(Site is a graveyard - How can boards save itself?) Any update?

JP Liz V1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529210#Comment_122529210

Thanks for your honesty

Big Bag of Chips

Weepsie has been sitebanned on points.

thomas 123

I read a comment here that said users should paint a picture of what they are reporting by linking multiple comments - I think that is insane to put on a user. I’ve only ever reported individual posts post by post but it explains why I’ve gotten a few questionable “uncivil” messages, obviously the more effort put into a report the higher the chances of getting a desired outcome.

question:

Are over zealous reporters sanctioned for wasting moderator time at all?

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122528557#Comment_122528557

a completely fictitious example was entirely the point. But I think you knew that and are just looking to nitpick

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529362#Comment_122529362

I think that was suggested in the context of trying to show a pattern of posting where a single post might be ok but as a repeated pattern derails threads. Not something expected for most reporting situations.

flyer_query

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122525305#Comment_122525305

thats interesting to read.

Spear

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529362#Comment_122529362

Yes, there's been a few instances where users have abused the report post option to generate needless amounts of spurious reports, e.g. for minor/borderline issues or just being petty. It's not common and doesn't get entertained.

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529028#Comment_122529028

then is this not a complete misrepresentation of your own??

your OWN representation of the exchange doesn’t indicate where the link got shared:

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122528854#Comment_122528854

care to revise, post links?

thomas 123

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529381#Comment_122529381

glad to hear it.

Furze99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122527865#Comment_122527865

I think we can usefully ignore the first part of above, the insult.

But the latter part is I believe pertinent to this thread. You refer to a fairly short lived thread on a referendum proposal and that I "went into that thread suggesting there was some conspiratorial motive for those changes."

This is the thread in question:

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058340381/eu-patent-court-referendum

It would be useful if those interested in the ills of boards go read the few pages of this and make up your own minds as to what the moderators on that thread and AWEC here allege as regards my participation in it.

• it starts by other posters claiming they will vote no to give the government a kicking. Nothing to do with me, I never offered this opinion at all.
• it's a Politics thread. I ask very simple & relevant questions: whose benefit is the proposed constitutional change for, who is lobbying for it etc
• there's a polite exchange of views back & from without this being answered. I'm seeking information in perfect good faith and with moderate language throughout.
• then poster/ moderator ancapailldorcha (again) steps into the frame on page 3 and twists the narrative by stating "It sounds like you're trying to spread some sort of conspiracy narrative as opposed to educating yourself."
• this was a projection entirely on the moderators part, an assumption of my motives. I clearly stated that I have an interest in intellectual property rights.
• on page 4 moderator Seth Brundle comes and states - use Google, don't drag a thread off topic (which I wasn't) because you don't understand, don't ask questions in other words. What an extraordinary statement for a moderator on a politics forum!
• we debate and work out a few points over next few posts with ancapailldorcha rowing in again until we get to
• page 5 when moderator Quin_Dub jumps in and says essentially you've asked too many questions, thread ban.
• the thread peters out as the government decides that running this referendum is unwise at the moment for unexplained reasons.

There were several other moderators posting on this short thread which was completely over moderated for unexplained reasons. On the basis of this AWEC claims I was 'soap boxing' and that I went in with a 'conspiratorial motive'. Complete fabrication. I challenge anyone to read that thread and point out where I posting in an unacceptable manner, it was all to the point of the thread and in moderate language, no slurs or attacks on other posters. If I asked for clarification, it was because the basic questions of why we holding this referendum were not answered and where they were, we were teasing out the reasons. Is that not what a politics forum on boards is for?

The conspiracy motive was nothing to do with me, that was a pure invention on ancapailldorcha's part.

Why would anyone bother to engage with topics on boards when moderators treat a poster like this, not one but three or four. That thread is a disgraceful example of moderator shaping and bias.

As for 'soapboxing', take a look at the refugee/ asylum thread any day over the past several weeks and it's bloody obvious who the 'soapboxers' are and the chief protagonist is.

But I wouldn't argue to ban them, let them at it. They hold honest views if you take them at face value. But don't go then threadbanning others of honest views who choose to challenge the 'soapboxers'.

thomas 123

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529432#Comment_122529432

Re the first part . I’ve been pinged by beasty for much much less, I don’t argue back but it’s pretty poor coming from a representative of the site - it really turns you off taking part in any conversations.

JP Liz V1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529344#Comment_122529344

Wow is a complete site ban not a bit harsh

Big Bag of Chips

We do not comment on individual cases but as the first line of that quoted posts states he was banned on points. Which means he accumulated at least 5 warning points which automatically triggers a temporary siteban.

Leg End Reject

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529493#Comment_122529493

Can you give any clarification on this?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122528305#Comment_122528305

On this basis I, and many others, could be banned despite never receiving a warning.

JP Liz V1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529493#Comment_122529493

How long is temporary?

How many points gets you banned?

JP Liz V1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529261#Comment_122529261

Should we do AMA with a top mod or the top brass @Boards.ie: Odhran @Boards.ie: Mike 😁

pjohnson

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529432#Comment_122529432

You were soapboxing as you frequently do.

This has been explained to you within that very thread and its been explained to you in this thread before aswell.

Big Bag of Chips

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529508#Comment_122529508

People on this thread have repeatedly called for enforcement of the already existing rules. It is a site rule to post in a civil manner, and we also have a swear filter.

After feedback on this thread I started applying the rules. The posts that were warned were deemed to be uncivil and trying to get around the swear filter.

You haven't been sitebanned on points since no need to worry about what "might have been". Moderators use their discretion, all the time.

thomas 123

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529549#Comment_122529549

do you moderate on here?

pjohnson

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529561#Comment_122529561

No but I can understand the rules properly.

thomas 123

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529571#Comment_122529571

what’s soapboxing then in relation to what the other poster is talking about? Is it like having an opinion? Because it’s mad to me that someone discussing a topic they have an interest in wouldn’t have some sort of agenda or stake in the conversation - otherwise why the hell would they be there in the first place?

nachouser

Honestly, do the new accounts asking questions and the old accounts airing grievances add anything useful to the thread? Dragging up old grudges on this thread is pointless. Let mods do their unpaid job and get on with it and we should all get over it. Don't break the rules and you won't get modded.

Spear

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529509#Comment_122529509

It lasts until the points expire.

We use the default Vanilla settings, so three active warning points gets your account restricted (shows avatar jailbars on mobile, can't start new threads etc), and at 5 active warning points the account is sitebanned until they expire.

https://success.vanillaforums.com/kb/articles/180-community-rules-warnings

Yvonne007

I've just been given a warning for speaking about how another poster had blatently lied in a thread.

It was an attack the post not the poster warning.

I'm not quite sure how you can attack the post without being at least slightly derogatory against the person who wrote it. I get full on personal abuse is out of line, but saying that consistent lying makes someone look silly surely doesn't constitute a personal attack?

If that's against the rules, fair enough, but it is inconsistently applied.

Any of the American politics threads in the Current Affairs section would have every contributer banned.

JP Liz V1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529594#Comment_122529594

I see so vanilla automatic, is this good or bad? How do posters and mods feel? Can it be appealed, if so how?

Sorry Spear has become my AMA 😉😊

Irish Aris

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529605#Comment_122529605

I see it as a different approach to the yellow and red cards we used to have.

I have seen such warnings with points in the DRP.

Spear

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529605#Comment_122529605

At level 3 at least, they can still be appealed on DRP, though myself and Shield will need to start the thread for them to accommodate it.

Once sitebanned, there's nothing they can do with their main account directly. They can still email the hello@boards.ie address, or there's been a few who've created a second account to appeal. There's no prison forum that would have allowed this in the past, and admins have been somewhat tolerant of new accounts for the sake of appealing only.

Big Bag of Chips

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529605#Comment_122529605

5 points results in an automatic siteban. You get plenty of warning and opportunity to change your post my style before you accumulate enough for a siteban.

Leg End Reject

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529558#Comment_122529558

That's all fair enough but not everyone will have read this thread and know that was mentioned. I have read it and didn't realise this was being implemented.

archfi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529600#Comment_122529600

Any of the American politics threads in the Current Affairs section would have every contributer banned.

Have to agree with this, the US threads in CA are littered with personal attacks since each of those threads started.

gossamerfabric

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122518648#Comment_122518648

Jesus Christ!(sic): Leviticus, the most old testament of the old testament books in the Bible where a vengeful God would smite you for just about anything and the poster is using it to push an open-borders agenda.

pjohnson

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529676#Comment_122529676

Might be a good idea to make an announcement about this @Big Bag of Chips

JP Liz V1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529757#Comment_122529757

Is there a general mod announcement thread or is that only in the mod cave @Spear

Leg End Reject

I think the swear filter should just be abandoned, casual cursing is part of our vocabulary. I find it a bit schoolmarmish to warn posters for this.

TheChrisD

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529558#Comment_122529558

To retroactively apply a new moderation standard is a bit of a low-blow though, especially if the posts are somewhat dated and/or have been ignored under previous criteria.

nachouser

Very demanding thread now;-)

eightieschewbaccy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529558#Comment_122529558

Honestly the fact that swearing is one of the things being picked up, doesn't feel like it's addressing concerns at all. I don't believe anyone on thread was concerned about radical swearing as an issue. The fact that it seemed to outright surprise @awec did make me laugh though. I get that there's an element of stress trying to work out how to approach some kind of a different boards though so appreciate that this is something you're working out.

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529706#Comment_122529706

There was a no open boarders agenda.

Big Bag of Chips

I went back to check the warnings given the other day because I couldn't remember them. There were 3 posts relevant to this discussion. All were given zero points, so an instruction/request rather than a warning. All were for being uncivil. And yes, the language used in those posts was uncivil and unnecessarily aggressive.

A notice at the end of the thread told posters to have a look through the thread to see what types of posts would be clamped down on. Posters asked for extra moderators in CA to help keep some control. People have overwhelming voted for there to be a clamp down on bickering, aggressive posting, derailing threads. Aggressive language and aggressive language directed at another poster falls under this. Posters are now aware to try to be more civil in their replies. I would say a huge majority of CA posters saw that thread and saw the notice at the end of it.

Ahwell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122530094#Comment_122530094

Aggressive language directed at another poster…yeah, absolutely rightly shouldn't be allowed. Aggressive language per se…I'm not so sure really. Did people really vote overwhelmingly for this? Plus, how is "bickering" being defined. You have used the term in a warning on this thread. Yeah, OK these posts may have been off-topic in a feedback thread, but I'm not sure they were "bickering".

Backstreet Moyes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122529600#Comment_122529600

I am assuming it's for a response to the poster who has blatantly lied about multiple studies in the past few days.

Then when called out says it was a mistake.

I would think blatantly posting lies to rile people up would be more deserving of mod action myself.

Leg End Reject

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122530094#Comment_122530094

I've had a look at all the posts that were warned for swearing, none of them used it to direct aggressive language towards another poster (in my opinion). It was simply the colloquial use we're all familiar with.

Now, if that's the new standard of moderation we're all going to have to adapt to it, but with the shortage of moderators that's been discussed here is this new style of moderation sustainable? All the extra reports and mod time required to follow this up seems a tad redundant to me. And who is going to report a post because someone used a variant of a word to bypass the swear filter?

Not everyone reads or posts in CA either, so a warning there isn't of much use to them.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122530690#Comment_122530690

I didn't even know there was a new standard of moderation on swear words until I accidentally came across this thread.

Furze99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122530215#Comment_122530215

I certainly don't recall any overwhelming vote of any sort, or any vote at all for that matter. What's this all about?

What gets posters riled is inconsistent and biased (BBOC uses the term discretion) moderation.

Debating any issue will inevitably result in a certain level of dispute (bickering if you wont) and that is surely fine, discussing points, learning a bit, changing views.

What is proposed above is more 'choose you own expletive' moderation, not less moderation as the site needs.

We have too much over moderation and I've instanced it above. We have posters engaging civilly and being warned and banned because moderators accuse them of being off topic, in their opinion (ie discretion or bias). We have long lists containing many ordinary decent posters thread banned off threads, total opposite of the basic concept of boards. This type of moderation is a failure.

We have a voluntary moderation group that seem to find it impossible to simply say they made a mistake, apologise etc. Instead they circle the wagons, palm posters off with excuses and dig ever deeper holes.

I and I'm sure the vast majority appreciate the work that moderators put in but that doesn't justify incompetence, bias and abuse of those positions.

Leg End Reject

One poster did suggest that swearing should be moderated but I don't recall it getting much traction.

I can't remember who it was and there's no way to search for it apart from the reading the thread from the start.

Goldengirl

Saying another poster who is not even posting here is lying on a thread somewhere is so unfair , those that do this sort of thing are exactly the posters that should be sanctioned I think .

It's not be very fair to be saying that about a poster here on this thread especially when they are not here to defend themselves

Notice these posters using this feedback thread to air grievances about petty squabbles and every warning they get that they think they shouldn't .

There is no hope of improving or suggesting improvements if people that petty are allowed to rail continually on feedback .

JohnJoFitz

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122532030#Comment_122532030

I got thread-banned for calling out that absolute spoofer. You were doing plenty of petty squabbling in this thread yourself after a poster asked you a simple question.

The Black Oil

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122523247#Comment_122523247

The Group A/B thing I think also does a disservice to who are not in A or B, or who don't feel they neatly fit. It bothers me how binary the world feels at times. It's not new, it goes back a while, but I think the web has heightened a sense of bitterness that's quite normal in public discourse. Coupled with media coverage where being first can go ahead of accuracy, if it bleeds, it leads and all that. The other thing the binary view does, imo, is create a sense of hassle. Hassle that you'll be seen to or that you must support A or B. We can all take a certain amount of non-personalised flack against our arguments, I think. It's when it becomes exhausting or tiresome to think about participating that gets frustrating. Or, do we even say, yes, I'll concede that or you've changed my mind, thanks?

I found it interesting that the ignore feature came up earlier. I never made use of this on the current or old version of boards. It didn't appeal to me. No such thing exists if you're driving, all you can do is reduce risk and not get sucked into other people's drama.

Goldengirl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122533320#Comment_122533320

I have a right to answer and defend against accusations which were incorrect . Those questions were at least made straight to my face . Big difference saying someone outside of here on another thread is" a liar . "

If you got threadbanned for" calling someone out "you must have said something pretty objectionable . But its someone else's fault , is it , JohnJo ?

You have come on here to air your own petty grievance ...perfectly illustrating my point .

Furze99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122533326#Comment_122533326

I think you are correct - peoples views on most matters are not black & white. They are not binary or in group A or B exclusively. Based on their life experiences they have one opinion on one matter that might be considered very liberal but conservative on other issues.

And therein lies an issue with both how posters interact but also how moderators take a view of posters. I can only properly speak for myself but it's clear to me that several moderators have formed an opinion of me and slotted Furze into one category. They have jumped to conclusions and failed to correct their prejudices. But I also have a good idea from others that they experience the same type of categorisation.

What will or can be done about it? So that posters who contribute from all sides of an issue can do so without looking over their shoulders continuously. Who mods the mods in any effective way?