number of infractions over 14 years is the same as someone with the same number of infractions over a 1 year period, because simply it isn't and if you think I am saying that I am simply not. But if someone has picked up a massive amount of infractions then obviously this is someone who has decided they do not wish to be bound by the rules of this site and if so why should we pander to them?

If you have an issue with a moderating action there is the Dispute Resolution Process which as a mod I'm a big fan of because it allows members who feel they have been wronged to have two avenues of appeal and it is all done publicly as well. I don't know of any other forum that has such a system as most will just ban you and any appeal has to be done in private.

I would not regard my infraction count as massive in that 14 years. But to use it to score a point and to suggest I have an axe to grind is not cool.

devnull

10000maniacs wrote: »

I would not regard my infraction count as massive in that 14 years. But to use it to score a point is not cool.

I wasn't talking about you, or your infraction count, I don't even know what it is, so any accusation of me trying to score a point against you has no merit on this I'm afraid.

10000maniacs

devnull wrote: »

I wasn't talking about you, or your infraction count, I don't even know what it is, so any accusation of me trying to score a point against you has no merit on this I'm afraid.

You were pretty close with my infraction record.
8 yellow, 4 reds and 2 bans (2 one day bans I think)

Discodog

devnull wrote: »

Like it or not there are people on here who have an axe to grind, it's very few people but you are naive if you think such people do not exist because I have seen some of my fellow mods be victims of this kind of mentality and believe it or not it is not fair on volunteers who give up their free time and have to put up with a shed load of very personal abuse that a lot of people won't necessarily see.

There are some people on here who seem to think that whatever they give as feedback has to be implemented just because they said it and if it does not get implemented then they will almost say that is proof that things are unfair as boards didn't implement what they want. At the end of the day the Admins should and believe do listen to feedback, but ultimately Boards is a private website and the people in charge should have the final say.



I don't think anyone is going to say someone with a minor number of infractions over 14 years is the same as someone with the same number of infractions over a 1 year period, because simply it isn't and if you think I am saying that I am simply not. But if someone has picked up a massive amount of infractions then obviously this is someone who has decided they do not wish to be bound by the rules of this site and if so why should we pander to them?

If you have an issue with a moderating action there is the Dispute Resolution Process which as a mod I'm a big fan of because it allows members who feel they have been wronged to have two avenues of appeal and it is all done publicly as well. I don't know of any other forum that has such a system as most will just ban you and any appeal has to be done in private.

So do you think the hundreds of people, that have been voicing opinions for months, are the disruptive few ? Of course those in charge have the final say just as they take the blame when things go wrong.

You do realise how this came about ? A thread was opened, in AH, about why the numbers were falling. Boards invited feedback & opened channels for it. For a while it felt like Boards were acting as a modern business & valuing customer input.

Now it's obvious that this wasn't universally popular & opposed by the old ban em & flog em brigade who are now, long after the process was started, voicing their opinions.

I was a big fan of the DRP. In those days I believed the Boards hype about fairness, openess etc. That was until I was in the DRP. Not that I have been there but it feels like being in Court but not being allowed a jury, a solicitor/barrister & witnesses. It is totally one sided. Add in the fact that Boards has to protect it's own, especially as they are volunteers & you quickly realise that you are on a hiding to nothing. But as my history shows I wasn't the disruptive influence that some claimed. I had a genuine grievance & thought the system would listen - deja vu ?

Whether you & those who share your view, like it or not things have changed. Boards had no competition, in the good old days. You could ban whomever you like & do as you please. Things are different now & Boards has to fight for customers - do you really think that the owners want to see the numbers constantly falling ?

Even O'Leary has admitted that he has to respect his customers. Will Boards be the last dinosaur ?

Beasty

Discodog wrote: »

Beasty. You thanked this post & you are the one who has been leading & guiding most of the feedback over the past three months. Do you believe that Boards are pandering to the whims of the few ? Do you believe that it's the tail wagging the dog ?

I thanked the post because I appreciated the contribution. Now I know people try to read stuff into why posts are thanked. I am not going to say anything further on the matter. Now please get back to the topic rather than querying why I thanked the post

"Thanks";)

devnull

Discodog wrote: »

I was a big fan of the DRP. In those days I believed the Boards hype about fairness, openess etc. That was until I was in the DRP. Not that I have been there but it feels like being in Court but not being allowed a jury, a solicitor/barrister & witnesses. It is totally one sided. Add in the fact that Boards has to protect it's own, especially as they are volunteers & you quickly realise that you are on a hiding to nothing. But as my history shows I wasn't the disruptive influence that some claimed. I had a genuine grievance & thought the system would listen - deja vu ?

You do realise that this is an internet discussion site and not a criminal court? I think it's great that Boards has a DRP system, as I've said before every other discussion forum I have used has nothing transparent like that as once you're banned everything is in private view. I'm not quite sure how someone can say that this is a bad thing?

Whether you & those who share your view, like it or not things have changed. Boards had no competition, in the good old days. You could ban whomever you like & do as you please. Things are different now & Boards has to fight for customers - do you really think that the owners want to see the numbers constantly falling ?

Everyone has different views and unfortunately whilst everyone has a right to air those views, you cannot expect to get your own way all of the time and sometimes you're just going to have to deal with things you don't like. At the end of the day the admins and the staff of Boards have a right to make their decisions as they see fit based on feedback they see fit and obviously not everyone is going to agree all the time.

Maybe Boards should do a survey with a prize draw and get everyone from all over the site to take part and see what people think overall rather than just people who post in feedback threads, as I've worked in companies with very high customer satisfaction rates but if you saw their feedback channels you'd think that everyone is happy because unhappy people tend to post negative feedback but happy ones almost never post compliments.

looksee

Discodog wrote: »

The whole point is that Boards said they wanted feedback. Contrary to some opinion a lot of the feedback has been from respected, long serving Boards members. Some of them held up little chance of any real change & maybe they were right.

Boards sound like Phillip & Liz being told that the monarchy need to open up the Palace & embrace social media. The thought of having to discuss things with dicks like us.

What has emerged is that Boards are a divided organisation. Some still see it as their private members club where people can either follow the rules or get lost. Others are realising that, heaven forbid, Boards needs customers - those adverts need clicks.

But whether we are dicks or not we are the enemy because we dare to suggest change. As dicks we are just doing this to cause trouble, it couldn't possibly be because we have contributed years to the site & want it to survive.

Boards will end up like the two old men in the Muppets reminiscing over the good old days when you just reached for the "Ban Hammer"

Are you suggesting here that the need for customers means that any kind of customers will do and if they come in and trash the place that's ok because we need customers? And if customers trashing the place puts off other customers, well ... um

Beasty

Discodog wrote: »

So do you think the hundreds of people,

Just to clarify, when I last checked I reckon there were around 340 posters contributing to this thread including Mods. CMods , Admins and Office staff

That's a big improvement on the Open discussion on Feedback, which has attracted less than 100 posters.

The benefit I've seen from this thread is we've had a much wider sample of the userbase contributing. Still a very small proportion of that userbase. Indeed I can currently see around 450 people viewing AH, and 5 and a half thousand across the site.

Now the benefit (over what we typically see in Feedback) is there is a much more balanced sample of the userbase in AH, but that still excludes a lot of posters who never go anywhere near the AH, or indeed Feedback

That is not to discount the feedback received here, but I would add that this thread has been a lot less "confrontational" than those we have seen in Feedback because we are getting a wider range of views. Yes hundreds have contributed, but I would suggest that a minority of those have actually had "material" complaints. And we are not seeing the views of those other 5,000+ currently on the site, and many thousands of others who may be doing other things like watching the Masters

Regardless we are listening, but we need to take care when taking decisions to ensure we don't end up upsetting more users than we placate. There is a classic recent example of this where comments were made about moving threads to Politics and it was suggested that it had been agreed that this would not be done. I had to step in and point out that there had been no such agreement. Posters were reading things into the thread because it suited them.

Now I can counter such things because I've been close to the thread throughout. I'm also good with numbers and can pull together stats that help highlight my points, rather than relying on some statement that may not reflect underlying facts

robarmstrong

Whilst it's great looking for Feedback, it's natural for people to want to know what happens with their Feedback.

I used to think things were overly-moderated but to be honest I've since changed my mind, it's more of an inconsistency with moderation which again is understandable considering the vast difference in personalities that post on Boards.

For Feedback to be really effective it's not just the onus on Boards, it's admins and it's mods to action, but I feel (maybe I'm wrong in feeling/thinking this) that this "sanitisation" is a joint effort from everyone, everyone is to do their part. A lot of posters are coming forward in criticism of a certain style of posting that seems to be carried by a minority of posters who seem to be protected (I'm using seem a lot here), and from what I've picked up is some mods have picked up on this posting style and done something about it in that particular thread or forum, but it's almost as if once the person utilizing that particular posting style is banned from that thread/forum, it's like they feel the problem has "left" them if that makes sense.

I like being on Boards, there are so many knowledgeable, fantastic and genuine people here, but when I hear Mod's or Admins admitting that forums such as AH (for example) are "difficult to moderate", it's a little sh!tty. Me, personally? I'd love to mod AH, to me it'd be like the proven grounds of moderation, if you make a good name for yourself in there with all that sh!te then you're golden, but if people are saying it's "difficult" then maybe they shouldn't be moderating that particular forum.

_Kaiser_

muffler wrote: »

Maybe Im getting too old for all this shit but with some current proposals/suggestions combined with previous changes and possibly more to come Im getting a feeling that there is an attempted element of rejigging everything we have come to love and appreciate. Leaving legal issues etc aside (which needed changing) what was wrong or bad about Boards or the way it was run and modded going back 5, 10 or 15 years ago? Very little would be be my opinion. To pull a quote from Dermot Bannon - it worked!

Back in the day we stood up to the few trolls and clowns and give as good as we got and if they didnt tow the line or tone it down then we got rid of them where necessary and in doing so made the place more enjoyable for the many, many decent posters out there. Regular low level trolls had the feedback forum as their little play area and how did that end up? They got their way and the forum is all but closed. The genuine posters who not only would have a query, complaint, feedback etc but would need others to help put their case forward on occasions are denied this now because of the actions of a few.

Sure, there are some basic areas and situations where modding could and should be more streamlined but there is no one size fits all and I personally dont see any rule book covering every situation that could arise in every forum or come remotely close to it. I believe we are merely pandering to the whims of a few in attempting to make the changes they are looking for. Certainly, there would be the odd thing that needs brushed up on but are we really seeing the tail wagging the dog here?

Instead of the pandering I think that we should (in a lot of situations) take a more of a "our house, our rules" stand and in the nicest possible way just tell these whingers that if they're not happy they can feck off and find somewhere else to vent. Yes, thats a crude way to put it but the underlying message would be along the lines of "here's a privately owned discussion site (for sensible and respectful discussions) and if you play nice you are more than welcome to stay. Play nasty...well dont let the door hit you on the arse on the way out"

There's a lot of truth in this IMO, and it's easy to see how it happened.

Boards is now a "legacy" format in an era of Twitter, Facebook and so on. In order to try to keep pace it changed from being a somewhat nerdy discussion site to one a lot more generalised and with service add-ons like the Talk To forums and Adverts.

For a while this worked but as the site grew and new users came in, so too did their attitudes. Gone went the more common-sense "It's the Internet. Don't take it too seriously and have a thicker skin" attitudes of the late 90s and in came this hyper-sensitivity and inability to deal with differing opinions... so in an attempt to try to please everyone - and keep the "sponsors" happy - we got increased moderation, extra layers of rules and limits on the discussions, and ultimately leading to the current situation.

Of course as this new wave spread over the site, many of the older hands said "feck this" and went elsewhere. The problem is the new wave are a lot more fickle and haven't stuck around either - or at least haven't made the same efforts to form communities that characterised the site in its heyday.

The bigger problem of course is that, in its attempts to both keep everyone happy and retain the users, the new corporate, sanitised and regulated structure of the site is actually pleasing no-one.. certainly not the "new wave" who are used to the pretty much unfiltered flow of the aforementioned Facebook and Twitter, and definitely not the "old hands" who remember (and miss) what the place USED to be like.

_Dara_

10000maniacs wrote: »

You need to change it to "Express your point with manners and courtesy". Not "Don't be a dick" surely? Its a family forum.

No it’s not. Nothing is done about people circumventing the swear filters. And thank FUCK for that.

What you’ve posted amounts to “Won’t somebody PLEASE think of the children!”. An inane angle, always.

Sanitisation not required. We’re big boys and girls.

sdanseo

10000maniacs wrote: »

You need to change it to "Express your point with manners and courtesy". Not "Don't be a dick" surely? Its a family forum.

Of all the things boards needs to be worried about, of all things to address - the odd bit of very mild mannered cursing is bottom of the list.

If a person can't handle the phrase "don't be a dick" - especially when it's intended in the best possible context like a charter - then they should probably just refrain from using the internet at all.

Irish Steve

I'm not sure that posting here in this thread is a good idea, given the hostility that is not far below the surface in some of the posts in this thread, but on the basis of "life" experience, I'm going to make a few comments, which may not please some people, but that's nothing new. Some of you may want to move on now to the next post, this is not going to be a short post!

I've been active on Boards for around 12 years, and active on "the net" in one shape or another for close on close on 30 years, back before it was the Internet, but there were computer services available like Compuserve, which had a massive worldwide forum style community on it for a long time. in the early days, it was text only, no graphics, or links to other pages or sites, and the rules that were enforced by moderators there were wide reaching, and if you broke them, there was very little option in terms of appeals, or dispute resolution procedures, or any of the other options that are available on the Boards.ie site.

My main interest on Compuserve was the Flight Simulation area, and there was a massive worldwide community active on a commercially sponsored forum, and I was a regular contributor to that forum, and after a number of years on line, I was offered a moderation role, which worked in a very similar way to the way moderation works on Boards.ie, there were several levels of moderation, with the ultimate responsibility being held by the Wizop. the Wizard operator, who in that case was the forum sponsor. Most of the time, it worked well, but there were times when things got difficult, with a huge international membership, there were times when a thread would go bad as a result of language issues, (everything was done on line in English) where people who's native language was not English got hold of the wrong end of the stick, and flame wars erupted, which on a bad day received posts faster than one person could read them, so moderating such a thread became a nightmare, for all sorts of reasons.

Eventually, Compuserve pulled the plug on their community services, and they either closed down or were migrated on to other platforms. The flight simulation systems were taken over by a new company, and over a period of time, I became more involved, and took on the role of No 2 to the owner, with all the responsibilities that involved. That was over 15 years ago, and I did that job for close on 10 years, it was voluntary, and at times was a massive time sink, especially when things went bad for whatever reason.

Why post all the above? On Boards,ie, I am simply a moderator of one forum, the Aviation and Aircraft forum, which is a specialised area with a relatively low level of activity most of the time. Very rarely, we get a sudden surge in activity, the most notable was 12 months ago, when the R116 helicopter crash happened, and at the time, it was a nightmare to moderate, between a shortage of moderators, inappropriate posts, wrong posts, false news posts and just plain offensive posts, moderating that thread alone became a full time activity for close on 24 hours, and eventually, some extra help was drafted in to help spread the load. It wasn't fun, or easy, when posts are arriving faster than you can read them, you don't have the luxury of being able to spend too long thinking about how appropriate they are or how to deal with them, and doing nothing is not an option.

Did we make mistakes while moderating under those sorts of pressures? Probably, trying to strike the right balance between conflicting opinions, and also at the some time trying to ensure that the (complex) site rules are being observed, it's almost inevitable that some mistakes were made, simply because of the pressure that people were under, and if the same were to happen next week, there's no guarantee that we wouldn't get it wrong going forward.

Recent events in other areas of the Internet are raising considerable doubts about the role and legal liability and responsibility of the service providers, which may result in some changes over time, it's beginning to look like a post on Facebook , or Whatsapp, or Twitter will be regarded as the actions of an individual, and the site that hosts the post will not be seen as the publisher, which may significantly change the legal implications of operating the sites, and that will also (hopefully) be the case for Boards.ie, if the indications of recent weeks are sustained, I'd like to hope that some of the more restrictive rules that have been the norm for Boards.ie may be relaxed in light of the changes that seem to be happening across the web.

Having said all of that, to make it clear that I'm not posting from a position of ignorance of how these things operate, some other comments are appropriate.

There are times when the numbers on line on boards.ie are way in excess of what some may think they are, in recent weeks, when the weather was doing its best to close the country down, there were times when there were in excess of 5000 users on line in just the weather forum, and most of them would have been looking at just one or two threads, and I know from talking to one or two people involved, and from my own experiences, moderating such threads at times of high activity are a total nightmare, no matter how good the moderators are, or how many are on line, simply because there are issues and problems caused by the volume and levels of activity, and Net based issues resulting from the peak loads.

At the same time, taking a real life experience, over a 30 year period, because of work commitments, I have spent a lot of time travelling on scheduled airline services. In that 30 years, I have only had cause to write negative feedback, or complaints to the service providers on less than 5 occasions, and that will influence how I perceive complaint issues, while any complaint is valid, it has to be taken and viewed in the light of how many users are using the service or facility, and how many complaints are being generated in comparison to the total service being provided.

Complaints can also be for a number of reasons. Some relate to a failure of some nature in the provision of the service, and they need to be looked at in an appropriate manner, but some complaints will be because the complainant believes the service should be provided in a different manner to the way it's being provided, but that may well not be a valid reason to change anything.

For a wide range of reasons, it may be completely impractical to change the service to meet the demands being made by a small but vocal minority. In an Airline context, providing business class service for everyone at Economy pricing would be wonderful, but any airline that tried to do it would not last long.

After Hours. I rarely go there these days, it's changed, not because Boards.ie has changed significantly, but because the Internet in general has changed, and the self imposed standards that used to be the norm in "adult" and reasonable discussion is no longer the norm, the standard of discussion and the tolerance of different opinions that was the norm even a few years ago is nothing like as prevalent as it used to be, and the result is the proliferation of many posts that are either offensive, inappropriate or unacceptable for other reasons, and the result of that is a higher level of moderation activity, not because the moderation is more aggressive than it used to be, but because the standard of posting has declined significantly.

You may choose to disagree with me, Boards.ie is not suffering a slow death of the forums, and it's certainly not suffering such an event as a result of changes in moderation, not in terms of the areas that I see on a regular basis. Yes, After Hours has changed, and not for the better, not because of moderation, but because of a decline in the posting standards, and an increase in the numbers of troll and similar posts, which are adding nothing to the discussion, and making them much less attractive to regular posters.

The Admins, in discussion with the site owner, and the Cmods and moderators, are looking at what needs to change to keep Boards.ie as a place worth visiting. I hope they don't change too much, the underlying concept of Boards.ie is not broken as such, while there may be some tweaks to be made around the edges, the fundamentals of the way that Boards.ie works is not as such broken, and for me, it doesn't need to be changed much.

And yes, in closing, I will give a big vote of thanks to the significant number of people across the site that give their time and skills to trying to ensure that the experience of the users of the site is a pleasant one, and provides them the information they came here looking for. A high percentage of the forums on the site are covering specific and specialised subjects, and moderating them requires specific knowledge and skills, it's very rare that wrong or bad information is provided over a wide range of subjects, and that is too often not recognised for the valuable service that it is.

jmayo

Discodog wrote: »

Neither do I but at least I am willing to have a go at finding an answer. You can't easily modify human behaviour. AH has been getting more serious for years. Suddenly trying to change it won't work without an alternative.

The Cafe doesn't work so people post in AH. You close the posts & people go elsewhere. You move them to somewhere that's about Politics & half will run away. Why not try something new & make it easy to discuss the news - isn't that what Boards is for - or should be ?

Who knows, if you turn Boards into a respected news discussion site, it might start growing numbers.

Politics forum was way more open and maybe there weren't huge contentious issues 12-15 odd years ago.
But the Politics forum turned into a complete circle jerk, especially the mods, where it appeared one had to debate constitutional matters, or debate to the level of political doctorate.
Hell when people wanted to discuss the behaviour and attitude of certain elected politicians it was moved to the Cafe.
It wasn't deemed worthy even though it was actually discussing politicians.
And Politics Cafe turned into an unmitigated disaster, particularly the mods throwing their weight around, getting too heavily involved in discussions and then bullying posters with opposing viewpoints.
And whoever appointed some of the mods to that forum were clueless as was subsequently proven by the performance of some new mods.

Now it is by invite only which really reeks of controlling the narrative, to use a new common buzzword.

A lot of the discussion now here in After Hours is not actually strictly Politics.
A rape case is not politics, the abortion referendum is.
A terrorist attack is not politics, going to war or introducing security measures would be.
They are current affairs topics, just like the antics of a certain cage fighter nowadays is not sport but a topic of current affairs.

And all these threads end up here because this place has become the catch all and some of these threads haven't got a natural home.
Also how can anyone start a thread in Politics Cafe unless they have passed the entrance criteria.

robarmstrong

Here is what I personally feel needs to change.

Add a "Current Affairs" section to AH with stricter moderating of posting styles (soap-boxers, flutes, trolls, etc). * by the way, whoever thought of the Current Affairs initially, that's an absolutely brilliant idea!!

Revamp/Improve the DRP process: Right now it's essentially "I will ignore all your valid points, wait for you to grovel and if you don't grovel I'm locking your thread". What's the point in having an admin review your DRP if you don't get to query with the admin? For example, I requested an admin to review my DRP and it was quite obvious they didn't bother their hole with any of my points and just closed it because it didn't suit them to keep it open and discuss. What's the point of having a "Dispute Resolution" if you can't actually dispute it properly?

Improve infraction process: This seriously needs a look into. Right now it's just so inconsistent it's beyond a joke and I know first hand so many people who are properly p1ssed at this due to being shut down over ridiculous infractions.

If any mod/admin can share light on this in particular I'd be extremely grateful to know how this makes sense.

Poster comes in soap-boxing -> people report/challenge said poster -> poster gets a mod warning (nothing else) -> poster goes quiet for a few pages then comes back in with the exact same posting style -> other posters challenge this individual -> other posters receive infractions for challenging/commenting this individuals posting style.

How on Earth is that fair? You're giving someone a warning about their posting style yet carding people who challenge/comment on that posting style? That would be like a referee in football warning (not carding someone) for tugging on your shirt, then booking you for challenging/commenting on the shirt tug in the first place? That makes no sense whatsoever.

Come on lads, I know there's a lot of work to be done but if your posters are more than willing to help improve things around here you've gotta meet us half way.