Boards Deals scam

pickarooney

Mr Magnolia wrote: »

We've allowed similar threads in F&D where I've felt the user-base would benefit from a specific offer which relates to the forum directly.

That's pretty much exactly the kind of thing indignant spammers say in their prison threads.

Tar.Aldarion

Yes, I delete posts like that, telling them to contact boards about advertising.

pickarooney

Tell them to contact boards deals instead? I hear they'll let any oul rubbish through :pac:

Too soon?

Dav

Hold on one second pickarooney, this isn't some outside company we're letting run rampant across the site, this is parts of Boards and it's the part that makes us the money we need so we can keep the site going. If find your tone and attitude more than a little disrespectful and as has been pointed out already, permission was saught and given by the local mods before making these posts.

Oryx

Dav, Ive already posted my concerns on this thread, and read your pretty decent reply. I take picka's post as a joke, as is normal (or used to be normal) in these kinds of threads. However, it does contain a grain of truth for me, which I spoke about earlier. On the one hand, boardsdeals is separate, (the connection to here has been discussed at length before). On the other, you say its part and parcel of here. The way I see it, you are using your connection to this site, to do things other people arent allowed to do. It doesnt matter to me what the finances are, I dont want adverts either covert or overt, in my face here. Its not been allowed like this before. What matters to me is the perception it gives, and the precedent it may set. I know you can do whatever the hell you like here. You can paint the place pink and use it to sell valentines cards and condoms if you want. You own the place. But you have to accept that doing as you please, legitimately or not, irks a portion of your user base, who may see it as unfair or unwanted.

If permission was sought on the forums I moderate, I would not want it. Do I have veto? Would I be demodded for refusing to toe company line? This stuff bothers me.

Dav

Oryx wrote: »

If permission was sought on the forums I moderate, I would not want it. Do I have veto? Would I be demodded for refusing to toe company line? This stuff bothers me.

Yes, you can of course say no and why on earth would we demod you for that? I've already said this on *this* thread. We also discussed this with all mods on the Mods forum before we rolled any of this out and this is what was agreed - if mods don't think the community they represent wants to see reps posting in that forum, then that's fine, they say "no thanks" and reps won't post there and that's the end of the discussion. You will never get any pressure from me or anyone else in the company to allow something on a forum you moderate that you don't want - be that reps or competitions etc. I'll see if I can dig up the links to the threads where we discussed this on the Mods forum and PM them to you.

pickarooney

Dav wrote: »

Hold on one second pickarooney, this isn't some outside company we're letting run rampant across the site, this is parts of Boards and it's the part that makes us the money we need so we can keep the site going. If find your tone and attitude more than a little disrespectful and as has been pointed out already, permission was saught and given by the local mods before making these posts.

So I can't make a joke now without getting a dressing down? Screw that, Dav, seriously.

There's so much flip-flopping over whether or not boards deals is or isn't part of boards nobody knows who to believe at this stage. If you honestly think that the owners of a website asking 'permission' from a volunteer to place an ad on his/her own website is not putting any pressure on the mod...

IITYWYBMAD

Dav, with all due respect to both websites I think where back to square one with BoardsDeals, especially with the cross forum posting. It seems to me that when it suits the Mods/Admins/Management that BoardsDeals.ie is a completely different website but under the the same umbrella. In this thread we have an Admin who is clearly apathetic to the fact that users on this site are *possibly* being scammed. Another who clearly does not want a discussion here and consider BoardsDeals a "a totally different website to Boards.ie itself" which while factually true, goes completely against the spirit of your comments above.

I'd say that there are loads of companies out there and here, who would love the opportunity to cross-sell their wares over different fora, if given the chance (look at any of the mobile providers for example) but who would not be afforded this opportunity, as while they are a completely different website to boards.ie, they don't seem to have the same "weight" when it comes to getting the backing of an Admin.

Bottom line, for me anyway, is that you cannot simply justify it both ways. It's very easy to point the finger when things are going wrong and say ./..shrug, nothing to do with us... but you can't justifiably get all defensive when they are accused of spamming (which technically they are doing irrespective of the permission sought.

And on that, can I suggest that, as this affects the community as a whole, as it 's those that *have* to read these deals on different fora, that you publish the direction/threads/etc.. as discussed on the Mod forum here? I would suggest that these things should also have been discussed in 'Feedforward', but I think we can all see what a failure that's been.

--amadeus--

@Dav - I appreciate that you are in probably the definition of a no-win job here and it must be frustrating to see people you know and work with acting as lightning rods for discontent in the way the BoardsDeals staff are.

I also know what you mean about Mods having a veto on any Rep posting in “their” forum but when you make it so explicitly clear that BD are a part of Boards and the part that makes the money that keeps the site afloat then do you really expect Mods to say no? I would imagine it would be a very difficult thing to do and not something that would be done by many. And while a request may have come in from some users to promote BD's in regional forums (for example) the lack of thanks on those posts would seem to indicate that they are not that welcome.

It seems to me to be very disingenuous to say on one hand that BD's is a separate site with a shared ownership and nothing else with Boards and therefore feedback on it shouldn't be in the main FB forum on the one hand and on the other to be so explicit about the need for cross promotion and how BD funds Boards. Either it's part of the Boards set up or it's not – it seems like it is when it suits but not when it's causing hassle.

The issue as I see it as an outsider is that the main Boards site was a community model that runs in the most part from volunteer effort. Now the parent group is more commercially minded there is a conflict between the old community ethos and the new commercial model; you wouldn't get volunteers working to police Facebook or Google because they are commercial entities whose main purpose is to make money. Boards main purpose is now to function as part of the Distilled Media group and contribute to the bottom line either through revenue or promotion of revenue generating sites. And that is angering a lot of people who choose to work for free on the site as well as a lot of the people who post here. Boards holds a dominant market position but the feedback from at least a part of your userbase and your volunteer staff seems to be that they are feeling a bit taken for granted and taken advantage of. Only you can decide if that is a big enough part to worry about but it seems to be a vocal minority that is getting bigger rather than smaller.

RoundyMooney

Walking a fine line between a volunteerism driven community, and a viable commercial entity is, I'd imagine, difficult to say the least. Has been for some years, in the case of boards, but it's still here and kicking hard.

However, a balance needs to be struck, or else the site that we all know and love will suffer, and undergo a painful catharsis from which it may not recover.

The very fact that there are still people here willing to volunteer their time is telling enough, in that no one wants to see the latter. And those tasked with running the show for a wage are also necessarily mindful of the monetary reality of making the site(s) work for their bread in a financial sense.

Which is fine. But I don't think it's a good idea, and I'm sure it wasn't the intention, for people to feel beholden to allow posts on "their" fora, which they feel are spammy in nature, for fear of depriving boards of revenue.

I don't know how boards is holding up financially-I assume it's doing okay, as in breaking even, or the current corporate structure wouldn't exist. My point being, that disallowing deals posts on this site is not going to send it to the wall, or threaten its existence, surely?

It is in my humble view unfair to imply, however unintentionally, that any criticism (or tongue in cheek joke-in pickarooney's case), is somehow jeopardising the site. And I say this with the utmost of respect for the work that goes on here that few of us get to acknowledge or appreciate.

Mr Magnolia

Would I stop a user, an admin or a boards deals employee posting something that would be detremental on a forum that I've cultivated or been charged with looking after? Of course I would and have done previously as Des highlighted, it's never been a problem. It's accepted that the local mods know what's best for a forum and debate is also always welcome. No drama there.

--amadeus--

Mr Magnolia wrote: »

Would I stop a user, an admin or a boards deals employee posting something that would be detremental on a forum that I've cultivated or been charged with looking after? Of course I would and have done previously as Des highlighted, it's never been a problem. It's accepted that the local mods know what's best for a forum and debate is also always welcome. No drama there.

You're an experienced Mod who has been around for a long time. I don't think everyone would be the same, especially new ones. And it's one thing to say you'd refuse and another to follow through

tbh

--amadeus-- wrote: »

You're an experienced Mod who has been around for a long time. I don't think everyone would be the same, especially new ones. And it's one thing to say you'd refuse and another to follow through

look I think the lads in HQ are in getting a raw deal - they can come out and say "we don't put any pressure on" and they can actually follow through with that, but then everyone says "ah but sure you do really, you just don't know it".

I can give you my experience - as someone who doesn't want those ads in any of the forums I read - there was an announcement made in the mods forum that there was going to be commercial reps, it was made very clear in that announcement that it was totally up to the local mods as to whether they'd be allowed post in those forums, there was no pressure, implicit or explicit to allow that (ie no "but bear in mind, these pay for the site" type messages) and I've never heard of anyone getting any grief for not allowing them.

I'm not sure if you can *just* allow c.reps from distilled media - I think it's all or none - but I'm sure that there are some mods who may feel "we better say ok to this" even tho they don't want to - but that's not HQs fault. All Dav and co can do is to say "your call - no pressure" and to be fair, they've lived up to that as far as I can see.

Oryx

I don't usually get annoyed over stuff on the internet, and policy decisions here usually sail right over my head. So I'm a little surprised at how strongly I feel about this one. Generally moderators are told when big changes are about to happen here. I would like to have seen a poll taken among mods to gauge opinion on this one which to me is a big change in advertising policy, before it started to happen.

And about no pressure being put on mods to let this fly.. Dav, you just said the site needs the finances provided by deals. You've said its an inter-site thing and therefore ok. So thats the company line on this. You really think then that most everyday mods will feel ok challenging the boss on this one?

As has been said here this is a free forum, staffed for you for free. Its what makes this site what it is imo. I dislike some other social media models intensely because the blatant advertising makes me feel like nothing more than a sales target. Now youre putting pressure on us to introduce a money generating element which to me signals a massive change in how things are run here. A change that changes boards from a community to a money making product.

Wibbs

RoundyMooney wrote: »

However, a balance needs to be struck, or else the site that we all know and love will suffer, and undergo a painful catharsis from which it may not recover.

It depends on how you define "suffer". More ads would kill it? I doubt it. Not financially anyway. People use plenty of sites much bigger than Boards that are very ad/marketing heavy and it's not affected them. How many billions will Facebook the marketing company make when it's floated?

Maybe the pool of volunteers would dry up? Again I doubt it. It's currently the go to discussion site in Ireland. I reckon on that score you will always have people lining up to volunteer, pretty much regardless of how things change(though quality would likely suffer). If the aforementioned FB opened it's doors for volunteer mods I guarantee the E-queue would be around the E-block. They could probably charge for the privilege. I've seen mods come and go, some bloody good ones too and like sharks teeth they fell out and another one was right behind. A large chunk of posters/mods/cmods, even admins who feel that things have gone a bit adrift may think they have a say and yes they can say it(thankfully), but it's a lot less of a say than they think. It'll cause a slight blip/seen as trouble and over time, nothing, or very little will change and the main body of the userbase won't notice or care. 5 years ago it would have had a much bigger effect, but today I really doubt it. I've seen mods leave, new mods appointed, little changes in policy etc in various forums and the userbase haven't even noticed nor cared it seems. In many ways the site's operating structure is predicated on this and the bigger it gets and the more actual money and wages or on the line the more this may be in play.

That all said, so far Boards has been pretty good on this score overall. It would be my opinion that they could in the morning block dissenting voices, close feedback etc and yes they would lose maybe 100 mods and around the same amount of users, but would not suffer that much. I'm sure the temptation might be there at times but they've not done that.

The very fact that there are still people here willing to volunteer their time is telling enough, in that no one wants to see the latter. And those tasked with running the show for a wage are also necessarily mindful of the monetary reality of making the site(s) work for their bread in a financial sense.

Not an easy tightrope to walk at all, especially for the paid folks, a good chunk of whom have grown with the site and have a deep emotional stake in it. Thus far IMH anyway, they've walked it pretty well. You're gonna expect the odd wobble.

It is in my humble view unfair to imply, however unintentionally, that any criticism (or tongue in cheek joke-in pickarooney's case), is somehow jeopardising the site.

+ 1, he was joking. It's allowed. It's also allowed that others miss said joke. One comment does not make for policy. Move on, dont rinse and repeat I reckon.

Wibbs

tbh wrote: »

l All Dav and co can do is to say "your call - no pressure" and to be fair, they've lived up to that as far as I can see.

TBH I'm with tbh on this score. (That's a lot of tbh's:)). I've certainly not seen any examples of commercial pressures being brought to bear on the moderating team and you can take it to the bank that I and many others would bring a fair bit of WTF? if it had. As for "challenging the boss", Yep O I'm sure a fair number would keep their head down, but I'm equally sure a fair number would not and vocally too. So long as enough of the latter remain this site will be the better for it.

Morag

If a person can't call bull **** or say no and give good clear reason reasons to admin or staff they same way the should to other posters when I'd wonder should they be a mod. No one ever said mods were to be "yes" men.
Aren't they chosen on their ability to make judgement calls and be able stand over them?

TouchingVirus

Oryx wrote: »

I don't usually get annoyed over stuff on the internet, and policy decisions here usually sail right over my head. So I'm a little surprised at how strongly I feel about this one. Generally moderators are told when big changes are about to happen here. I would like to have seen a poll taken among mods to gauge opinion on this one which to me is a big change in advertising policy, before it started to happen.

I'm no mod here, but two people so far (one of them being the community manager) have already said that this happened, that you had your chance to voice opposition, that there were announcements or notices made in the moderators forum. Before continuing on with the "I wish we were informed" bit, why not make sure you weren't? If it transpires you missed it well then what can you do but pay more attention the next time?

And about no pressure being put on mods to let this fly.. Dav, you just said the site needs the finances provided by deals. You've said its an inter-site thing and therefore ok. So thats the company line on this. You really think then that most everyday mods will feel ok challenging the boss on this one?

Is there a party line you need to tow? Massive injustices on boards always cause sh*tstorms, and you can bet any money that if a mod got removed just for saying "Nah, I don't want a boardsdeal post on my regional forum, it's sorta spammy and doesn't suit the community" there would be a major storm.

As has been said here this is a free forum, staffed for you for free.

For us.

Its what makes this site what it is imo. I dislike some other social media models intensely because the blatant advertising makes me feel like nothing more than a sales target. Now youre putting pressure on us to introduce a money generating element which to me signals a massive change in how things are run here. A change that changes boards from a community to a money making product.

More money wouldn't hurt Boards, would it? I'm sure there are lists as long as several arms about what's to be done with the site, but in the end it comes down to time and money. More money means more things done off that list. While BoardsDeals appears to be doing all right, a little more targeted exposure could increase profits and thus increase the money available to Boards - not that bad an idea, as long as it's done without being so in your face as a new thread by somebody who has a red username posting a sales pitch.

Wibbs

TouchingVirus wrote: »

I'm no mod here, but two people so far (one of them being the community manager) have already said that this happened, that you had your chance to voice opposition, that there were announcements or notices made in the moderators forum. Before continuing on with the "I wish we were informed" bit, why not make sure you weren't? If it transpires you missed it well then what can you do but pay more attention the next time?

Bit harsh there Ted? From my recall there was a talk about commercial reps in general and if you didn't want them in the forum then that was cool and the gang. I don't recall personally that specific mention was made about Boardsdeals reps/offers, though I fully admit I could be way off there. I suspect Oryx is referring to the "grey area" as seen by some regarding the connections between the deals folks and the main boards community and how that might influence mods where other named reps wouldn't?

Is there a party line you need to tow? Massive injustices on boards always cause sh*tstorms, and you can bet any money that if a mod got removed just for saying "Nah, I don't want a boardsdeal post on my regional forum, it's sorta spammy and doesn't suit the community" there would be a major storm.

Maybe, then again maybe not TV. It would be my opinion that yes there would be some sort of shítstorm, but it wouldn't spread or be taken up to the degree it might have in the past.

For us.

+1 and so long as it's for "us", not "you" then this site is doing OK. TBH and obviously speaking for myself, I really don't bother my arse concerning myself with the You's up the line anymore. So long as they help the community when they need to and leave communities alone when they don't and don't BS the difference then I don't care. IMHO so far the office level folks have done that across the board and fair play. I can't recall a single time when I had a WTF? or kept in the dark moment from Dav et al(and Darragh when he was here).

More money wouldn't hurt Boards, would it? I'm sure there are lists as long as several arms about what's to be done with the site, but in the end it comes down to time and money. More money means more things done off that list. While BoardsDeals appears to be doing all right, a little more targeted exposure could increase profits and thus increase the money available to Boards - not that bad an idea, as long as it's done without being so in your face as a new thread by somebody who has a red username posting a sales pitch.

Funny enough I'd agree with you on this point. One can choose not to read/avail of it. Within reason of course. Then again I can't see boards popups and mass ad spamming anytime soon or ever. If we as a community don't want any ad revenue then we could all subscribe. If the numbers of unique visitors are to be believed then that would bring in a fair few quid. Otherwise we'll have to learn to live with the "business" side. Like I said it's hardly OTT.

TouchingVirus

Wibbs wrote: »

Bit harsh there Ted? From my recall there was a talk about commercial reps in general and if you didn't want them in the forum then that was cool and the gang. I don't recall personally that specific mention was made about Boardsdeals reps/offers, though I fully admit I could be way off there. I suspect Oryx is referring to the "grey area" as seen by some regarding the connections between the deals folks and the main boards community and how that might influence mods where other named reps wouldn't?

Yes, it came off as being much more harsh than I thought it would and I must apologise for that - I'm not sure how to phrase it better. I just thought that rather than go around in circles with Dav saying "Mods were informed" and Oryx saying "I wish I was informed" a common ground could be found like "We were informed, but it was never about Boardsdeals and was more about the likes of Vodafone/Currys etc". As I said, I'm not a mod so I don't know what was said, it just seemed to me that the same line was being repeated there as regards no notice but an alternative view was presented and skipped over.

Wibbs wrote: »

Maybe, then again maybe not TV. It would be my opinion that yes there would be some sort of shítstorm, but it wouldn't spread or be taken up to the degree it might have in the past.

A fair enough point, it mightn't be big but it would happen. The ACT movement wasn't all that big, but it sure as hell was loud and got something out it

Wibbs wrote: »

+1 and so long as it's for "us", not "you" then this site is doing OK. TBH and obviously speaking for myself, I really don't bother my arse concerning myself with the You's up the line anymore. So long as they help the community when they need to and leave communities alone when they don't and don't BS the difference then I don't care. IMHO so far the office level folks have done that across the board and fair play. I can't recall a single time when I had a WTF? or kept in the dark moment from Dav et al(and Darragh when he was here).

I'd be of a similar mind myself, the folks in HQ can manage the business side of it and can help the community along as it needs with the likes of Dav, the tech team and all that other stuff but without forgetting that this place is a community and that's what makes it. The trade off is the business needs money to sustain itself, so the community is going to have to give a little as well.

Wibbs wrote: »

Funny enough I'd agree with you on this point. One can choose not to read/avail of it. Within reason of course. Then again I can't see boards popups and mass ad spamming anytime soon or ever. If we as a community don't want any ad revenue then we could all subscribe. If the numbers of unique visitors are to be believed then that would bring in a fair few quid. Otherwise we'll have to learn to live with the "business" side. Like I said it's hardly OTT.

The uniques are done by external groups as far as I know, so there'd be no tainting numbers. I'd hate to see a subscription based service though, nothing like an entrance fee to stifle discussion.

--amadeus--

I don't think anyone begrudges Boards making money or the idea that the site has to be commercial to be viable - as Wibbs says there are bigger sites that are far more commercial and in your face.

But there is a tipping point - look at Poker. A while back it was one of the busiest forums (top 5 or 10, I think?) and then the Mods and userbase had a falling out with the hierarchy and they moved as a bloc to a new site. That site is now thriving and the Poker forum here is a wasteland. Irrespective of the rights or wrongs of that case it does show that you can't just assume that a community is forever and that Boards will remain the go-to forum forever no matter what changes are made.

And I'm not saying that BD shouldn't be promoted or advertised on Boards - that's a nonsense. But I do think it needs it's position relative to Boards to be settled and whatever rules are made should be stuck to.

denballs

minidazzler wrote: »

what an interesting and well thought out opinion, formed from a vast experience of the boards deals.

Theres no better way to say it......i think every deal is poor value and never for anything id want or even in the slightest find interesting....if i wanted deals online i could google and spend 24/7 365 looking through better deals for the rest of my life............therefore to sum up....boards deals is crap...IN MY OPINION .....always has been.............happy?.........if not in stead of giving an even shorter less explained response then my first post maybe explain whats wrong with my comment before criticising.

NicsM

denballs wrote: »

Theres no better way to say it......i think every deal is poor value and never for anything id want or even in the slightest find interesting....if i wanted deals online i could google and spend 24/7 365 looking through better deals for the rest of my life............therefore to sum up....boards deals is crap...IN MY OPINION .....always has been.............happy?.........if not in stead of giving an even shorter less explained response then my first post maybe explain whats wrong with my comment before criticising.

So you don't find holidays or meals out interesting and would never want to stay in a hotel or eat a meal in a restaurant? Fair enough.

And you think a 50% discount represents poor value? The whole point of BoardsDeals is that you don't have to spend time Googling better deals-they try to bring you the best.

Wibbs

+1, one swallow does not make a summer, and a couple of Boards deals that went a bit pete tong does not make a bad service. Not by a long shot. Not my bag really, but I know a fair few folks who've gotten good value bargains from it.

denballs

Ninaluna wrote: »

So you don't find holidays or meals out interesting and would never want to stay in a hotel or eat a meal in a restaurant? Fair enough.

And you think a 50% discount represents poor value? The whole point of BoardsDeals is that you don't have to spend time Googling better deals-they try to bring you the best.

i plan my own holidays...if i want a discount to a certain destination of course ill google......

if i wanted to stay in a hotel then i would have to need accomodation as im going to the place the hotel is located.....even if there happend to be a boardsdeal on at the same time as i was looking to go to this place i would still google and look at every hotel and every deal....


......its not really that i dont want 50% off at a restaurant....its that the restaurants giving 50% off here are already over priced or places i wouldnt go......if i offered you to buy a one euro coin off me for 50 euro and told you i had been trying to sell it for 100....would you think that a good deal?


Also......and this is my main issue really.....i believe that boards gets paid to advertise these deals so that they are not advertiseing with the interests of boards members but its merly just another add on a website........do you click every add you see on facebook that says 50% off?......

now if boards management can tell me that im wrong and they or anyone who works with this site receives anything for posting up these supposed deals.....i will apologise....but i will also be very surprised at what iwould be ...IN MY OPINION...a very poor attempt to bring us varied and good value deals.

Wibbs

Eh maybe I'm missing something here? Boards deals is a business so why wouldn't they get paid?

In any event they're hardly intrusive. If anything the opposite. Can't personally recall the last ad for a deal myself. And TBH I'd not be that up to speed if I wanted to look. It's actually quite stealthy which can't be great for biz either. So I think the facebook comparisons are a tad off myself.

denballs

Wibbs wrote: »

Eh maybe I'm missing something here? Boards deals is a business so why wouldn't they get paid?

In any event they're hardly intrusive. If anything the opposite. Can't personally recall the last ad for a deal myself. And TBH I'd not be that up to speed if I wanted to look. It's actually quite stealthy which can't be great for biz either. So I think the facebook comparisons are a tad off myself.

No offense, you are of course entitled to your opinion/input but i view everything you say on the matter as biased and i have trouble understanding parts of what you say.

Wibbs

denballs wrote: »

No offense, you are of course entitled to your opinion/input but i view everything you say on the matter as biased

Me? Biased? Oh that's funny. No really. :pac:

i have trouble understanding parts of what you say.

noted for future ref. Actually I think it better to ignore you as so far your "arguments" are pretty silly and simplistic.

Every boardsdeal is crap.....IMO.....they always have been

'nuff said really.

_blank_

Wibbs, I have trouble understanding most of what you say.
:pac:

RoundyMooney

denballs wrote: »

No offense, you are of course entitled to your opinion/input but i view everything you say on the matter as biased and i have trouble understanding parts of what you say.

How is he biased then? 'Cos he happens to be a mod?

@Des: He's just blinding us with science, or something.