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

May I ask why do you think that is happening?

I was a mod here for nearly 20 years, (Jesus, that's a long time!) but if I was to guess it's:

Site wide rules/charter not being advertised on all fora.

Charters not being incredibly accessible (stickied).

Not enough mods.

Mods who are too long in the tooth, and need to move on, but can't as they feel a responsibility towards the site that it would crumble as there's no new mods coming in.

No direction from the top.

Personally, I stepped down as A: I didn't like the direction boards appeared to be going in. B: Didn't want to volunteer my time for a company that had stopped believing in the community aspect of boards. And C: I didn't have as much interest in the fora I modded, but that was only a small part of it.

I haven't let go of the boards past because I still believe it can be a force for good in the world. I really have got a lot out of boards over the years. Friendships, work, socialising, charitable events, and the very feel good nature of Santa Strike Force.

I'll be honest though, if we don't hear from the owners/management soon, I'll bow out of this feedback loop and know that the community aspect of boards, which I felt was central to the project, is dead in the water and I'll just deal with it and move on.

How can you bypass a threadban unless the mod lifts it, I assume posters adhere to threadbans "don't post in here again" given a list is in the the op, mods know who is banned

They are adhered to in the main but you do get the occasional posts in the original thread, and sometimes hijacking of another thread to make points about the topic they are banned from. Or the creation of a new thread, the discussion of which will naturally flow into the same territory.

I see it in the covid forum. At this stage, it should probably be reduced to a single thread, and a decision made as to whether threadbans from earlier major threads (such as the main thread, masks, vaccines) carry through or not, or just recent ones.

(I'm beginning to believe this thread should instead be called "The Vent" as it is mainly people venting their anger and frustration out at what boards.ie currently is, with no input from the owners/management)

A poster who won't answer a question has effectively answered it and proved your point.

So this is where context of the post that has been reported is important .

A mod who has no idea of what went before because they are so snowed under is not going to be able to moderate those posts nor apply sanctions to all the people who deserve them .

And back to the lack of mods again ..

It's not just clearer charters and clear rules .

Yes, both go hand in hand . That was my point .

Well, in fairness, a 1000 posts might be a bit much to expect someone to build before they can post in CA or Politics. But a couple of hundred might put off a lot of the re-reg trolls that are only here to disrupt.

However, a lot of the problems of the site aren't caused by that kind of shitposter. It's the accounts whose only reason to be here is to wind other posters up or to spread lies and bullshit, and some of those accounts have been active for years. They manage to stay just barely on the side of the rules as not to be banned. But they're no better than the average sad sack re-reg troll that tends to get nuked quickly because their trolling is less "sophisticated".

None of that type is actually interested in a discussion on anything, which is what the site was set up for.

On your point about community @Flaneur OBrien, I feel like some posters are allowed gang up and basically defame others here to a point where the poster feels they cannot post anymore .

I said this before and posters who can shrug this behaviour off , argued that it was part of life here and I should get over it .

I disagree.

I always believed that Boards was a safer place to post than it is in fact now ..with rules about how posters could discuss others .

How is it fair that a poster can have their name dragged through here and on other threads by posters who have told whatever lies they want about others under the guise of " just asking " and those named posters have no recourse except to report them and hope it will be actioned ?

One such is in a dispute presently , coincidentally resurrected to time with this thread , about a pretty blatant insulting post , that they dispute so they can again name a poster (as it happened the mod named the poster in the reply via pm which was published ) No chance that the transgression would not be actioned so why else bring it up .

Flinty mentioned these disputing threads .

Not all of them are on the level .

It's just another way for some to publicly goad another poster or to get at a mod .

The only difference is the mod can reply back .

And the poster just has to suck it up and wait for the next attack ?

Don't mention the ganging/piling up war. 😬😂

The thing is, and was demonstrated on this thread before it was deleted, some people think it's ok to do that if they disagree with a poster or dislike their posts, but woe betide anyone who does it to them.

This thread is full of demands for rules that apply to others, but not to them. Rules have to apply to everyone, and as I've said before (as have you today), the context needs to be taken into account. It's not fair that one poster snaps after repeated goading and gets warned, while the other continue, and that this is ignored when pointed out if that poster raises it with a mod or in DRP. If one person is sanctioned for being a dick, sanction all the dicks.

"Ignore" could be implemented better however. If a user puts another user on ignore, then they shouldn't see anything at all from them. The way it is currently, is that the "ignored" user's post is simply greyed out and can be clicked on if the temptation is strong enough.

It's still a good feature however and the tiny amount of ignored users I have in my own box makes this place a lot healthier to visit.

The ignore feature isn't even accessible from Android from what I can see.

If a politician is corrupt or a womaniser, does that mean all his supporters are corrupt or womanisers ??

No. It means that they support a corrupt womaniser.

In the case of Trump, we have a convicted fraudster and an adjudicated rapist (and that's just for starters) that a lot of people are willing to support and that isn't really much better.

Talking about others believing the mud that's slung instead of their own experience with a poster and their own judgement …