Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

1282931333470

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 84,194 ✭✭✭✭Overheal




  • Registered Users Posts: 3,448 ✭✭✭Dick phelan


    Boards just isn't as fun and lighthearted as before. Threads like "describe your first sexual experience with a movie title" and " I think my grinds teacher fancies me" were kind of what first drew me to the site. There's obviously real technical issues like the search function but the site has become far less jovial. When I said a year ago in the Biden thread that he was too old and senile I was met with accusations of defending rape and supporting racism. After the assassination attempt the number of posts openly wishing the assassination was successful and not being warned by Mods was shocking.

    It's still good for things like the Olympics and asking questions about non controversial topics but there's lots of people on boards including some Mods who really need to calm the **** down.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭Ezeoul


    I haven't read the last 20 pages or so, so bear with me, but here's a crazy thought I just had (at 2:30am).

    If the problems in CA are due to lack of moderation / not enough CA mods, then why not give every Boards CMod, and all Mods in the Social and Fun category the right to give on thread warnings in CA for ignoring of basic rules: e.g. racist, transphobic, flame baiting, etc? They've already passed the "mod suitability" process.

    It would immediately increase mod presence on CA, and at least some of the crap might get nipped in the butt before it begins.

    Such on thread warnings could be flagged to the official CA mods for review, (by the mod issuing the warning using the report function to flag it to them) with a view to the CA mods then issuing point warnings and threadbans, if required.

    Now I'm going to bed.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,881 ✭✭✭Polar101


    Well, it's Vanilla..

    Also, "most thanked post" is probably going to be something offensive.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,938 ✭✭✭Backstreet Moyes


    The Cmod in question was baiting a poster to ignore mod rules and to post something recently on a thread.

    The poster kept saying they couldn't discuss it but he kept on goading.

    If the poster listened to the Cmod and got banned, the person who told them to break the rules would be reviewing the ban in dispute resolution.

    Dispute resolution is a waste of time for everyone how it currently operates.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,938 ✭✭✭Backstreet Moyes


    7 minutes before this you are accusing a poster of soapboxing and their style of posting.

    Here you are a few minutes later baiting a poster to come back to cause arguments.

    Your post is a deliberate attempt to get a dig in at someone and to drag the thread off topic, it has nothing to do with feedback.

    Maybe you should revisit your own posting style before offering advice on other people's.

    This is a great example of what mods need to tackle, blatant attempts to cause arguments that end up spamming and ruining threads, tackling these would make things much easier for everyone.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,554 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    When it comes to HATE SPEECH, none should be tolerated, as used to be the case until fairly recently.
    Calling for the annihilation of ordinary Irish citizens, ordinary Israeli citizens or ordinary Palestinian citizens would rightly be sanctioned as hate speech but in the Ukraine/Russia forum calls for the annihilation of ordinary Russian citizens ORCS, is de jure, There are hundreds if not thousands of instances.
    Either hate speech is tolerated or it isn’t. There can’t be a situation where hate speech is acceptable against certain groups but forbidden against others.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,652 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    This is completely untrue and total misrepresentation.

    ORCs is used a term of abuse for the Russian officials, military and mercenary scum conducting illegal war on Ukraine, inflicting warcrimes and atrocities including looting, execution of civilians, rape and the kidnapping of children.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Administrators Posts: 54,021 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    Usually the existing mods will ask for more help. They'll give admin a list of potential candidates, we'll approve or deny each of them and they'll then decide who to approach.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 887 ✭✭✭OscarMIlde


    To be fair I think the original suggestion suggested that current affairs/politics would be excluded. It was to highlight fun threads.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,398 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    I don't agree with personal abuse.

    I've already explained why I don't think it's feasible to monitor thanks.

    I have explained.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,652 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    You haven't explained anything. You weren't asked about its feasibility.

    "You don't agree with personal abuse" is a lot way off agreeing that it should be sanctioned by mods.

    I think it is obvious now that multiple times you've dodged a straightforward question:

    So is thanking such a plainly abusive post being a dick or not? Yes or no?

    Your lack of answer speaks for itself and proves that such conduct is being a dick.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,398 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    Example 1 - A poster might discuss immigration accommodation, or lack thereof, without being racist

    Example 2 - A poster might discuss concerns about puberty blockers without being transphobic

    Not everything is black and white.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,347 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    For arguments sake,someone could say "the long term effects of puberty blockers aren't properly understood yet because it's a new treatment" and a standard enough reply to that from some would be "transphobic dog whistle".

    That type of thing isn't worth allowing in a reasoned debate.

    In the soccer forum you can't use phrases like WUM (Wind up merchant) or use snarky nicknames for players or pundits (calling Graeme Souness, Graeme SOURness for example) and warnings are handed out accordingly.

    A set of forbidden phrases that do nothing to enrich discussion could be set for CA as well.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,398 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    I said I wasn't engaging with you. That posts was a reply to another user and gave an example of how "offensive" is in the eye of the beholder.

    I asked both you and Suvigirl a question - a question on a discussion forum. I didn't use the term pile on and have made it clear I hate it, I don't think several people responding to, or disagreeing with, one poster is a pile up.

    I acknowledged I might be wrong when I asked, it turns out I was wrong.

    Report my posts or PM a mod if you think I set out to offend or insult you.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,398 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    You have complained about others piling up on you and of posters being run off threads. Yet you outright dismiss others who feel the same.

    That's what my point is - is it one rule for you and another for those who disagree with you. From this thread alone:

    And here you mention cliques, but take issue with someone else mentioning a cabal.

    Are you right when you see these things but others are wrong when they do? I'm genuinely curious here because you don't seem to see the disconnect here.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,398 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    I have reported several posts for personal abuse.

    I have reported two threads that were started to mock posters, and PMed mods and admins to alert them too. They were 2 posters I regularly disagree with, so I don't only have an issue with personal abuse of posters I agree with (just in case that's suggested). One of those threads referred to a poster as "handicapped".

    I have reported a doxxing thread, and PMed mods and admins to alert them.

    I have reported a post that made a sexual comment about a young murder victim.

    I do not condone personal abuse. I still do not think you can sanction thanks when only 10 will show and it would be a complete time sink.

    I'm happy for a mod, cmod or admin to confirm the above if you would like proof.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,554 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    Well perhaps the users of the term are using a term they don’t understand.
    It’s surprising to see defenders of clearly hateful dehumanising language.

    Post edited by SafeSurfer on

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,854 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    How about a clearly defined (and adhered to) Dispute Resolution Process developed in parallel with any charter edits.

    I think the process from a post being flagged all the way to a person being site banned (and everything in between) could be visually displayed in a single flow chart with the various steps/options involved that lead to action being taken.

    This may allow quicker interpretation of the process and an understanding that mod actions are reviewed as part of the escalation process. This can be accompanied in the background with specific instruction for new (and old mods) as to their duties at each level at which they may be involved.

    If this was done right it could help with Communication of the process to site users, Consistency among Mod/Admin personnel, Training for New Mods, and hopefully acceptance of end results.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,370 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    This is gas. So you consider that posters who 1) ask intelligent questions relating to a thread and 2) take the time to phrase them correctly, are 'soapboxing'!!! Have you got something against the careful & appropriate use of language?

    Maybe if it was written as "you ignored the question.. this ref is pure scutter and only the likes of yous will benefit. The fine gaelers are sh*tting their pants now as they don't want to lose another" then that would be acceptable??

    And of course, I was quite correct in my analysis, was I not?? Dropped like a hot spud :)



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,370 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    That's a great idea but not how it works in practice?? Look at any thread with a long list of banned posters, I instanced one yesterday with c80 and only a tiny handful will have been lifted.

    As an experiment recently, I tried this advice of yours re having a ban lifted. Assuming it was a mistake or over reaction, I politely requested that it be reversed. The response from the moderator involved (after several days) - this was 'taking the piss'!!

    If that was someone representing me (either in a paid or voluntary capacity) and they insulted customers like this - I'd either fire or demote them.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 39,339 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    The DR forum used to have a flowchart detailing how the process worked but that's one small thing lost in the transition to Vanilla.

    There isn't really a rigid process. If people keep accruing cards, they get bans which tend to increase in size as they accumulate, culminating in a permanent site ban. I'm not sure what more needs to be added or elucidated there. For all of the problems ailing this place, more legalism isn't a solution.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,124 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    No I don't accept. You continue the commenting about us , you can continue to engage . I don't want to continue this here , but if you keep bringing it up I will continue to be obliged to defend myself .

    You did say you were wrong . Well then don't use me or the other poster to illustrate your points . It wasn't your finest hour , Leg End Reject .



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,652 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    And where does the poster call for the annihilation of all russian citizens?
    That's an idiosyncratic definition of the phrase by one poster, it does not tally with Wikipedia's description of it or its common usage on boards or twitter.
    So you can find posters calling for the annihilation of the invading Russian forces, and those involved with the prosecution of the war… so that they cannot inflict more damage and war crimes on Ukraine.
    And you can find posters using the term ORCs, in the main referring to those same Russian forces… sometimes with a wider meaning, of Russians engaged in heinous, brutish nationalistic \ pro Putin \ anti Ukraine conduct.
    But that's a million miles away from your original claim.

    So where are these "hundreds if not thousands" of posts?

    They don't exist.

    It's surprising to see posters more concerned about the language used describing them, than the actual vile acts Russian forces are engaged in isn't it?

    This is the actual act they are referring to:

    Russia: 87-year old survivor of Stalin and World War 2 was assaulted by 'ordinary Russians' in downtown Moscow because he said Wagnerites are murderers.

    Calling the people who did this ORCs is what bothers you?

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,398 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    Can people not be wrong in an assumption or ask a question on a forum now?

    I've explained why I mentioned it again , just report my post.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,010 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    I'm not getting into a back and forth with you.

    I have already explained what I believe will help boards.ie continue.

    I have seen posters being run off threads by groups/ cliques and new people getting short shrift and not coming back. That is my opinion on a feedback thread.

    One person who accused people of pile on here because 4 people responded to them then decided to put what came up on screen as a billboard size poster of a Mod's comments from another thread here with the words……I dont want to get the boot in, but…and immediately proceeds to get the boot in.

    I also think you should re-read some of your own comments on this thread.



  • Administrators Posts: 14,294 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Big Bag of Chips


    @Goldengirl and @Leg End Reject that's enough. This thread is not the place to argue your points with each other.

    Move on now.



  • Administrators Posts: 14,294 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Big Bag of Chips


    Reminder to all...

    Feedback!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,398 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    I don't want a back and forth either, just an answer to explain how you differentiate between what you feel is a pile on and a clique, and what others see as a pile on and cabal.

    I've been asked to clarify many times in this thread so no double standard is in play.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,554 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    Being vehemently against hate speech against those you like but being in favour of hate speech against those you hate shows how much you miss the point of having a policy of not tolerating any hate speech or dehumanising language on Boards.ie at all.
    If you look at the dictionary definition of a certain derogatory word beginning with k which has been used by some to describe certain members of Irish society, one finds no reference to its abusive connotations. That a dictionary or Wikipedia doesn’t allude to the meaning hateful people use the term for is no defence against hate speech.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement