Is Boards aware of the reputation it has across the web?

Miss Demeanour

maudgonner wrote: »

I think it's time to call it a day with these puns. Were starting to sound like complete fruitcakes.

She is entiltled to wine about it........


Ill get me coat.........

Spanish Eyes

Got a great laugh from you all about the grapes today.

Thanks a lot you witty people.. you're certainly not withering on the vine!

KomradeBishop

K-9 wrote: »

We must sort out that bug in the system forthwith! Joke btw. Tbh, personally, let bygones be bygones, just my personal opinion, I'm more mellowed out as time has gone on. Without going into details (seriously, both of us don't need to go over this old ground yet again), a compromise was offered, us mods did spend time trying to reach a compromise.
A forum was even set up on your request, political economics, so any objective mind can't say we didn't listen.
Plus you aren't quite technically correct, but let's not bore everybody with that stuff!

Well, I'll agree to disagree - mainly as my original reply was getting far too large

I don't have any personal issues with anyone from all of that - I can see exactly how each of the steps can happen quite innocently, without ill intent from anyone - but I do think it all represents a diverse and wide-ranging set of problems with moderation, problems which are still unresolved and still leave me partially banned in bizarre rube-goldberg-esque circumstances, which I doubt even mods/admins could make sense of at this stage (so, it's not exactly a 'let bygones be bygones' situation, it's still far from level ground - while no individual mod screwed me, the overall way in which moderation was handled led to me being massively screwed over).

jackofalltrades

Wibbs wrote: »

There can be some real passive aggressive types who goad others just below the radar waiting for them to kick off and then go a running to daddy to sort them out.
They can even operate in a pack to do it. Again they don't break the rules and come across all "reasonable".

They really are the worst.
Targeting users to get them banned or so the thread becomes too difficult to moderate and gets shutdown.
It's even worse when they scare off new users with this tactic.

Maguined wrote: »

My biggest pet hate is when a thread is locked because a small handful of people cross the line.
Rather than take action against the one or two people breaking the rules by banning them if necessary the entire thread is locked so no discussion is allowed further.

It is simply lazy and heavy handed.

Yeah it's a real pain in the arse when this happens.
In fairness though the Mods on some forums(e.g. Politics Cafe) do a good job of keeping open heated threads.

recylingbin

RayM wrote: »

None of them would last five minutes on After Hours - not least because posting in other languages ist verboten.

This deserved more.
Well played, Sir.

MRnotlob606

I don't like the whole don't talk about Islam thing on Boards. It's fine to attack Christianity here, but criticising Islam is a no-go area. Sure you can talk about it, but then threads get moved, locked, people get banned etc. Just ways to stiffle debate and discourse.

I am not totally Anti-Boards either, its just I think at times threads get locked quite gratuituously

ShakerMaker91

The over moderation on Boards is ridiculous you cant even partake in a bit of banter with people especially on the soccer forums without fear of a warning its like being in North Korea

tomwaterford

ShakerMaker91 wrote: »

The over moderation on Boards is ridiculous you cant even partake in a bit of banter with people especially on the soccer forums without fear of a warning its like being in North Korea

They haven't the Internet in North Korea :pac:

Amalgam

tomwaterford wrote: »

They haven't the Internet in North Korea :pac:

They have a weird intranet, The Register published an interesting article on it.

The Register: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/21/north_koreas_internet/

Wiki article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_in_North_Korea

BlaasForRafa

jackofalltrades wrote: »

They really are the worst.
Targeting users to get them banned or so the thread becomes too difficult to moderate and gets shutdown.

The SJW types have this down to a tee, aided by some of the mods.

J Mysterio

Amalgam wrote: »

They have a weird intranet, The Register published an interesting article on it.

Fascinating. Nice one.

solo1y

I've been getting into all sorts of trouble on all sorts of forums for about 20 years now.

The result is a post with some basic principles for board moderators:

1. Be absolutely clear on what your board regards as unacceptable.

Trying to be positive and constructive about content guidelines is a nightmare. It’s much more efficient to explain what you don’t want. Then everyone can infer that anything not on that list is fair game. However, if you keep slapping posters for breaking ambiguous or non-existent rules, it will create justifiable resentment and your boards will suffer.

2. Discourage cliques as much as possible.

It’s impossible to prevent cliques, but you can be aware of the risk, and establish damage limitation measures. The last thing you need is a small bunch of people agreeing with everything any member of the clique says, and pretty much ignoring everything else, or worse, making snide and sarcastic comments about anyone who isn’t in that clique. Some ideas: Call them out publicly as often as you see it, but do it with a sense of humour. If that doesn’t work, make one of them a mod of some forum and explain that his new job is to stop cliquism, and if he doesn’t do it properly, he’ll be de-modded. Most posters will trade clique membership for on-board banning power without blinking. This should neuter, or at least destabilise the clique.

The worst cases of cliquism are when an admin signs up to one. Because he’s on the inside, he might not even notice what he’s doing. If he does not develop the mental capacity to stand outside his boards and look in, he will remain mystified as his boards crash around him.

3. Provide fresh, interesting content.

Most posters (including me) are reactive rather than active. This means that you need to provide a regularly-updating structure upon which they can hang their posts. It doesn’t matter what the structure is - you can use brain-numbing myspace-style surveys, or find current news stories relevant to the theme of your board - as long as it kicks off some threads. If you have someone on your boards who provides frequent, relevant content to your board, look after her. People like this are worth more to your boards than ten posters whose entire contribution to threads is “LOL”.

4. Deal with problems quickly.

There will be problems. Deal with them in as quickly and as low-key as you can. There’s nothing worse than a thread dragging out into a stupid fight between the admins and the posters. Whatever you’re going to do, just do it. (Note that if you’re the asshole in this equation, this can spectacularly backfire. So don’t be the asshole.) Once you have decided to hand down a ban or a suspension, stick to it. If you temporarily suspend someone, and he re-registers to post again, ban him forever at I.P. level. Delete without comment any post he tries to make. As long as you’re not engaging with him at all, he will get bored and go away.

5. Have a sense of humour.

People will take an awful lot of **** from you if you’re funny. I know this from my experience on message boards and from real life. I’ve said some terrible things to some violent people and as long as everyone around him is laughing, he can’t get too offended. This is a bit trickier on the internet, but it can be done. If you’re not actually funny, this also can backfire. Don’t try to be funny if you’re not, and remember, being personally hurtful and nasty to an individual poster (unless he’s in on it) is never funny. The rule is: sarcasm only works UP the chain of command.

6. Don’t have too many mods.

This is a recipe for disaster, not least because the more mods you have, the more likely it is that they will start fighting among themselves. Also, unless you have a massive, sprawling site, it will cause resentment among some members who feel that they, too, should become moderators, given the low criteria you must have applied. In any case, make sure all your mods are on-message.

7. Listen to your members.

If a bunch of your active members want something, give it to them, even if that something is, in your opinion, really stupid. If a bunch of your active members want you to get rid of something, get rid of it, even if that something is, in your opinion, really cool.

8. Have fun.

If your boards are characterised by constant pitched battles, nasty comments, sarcasm, personal attacks, and so on - no one’s having fun. It’s fun to have some drama occasionally, but constant stupid, nasty drama is off-putting, draining and no fun. (A good sign that life is draining from your board is if the fun, interesting posters only log on to defend themselves on threads composed mainly of trolling.) Whatever you’re doing, you’re doing it wrong. Read the paragraphs above, re-assess, and fix it.

Not that the people most in need of this advice will pay any attention, but and as however.

_Tombstone_

I wonder how far down that Alexa Chart Boards will have to go before any notice is taken of all these sorta Threads started here or in Feedback?

moc moc a moc

MRnotlob606 wrote: »

It's fine to attack Christianity here, but criticising Islam is a no-go area

This is a stance associated with the 'regressive left', stereotypical of hipsters and SJWs which are the kind of people that seem to be running Boards lately.

osarusan

I wasn't aware that Boards had a reputation on the internet.

Kind of sad to be going onto some site/forum to complain about another forum. Why would you even bother?

J Mysterio

osarusan wrote: »

I wasn't aware that Boards had a reputation on the internet

Indeed. :pac:

Esel

solo1y wrote: »

I've been getting into all sorts of trouble on all sorts of forums for about 20 years now.

The result is a post with some basic principles for board moderators:

1. Be absolutely clear on what your board regards as unacceptable.

Trying to be positive and constructive about content guidelines is a nightmare. It’s much more efficient to explain what you don’t want. Then everyone can infer that anything not on that list is fair game. However, if you keep slapping posters for breaking ambiguous or non-existent rules, it will create justifiable resentment and your boards will suffer.

2. Discourage cliques as much as possible.

It’s impossible to prevent cliques, but you can be aware of the risk, and establish damage limitation measures. The last thing you need is a small bunch of people agreeing with everything any member of the clique says, and pretty much ignoring everything else, or worse, making snide and sarcastic comments about anyone who isn’t in that clique. Some ideas: Call them out publicly as often as you see it, but do it with a sense of humour. If that doesn’t work, make one of them a mod of some forum and explain that his new job is to stop cliquism, and if he doesn’t do it properly, he’ll be de-modded. Most posters will trade clique membership for on-board banning power without blinking. This should neuter, or at least destabilise the clique.

The worst cases of cliquism are when an admin signs up to one. Because he’s on the inside, he might not even notice what he’s doing. If he does not develop the mental capacity to stand outside his boards and look in, he will remain mystified as his boards crash around him.

3. Provide fresh, interesting content.

Most posters (including me) are reactive rather than active. This means that you need to provide a regularly-updating structure upon which they can hang their posts. It doesn’t matter what the structure is - you can use brain-numbing myspace-style surveys, or find current news stories relevant to the theme of your board - as long as it kicks off some threads. If you have someone on your boards who provides frequent, relevant content to your board, look after her. People like this are worth more to your boards than ten posters whose entire contribution to threads is “LOL”.

4. Deal with problems quickly.

There will be problems. Deal with them in as quickly and as low-key as you can. There’s nothing worse than a thread dragging out into a stupid fight between the admins and the posters. Whatever you’re going to do, just do it. (Note that if you’re the asshole in this equation, this can spectacularly backfire. So don’t be the asshole.) Once you have decided to hand down a ban or a suspension, stick to it. If you temporarily suspend someone, and he re-registers to post again, ban him forever at I.P. level. Delete without comment any post he tries to make. As long as you’re not engaging with him at all, he will get bored and go away.

5. Have a sense of humour.

People will take an awful lot of **** from you if you’re funny. I know this from my experience on message boards and from real life. I’ve said some terrible things to some violent people and as long as everyone around him is laughing, he can’t get too offended. This is a bit trickier on the internet, but it can be done. If you’re not actually funny, this also can backfire. Don’t try to be funny if you’re not, and remember, being personally hurtful and nasty to an individual poster (unless he’s in on it) is never funny. The rule is: sarcasm only works UP the chain of command.

6. Don’t have too many mods.

This is a recipe for disaster, not least because the more mods you have, the more likely it is that they will start fighting among themselves. Also, unless you have a massive, sprawling site, it will cause resentment among some members who feel that they, too, should become moderators, given the low criteria you must have applied. In any case, make sure all your mods are on-message.

7. Listen to your members.

If a bunch of your active members want something, give it to them, even if that something is, in your opinion, really stupid. If a bunch of your active members want you to get rid of something, get rid of it, even if that something is, in your opinion, really cool.

8. Have fun.

If your boards are characterised by constant pitched battles, nasty comments, sarcasm, personal attacks, and so on - no one’s having fun. It’s fun to have some drama occasionally, but constant stupid, nasty drama is off-putting, draining and no fun. (A good sign that life is draining from your board is if the fun, interesting posters only log on to defend themselves on threads composed mainly of trolling.) Whatever you’re doing, you’re doing it wrong. Read the paragraphs above, re-assess, and fix it.

Not that the people most in need of this advice will pay any attention, but and as however.

Copy & paste, or from scratch?

Good stuff either way.

_Tombstone_

Esel wrote: »

Copy & paste, or from scratch?

Good stuff either way.

Its a great post.

Point 3 is completely lost on Boards.

ZeroThreat

lol boards mods aren't as bad as politics.ie mods. Just notified I've been perma-banned for referring to DOB as 'Brib**y O'Brien'

_Kaiser_

solo1y wrote: »

7. Listen to your members.

If a bunch of your active members want something, give it to them, even if that something is, in your opinion, really stupid. If a bunch of your active members want you to get rid of something, get rid of it, even if that something is, in your opinion, really cool.

*cough *newsite *cough*

Excellent post though!

_Kaiser_

ZeroThreat wrote: »

lol boards mods aren't as bad as politics.ie mods. Just notified I've been perma-banned for referring to DOB as 'Brib**y O'Brien'

To be fair though, most sites (news sites included) have become VERY wary about comments on stories about him. Sites like BreakingNews have taken to disabling the ability to comment on such reports at all.

Esel

_Tombstone_ wrote: »

Its a great post.

Point 3 is completely lost on Boards.

Agreed on #3. Could be a game-changer here on Boards, as long as the proactive thread starters had a fair bit of cop-on.

Dav, are you listening?

mzungu

ZeroThreat wrote: »

lol boards mods aren't as bad as politics.ie mods. Just notified I've been perma-banned for referring to DOB as 'Brib**y O'Brien'

Careful now, ye don't want to be getting letters from the man himself.

Yeah_Right

I enjoy Boards. If I didn't, I wouldn't come back.

However I've been paddled by the mods a few times. Twice it was because I was a dick so it was fair enough. Once it was because I offended a racist. I still stand by that statement. But a couple of times it was because the mod (and their mates) didn't like my opinion on an issue. On one occasion I was asked a specific question which I answered honestly and I got carded.

Patty O Furniture

The Moldy Gowl wrote: »

Yeah. There is a handful of chatty social forums.
Grand if you get on with who is in there.

If your hot and female and single, you will get the ride off young bucks like myself.

I'm only logging in now,

Heh! No sooner than i posted about private forums last nite, the site went down last nite & i got Err 52

I suppose rule no1 is don't ask about about... :P



I meant to say are the other sites mentioned: buzzfeed & The Journal owned by Boards as well?

Esel

Patty O Furniture wrote: »

I'm only logging in now,

Heh! No sooner than i posted about private forums last nite, the site went down last nite & i got Err 52

I suppose rule no1 is don't ask about about... :P



I meant to say are the other sites mentioned: buzzfeed & The Journal owned by Boards as well?

Para much? :eek:

WarZ

moc moc a moc wrote: »

This is a stance associated with the 'regressive left', stereotypical of hipsters and SJWs which are the kind of people that seem to be running Boards lately.

I have already made comments about the over zealous modding but it's only in reaction to the insane amount of extreme right wing posters that came along and started soapboxing in afterhours. So unfortunately there's no easy solution to the problem if we don't want After Hours turning into Stormfront

I utterly despise that term SJW. Whenever someone uses it in an argument I instantly just disregard their opinion.

Blazer

Discodog wrote: »

I remember asking once why Boards wasn't available on Tapatalk. The reply was that Boards was way better & didn't need someone else's mobile platform :rolleyes:

still waiting for that ios app to come along :pac:

mansize

WarZ wrote: »

I have already made comments about the over zealous modding but it's only in reaction to the insane amount of extreme right wing posters that came along and started soapboxing in afterhours. So unfortunately there's no easy solution to the problem if we don't want After Hours turning into Stormfront

I utterly despise that term SJW. Whenever someone uses it in an argument I instantly just disregard their opinion.

Yes there's some threads in AH I wouldn't want showing up on my browser history- and the links they give...

Goose81

WarZ wrote: »

I have already made comments about the over zealous modding but it's only in reaction to the insane amount of extreme right wing posters that came along and started soapboxing in afterhours. So unfortunately there's no easy solution to the problem if we don't want After Hours turning into Stormfront

I utterly despise that term SJW. Whenever someone uses it in an argument I instantly just disregard their opinion.

I suppose its the same way anyone who is centrist/rightist feels about Leftism/SJW and people who feel like yourself.

Despite being the silent majority people like to dismiss them as racists/bigots in any discussion regarding immigration etc, its an easy argument to make to discredit someone.

Youll find its usually the educated middle class (who make up the majority on boards) who pontificate because at the end of the day the issues usually dont affect them either directly or indirectly.

I doubt boards.ie cares, its become a laughing stock in the last few years with all the decent posters either gone or re-registered popping up occasionally out of interest.