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

Goading of posters?

Options
  • 26-05-2015 7:49pm
    #1
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭


    Hey, I'll keep this brief. There's been an ongoing thing of referring to posters in threads they haven't posted in.

    Such as "Oh, Strobe will be along any second to say the things he normally says, the big fool. I pre-emptively laugh at him and his ways." etc.

    I mainly post in and read AH, so this is where I see it, no idea if it's a common thing throughout the site.

    What's the stance on this in general?

    I think it's a bit of a sh1tty thing to be at, personally. Sometimes it seems reasonably good natured, just injokey kind of stuff, but a lot of the time it just seems like people taking petty swipes at people they don't like, when they aren't there to respond.

    Is there any kind of general feeling on that kind of thing, charter wise etc? Seems a little like not not being a dick. Certain posters seem to get a disproportionate amount of it aimed at them, and I'd imagine it isn't very nice to be on the end of.

    Thoughts?
    Post edited by Shield on


«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 50,630 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    It's not OK. Please report it when you see it.


  • Options
    #3
    padd b1975
    Registered Users Posts: 10,704 ✭✭✭✭padd b1975


    It's absolutely rampant on the soccer forum, even the most casual skimming by the Mods there should pick up on it, but it seems to go largely unchecked.


  • Options
    #4
    Orion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,807 ✭✭✭✭Orion


    padd b1975 wrote: »
    It's absolutely rampant on the soccer forum, even the most casual skimming by the Mods there should pick up on it, but it seems to go largely unchecked.

    On a forum as busy as Soccer never assume a mod can or will read every post. Report it and they will get a mail so they can review it. Simples.


  • Options
    #5
    anncoates
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,925 ✭✭✭✭anncoates


    I'd say strobe will be along later to see if this got looked at.




    :)


  • Options
    #6
    padd b1975
    Registered Users Posts: 10,704 ✭✭✭✭padd b1975


    Orion wrote: »
    On a forum as busy as Soccer never assume a mod can or will read every post. Report it and they will get a mail so they can review it. Simples.
    I didn't assume anything.

    I specifically used the phrase 'most casual skimming'.:cool:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    hullaballoo
    Administrators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,712 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭hullaballoo


    padd b1975 wrote: »
    I didn't assume anything.

    I specifically used the phrase 'most casual skimming'.:cool:

    You picked the wrong forum for a "casual skimming". In soccer, it would be a full-time job to casually skim every post in the forum and you still wouldn't pick everything up.

    The other thing is that in Soccer, it's mainly just friendly banter between fans of the same team. It's not goading as per the OP here. Occasionally, yes it does stray into something more sinister and those posts should be reported. A moderator who is not overly familiar with the social intricacies of one team's thread won't necessarily know on a casual reading that a post is goading unless it's pointed out to them.


  • Options
    #8
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    You're not going to biko this, are you?

    :pac:


  • Options
    #9
    Links234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,944 ✭✭✭✭Links234


    Hmm, I've had this done about me a few times and it never bothered me. In certain AH threads, people have said "In before Links234" or something similar, I thought it was just a nod or expectation to see me posting on a topic that I've often had strong opinions on.


  • Options
    #10
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,562 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    It will depend on context surely.

    "Can't wait for Poster X to come along spouting their usual bleeding-heart PC nonsense" is the kind of thing the OP is on about.

    I have a good idea who the OP had in mind, and such baiting of them has become more common recently (no idea how they feel about it though, if it is who i am thinking about).


  • Options
    #11
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,857 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Links234 wrote: »
    Hmm, I've had this done about me a few times and it never bothered me. In certain AH threads, people have said "In before Links234" or something similar, I thought it was just a nod or expectation to see me posting on a topic that I've often had strong opinions on.

    Sometimes I've seen it light hearted, other times its downright antagonistic.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    fran17
    Registered Users Posts: 1,264 ✭✭✭fran17


    Links234 wrote: »
    Hmm, I've had this done about me a few times and it never bothered me. In certain AH threads, people have said "In before Links234" or something similar, I thought it was just a nod or expectation to see me posting on a topic that I've often had strong opinions on.

    I agree,if its done in a light hearted manner then its all part of the banter and is usually taken that way.However I find it quite distasteful if one is the victim of such actions and you politely ask the perpetrator to refrain from doing so again but they continue to do so.


  • Options
    #13
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Absolutely rampant in AH until Super-Rush kicked some arses, it seems to be creeping back. I'd appreciate the mods taking a hard stance again.


  • Options
    #14
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    fran17 wrote: »
    I agree,if its done in a light hearted manner then its all part of the banter and is usually taken that way.However I find it quite distasteful if one is the victim of such actions and you politely ask the perpetrator to refrain from doing so again but they continue to do so.

    "banter" covers a lot of bullying behaviour and thanks-whoring.


  • Options
    #15
    Turtyturd
    Registered Users Posts: 28,395 ✭✭✭✭Turtyturd


    Seems to be dependent on who the recipient is. Look at the 'bootcut jeans' thread in AH and posters seem to have free reign to have a go at the OP, yet there was one comment about one of the regular prominent posters which was instantly carded.

    Similarly the soccer forum seems to have a 'who said it/who was the recipient/do they support a team I like/dislike?' approach despite a specific rule being brought in the address it.


  • Options
    #16
    Canis Lupus
    Registered Users Posts: 9,893 ✭✭✭Canis Lupus


    Turtyturd wrote: »
    Seems to be dependent on who the recipient is. Look at the 'bootcut jeans' thread in AH and posters seem to have free reign to have a go at the OP, yet there was one comment about one of the regular prominent posters which was instantly carded.

    Similarly the soccer forum seems to have a 'who said it/who was the recipient/do they support a team I like/dislike?' approach despite a specific rule being brought in the address it.

    Well, isn't Aongus just a joke account? It's like Alan Partridge posting rather than Steve Coogan and as such you can't really insult a character can you. The chap just wants material for his blog.


  • Options
    #17
    MrWalsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,664 ✭✭✭MrWalsh


    Canis Lupus wrote: »
    Well, isn't Aongus just a joke account?

    I thought we were supposed to take posts on this website at face value.

    I'd no idea of the existence of "joke accounts".


  • Options
    #18
    Canis Lupus
    Registered Users Posts: 9,893 ✭✭✭Canis Lupus


    MrWalsh wrote: »
    I thought we were supposed to take posts on this website at face value.

    I'd no idea of the existence of "joke accounts".

    Well I guess now you know. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #19
    tritium
    Registered Users Posts: 7,428 ✭✭✭tritium


    MadsL wrote: »
    Absolutely rampant in AH until Super-Rush kicked some arses, it seems to be creeping back. I'd appreciate the mods taking a hard stance again.

    Tbh there's a whole host of distasteful posting styles in AH at the moment that there appears to be no appetite to address. This is one, another is the linking anyone you don't agree with to being a shinnerbot/MRA/blueshirt etc. Id even add deliberately antagonising posters. Petty little cheap shots that seem to be let slide often from posters with enough experience to expect better. I don't know if its possible to do it effectively but a feedback session on what kind of behaviour should be rejected in AH would be really useful as part of a charter spring clean there


  • Options
    #20
    fran17
    Registered Users Posts: 1,264 ✭✭✭fran17


    tritium wrote: »
    Tbh there's a whole host of distasteful posting styles in AH at the moment that there appears to be no appetite to address. This is one, another is the linking anyone you don't agree with to being a shinnerbot/MRA/blueshirt etc. Id even add deliberately antagonising posters. Petty little cheap shots that seem to be let slide often from posters with enough experience to expect better. I don't know if its possible to do it effectively but a feedback session on what kind of behaviour should be rejected in AH would be really useful as part of a charter spring clean there

    I found that the debate,or lack there of,regarding the SSM referendum absolutely stunk of double standards.If you were in the yes camp it appeared,to me anyway,that you had an out of jail free card.However if you opposed it you were,in my opinion,walking on egg shells constantly regarding what you said as cards seemed to be issued for very little in this regard.
    It became very clear from very early on what the opinion of boards.ie on this topic was,which turned out to be in line with the majority of the country,and that's fine but I felt that the stifling of opinions and debate only served to diminish the forum as a whole.


  • Options
    #21
    GreatDefector
    Registered Users Posts: 540 ✭✭✭GreatDefector


    strobe wrote: »
    Hey, I'll keep this brief. There's been an ongoing thing of referring to posters in threads they haven't posted in.

    Thoughts?

    Facekicker will be here any minute


    .... Yup.... Any minute now.....


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    RDM_83 again
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    fran17 wrote: »
    I found that the debate,or lack there of,regarding the SSM referendum absolutely stunk of double standards.If you were in the yes camp it appeared,to me anyway,that you had an out of jail free card.However if you opposed it you were,in my opinion,walking on egg shells constantly regarding what you said as cards seemed to be issued for very little in this regard.
    It became very clear from very early on what the opinion of boards.ie on this topic was,which turned out to be in line with the majority of the country,and that's fine but I felt that the stifling of opinions and debate only served to diminish the forum as a whole.

    This is the problem with the invisible/inconsistent moderation, a lower post count user on the "wrong" side will get a card a valued contributer posting antagonistically will get either ignored or an in thread warning by mod post that X topic or stance is not relevant or required in the thread. This is important because these actions don't show up on the users infraction record, so a "correct poster" will appear to have a much cleaner record than the latter, this will be countered by the but mods know the posters idea which if its true for a forum like AH brings in the bias thing again.

    Another thing is that when a comparison/topic on thread is considered off topic (which is happening an awful lot these days, even with comparisons that can be found in major mainstream media articles like the Guardian). Its apparently ok to keep bringing up the topic tangentially as long as you agree with the moderator stance.
    Here's part of a reply I got about this from one of the mods

    "XXX post is not actually discussing XXX issues - it's about people who are discussing XXX issues. A small distinction perhaps, but a distinction none the less"


  • Options
    #23
    biko
    Registered Users Posts: 81,223 ✭✭✭✭biko


    Are we moving from goading posters topic to addressing poster's moderator issues?


  • Options
    #24
    fran17
    Registered Users Posts: 1,264 ✭✭✭fran17


    biko wrote: »
    Are we moving from goading posters topic to addressing poster's moderator issues?

    Fair point,the feedback is on the topic of goading posters.Is it permissible to discuss it if you find yourself goaded by moderators?


  • Options
    #25
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    fran17 wrote: »
    Fair point,the feedback is on the topic of goading posters.Is it permissible to discuss it if you find yourself goaded by moderators?

    Fran has a point, there has been a lot of goading on AH in particular lately and it is often ignored if the "victim" is not on the right side of the argument. And it is sometimes coming from mods. I would be polar opposite to Fran here on most issues but I have to agree with him on this one.


  • Options
    #26
    fran17
    Registered Users Posts: 1,264 ✭✭✭fran17


    eviltwin wrote: »
    Fran has a point, there has been a lot of goading on AH in particular lately and it is often ignored if the "victim" is not on the right side of the argument. And it is sometimes coming from mods. I would be polar opposite to Fran here on most issues but I have to agree with him on this one.

    Absolutely,its the trickle down effect.If its accepted as a tactic in an attempt to belittle and silence others at the highest levels then its a green light for all who share the same opinion.Its endemic in AH in particular and will remain so as the standard procedure to any complaints or reported postings a user makes is to circle the wagons.

    I'll send you the friend request now eviltwin :pac:


  • Options
    #27
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    fran17 wrote: »
    Absolutely,its the trickle down effect.If its accepted as a tactic in an attempt to belittle and silence others at the highest levels then its a green light for all who share the same opinion.Its endemic in AH in particular and will remain so as the standard procedure to any complaints or reported postings a user makes is to circle the wagons.

    I'll send you the friend request now eviltwin :pac:

    Its ruining threads. I know that these issues are emotive so tend to bring out the worst comments on both sides but similar debates have been taking place in the religious forums for years now and have always been handled in a very respectful and responsible way.

    AH is slowly going back to teenage humour and smart arse one liners and its ruining it.


  • Options
    #28
    RDM_83 again
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    eviltwin wrote: »
    Its ruining threads. I know that these issues are emotive so tend to bring out the worst comments on both sides but similar debates have been taking place in the religious forums for years now and have always been handled in a very respectful and responsible way.

    AH is slowly going back to teenage humour and smart arse one liners and its ruining it.

    The thing is its not turning back into the AH that was either, I didn't really post much in the old AH because it wasn't great for debate but at least it was occasionally funny and mildly risqué now its heavily moderated which kills humour (e.g poster gets a red card for saying in the domestic abuse thread that the guy (who's black) has two black eyes, its a ****ty joke but I doubt it had a Stormfront style motive behind it) but on the other hand the moderation is even which sort of kills the controversial threads.

    (and yes I know there is no internet/AH "golden age" but the current trend is the worst of both worlds.)

    ps obviously I meant UNeven!


  • Options
    #29
    Robsweezie
    Registered Users Posts: 3,434 ✭✭✭Robsweezie


    What can often happen is poster A makes a dig at poster B mid argument, poster B is frustrated and fires back with their own dig, and from there it quickly becomes more and more personal. The key thing is how the word "you" is used. That's when it gets personal as it relates to the individual being "targeted".


  • Options
    #30
    MrWalsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,664 ✭✭✭MrWalsh


    Robsweezie wrote: »
    What can often happen is poster A makes a dig at poster B mid argument, poster B is frustrated and fires back with their own dig, and from there it quickly becomes more and more personal. The key thing is how the word "you" is used. That's when it gets personal as it relates to the individual being "targeted".

    I see more generalised goading tbh, such as described in the OP here, a randomer popping up and posting "Oh such and such will be along shortly with his bleeding heart liberal policies" or some such. No exchange (although there may well have been in other threads).


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    biko
    Registered Users Posts: 81,223 ✭✭✭✭biko


    fran17 wrote: »
    Fair point,the feedback is on the topic of goading posters.Is it permissible to discuss it if you find yourself goaded by moderators?
    Anything is permissible for me in this forum (I'm just another poster here) :)

    As I read this OP they discuss the mention of posters that have not posted in thread yet.
    "I can't wait for P0st3R to get here with his bullcrap"

    If two posters are arguing in a thread it's not goading as described in this thread.


Advertisement