Mods need to step up in Politics Forum

swordofislam

It is turning into a moron fest.

El Weirdo

swordofislam wrote: »

It is turning into a moron fest.

Wow. What an excellently well thought-out and informative post.

I'm sure from all the examples of you've given, that the mods and admins will get straight on to this as a matter of absolute urgency.

Dades

I think parents need to step up, tbh.

Sarky

Short people *really* need to step up.

Where To

I was driving past a psychiatric hospital the other day when my tyre suddenly blew out. I undid the wheel nuts and changed the tyre. In doing so I accidentally kicked the nuts into a storm drain, too far to get them out again.
"What am I going to do now" I thought.

It was then I noticed the two patients of the hospital looking over the wall. "Why don't you take one nut off each of the other wheels and put them on the fourth wheel and that will sort you until you get to a garage" one of them said. "Jeez thats a great idea", says I, "you shouldn't be in there at all.

"Oh", says the other patient, "we're in here because we are mad not because we are stupid!"

swordofislam

El Weirdo wrote: »

Wow. What an excellently well thought-out and informative post.

I'm sure from all the examples of you've given, that the mods and admins will get straight on to this as a matter of absolute urgency.

Thanks weirdo.

gandalf

Unfortunately it has been going that way for a while op.

Here are some of the previous threads about it in the last year or so.

here'

here

& here.

swordofislam

Add 2 new moderators so.
I suggest Permabear and some trustworthy non trolling left winger. That would be balanced.

dr.bollocko

TBH as the forum gains popularity, the ... how to say this nicely... the spectrum of opinion gets wider and trying to maintain high standards becomes a more difficult job.

Orion

swordofislam wrote: »

Add 2 new moderators so.
I suggest Permabear and some trustworthy non trolling left winger. That would be balanced.

I'd suggest someone with no interest in Politics whatsoever. That's even more balanced.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

swordofislam

swordofislam wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Permabear wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I agree :eek:

Dades

dr.bollocko wrote: »

TBH as the forum gains popularity, the ... how to say this nicely... the spectrum of opinion gets wider and trying to maintain high standards becomes a more difficult job.

This!

MungBean

I dont think the politics forum needs any more mods I just think the mods there should take a harder line with posts. As already said it may be an impossible task as the forum gains popularity and the amount of differing opinions increase.

But I dont see one or two new mods changing anything. Unless they are young renegade mods keen to prove themselves and put some manners on the forum. I'd like to see that.

swordofislam

Orion wrote: »

I'd suggest someone with no interest in Politics whatsoever. That's even more balanced.

Only a person with an interest in politics is suitable.
Here's why I nominate Permabear

1. He is a crank but not a troll
2. Because he is a crank he has to be even more fair than a non crank
3. He is a moderator already
4. He reads the politics forum all the time

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Black Swan

Boards.ie represents a community of posters, as does the Politics forum and its seven subforms. Posters interested in their community will contribute meaningful content to the discussion threads, and when a fellow poster abuses that privilege, such interested community members will officially report the offending post to the voluntary mod staff.

In this way, those that participate in the Politics forums can exhibit some measure of community self-regulation, rather than to totally rely on the discretion of the moderating staff. Rest assured the mods will strive to ensure that the spirit and intent of the charter and guidelines are met, but a little help from our community can go a long way towards shaping the Politics forums over time.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

K-9

dr.bollocko wrote: »

TBH as the forum gains popularity, the ... how to say this nicely... the spectrum of opinion gets wider and trying to maintain high standards becomes a more difficult job.

I don't think the spectrum is much wider tbh, there was always plenty of Libertarians and hard line Socialists, its more just increased traffic that is harder to mod.

Couple of threads recently that AH did a better job on the topic but there are still plenty of threads in politics that aren't bad.

dr.bollocko

K-9 wrote: »

I don't think the spectrum is much wider tbh, there was always plenty of Libertarians and hard line Socialists, its more just increased traffic that is harder to mod.

Couple of threads recently that AH did a better job on the topic but there are still plenty of threads in politics that aren't bad.

That's my take on it too...
Aside from some real OTT posters which may have to be removed (which you'll always get)... I am starting to enjoy posting in the politics forum more / reading it more than I would have previously.

MungBean

Is there anything to be said for a stricter sub forum ? Where low level posts are not tolerated and where people can start a thread when looking for a bit of clarity on something and not just general discussion ?

I get dr.bollocko's point of the politics forum being more accessible now and I'd agree with him on that so perhaps there just needs to be an outlet for those who take it a bit more seriously.

southsiderosie

swordofislam wrote: »

Only a person with an interest in politics is suitable.
Here's why I nominate Permabear

1. He is a crank but not a troll
2. Because he is a crank he has to be even more fair than a non crank
3. He is a moderator already
4. He reads the politics forum all the time

For some reason I find this really, really funny...sorry Crankybe-, uh, Permabear.

MungBean wrote: »

Is there anything to be said for a stricter sub forum ? Where low level posts are not tolerated and where people can start a thread when looking for a bit of clarity on something and not just general discussion ?

I get dr.bollocko's point of the politics forum being more accessible now and I'd agree with him on that so perhaps there just needs to be an outlet for those who take it a bit more seriously.

How many sub-forums does Politics really need? The OP and the first few responses usually set the tone for the rest of the thread. If people were more careful about what they put up in the first place, and then self-policed their own threads, this would both make the moderators' jobs easier and up the quality of the discussion.

I'd also add that in the past (not sure about now as I'm not on boards as much these days), the people who took politics more seriously were/are usually the ones who write the sharpest posts & critiques. Yet you've recently started a thread in Feedback about hostile posting. It is far easier to dismiss a cranky/dumb 2-line post that attacks your position than a well thought-out three paragraph post that slices your position into ribbons. So be careful what you ask for...(not that I think you should get it; I'm just sayin').

MungBean

southsiderosie wrote: »

How many sub-forums does Politics really need? The OP and the first few responses usually set the tone for the rest of the thread. If people were more careful about what they put up in the first place, and then self-policed their own threads, this would both make the moderators' jobs easier and up the quality of the discussion.

Mods are responsible for the allowed tone if the OP is deemed ok. It doesnt make a difference if the OP leads to further issues or low level posting. If the mod allows it then thats the standard of posting. If you allowed everyone to police their own threads and allowed all threads to continue in the tone the OP sets then the forum wouldnt be long about turning into a farce.

I dont know how many sub forums politics needs, as many as would be necessary I suppose. Unless you have a preferred limit regardless of necessity ?

I'd also add that in the past (not sure about now as I'm not on boards as much these days), the people who took politics more seriously were/are usually the ones who write the sharpest posts & critiques. Yet you've recently started a thread in Feedback about hostile posting. It is far easier to dismiss a cranky/dumb 2-line post that attacks your position than a well thought-out three paragraph post that slices your position into ribbons. So be careful what you ask for...(not that I think you should get it; I'm just sayin').

I dont think its out of the question to ask if those cranky/dumb 2-line posts could be tolerated less when they really have no bearing on the discussion other than to cause problems. If you or anyone else picks my position apart I have no alternative but to accept that and re-evaluate my position, ie learn and move on. What my thread was about was the dismissal of peoples opinions as invalid before discussion leading to hostility.

southsiderosie

MungBean wrote: »

Mods are responsible for the allowed tone if the OP is deemed ok. It doesnt make a difference if the OP leads to further issues or low level posting. If the mod allows it then thats the standard of posting. If you allowed everyone to police their own threads and allowed all threads to continue in the tone the OP sets then the forum wouldnt be long about turning into a farce.

Then report the post/thread. The mods aren't going to read everything as it is posted, and this is not a pre-moderated forum; nothing is 'deemed OK' beforehand.

MungBean wrote: »

I dont know how many sub forums politics needs, as many as would be necessary I suppose. Unless you have a preferred limit regardless of necessity ?

It's not clear to me why this is necessary though. There are always calls for sub-forums for various hobby horses. My personal opinion is that there are too many as it stands, and in part this lets dud threads stay on the front page for far too long. But maybe that is just me.

MungBean wrote: »

I dont think its out of the question to ask if those cranky/dumb 2-line posts could be tolerated less when they really have no bearing on the discussion other than to cause problems. If you or anyone else picks my position apart I have no alternative but to accept that and re-evaluate my position, ie learn and move on. What my thread was about was the dismissal of peoples opinions as invalid before discussion leading to hostility.

What exactly do you want then? This isn't a political seminar, it's a politics forum. And in my personal experience, many of the regulars have been quite generous in answering specific questions I've posted about Irish politics; I have learned quite a bit here. What people don't respond well to are 'questions' which are clearly agenda-driven and/or where the poster is obviously not interested in the answers, but rather using inquiry as an excuse to tear other people's political beliefs down (or to try to tear them down anyway).

Dr Galen

As one of the newer Mods on the forum, I'd like to give a few insights, things that I've learned about the place since taking on that role. Some of these things were really surprising tbh, some not so much.

1) There is nothing like the amount of reported posts that I thought there would be. I was figuring that the email reports would be flying in tbh. Thats just not the case. You do get a lot of the same people reporting things in fairness (thanks for that ) but in the main, relative to the number of posts per day, there aren't that many.

2) There are on generally 3 types of post that get reported

a) outright abuse and trolling
b) h/she was mean to me, do something
c) posts that fall into a grey area of either being a bit aggressive/OTT/controversial

3) It is fine and well to talk about standards, but when you are faced with a post on the forum, and you may later have to stand over an action in the DRP forum, you really do have to stop and think. Also, if you want a Mod to impose an editorial policy on the forum, then find a new one, because I won't ever be doing that.

One of the greatest things about that forum is the mix of people posting there. We have people from all walks of life, posting from all over the world. People have to allow a bit of give and take.

4) In most debates that turn into arguments, one side is often as bad as the other

5) There are groups of posters, from various political persuasions, that not only dig trenches, in preparation for war, but actually permanently reside in said trenches. That is one of the most difficult things to moderate.

6) A little bit of thought before posting would go a long way in many posters cases.

7) I really really really detest petty name calling, e.g. baby-killer, hippy, student leftie, scum(bag) etc, etc, etc, etc

8) We could rewrite the charter tomorrow, replace the whole thing with one line. The Golden Rule of boards.ie - Don't Be A Dick.

9) There are some brilliant minds posting on that forum. People that I totally disagree with, people that I totally agree with, people that are somewhere inbetween. They have passion, insight, smarts and even when i disagree, i love reading their posts.

10) It's great fun tbh, and I'm really glad to have been asked to help out

MungBean

southsiderosie wrote: »

Then report the post/thread. The mods aren't going to read everything as it is posted, and this is not a pre-moderated forum; nothing is 'deemed OK' beforehand.

I have reported them but the lack of action and the fact that the mods may have already posted on the thread in line with the OP leaves little room for "mods dont see everything" and leads me to the conclusion that these tones and ways of posting are allowed.

It's not clear to me why this is necessary though. There are always calls for sub-forums for various hobby horses. My personal opinion is that there are too many as it stands, and in part this lets dud threads stay on the front page for far too long. But maybe that is just me.

You could be right, it may well turn out to be a dead sub forum I was merely asking for other opinions of whether or not there would be anything to be said for it.

What exactly do you want then? This isn't a political seminar, it's a politics forum. And in my personal experience, many of the regulars have been quite generous in answering specific questions I've posted about Irish politics; I have learned quite a bit here. What people don't respond well to are 'questions' which are clearly agenda-driven and/or where the poster is obviously not interested in the answers, but rather using inquiry as an excuse to tear other people's political beliefs down (or to try to tear them down anyway).

I have stated what I want plenty of times. I have learned a lot here too from people willing to engage and I also know that a lot of people will as Dr Galen say dig their trenches and reside in them.

But as with everything theres a line that shouldnt be crossed. I'd be in favour of moving that line a bit to counteract the hostility/low level posting/petty nonsense I perceive (I'm only giving my personal opinion here as I am entitled to do in feedback, if you disagree then thats fine but it makes my point no less valid ) to be existent and a problem in the forum.

K-9

I would report a post now and again, usually is actioned so mustn't be that petty!

There are posts I'd let slip as others either ignore them and the thread goes on, or its a tit for tat name calling thread with no hope of recovery and probably either should be locked, or just let them go round in circles because they'll probably find another thread and ruin it!

Tbh the board is generally a better read that it was during the Presidential election, the GE etc. I avoided it for a while because of that. The Budget will be another day that it'll be hard to find quality posts amid the noise, but it is worth sticking with it as posters start going through it and sieving the detail. The threads the day after generally get at the main points and the sneaky measures missed on the day.

Just in case I'm being too uncritical, probably time to lock the Election board for a while?

later12

I just read the politics forum for the first time in a fairly long while, and I said to myself 'I hope there is at least a new feedback thread about this'. Thankfully there is.

Hopefully something will eventually be done about it, but i wouldn't hold my breath. This has been done to death in previous threads and will probably be done again.

Boards.ie's politics section is no politics.ie.

But the one thing it had going for it over p.ie was that it was heavily moderated and one couldn't previously get away with juvenile slagging matches or deliberately unintelligent responses. So you could expect a reasonable debating field.

Now, it just looks like a smaller p.ie, without the hacks. It's not a place for rational debate.

nesf

later10 wrote: »

It's not a place for rational debate.

I'd agree that there isn't enough of this and that most of the forum is just full of poorly worded whining about whatever negative thing is in the news.

I do struggle to think of a way to fix this though. We can't force people to have rational informed debates, either posters capable of such participate or they aren't and (and I'm going to be bloody blunt here) the rabble have decided they're suddenly interested in politics and no, they don't need to educate themselves about things first, I don't really blame the more informed posters for not debating much. The forum stopped being a "political anorak only forum" a good few years ago.

I was reading threads tonight despairing about the standard of debate and contribution, generally from newer members of the forum. It's only going to get worse with the Budget but hopefully it'll die down a bit after that and things will improve a little. Heavier moderation isn't the answer, more banning and infractions won't magically turn crap contributors into stellar ones.

K-9

nesf wrote: »

I'd agree that there isn't enough of this and that most of the forum is just full of poorly worded whining about whatever negative thing is in the news.

I do struggle to think of a way to fix this though. We can't force people to have rational informed debates, either posters capable of such participate or they aren't and (and I'm going to be bloody blunt here) the rabble have decided they're suddenly interested in politics and no, they don't need to educate themselves about things first, I don't really blame the more informed posters for not debating much. The forum stopped being a "political anorak only forum" a good few years ago.

I was reading threads tonight despairing about the standard of debate and contribution, generally from newer members of the forum. It's only going to get worse with the Budget but hopefully it'll die down a bit after that and things will improve a little. Heavier moderation isn't the answer, more banning and infractions won't magically turn crap contributors into stellar ones.

The problem is the posters who do give the forum time, just despair at the level of debate during elections and budgets. Pointing out the current budget deficit on threads blaming the banks and bondholders just gets tiresome. So noise takes over.

I don't see why politics can't be a higher standard. This isn't politics.ie, AH is there for the more dumbed down posts. An AH thread was closed recently pointing to politics but reminding posters they'd need a higher standard of posting, I half laughed!

_blank_

What about a "High Brow Political Discussion" Sub Forum?

Make it read-only like Soccer, with people who "prove" themselves in the usual Politics forum allowed access after a while, or if they ask for it.

If thier opinions aren't seemed informed enough, then fire them out again.

That means you get a "rabble rabble FF is the devil, I hate the blueshirts" where everyone who wants to talk about politics can have their say, and you also have a forum for the more informed members of Boards.ie to have some more intelligent discussion.

nesf

Des wrote: »

What about a "High Brow Political Discussion" Sub Forum?

Is there enough interest to make it worthwhile though? Or will we end up with a dead forum with the same 10-15 users arguing around in circles from well entrenched positions?

_blank_

nesf wrote: »

Is there enough interest to make it worthwhile though? Or will we end up with a dead forum with the same 10-15 users arguing around in circles from well entrenched positions?

At the risk of sounding glib, why not "suck it and see" - it doesn't cost anything to make a new forum, if it works, yipee, if it doesn't, remove it again.

nesf

Des wrote: »

At the risk of sounding glib, why not "suck it and see" - it doesn't cost anything to make a new forum, if it works, yipee, if it doesn't, remove it again.

No action comes without cost, if we create a special forum, everyone who doesn't get access is going to resent it and that'll create problems for us on the rest of the forums and the moderating of them. Some animals are more equal than others etc.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

nesf

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

How? We all agree that we'd like standards to be higher. But I've yet to see a good way of doing it that makes sense.


And we didn't argue a trickle down theory, we argued that standards would naturally lower as politics became a subject that the general public were interested in.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

nesf

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

That would create a nightmare though, with a very, very long list of accusations of bias, bans being challenged and so on. We're talking about banning well over 100 posters here at an absolute minimum. Also such an approach could inadvertently ban potentially good posters once they got bedded in.


I think Politics has had its Eternal September and I'm at a loss of a clean way of sorting it out.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

nesf

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It wouldn't just be the mods, it'd be the CMods and Admins who'd also have to bear the weight. I appreciate you're offering a solution, I'm just poking holes in it because I see issues.

It also runs against the boards.ie unofficial philosophy of the posters make the forum, not the mods.

Sunnyisland

Everyone should be able to post in the politic forum if they want and it should be up to the mods there to impose bans or infractions on posters who don't come up to politics standards what ever they are ?

It seems some people would like a bit of elitism there ? There is enough of that around thanks.

Soldie

I agree that the mods should be a lot more strict. There are too many trolls and low-quality posters. I've reported a blatant troll twice in the last week or two and nothing has been done about it. I barely contribute to the forum any more because of the abundance of drivel.

We've tried swapping the mods around and accommodating certain posters with the Café forum, but it's clearly not working. Let's get serious about stamping out the nonsense before the last remaining good posters give up.

Also, the organisation of the forum/sub-forum needs to be cleaned up.

It was good catching up, guys. See you all here again in around 3 months.

nesf

realies wrote: »

Everyone should be able to post in the politic forum if they want and it should be up to the mods there to impose bans or infractions on posters who don't come up to politics standards what ever they are ?

It seems some people would like a bit of elitism there ? There is enough of that around thanks.

Soldie wrote: »

I agree that the mods should be a lot more strict. There are too many trolls and low-quality posters. I've reported a blatant troll twice in the last week or two and nothing has been done about it. I barely contribute to the forum any more because of the abundance of drivel.

We've tried swapping the mods around and accommodating certain posters with the Café forum, but it's clearly not working. Let's get serious about stamping out the nonsense before the last remaining good posters give up.

Also, the organisation of the forum/sub-forum needs to be cleaned up.

It was good catching up, guys. See you all here again in around 3 months.

The above sums up the issue for the mods here.

Sunnyisland

What is low quality posts ?

We no what trolling is and that should be easy enough to stop.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

nesf

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It's a problem, I'm not saying it's a particularly nice problem but we have to consider workload on people because we're volunteers here.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

There's a line, I'm just not sure where it should be drawn to be honest.

Anyway, the Budget has started, will be back later.

Soldie

nesf wrote: »

The above sums up the issue for the mods here.

Well, not really. I'm against a private/subscription forum. I just think that the moderators should be a lot more strict.

nesf

Soldie wrote: »

Well, not really. I'm against a private/subscription forum. I just think that the moderators should be a lot more strict.

Sure and we have other posters saying they don't want that. This isn't as simple as having only posters coming to us begging for a stricter forum.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Lockstep

Dr Galen wrote: »

As one of the newer Mods on the forum, I'd like to give a few insights, things that I've learned about the place since taking on that role. Some of these things were really surprising tbh, some not so much.

1) There is nothing like the amount of reported posts that I thought there would be. I was figuring that the email reports would be flying in tbh. Thats just not the case. You do get a lot of the same people reporting things in fairness (thanks for that ) but in the main, relative to the number of posts per day, there aren't that many.

2) There are on generally 3 types of post that get reported

a) outright abuse and trolling
b) h/she was mean to me, do something
c) posts that fall into a grey area of either being a bit aggressive/OTT/controversial

3) It is fine and well to talk about standards, but when you are faced with a post on the forum, and you may later have to stand over an action in the DRP forum, you really do have to stop and think. Also, if you want a Mod to impose an editorial policy on the forum, then find a new one, because I won't ever be doing that.

One of the greatest things about that forum is the mix of people posting there. We have people from all walks of life, posting from all over the world. People have to allow a bit of give and take.

4) In most debates that turn into arguments, one side is often as bad as the other

5) There are groups of posters, from various political persuasions, that not only dig trenches, in preparation for war, but actually permanently reside in said trenches. That is one of the most difficult things to moderate.

6) A little bit of thought before posting would go a long way in many posters cases.

7) I really really really detest petty name calling, e.g. baby-killer, hippy, student leftie, scum(bag) etc, etc, etc, etc

8) We could rewrite the charter tomorrow, replace the whole thing with one line. The Golden Rule of boards.ie - Don't Be A Dick.

9) There are some brilliant minds posting on that forum. People that I totally disagree with, people that I totally agree with, people that are somewhere inbetween. They have passion, insight, smarts and even when i disagree, i love reading their posts.

10) It's great fun tbh, and I'm really glad to have been asked to help out

This.

It's a hard place to moderate as often it's unclear if a person is trolling or genuinely being a dick.

Bill and Ted's motto is probably best for the forum: Be Excellent to One Another.

nesf

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

More that it's a very big ask for a volunteer team to implement what you're talking about.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Sure, I wouldn't argue that but the charter was written in nicer times really. We have an austerity budget going through along with people slowly realising that FG/Lab can't actually magic up no cuts to services and no tax hikes while closing the deficit.

Realistically, right now, we have a very poor signal to noise ratio. This is solely due to a huge volume of posts from people not ordinarily interested in politics getting involved. Your solution means that we ban these people. All of them, and keep banning as more and more join the forum and people rereg to avoid bans and so on. As well as deal with a very hard and harsh backlash against the mods because it'll be the mods setting the bar and literally banning people for their opinions and the way they express them. You're asking an awful lot from the mods and no, adding more mods doesn't solve things as it would be difficult enough getting 5 people to agree to implement a certain standard never mind more than that.