Time For A Bit of Forum Feedback

awec

This post has been deleted.

iptba

@The Corinthian:
I think the perfect can be the enemy of the good i.e. by pushing for the perfect, you can end up with little or nothing.

I don't agree with every decision made on tGC, but I realise the mod team are only volunteers, as well as humans who may see things differently to me. So I'm grateful for the facility and the time the mods put it.

The Corinthian

awec wrote: »

So, you'd have closed the thread. Which is what happened.

Why did you just selectively pick the last thing I would have done and ignore the rest? Is there a particular reason you are doing this because between your presumptions on things that I don't actually say and now arriving at conclusions based on selective reading of what I do say, I'm beginning to suspect you're doing this intentionally.

I think these straws, I mean arguments, you're picking with me are what are beyond belief at this stage.

A months ban for what too? The OPs most may not have been morally right but they broke no rules.

I never said I would go that far, but they did at the least deserve an infraction.

And they did break the rules - misrepresenting yourself on Boards for the purposes of pushing an ulterior agenda, such as a company, Web site or political group is called shilling. Feel free to look it up.

The Corinthian

iptba wrote: »

@The Corinthian:
I think the perfect can be the enemy of the good i.e. by pushing for the perfect, you can end up with little or nothing.

Or we can push for nothing and not be disappointed when we get it.

Dravokivich

Maguined wrote: »

If it is down to an individual would that individual not be punished rather than the thread itself?

Surely locking a thread is done when the thread itself violates the charter and not a individual posting on it?

Well as I mentioned "Attitude" within a thread. If one starts hammering away at something and no-one bites, sure infract that person. But if the thread descends into little more than a flame war/points scoring, that is then an issue with the attitude within the thread and they should be closed out IMO.

But also as I mentioned, it's only been rare that I've seen it.

awec

This post has been deleted.

Liam McPoyle

The Corinthian wrote: »

I didn't decline - I told you to look back in the thread where I'd already done so - and as you'll see above, I've done so again. Do you have any examples to the contrary?

No no buddy,you claimed that there were numerous threads that were locked or moved,here is what I said.

If there are so many examples of threads been moved to humanities from here I challenge you to link to even 4 or 5 but the fact is you won't be able to because they simply don't exist

You have trotted out one example,just one,where a thread was moved.

And you keep using it because the fact is,there are little/no other threads that were moved.

That feminism thread was closed at the OP's request as is standard practice across boards.

With all due respect,you mod one forum that has had 5 posts in the last month and a half,one that is about phones and the other that is about internet access.

Not exactly hot beds of controversial topics so your opinion on modding subjects that can be troublesome, in here or anywhere else for that matter holds little water.

You seem to think this forum owes you something just because you are a bloke.

Heres some news for you,male posters in tGC have gotten a lot of lee way from myself (when I was modding) and other mods when it came to some contentious issues because this forum is for male opinions, by design.

There was one female poster that you constantly butted heads with in threads about fathers rights.I had numerous PM conversations with her as she felt she was been bullied, I disagreed.You may have been voicing your opinions quite aggressively in some instances but for the most part it was deemed appropriate given the forum.

Likewise, another high profile female poster made the same complaint about another thread (not involving you btw) that she was being bullied, again, there were some posters that were being quite aggressive but there was nothing worth actioning.

Both of these posters closed their accounts over a year ago btw so imo its ok to make these points,mods,feel free to edit my post if ye see fit.

When I modded,could I have handled some things better?

Undoubtedly, however when you are dealing with issues that some people feel very passionate about, you arent always going to please everyone,such is life.

Also, as an fyi, not that you deserve any explanation, the thread that I moved to humanities and that you are so fond of using as your stick to try and beat tGC with, was discussed by the mods and was going to be locked a couple of days before it was eventually closed, we just didnt get around to it,mthe last stupid post was just the final straw.

The Corinthian

awec wrote: »

Tell the truth now...

I would have infracted them and perhaps gone as far as a ban, not that does not mean I definitely would do so and this is what I wrote.

My apologies if this was unclear - I will use simpler language when responding to you in future.

oddman2

I think this thread has turned into a very good example of what can happen to serious threads in here, and is why I don't really post in those threads. The first few pages are decent enough, while the rest have consisted mainly of a small number of posters bickering, with good posts getting lost in the noise.

The Corinthian

Necronos wrote: »

No no buddy,you claimed that there were numerous threads that were locked or moved,here is what I said.

When you actually supply something too I'll take what you're saying seriously.

That feminism thread was closed at the OP's request as is standard practice across boards.

So's banning/infracting shills.

Not exactly hot beds of controversial topics so your opinion on modding subjects that can be troublesome, in here or anywhere else for that matter holds little water.

Is this some sort of penis measuring competition? I note you presently mod no boards here.

You seem to think this forum owes you something just because you are a bloke.

Because I'm a bloke? What an believably dumb presumption.

I don't think this forum owes me anything. This is why I have repeatedly argued that if the mods are uncomfortable with free discussion on men's rights, then spin it off elsewhere. That's hardly too much to ask, is it?

Both of these posters closed their accounts over a year ago btw so imo its ok to make these points,mods,feel free to edit my post if ye see fit.

Nice one. TC bullies girls and forces them all to close their accounts. That should play well to the cheap seats in the back.

Also, as an fyi, not that you deserve any explanation, the thread that I moved to humanities and that you are so fond of using as your stick to try and beat tGC with, was discussed by the mods and was going to be locked a couple of days before it was eventually closed, we just didnt get around to it,mthe last stupid post was just the final straw.

Why was it going to be locked then? Not that any of us deserve an explanation, of course.

The Corinthian

oddman2 wrote: »

I think this thread has turned into a very good example of what can happen to serious threads in here, and is why I don't really post in those threads. The first few pages are decent enough, while the rest have consisted mainly of a small number of posters bickering, with good posts getting lost in the noise.

TBH, I'd have to agree with you. I made my case much earlier in this thread and this is the price I pay for doing so. So I can either ignore these attacks (many are at this stage personal, which apparently we're not supposed to do in this thread), in which case one small group of vocal posters get to shout down the other vocal group of posters or I fight my corner (resulting in this bickering).

Of course, in theory this is where moderators should typically step in. But I suppose that depends who's been flamed.

Anyhow, I'm done. Status quo it is.

Panthro

The Corinthian wrote: »

I would have posted that the thread had run its course and was going to be closed because of that, not at the OP's request.

So in the forums you mod, if an OP asks you to close a particular thread, you refuse to unless the thread has, in your opinion, run it's course? I find that difficult to believe to be honest, but each to their own.

The Corinthian wrote: »

I would have added that the OP should not have opened the thread without disclosing their intentions and that for this I would at the very least infracted them for this, if not given a month's ban. Then I would have closed the thread.

What? Let me get this straight, So with every single new thread that pops up in TGC, you expect the OP to outline their intentions behind the thread from the get-go, and if not given, us mods to seek such intentions?

iptba

oddman2 wrote: »

The first few pages are decent enough, while the rest have consisted mainly of a small number of posters bickering, with good posts getting lost in the noise.

Although I think it should be put in context that lots of discussions on lots of forums on boards and elsewhere often involve bickering, probably especially after the first few pages.

awec

This post has been deleted.

Liam McPoyle

Oh Corinthian,you do make me laugh.

You are conducting yourself in the same brow beating,opinion forcing bullshít that perpetuates pretty much every single thread you involve yourself in.

You asked Dravkovich for examples of posters destroying threads by constantly trying to push their own agenda,well look no further than this thread and yourself.

You really are so self involved you cant see the forest for the trees.

Maguined

Panthro wrote: »

What? Let me get this straight, So with every single new thread that pops up in TGC, you expect the OP to outline their intentions behind the thread from the get-go, and if not given, us mods to seek such intentions?

I would imagine TC is not proposing the mods ascertain the intentions of new threads but when a poster openly admits they created the thread for ulterior motives than first presented that they effectively shilling for another website this could of been stated as part of the reason the thread was closed rather than simply upon the wishes of the thread starter.

Maguined

Necronos wrote: »

Oh Corinthian,you do make me laugh.

You are conducting yourself in the same brow beating,opinion forcing bullshít that perpetuates pretty much every single thread you involve yourself in.

You asked Dravkovich for examples of posters destroying threads by constantly trying to push their own agenda,well look no further than this thread and yourself.

You really are so self involved you cant see the forest for the trees.

Define opinion forcing? This thread was created by the mods for feedback. TC gave his feedback. Some people disagreed with his opinions (which is their right) and wanted to debate his points so he debated them back so I don't see how this is forcing his opinion on people?

Liam McPoyle

Maguined wrote: »

Define opinion forcing? This thread was created by the mods for feedback. TC gave his feedback. Some people disagreed with his opinions (which is their right) and wanted to debate his points so he debated them back so I don't see how this is forcing his opinion on people?

He has used one example,just one,to illustrate a central argument of his ie "mens rights threads in here get locked/moved to humanities on a regular basis" and he has over 40 posts in this thread.

More than 40 posts, with the same example, for the same argument is attempting to force an opinion/brow beat people into submission in my opinion.

Maguined

Necronos wrote: »

He has used one example,just one,to illustrate a central argument of his ie "mens rights threads in here get locked/moved to humanities on a regular basis" and he has over 40 posts in this thread.

More than 40 posts, with the same example, for the same argument is attempting to force an opinion/brow beat people into submission in my opinion.

It doesn't matter if he has 40 posts though. He made one initial post giving his feedback. Anything after that has been as a response to someone questioning his opinion. If you are allowed question someone's opinion and ask them to defend it then you should be allowed defend it without being labelled as forcing your opinion on it.

Dr Galen

Please, Please, Please, Please stop the bickering and sniping.....please. Could we also tone it down a touch? For people who are so worried about the "community" it's kinda surprising to see the tone and attitudes coming across here. Lets just take a deep one and relax for a bit.

It is getting no-one anywhere good and is just turning what is meant to be a feedback thread into a petty lookin bitchfest. I'm going to take it that it just a case of people getting a bit hot under the collar etc. but that is it.

No more, I don't care who you are, what you think or anything else along those lines. Infractions will follow if my request isn't heeded.

Cheers

DrG

Dr Galen

Specifically @ TC for a sec

Man, I don't know what you want here? If you want me to say that things haven't always been perfect in relation to the Moderating of threads around the issue of Male Rights, I've already said it. I've also said, that we're getting some new Mods in, to help lighten the load. This will also help in the decision making around issues as they creep up, power of crowds and all that.

I could go all multi-quote on you with regards to your response to my more recent post, but honestly I don't have the time or the energy right now.

For now though:

Bashing ≠ having a rational, reasoned discussion or debate about something

Moderator Discretion exists across fora on this site, and will continue to.

If you feel a specific Mens Rights forum should exist, cool, go ahead and see if there is support for it in the Forum Requests forum. I'm not against it, but I'm not for it either. I can see potential issues with it and for the majority of discussions under the general heading Men's Rights tGC serves just fine. Other people may want a more specific forum, they might be more interested in the topic than I. Fair enough really.

Or would you prefer to keep it here specifically so you can stifle discussion?

Do not attribute thoughts or feelings to me that I have not clearly stated I hold. You and I have posted here for a long time, you also post over in Politics. You really should know that stifling or censoring discussion is not my gig at all.

The Black Oil

I can't remember when I started posting here, a year or so ago, maybe. I lurked for a good while before joining in. I'd encourage anyone who is ensure to jump in. Generally, I'd say the forum is pretty relaxed in its atmosphere and friendly.

As for 'fluff' and weighty issues, I see no reason that there can't be both. Some of points made in this thread are a bit lost on me as I've tended not to read the more serious threads in detail, particularly if they were getting out of hand. There have been some others I've read, the bullying one someone mentioned, for example. With the 'easy on the eye' thread, I tend not to open it because I often can't be arsed with opening pic heavy threads.

Extra mods are needed. That's more about coverage and availability than anything else, really.

Daisies

The Corinthian wrote: »

Well, we'll just trust you on that then...

Conversely, in this thread a few examples of poor moderation have actually been given:

OneDeleting the posts, warning or infracting them was too much trouble it seems.

iptba wrote: »

@The Corinthian:
I think the perfect can be the enemy of the good i.e. by pushing for the perfect, you can end up with little or nothing.

I don't agree with every decision made on tGC, but I realise the mod team are only volunteers, as well as humans who may see things differently to me. So I'm grateful for the facility and the time the mods put it.

I want to agree with iptba. I have huge respect for mods of busy (and sometimes controversial) forums. You have to remember they are volunteers but over all they are human. Yes people make mistakes, yes not everyone will agree with their decisions but that's what makes us adults, that we can have a disagreement, and ideally a rational discussion about said disagreement.

This thread has spiralled down into (and I loathe to use the phrase) "handbag" territory. A feedback thread is for that, feedback. If you make your point once, that is all that is needed. If someone disagrees with said point, that is allowed. If your feedback is valid I don't see why you would constantly need to repeat the point again and again. TBH it just irritates people (and by people I mean me:pac:). If the point is genuinely good, I have every faith the mods will take it on board. From my dealings with them they seem to be a pretty (!) reasonable bunch. Again, I want to point out that they are only human (except Dr G, I'm pretty sure he's supernatural):P

TL;DR Why can't we all just agree that we have different opinions?

Dravokivich

I can't believe no-one has said this, can "Beers/Meetup" threads be unstickied more sooner, like 1 or 2 days after the event?

Panthro

Dravokivich wrote: »

I can't believe no-one has said this, can "Beers/Meetup" threads be unstickied more sooner, like 1 or 2 days after the event?

Thread unstuck!
(See, I listen folks! )

The Corinthian

Dr Galen wrote: »

Bashing ≠ having a rational, reasoned discussion or debate about something

No it's not, but that depends on what you define as bashing.

Some users here, such as yawha, would likely accuse any criticism of Feminism as 'bashing', while I would suggest that when some posters begin to come out with some of the more conspiratorial accusations against Feminism, that the plot has been lost and it's just degenerated to 'bashing'. I've had no problem either shooting down such misogynistic arguments or reporting them, in the past, when they arise.

I would suggest the moderators should give a definition of what constitutes 'bashing' for future reference, except I would suspect that this definition may well be thrown out the window at the 'discretion' of a moderator and any objection to such inconstancy would be put down to 'rules lawyering'. And that too is part of the problem.

Moderator Discretion exists across fora on this site, and will continue to.

My criticism has been that this discretion has been biased and I gave two examples of this (not one as some have claimed), while instead counter theories on why threads were closed or moved have been proffered, yet not a single example of this has been offered - this is what I find particularly hilarious.

Now, I cannot really say which moderator or moderators have behaved in this way; many moderator actions are not visible and even when they are, both who is a moderator and even their usernames change periodically, so it is entirely possible that this is not something that is practised by all the moderators. But it has happened, and given rather venomous Necronos' posts, I can see how.

(On this note, any reason that Necronos' pretty vicious personal attack, following a warning by a moderator to avoid sniping, and reported by me, went unpunished? Can I mount a personal attack against Necronos now without fear of so much as an infraction?)

If you feel a specific Mens Rights forum should exist, cool, go ahead and see if there is support for it in the Forum Requests forum. I'm not against it, but I'm not for it either.

Then it won't happen as it didn't the last time a request for one was sought on Boards. The only way it might happen is with the support of the moderators here.

Personally, I don't actually want that a separate forum be set up - ideally I think the home of such discussions should be here. It is only out of exasperation at the de facto moderation policies that I have suggested this option.

Look, where it comes to men's rights threads, I tend to be the guy who for some reason has become the debating hatchet man; plenty of PM's edging me on, often from posters who then present a much softer side when they post on thread.

And, TBH, I'm kind of fed up with it. Enough posters, not only me, have stated there's a problem with how Men's Rights threads are dealt with here. So this will either change or it won't. And if it doesn't, you'll just get fewer discussions on the subject as it migrates to either other boards or off Boards.ie altogether.

Anyhow, that's all I have to say and I really have no further interest in being the hatchet man any more - others can do their own dirty work from now on.

donfers

I've never gotten this bashing/bullying stuff

jesus, this is an internet discussion forum where we write words into a box

if some stranger writes words in a box that suggest I am talking bollox my self-esteem will probably recover from the blow one day!

let's all have at it folks - I am astonished that people ever feel harassed or belittled or "shouted down" on here, i am astonished they go running to mods claiming they have been bullied

this crybaby mentality damages real debate, framing our opinions so they fit the acceptable criteria of the day, it's one big lie - if a person is rude or idiotic then allow them to be seen as just that

but no, the first instinct is always always to protect the crybaby, their delicate sensibilities set the agenda - thus encouraging the complainant even more

i'm not sure if that is the correct way in most cases yet i accept the radical change that i would like to see is never going to be allowed to happen on these boards

as a kind of watered down portrayal of how societal control panders to and rewards certain agendas of the day and how these influence debate, it has value i suppose

apologies for sounding pretentious and talking in vague terms throughout the post

yawha

A vocal group of posters in agreement vehemently supporting a particular viewpoint can often be very offputting to those with differing opinions, as well as those who would rather see a forum with more focus on respectful discussion, rather than constant, heated debate. This is particularly relevant to newcomers, and tends to drive them away from the forum.

Maybe your position is that they should just get over it, grown a thicker skin and continue to post voicing their views, but in reality, this is how people react to this sort of situation.

Right now, for example, for simply voicing an opposing viewpoint in a few threads, I'm being held up as an example of some sort of unreasonable poster who can't distinguish valid criticism from "bashing". I don't care that it's the internet and I apparently shouldn't take anything seriously, that sort of crap is exhausting and does not encourage me to want to post here.

iptba

I took quite a bashing for one particular thread in particular (I highlighted/complained about a big collection of jokes on men's health, man flu', etc). It wasn't particularly nice but, as I don't use my real name, like most people here, it made it a lot easier. I have found other outlets if I wanted to to discuss some issues like that now.

Dravokivich

donfers wrote: »

I've never gotten this bashing/bullying stuff

jesus, this is an internet discussion forum where we write words into a box

if some stranger writes words in a box that suggest I am talking bollox my self-esteem will probably recover from the blow one day!

let's all have at it folks - I am astonished that people ever feel harassed or belittled or "shouted down" on here, i am astonished they go running to mods claiming they have been bullied

this crybaby mentality damages real debate, framing our opinions so they fit the acceptable criteria of the day, it's one big lie - if a person is rude or idiotic then allow them to be seen as just that

but no, the first instinct is always always to protect the crybaby, their delicate sensibilities set the agenda - thus encouraging the complainant even more

i'm not sure if that is the correct way in most cases yet i accept the radical change that i would like to see is never going to be allowed to happen on these boards

as a kind of watered down portrayal of how societal control panders to and rewards certain agendas of the day and how these influence debate, it has value i suppose

apologies for sounding pretentious and talking in vague terms throughout the post

I think you've gone a bit sideways there. How can it be possible to throw such a general comment towards bullying without knowing the particulars of any incident involving bullying that's been referenced?

Believe it or not, serious shít can happen on the internet and it's obviously been a problem on boards.ie before, considering the approach the admins have to personal abuse. It's not tolerated in any form and I'm not too sure on how you consider that to be "protecting the crybaby." Then again that's more of a boards.ie thing overall, than a tGC thing.