More AH mods

OldMrBrennan83

batgoat wrote: »

Why exactly does the moderator's name matter?

It's more that it's just another piece in the whole attitude jigsaw.

Fighting Tao

Patww79 wrote: »

Yeah belittle it. That gets everyone on the same page.

In fairness, off all the complaints it can’t be taken seriously. As the mods have stated, the names are not hidden. Anyone that’s unhappy is not being forced to be here...unless Russian or Israeli bots hat have to stand up for the mother countries :pac:

droidman123

batgoat wrote: »

It's in reference to this thread and the mod warning in first post.
https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057943294/1

Think the name changing remark was in relation to thread titles changing rather than mods.

I know boards is known as a "bizarre" site bit the warning on the first post in that thread beats everything..."will be severely punished" that takes lunacy to new heights even for boards

batgoat

droidman123 wrote: »

I know boards is known as a "bizarre" site bit the warning on the first post in that thread beats everything..."will be severely punished" that takes lunacy to new heights even for boards

Think that was modified after because of the fact a poster was outraged by the existence of the warning which in itself is reasonable. Hence the thesaurus alternatives as well.

droidman123

batgoat wrote: »

Think that was modified after because of the fact a poster was outraged by the existence of the warning which in itself is reasonable. Hence the thesaurus alternatives as well.

I meant the actual warning of "will be severely punished"not the content of the thread,which as a side note i think is sick even for this cesspit of a site

batgoat

droidman123 wrote: »

I meant the actual warning of "will be severely punished"not the content of the thread,which as a side note i think is sick even for cesspit of a site

Yes, "severely punished" was a modification to the existing warning.

Pawwed Rig

Patww79 wrote: »

It's more that it's just another piece in the whole attitude jigsaw.

What jigsaw?? :pac:


As I said repeatedly the mods name is irrelevant. It is the warning that should be heeded regardless of who issues it.


What exactly do people want to say that the mods are stopping them from saying? The warning is saying to not associate paedophilia with homosexuality. Hardly a difficult instruction to follow I would have thought.

I am confused now as to what is actually being looked for here.

Pawwed Rig

droidman123 wrote: »

"will be severely punished"

Probably a semi joke as the worst that they can do to you is ban you from After Hours.

kneemos

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

What jigsaw?? :pac:


As I said repeatedly the mods name is irrelevant. It is the warning that should be heeded regardless of who issues it.


What exactly do people want to say that the mods are stopping them from saying? The warning is saying to not associate paedophilia with homosexuality. Hardly a difficult instruction to follow I would have thought.

I am confused now as to what is actually being looked for here.

Exactly. What would we know.

droidman123

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Probably a semi joke as the worst that they can do to you is ban you from After Hours.

Its irrelevant whether it was a joke or not,it sums up the mentality of the ethos of this site

Pawwed Rig

droidman123 wrote: »

Its irrelevant whether it was a joke or not,it sums up the mentality of the ethos of this site

The 'mentality' of After Hours is light chat/not too serious. The ethos of other forums (politics for example) is serious and higher brow. CVPL is light hearted, PI and RI are serious. Different sections of the site have different mentalities/madates/ethos.

Again what is it you are looking for? If you tell me I might be able to help

Skylinehead

Patww79 wrote: »

Yeah belittle it. That gets everyone on the same page.

If that's your problem, I don't care.

You're symptomatic of AH actually. Far too serious.

droidman123

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

The 'mentality' of After Hours is light chat/not too serious. The ethos of other forums (politics for example) is serious and higher brow. CVPL is light hearted, PI and RI are serious. Different sections of the site have different mentalities/madates/ethos.

Again what is it you are looking for? If you tell me I might be able to help

What makes you think i am looking for something?i made a comment about a mod warning containing the words " will be severely punished" why would that make you think i am looking for something? Those fantasy island words in the warning tells me everything i already knew

Pawwed Rig

droidman123 wrote: »

What makes you think i am looking for something?i made a comment about a mod warning containing the words " will be severely punished" why would that make you think i am looking for something? Those fantasy island words in the warning tells me everything i already knew

Ok. Noted for future reference. Thanks for your input

kneemos

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Ok. Noted for future reference. Thanks for your input

I suspect your response is passive aggressive,but this is the attitude to have when folk give feedback.
Not tell them they're wrong.

Pawwed Rig

kneemos wrote: »

I suspect your response is passive aggressive,but this is the attitude to have when folk give feedback.
Not tell them they're wrong.

Not really. I am just trying to understand the feedback. The poster said they are not looking to change anything so what else is there to do but note the comment and move on.
Happy to hear all constructive feedback.

_Kaiser_

Nixonbot wrote: »

If that's your problem, I don't care.

You're symptomatic of AH actually. Far too serious.

This idiotic argument again. AH is supposed to be fun! *stamps foot*

AH is the most popular forum on this site and serves as a catch all location for everything from what I had for dinner, to gangland crime, politics, and social and cultural discussions. That's the reality.

By all means, feel free to move threads to the rabbit's warren of quiet/abandoned sub-fora if you want (or create the "Current Affairs" forum off AH that was talked about a while back), but stop this condescending, insulting, tantrum-throwing because the users aren't conforming to your idea of what AH is/should be.. Worse again that you're a Mod of that forum.

Want to know what's wrong with the management of this site? That attitude right there and those who support it!
But as expected, the wagons have been circled - no surprise really given the same "process" that selects characters like Nixon here is so broken that only those with similar attitudes will be "promoted" - and thus the circle continues.

I know I'm wasting my time here (as someone else suggested , the feedback process is by the mods, for the mods) but I don't like seeing abuse of authority or disrespect for the users who generate the content on this site either.

Captain Obvious

This thread is like a clone of the old PC "feedback" threads. Am I wrong in thinking closing the old PC forum just moved the problem to AH? Is there any reason to think the same thing won't happen in a new Current Affairs forum?

_Kaiser_

Captain Obvious wrote: »

This thread is like a clone of the old PC "feedback" threads. Am I wrong in thinking closing the old PC forum just moved the problem to AH? Is there any reason to think the same thing won't happen in a new Current Affairs forum?

Maybe it's a clone of those threads because the same underlying issues exist to be fair.

PC v1 had a lot of issues - notably that the regulars of the "grown up" forum had issues with it taking traffic away from what they saw as "their" domain - but if the complaint from the Mods is "I want AH to be fun and don't wanna mod these other threads!!!" then A) they step down because that's what AH is or they get on with it and stop belittling the users.

Can't have it both ways and expect no-one to complain.

Stheno

Captain Obvious wrote: »

This thread is like a clone of the old PC "feedback" threads. Am I wrong in thinking closing the old PC forum just moved the problem to AH? Is there any reason to think the same thing won't happen in a new Current Affairs forum?

I'd say essentially yes. Part of the issue is that contentious threads caused polarised opinion and that doesn't encourage any sort of meaningful debate so the underlying issue of how to deal with that will remain regardless of the forum such threads are posted in.

Stheno

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Maybe it's a clone of those threads because the same underlying issues exist to be fair.

PC v1 had a lot of issues - notably that the regulars of the "grown up" forum had issues with it taking traffic away from what they saw as "their" domain - but if the complaint from the Mods is "I want AH to be fun and don't wanna mod these other threads!!!" then A) they step down because that's what AH is or they get on with it and stop belittling the users.

Can't have it both ways and expect no-one to complain.

The AH miss don't want to mod political threads as those are excluded from the AH charter.

Why would you sign up to mod something contrary to the forums charter?

Skylinehead

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

This idiotic argument again. AH is supposed to be fun! *stamps foot*

AH is the most popular forum on this site and serves as a catch all location for everything from what I had for dinner, to gangland crime, politics, and social and cultural discussions. That's the reality.

By all means, feel free to move threads to the rabbit's warren of quiet/abandoned sub-fora if you want (or create the "Current Affairs" forum off AH that was talked about a while back), but stop this condescending, insulting, tantrum-throwing because the users aren't conforming to your idea of what AH is/should be.. Worse again that you're a Mod of that forum.

Want to know what's wrong with the management of this site? That attitude right there and those who support it!
But as expected, the wagons have been circled - no surprise really given the same "process" that selects characters like Nixon here is so broken that only those with similar attitudes will be "promoted" - and thus the circle continues.

I know I'm wasting my time here (as someone else suggested , the feedback process is by the mods, for the mods) but I don't like seeing abuse of authority or disrespect for the users who generate the content on this site either.

I respect those who deserve it. Complaining about name changes is completely on the other end of the spectrum.

The circle of **** arguments does indeed continue. Not worth anyone's time.

_Kaiser_

Stheno wrote: »

The AH miss don't want to mod political threads as those are excluded from the AH charter.

Why would you sign up to mod something contrary to the forums charter?

The site depends on content generated by its users and no longer has enough of them to justify the maze of sub-fora (isn't that why a review of the number of forums was conducted last year?).

As such AH has over time evolved from the "random fun and silliness" forum it started as, to arguably the main page for the site. As the average age of the users has increased over time, so too have the topics being discussed to include the aforementioned politics, current affairs and social issues.

Now, the management team can lament this change and belittle the users, or they can adapt to the current reality of the forum, or they can shunt threads they don't like off to other forums, but I dare say that'll only hasten the decline of the user base which presumably is why this "do nothing" approach has been taken in the last 2 years.... but that then generates issues like are being discussed here.

However, as I said above, given that this site absolutely depends on its users for content and revenue, it should be led by those users, not the small cadre of Mods.

_Kaiser_

Nixonbot wrote: »

I respect those who deserve it. Complaining about name changes is completely on the other end of the spectrum.

The circle of **** arguments does indeed continue. Not worth anyone's time.

In your opinion.. however you seem completely unable to grasp that there is more at play here than just your opinion, and that as a Mod you have a different level of responsibility or accountability - how else are you supposed to be listened to, or be able to sanction others.

I've no idea of your age or background, but it strikes me that someone with your dismissive and condescending attitude (and you're not the only one to be fair to you) is absolutely the wrong choice to be a modding a forum - especially as you have issues with what the users post because it disagrees with your view of what the forum is.

It would be worth reviewing the Mod selection process in my view, because the current one isn't cutting it.

Skylinehead

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

In your opinion.. however you seem completely unable to grasp that there is more at play here than just your opinion, and that as a Mod you have a different level of responsibility or accountability - how else are you supposed to be listened to, or be able to sanction others.

I've no idea of your age or background, but it strikes me that someone with your dismissive and condescending attitude (and you're not the only one to be fair to you) is absolutely the wrong choice to be a modding a forum - especially as you have issues with what the users post because it disagrees with your view of what the forum is.

It would be worth reviewing the Mod selection process in my view, because the current one isn't cutting it.

Well that's the argument you're latching onto. In fact, you'll latch onto any pathetic argument that tries to paint a bad light on us. That's why I'm dismissing you, because I know I can't win. So why should I waste effort trying to?

If the admins want me gone, so be it. Doesn't seem to be the case. As I said, I don't care if you do. It's an irrelevance to me.

Remember, and thankfully, you don't speak for the regular users.

_Kaiser_

Nixonbot wrote: »

Well that's the argument you're latching onto. In fact, you'll latch onto any pathetic argument that tries to paint a bad light on us. That's why I'm dismissing you, because I know I can't win. So why should I waste effort trying to?

If the admins want me gone, so be it. Doesn't seem to be the case. As I said, I don't care if you do. It's an irrelevance to me.

Remember, and thankfully, you don't speak for the regular users.

Persecution complex and ignoring of the actual points aside, it would seem that a lot of the users DO have concerns which is why these issues keep cropping up.

But you have only validated my opinion on your level of suitability and maturity with your reply. Pathetic indeed!

kneemos

Nixonbot wrote: »

Well that's the argument you're latching onto. In fact, you'll latch onto any pathetic argument that tries to paint a bad light on us. That's why I'm dismissing you, because I know I can't win. So why should I waste effort trying to?

If the admins want me gone, so be it. Doesn't seem to be the case. As I said, I don't care if you do. It's an irrelevance to me.

Remember, and thankfully, you don't speak for the regular users.

Stall the bus for a minute. If you are a mod why doesn't it say so under your name?

Pawwed Rig

Ok. So to address the feedback I am seeing.


Re mods changing their names - That is not going to change as the mods are as entitled as anyone to enjoy the site. They only mod 1 forum not the site. Putting restrictions on mods would make a difficult recruitment process next to impossible.


Re After Hours hosting political threads - these are more suitable elsewhere and should be moved as such. This is what Political Cafe was set up for so I'm not sure why there would be an issue moving them there.



Is it really important for a user to know that they are posting in x forum rather than y forum?

Skylinehead

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Persecution complex and ignoring of the actual points aside, it would seem that a lot of the users DO have concerns which is why these issues keep cropping up.

But you have only validated my opinion on your level of suitability and maturity with your reply. Pathetic indeed!

Seems we're wasting our time here, which of course I knew already. It's not a persecution complex, I don't feel under threat whatsoever from you, but it is telling. Your point was that we shouldn't change our names, which is hilariously weak.

kneemos wrote: »

Stall the bus for a minute. If you are a mod why doesn't it say so under your name?

It does.

Mod: After Hours, Soccer, ZTest

Stheno

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

The site depends on content generated by its users and no longer has enough of them to justify the maze of sub-fora (isn't that why a review of the number of forums was conducted last year?).

As such AH has over time evolved from the "random fun and silliness" forum it started as, to arguably the main page for the site. As the average age of the users has increased over time, so too have the topics being discussed to include the aforementioned politics, current affairs and social issues.

Now, the management team can lament this change and belittle the users, or they can adapt to the current reality of the forum, or they can shunt threads they don't like off to other forums, but I dare say that'll only hasten the decline of the user base which presumably is why this "do nothing" approach has been taken in the last 2 years.... but that then generates issues like are being discussed here.

However, as I said above, given that this site absolutely depends on its users for content and revenue, it should be led by those users, not the small cadre of Mods.

I don't really think where the threads are posted is a major factor, when the original cafe was open to all the same issues were there with entrenched views

Nor do I think the current cafe structure works. Some long term solution needs to be found imo