[Feedback] What's wrong with the Airsoft forum? How do we fix it?

Witcher

OzCam wrote: »

True, there's rarely any serious aggression, but here's a thing and there's no way around it: the slagging between two people is not only read by those two individuals. If you want it to be private, use PM.

Other readers – including the Powers That Be, parents, employers – coming along can get the completely wrong idea because they don't know the context. Lots of posters on this forum seem to think sometimes that there's only a few of us in a closed little circle reading these posts. I've been embarrassed by some of the things posted on this forum in the last year, and they don't reflect well on us at all.

Whether we like it or not, every airsofter is a representative of this community and should behave like one, online as well as on the field.

Search engines are not your friend.

I think we all know there's a line where it becomes unsuitable for a public forum, I'm not suggesting people discuss romantic exploits or anything but a bit of good natured banter about the last skirmish thats not vulgar etc. shouldnt be frowned on. There's a line when a thread has gone too far but also one where it is a graveyard because we back so far away from the vulgar line.

Having a bit of a laugh(but not crossing the line:rolleyes: )was fine up until a while ago so why are we all becoming evangelical about it now?

I've said my piece in this thread and I'm filling it up repeating the same stuff to different people so I'll bow out now:) If people want to discuss or argue anything I've said my PM box is open.

The_ChiefDUB

I don't post to this forum too often for reasons which I'll go in to in a moment but I do use other forums quite a lot (non-airsoft related) where I would be quite active. I do however read most of the new posts on this forum every day (well for the majority of the more itneresting threads anyway).

Other readers – including the Powers That Be, parents, employers – coming along can get the completely wrong idea because they don't know the context. Lots of posters on this forum seem to think sometimes that there's only a few of us in a closed little circle reading these posts. I've been embarrassed by some of the things posted on this forum in the last year, and they don't reflect well on us at all.

Another knock on from this is that for someone who has just come across the thread or who doesn't know everyone involved it can be quite a disinsentive to post, as the thread will usually have strayed so far from the topic that you don't feel you can butt in and bring it back to what it is supposed to be about. It starts about one thing - all of a sudden it gets highjacked by banter (witty or otherwise) next thing is someone new who had something to say or a question to ask now feels unconfortable about inserting their own comment in to this ongoing off topic dialogue between two friends. I guess what I'm getting at is I think that off topic posts should all be in the off topic thread.
I don't agree with the deletion of posts - for the main reason that I believe a public record should be kept of the goings on in a public forum. Posts which don't belong should be moved with a record existing to note the movement so those who were writign the posts can continue their conversation in the appropriate space. But this should also be true of inappropriate posts (within reason - obviously there are liable laws to consider) so that other users can learn what is and is not appropriate. This would also force mods to enforce rules in a uniform manner and I think would provide the necessary transparency in modding which many here have been talking about.
On the subject of selecting mods - I do think this should come more from the forum users but not in the form of a direct election. The admins should select those to whom they offer the role of a mod based on a points system - for example: number of thanks received from other users. Perhaps this is already being taken in to account - I couldn't figure that out form the explanation of the mod selection process earlier on. But certainly this would ensure a selection of mods who are recognised as creatin useful threads or helping other forum users with questions etc.

Lemming

The_ChiefDUB wrote: »

The admins should select those to whom they offer the role of a mod based on a points system - for example: number of thanks received from other users. Perhaps this is already being taken in to account - I couldn't figure that out form the explanation of the mod selection process earlier on. But certainly this would ensure a selection of mods who are recognised as creatin useful threads or helping other forum users with questions etc.

What you've just described is popularity voting by another name. The thanks system can also be (and has been) abused and used in an underhand manner to infer insult against other users.

The_ChiefDUB

Well, not really, because this system is only being used to put forward suitable candidates either as a suggestion for candidates to admins so they can have a feel for who receives most respect, or in order to create a group of candidates to be considered coem the time for mod selection.
It would be easy to weed out those votes given to users for posts with little or no value which have obviously been given merely to upset the statistics.
If I am missing out on another way of abusing this system though I would be interested in what you have seen in the past Lemming.
I am just suggesting this though as a way to measure the respect of one user among the other users - not as a way of voting in and of itself. I think it could provide another area of transparency for modding decisions - "well so and so was picked because they have helped the most users on technical issues..." etc.

Lemming

The_ChiefDUB wrote: »

Well, not really, because this system is only being used to put forward suitable candidates either as a suggestion for candidates to admins so they can have a feel for who receives most respect, or in order to create a group of candidates to be considered coem the time for mod selection.
It would be easy to weed out those votes given to users for posts with little or no value which have obviously been given merely to upset the statistics.

It would actually no tbe easy to weed out votes given for little or no value (and what is the metric to determine what is of value?) as it would mean the admins & mods having to review a large volume of posts. There is currently little reporting/analysis ability on thanks other than what goes in your profile, to which I am aware. Steve can correct me on that one if something has since been put in place.

As myself & others have said before; being popular does not in itself make you a good choice of candidate. That popularity (or indeed the desire to "be" popular in some people) can actively taint ones view towards moderation action that may be needed.

If I am missing out on another way of abusing this system though I would be interested in what you have seen in the past Lemming.

It's something that only gets noticed (unless incredibly obvious e.g. user b posts something openly abusive towards user a, and then users c,d,e come in thanking user b. Personally I believe they all need censured not just user b) over a period of time as "noted behaviour". As such, it's otherwise difficult to spot. It's also very difficult to act on since there are no rules governing usage of the thanks feature, nor did boards.ie envisage this issue I'm sure.

I am just suggesting this though as a way to measure the respect of one user among the other users - not as a way of voting in and of itself. I think it could provide another area of transparency for modding decisions - "well so and so was picked because they have helped the most users on technical issues..." etc.

The mods will (or should since they're the ones policing a forum) have an idea of which users contribute in a level-headed way and as such they are free to make recommendation and reasons why to the admins during the decision making process.

The_ChiefDUB

Point taken Lemming. I do feel that users should have some input in to mod selection though in order to give forum users more of a feeling that they have some say in how things are being done. It is obvious from many of the posts in this thread that is an area where people would like to see a change so I think it's something worth looking in to even if the obvious solutions come with some obvious problems.
If Steve and the other mods are going to take a point from my previous post though I would like to make it clear that the issue of keeping threads on topic and moving posts to their appropraite threads rather than deleting posts or closing threads is the area where I feel most strongly. It's all well and good discussing other stuff but that's the main bit of input I want to get in to this important thread.

Danin

Would it be possible to have a short list of 5 possibles moderator candidates, compiled by the existing mods in association with the IAA and then pop them up in a poll for the general populous to vote on, but the final decision would fall to the Boards staff

that way you would have every one's views on the 5 possibles

just a thought, it may sound a bit long winded but IMO it would be pretty quick to implement in practice.

Shiva

Danin wrote: »

Would it be possible to have a short list of 5 possibles moderator candidates, compiled by the existing mods in association with the IAA and then pop them up in a poll for the general populous to vote on, but the final decision would fall to the Boards staff

that way you would have every one's views on the 5 possibles

just a thought, it may sound a bit long winded but IMO it would be pretty quick to implement in practice.

The problem with that though Danin is that instead of it becoming a popularity contest, it becomes a pointless popularity contest.

This might sound strange coming from me, but I don't think the users should have any say in who becomes a mod - they don't in any other forum. If a mod does his job properly it doesn't matter how well regarded or liked he (or she!) is - they'll only moderate when neccessary. The onus is on the Boards admins to make an informed and well thought out choice. (And I'm not saying they haven't in the past)

I also don't think the IAA should have any say in the matter at all, and to be honest, I doubt they'd want it. I'd actually be worried if they did !

OzCam

Shiva wrote: »

I also don't think the IAA should have any say in the matter at all, and to be honest, I doubt they'd want it. I'd actually be worried if they did !

Sorry I missed this earlier. Shiva* is absolutely right. The IAA have no say in mod selection, and should never have. It's nothing to do with them, boards.ie is a commercial enterprise and completely separate.


* sticking with handles in this thread for the benefit of occasional readers.

Steve

Lemming wrote: »

There is currently little reporting/analysis ability on thanks other than what goes in your profile, to which I am aware. Steve can correct me on that one if something has since been put in place.

Spot on there Lemming - it's conceivable that admins have such a search at their disposal but I'd guess not and it would take a db search by one of the developers.

There's a thread in feedback that started off discussing the mod selection process before it went a bit 'Airsoft' (off topic)

Changing that process is not something that local mods here are going to have much or any say in. Anyone that becomes a mod gets access to a lot of sensitive information in the mod forum so it's not something the admins take lightly.

Thread is here:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056099191

Danin

I take your points lads and I may have been naive thinking the poll would not be a popularity contest.
I thought if the selection of candidates was made by boards moderators and they were happy regardless of the candidate chosen, then it was passed to a poll, they would get a better idea of whom the forum would like to be moderated by. It wouldn't necessarily have to be the guy with the most hits gets in but it would also indicate to the mods if someone didn't get many hits he/she might not be the best candidate for the position. It would also negate this idea that mods are selected or nominated by friends of friends.

I also take your point regarding the IAA, I was just thinking on an impartial advisory level as someone mentioned that not all mods are active airsoft players, I may stand corrected on this by the way.

I'd also like to ask is there a set of criteria set in place if a moderator does not work out after being appointed, for example a trial period of sorts ?

Steve

Danin wrote: »

I'd also like to ask is there a set of criteria set in place if a moderator does not work out after being appointed, for example a trial period of sorts ?

Officially, no, but it's a subject that came up before and something I'd personally be in favour of.

Danin

Steve wrote: »

Officially, no, but it's a subject that came up before and something I'd personally be in favour of.

cheers Steve

gerrowadat

I'm only back from a week off from the forum because the censorship filter has a bug and let the word 'cuntlogs' through, so here's my 2c.

I disagree that moderation hasn't changed here over the past year or so. I have my own opinions on that, which I won't go into here so as not to colour my overall point, which is this:

The forum runs off content, and people's willingness to post. Take that away, and it's nothing. The content is user-contributed, and users put in what they think is worth the effort. the mods are not responsible for content, just for conduct.

I think the guiding principle which has been forgotten here is that If you lock a thread for good, you're not punishing a user. You're punishing the forum. This is a pretty fundamental thing people don't seem to get nowadays. The forum is the content. If people are being disruptive, deal with the people, not the content.

Over the past year or so, I've been less inclined to post more than a few sentences on any given subject, as posts the mods find irrelevant tend to disappear. This has gotten better over the last while, but I feel the damage has been done, and most of the prolific posters who have actual useful content to contribute have long since disappeared.

The difference in moderation is this: a year or two ago, if a thread got derailed to the point where it needed a shove in the right direction, the mod did that. Now, posts disappear and/or the thread gets locked. All someone has to do to get any thread locked is start an ad-hominem attack. It's actually kind of pathetic in its predictability.

A year or two ago, if a row got nasty on a thread, the offending poster (or two) got a few days off, and the thread got cleaned up and re-opened. This was the right way to do things. Now, depending on who you are, you get a ban for yourself and the thread gets locked and/or posts deleted.

The second big thing that get on my nerves is the "Thread has run its course" or "Locked at OPs request". The moderator or the OP don't decide when people are done discussing a subject. The users do. If there's still discussion going on, then the thread has not run its course. If it's gone offtopic, then deal with that by getting it back on topic. A thread has run it course when it disappears off the front page.

War Machine 539

I cant pretend my knowledge on this brilliant forum is extensive, because its not. Im very new and I enjoy the forum immensely but there are fundamental issues that make it a less enjoyable experience for me personally.

Number 1:
Moderators have been arrogant, big headed, powertripping and on some occasions ignorant ****s. Excuse the use of expletive language but I have been dying, aching to get that out for a month or so now. There also seems to be an attitude of " Im better than you " because there mods. Be it the smart arsed comments when locking a thread, or just the manner and reasoning that is applied ( Or not in many instances ) to resolving issues on a thread, I apologise for not going through my history and dragging up examples but Im sure everyone knows what Im talking about. I believe moderators should be marked, by us the USERS. I dont care if they do it for free, I enjoy this service and If I must pay to get decent moderation, I would do so without thought. I have never had major issues with mods myself, but reading through a thread and seeing the comments they leave that are steeped in smugness is something that has bugged me for a long time.

2: General Attitude
Many users have a holier than though attitude. Getting offended at playful banter etc. Are there any adults using the internet? Its ridiculous. I received a temporary ban for calling someone an idiot - Freeze, yes I called him an idiot, and I would have called him worse to his face, however I believe it was justifed. If the moderator in question put this "Infraction" into context I dont think my ban was warranted. Interestingly enough the offending party also received a ban.

3: Fairness
I realise that Airsoft being quite a specialised hobby would have a relatively small community on this forum, however I have a feeling that friendships have lead way to special treatment for some users.


Some people might not agree with how I feel but my thoughts and opinions are just that: Thoughts and opinions. Nice to finally have a forum for them.

In summation I would like to put forward that Moderators are marked in some way BY THEIR PEERS. Popularity votes may come in but Im sure they dont know everyone. The feedback system of Adverts for instance, a system like that could be used and if a Mod reaches a certain percentage of negativity that Mod is then removed. Permanently.

Steve, on a personal note, nice to see someone with some cajones to shake things up and willing to wade through the mountain of bollocks your colleagues let pile up. The only mod who has cared enough to do this right. Thanks a lot dude!

Trojan

gerrowadat wrote: »

SNIP

Some good feedback from gerrowadat there, and I'd encourage the Airsoft mods to take it on board.

However, personal abuse addressed to any member of boards (members, mods, admins or employees) is simply not tolerated.

As this is far from the first offence, and as he has also misused the Private Message system to send personal abuse to mods directly, I am banning gerrowadat from Airsoft for 6 1 months.

TheDoc

Trojan wrote: »

Some good feedback from gerrowadat there, and I'd encourage the Airsoft mods to take it on board.

However, personal abuse addressed to any member of boards (members, mods, admins or employees) is simply not tolerated.

As this is far from the first offence, and as he has also misused the Private Message system to send personal abuse to mods directly, I am banning gerrowadat from Airsoft for 6 months.

This sort of misunderstanding, over the top reaction and at this point sheer refusal to grasp what actually happens around here has finally hit melting point with me in fairness.

Any serious post Gerrowadat makes is 100% of the time down the same avenue of thought as mine and his no bull**** beating around the bush attitude is what makes him a large favorite but was also a big reason he was so successful as IAA chairman.

This forum will continue to operate in a poor fashion and be deprived of quality information that it used to ooze in the past. And more and more posters that contain that information will be gone.

Unfortunately I do not feel that this feedback topic will result in any change, as in the past it has not been the case, and the forums quality, moderation and content has taken a severe nose dive.

As much as most people probably don't care, from my PM's alone I gather a fair few people do , but this will very much be my last post, and last view of the forum. I will gather my airsoft knowledge and information on games and retailers through other avenues.

Hopefully the forum turns itself around a bit and there might be a reason to come back, but especially after the above, I see very little reason, and would very much like to explore other mediums and discussion boards for airsoft.

Best of luck with the place, hope things get sorted out and I'll see you around the fields.

War Machine 539

Trojan wrote: »

Some good feedback from gerrowadat there, and I'd encourage the Airsoft mods to take it on board.

However, personal abuse addressed to any member of boards (members, mods, admins or employees) is simply not tolerated.

As this is far from the first offence, and as he has also misused the Private Message system to send personal abuse to mods directly, I am banning gerrowadat from Airsoft for 6 months.

Typical OTT reaction. Were people not machines, even if you socially inept house plants arent. Stop hiding behind your positions and let this forum be.

Steve

Lads, you have to understand that there are site rules here that always will override local forum rules. One of them is sending abusive pms to another site user.

There's nothing any of the Airsoft mods can do about this.

If a mod sent any of you an abusive PM - you'd be out with the pitchforks looking for heads to roll - and rightly so. The matter would also be sorted by am admin as that's their remit to do so.

We (mods) have been actively staying out of this thread as I said it was yours to post your thoughts in. However I'm certainly not going to allow any insults to be posted here, especially not to a site admin who in my opinion based on previous experience on this site is one of the fairest.

War Machine gets a week off for the insults.

To anyone else that would like to question an admin decision, I suggest you take it up with said admin.

The following is not a suggestion:
Do not post about this specific matter here again

Witcher

I said I wouldn't post here again but after the past few posts I just have to say:

6 pages of posts and this single page is exactly what's wrong with the entire forum.

Couldn't be more ironic.

Danin

Steve

I'm sorry in advance for this and fully appreciate and except the consequences but it has to said that this is a prime example of some of the things that are so wrong here. I'd like to firstly say I don't condone what gerrowadat did and for that matter I don't want to know what he said or did

but

how can one person be banned for taking his grievance to the private posts away from the general public view

and another person can begin a tread in the public area with the sole purpose of accusing someone of basically being an anti semite on a completely different site and not be reprimanded in any way.

I'm not having a go at this person its just an example, I think he is a valued contributor to this place and I have the utmost respect for him but on this occasion I think action needed to be taken and it wasn't.
No offence but if we have rules they need to be for everyone irrespective of who they are... or respect for those rules and this forum in general will be lost

Poccington

Danin wrote: »

Steve

I'm sorry in advance for this and fully appreciate and except the consequences but it has to said that this is a prime example of some of the things that are so wrong here. I'd like to firstly say I don't condone what gerrowadat did and for that matter I don't want to know what he said or did

but

how can one person be banned for taking his grievance to the private posts away from the general public view

and another person can begin a tread in the public area with the sole purpose of accusing someone of basically being an anti semite on a completely different site and not be reprimanded in any way.

I'm not having a go at this person its just an example, I think he is a valued contributor to this place and I have the utmost respect for him but on this occasion I think action needed to be taken and it wasn't.
No offence but if we have rules they need to be for everyone irrespective of who they are... or respect for those rules and this forum in general will be lost

You answered your own question surely?

Just cause it's a PM doesn't mean you can say what you like, PM's can still be reported for abuse etc.

EDIT: I'm posting in this topic purely as someone who pops into the forum now and again, not as a Mod or anything like that.

Steve

Blay wrote: »

I said I wouldn't post here again but after the past few posts I just have to say:

6 pages of posts and this single page is exactly what's wrong with the entire forum.

Couldn't be more ironic.

Are you really suggesting that insulting another user be overlooked?

Danin wrote: »

Steve

I'm sorry in advance for this and fully appreciate and except the consequences but it has to said that this is a prime example of some of the things that are so wrong here. I'd like to firstly say I don't condone what gerrowadat did and for that matter I don't want to know what he said or did

but

how can one person be banned for taking his grievance to the private posts away from the general public view

and another person can begin a tread in the public area with the sole purpose of accusing someone of basically being an anti semite on a completely different site and not be reprimanded in any way.

I'm not having a go at this person its just an example, I think he is a valued contributor to this place and I have the utmost respect for him but on this occasion I think action needed to be taken and it wasn't.
No offence but if we have rules they need to be for everyone irrespective of who they are... or respect for those rules and this forum in general will be lost

Nobody has ever gotten a justifiable ban on boards for airing their grievances in a civil manner - when anyone becomes uncivil towards a mod, we don't deal with ourselves, we ask a higher impartial authority to look at it. That's all that happened here and that's the way it has always been here.

As to what happened on some other site - please clarify? I'm only concerned with what happens here.

Witcher

Steve wrote: »

Are you really suggesting that insulting another user be overlooked?

What do people do in reality when they receive some abuse?

Go and cry to mammy or in this case the admins?

No they argue back..I'm not suggesting we have all out war or anything but some people have too soft a skin. Lets face it abuse is part and parcel of being a mod, if they can't take it they know where the door is. That's a bit unfair admittedly but that's life.

Poccington

Blay wrote: »

What do people do in reality when they receive some abuse?

Go and cry to mammy or in this case the admins?

No they argue back..I'm not suggesting we have all out war or anything but some people have too soft a skin. Lets face it abuse is part and parcel of being a mod, if they can't take it they know where the door is. That's a bit unfair admittedly but that's life.

Life as a user involves following the rules as laid out by the Admins/Mods of boards.

Admins have to do it, Mods have to do it as do regular users.

Trojan

Hah, well I guess my status as a "socially inept houseplant" is questionable

However, thankfully calling anyone on boards.ie a "cuntlog" once, nevermind multiple times, is not questionable. It's not a misunderstanding, or sheer refusal to grasp what actually happens around here. It's simply personal abuse, and behaving like that towards anyone is not tolerated on boards.ie. Equally, sending abusive messages using the PM system is not tolerated.

Every community or social group has it's rules and norms. Airsoft clubs surely have them, maybe pertaining to live rounds, eye protection and the like? This is one of boards' rules.

You can disagree with me, and other folks, as much as you want, but please do it in a civil manner.

fayer

Steve wrote: »

Are you really suggesting that insulting another user be overlooked?


Nobody has ever gotten a justifiable ban on boards for airing their grievances in a civil manner - when anyone becomes uncivil towards a mod, we don't deal with ourselves, we ask a higher impartial authority to look at it. That's all that happened here and that's the way it has always been here.

As to what happened on some other site - please clarify? I'm only concerned with what happens here.

Hi Steve,

My understanding of the situation (I stand to be corrected) is a 6 month ban has been handed out for calling a Mod an eejit in response to a PM where they mistakingly thought they were being abused in thread.

If this is the case, is the wounded person of such a infirm disposition that this would call for escalation to a CMOD?

fayer

On a different note, this witch hunt has been running for quite a while now, it is serving any real purpose any more?

Do you have enough data to conduct some kind of review / create action items out of the community feedback?

Steve

Witcher

Poccington wrote: »

Life as a user involves following the rules as laid out by the Admins/Mods of boards.

Admins have to do it, Mods have to do it as do regular users.

Surely a mod taking a bit of flak would be considered part and parcel of the job as I said?

The mod(which ever one it was) received this abusive pm from Dave I assume debating their modding decisions. Instead of taking it as water off a ducks back they report it. I'm not condoning the abuse just to be clear.

Well Jesus if a person standing up to moderate the airsoft forum(where there is impassioned debating) can't take a bit of flak they're too thin skinned.

Again, I'm not saying pm abuse is right, but what this smells of to me is:

1. Dave complains about modding

2. Sends abusive pm

3. Mod can't handle criticism elsewhere and calls in the admins to ban knowing they've got his back.

This is my interpretation and of course is open to debate and being shot down (we'll never know if it is right or wrong unless the mod involved comments). But here it is anyway.

Also WarMachine receives a ban for calling an admin "a socially inept houseplant". The most eloquent "abuse" I've seen grace this website, if you can't shrug that off..wow. Again, not the right thing to be doing but we're adults here..shake it off.
---
As Fayer has said above is this thread really achieving anything? As far as I can see the people in charge here will bear a grudge over what is being said here and take it personally.

Poccington

Blay wrote: »

Surely a mod taking a bit of flak would be considered part and parcel of the job as I said?

The mod(which ever one it was) received this abusive pm from Dave I assume debating their modding decisions. Instead of taking it as water off a ducks back they report it. I'm not condoning the abuse just to be clear.

Well Jesus if a person standing up to moderate the airsoft forum(where there is impassioned debating) can't take a bit of flak they're too thin skinned.

Again, I'm not saying pm abuse is right, but what this smells of to me is:

1. Dave complains about modding

2. Sends abusive pm

3. Mod can't handle criticism elsewhere and calls in the admins to ban knowing they've got his back.

This is my interpretation and of course is open to debate and being shot down (we'll never know if it is right or wrong unless the mod involved comments). But here it is anyway.

There's a difference between criticism and abuse.

Most of the posts in this thread, I'm sure you'd agree, would fall under the criticism category. I can't imagine there's many Mods who would start cribbing about a bit of criticism.

However, there's a difference between criticism/feedback and someone being abusive.

While I don't know the specifics of what was said between the two folk, obviously fellow Mods and Admins felt it warranted a ban. Unless of course, more Mods and Admins need to grow thicker skin?

No Mod deserves to be on the recieving end of abuse from anyone. They're still users at the end of the day, albeit with additional responsibilities.

An ability to take on board feedback should really be a requirement for any Mod but abuse purely because they're a Mod? No chance.