Charter

Lindy97

I could be wrong here but surely the best way to change the tone of the forum, if you perceive one, is to engage?

How will anything be achieved or change if people say they've been stopped from posting because of the tone or things they don't agree on, but have done nothing to try to change this.

Its very easy to pop in now and claim that you don't post due to more regular and vocal posters or discussions. Well, they engage and take part in discussion so that is obviously going to reflect in the forum and the topics.

Bottom line: If you want to post, do, if you don't, don't, but don't blame it on other posters or the comments/threads. We're all adults here and if you don't agree with something, say it respectfully.

allym

I think the reason that some posters appear to take things personally (for the record I don’t think anyone is but it’s been said a few times) is because this thread is a perfect example of how threads go. Totally normal, civil discussion then suddenly its “bitchy” “nasty” “bulling”. It’s made personal by the posters saying those things against regular posters.

If you join a discussion with an actual contribution (even if that is to say “ah here I think that’s a bit much or something we shouldn’t talk about”), other posters will treat that with respect. They might not agree, because you know that’s life, but no one is going to get mean or personal. But if you come in attacking posters or being passive aggressive you can’t expect people to just take that.

Graham

anna080 wrote: »

Sorry- it was the tone you described as "frequently bltchy".
I forgot that the tone comes from the sky.

Didn't you call out passive aggressive posters earlier in the thread?

I suggested that many of the threads are bitchy in tone, it is you that appears to attribute that to the frequent posters, not me.

Lindy97 wrote: »

I could be wrong here but surely the best way to change the tone of the forum, if you perceive one, is to engage?
How will anything be achieved or change if people say they've been stopped from posting because of the tone or things they don't agree on, but have done nothing to try to change this

I can't speak for anyone else but personally I feel there's a general circling of the wagons around anyone that dares disagree with the some of the more forceful posters.

retro:electro

Why don't you start a thread on a topic that interests you so, Graham? You hold the same power here as all the frequent posters do.

SusieBlue

I actually find it hilarious that the thread has spiraled into arguments due to the very issues I highlighted on the first page of this thread. If this isn't proof to Mods I don't know what is.

SusieBlue

anna080 wrote: »

Why don't you start a thread on a topic that interests you so, Graham? You hold the same power here as all the frequent posters do.

I second this. Or give your opinion on an already established thread, if it so interests you.

retro:electro

WhiteRoses wrote: »

I second this. Or give your opinion on an already established thread, if it so interests you.

I've made the suggestion to start a thread to several posters now and it's radio silence on the matter. The fallback default response is just "but.... it's bltchy here, so there!"

SusieBlue

Graham wrote: »

Didn't you call out passive aggressive posters earlier in the thread?

I suggested that many of the threads are bitchy in tone, it is you that appears to attribute that to the frequent posters, not me.



I can't speak for anyone else but personally I feel there's a general circling of the wagons around anyone that dares disagree with the some of the more forceful posters.

If you don't want to add anything to the conversation only to criticise the people who are contributing it, I don't understand what your problem is.
From what I've gathered:

1) You think the regular posters use "bitchy tones"
2) You feel the bitchy tone is so bad you don't want to join in in the conversation about social media and blogging
3) You don't want to report this to a Mod
4) You don't want to call out the poster(s) in question about the tone you deem to be inappropriate, but are happy to bring it up in a different thread about a different topic while we are discussing the charter.

So what exactly do you want? I'm actually lost here. What is your solution to this?

baby and crumble

Any chance we could stop going around in circles?

Graham, I think your point has been made. Some folks here agree with you, others don't. Likewise everyone else, labouring the points don't really get us anywhere.

If you have issues with mod actions, please PM us as a group or just talk to us.

At a personal level, I'm really struggling with modding this forum because it gets personal quick, with lots of reported posts flying around and frankly it's a lot to deal with. I have a fulltime job, I'm studying for a PHD part-time and I have other hobbies and committments, especially coming up to Christmas, that means I don't always see reported posts that fast.

I can assure you the mod team is talking in the background about the suggestions to make changes that most people will hopefully be happy with, but it won't happen instantly, especially at this time of year.

I hope you can all have a bit more patience with us, and remember we're also posters just like you. Thanks.

(Ps those last comments are only coming from me personally, not as an offical forum mod statement, or anything. Hope that's clear)

Graham

anna080 wrote: »

Why don't you start a thread on a topic that interests you so, Graham?

WhiteRoses wrote: »

I second this.

The reasons for my hesitance have already been stated. There is undoubtedly a cohort that leave us helicopters with the impression we're not welcome or that we "don't know any facts" because we might disagree with the general consensus.

Thanks for inviting a helicopter like me to start a thread though, it's great to see regulars go out of their way to make new posters feel welcome.

retro:electro

So we make you feel unwelcome and then you get salty about being invited to start a thread. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Suit yourself.

SpillingTheTea

Graham wrote: »

anna080 wrote: »

Why don't you start a thread on a topic that interests you so, Graham?

WhiteRoses wrote: »

I second this.

The reasons for my hesitance have already been stated. There is undoubtedly a cohort that leave us helicopters with the impression we're not welcome or that we "don't know any facts" because we might disagree with the general consensus.

Thanks for inviting a helicopter like me to start a thread though, it's great to see regulars go out of their way to make new posters feel welcome.

As baby and crumble stated, we need to stop going around in circles here. Sorry if you don’t feel welcome, but I can only speak for myself (even though I know that I can speak for most) but you are more than welcome to start topics and enter into conversations etc. Not everyone will agree with each other but isn’t that life?

I hope to see you in various topics/threads

baby and crumble

Graham & Ana080, like I said above, please stop going around in circles.

Thanks.

LizT

Just my personal feelings on some things, and I don’t assume to speak on behalf of the mod team.

Trying to get the balance right is tricky. The whole move to reddit was prompted because people felt that the forum was over moderated. Yet in this thread people have said that the forum is not modded at all and they don’t think we give a sh1t, while others feel there should be little to no moderation because users can sort arguments out themselves. We’re obviously not getting the balance right at the minute and it’s impossible to please all of the people all of the time but it is frustrating. I enjoy posting in this forum and I don’t want to stop.

A forum is obviously made up of its active posters and without all of you campaigning for the opening of the forum and your continued support, we know we’d have no forum. But there are also members of boards that enjoy reading the forum and just because they don’t post that frequently, it shouldn’t mean they should have no say in the direction of the forum.

I personally would prefer to have to post as few mod warnings as possibly because I hate doing it and disrupting the flow of a thread. But it’s just really hard to see where the line should be. People report stuff and then if we action it, people report our posts saying we’re being too harsh. We obviously just need clearer rules in the charter so everyone knows where they stand.

SusieBlue

Thanks for your input LizT, it makes sense and is appreciated.

I just wanted to clarify because I was one of the people who made comments about the moderation - I feel that when regular contributors stepped out of line, particularly when the forum just began, mod warnings were thrown out left right and centre. There was constant reminders to stay on topic and threads were locked a couple of times too.
Yet when someone who isn't a regular, or some of the less vocal members, comes in and calls us nasty and bullies and b*tches amongst other things, there is no moderation to be seen apart from a warning to stay on topic.
In my own experience this week another male made no reply to a comment I made only to 'pull me up' on my choice of word and nothing appears to have been done about this either.
This has happened more than a few times and is very frustrating.

I agree about striking a balance but it seems that Mods come down heavy on those who post often and are nowhere to be seen when other members are taking the p*ss out of us.

Just also want to clarify that none of this is directed at you Liz, or any Mod in particular. It's just my general feel for how things are right now.

Dave147

WhiteRoses wrote: »

Thanks for your input LizT, it makes sense and is appreciated.

I just wanted to clarify because I was one of the people who made comments about the moderation - I feel that when regular contributors stepped out of line, particularly when the forum just began, mod warnings were thrown out left right and centre. There was constant reminders to stay on topic and threads were locked a couple of times too.
Yet when someone who isn't a regular, or some of the less vocal members, comes in and calls us nasty and bullies and b*tches amongst other things, there is no moderation to be seen apart from a warning to stay on topic.
In my own experience this week another male made no reply to a comment I made only to 'pull me up' on my choice of word and nothing appears to have been done about this either.
This has happened more than a few times and is very frustrating.

I agree about striking a balance but it seems that Mods come down heavy on those who post often and are nowhere to be seen when other members are taking the p*ss out of us.

Just also want to clarify that none of this is directed at you Liz, or any Mod in particular. It's just my general feel for how things are right now.

I'm the male that didn't bother replying, the reason is because you're an absolute nightmare and it isn't worth the grief dealing with you. I also note you use the exact same words "pulled up" about other posters who say mean things. I realise the irony of me now replying but you've constantly brought it up, I didn't attack you or say anything personal, I showed my distaste for a stupid and demeaning word and you went on the offensive. You can reply with whatever you like but I'm unfollowing the thread and that's all I have to say on it.

retro:electro

SusieBlue

Dave147 wrote: »

I'm the male that didn't bother replying, the reason is because you're an absolute nightmare and it isn't worth the grief dealing with you. I also note you use the exact same words "pulled up" about other posters who say mean things. I realise the irony of me now replying but you've constantly brought it up, I didn't attack you or say anything personal, I showed my distaste for a stupid and demeaning word and you went on the offensive. You can reply with whatever you like but I'm unfollowing the thread and that's all I have to say on it.

I actually couldn't care less about anything you have to say. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

baby and crumble

Last warning please- I really don’t want to have to start handing out infractions but everyone needs to stay on topic which ideally is issues around he charter. No personal attack’s or jibes in the rest of the thread. That goes for everyone.

Thanks.

wyrn

You know, I never realised this was a new forum!

I was there in the early days over in F&A when we couldn't name the bloggers. There was Ibiza/horse blogger, popular blogger and Cork blogger. There was that massive thread and then limbo. Until I found threads over in blogs/wiki/social media and the conversation picked up. It wasn't as big and slowly names were revealed. Then there was Biko and the putting down of handbags and with that I left. I pretty much rage quit because I could feel the contempt from the posts.

Until one day randomly I spotted on the front page (which I rarely look at now since the new [a couples of iterations ago] front page layout turned up) and I spotted blogger threads here. Until this forum, I had thought we were still in w/b/sm. I was actually wondering if Biko had stepped down. I missed the whole Helpdesk debacle and the Request for this forum.

Anyway, my point being - I've seen these blogger threads in many different forms and forums. I actually I like this version the best. It seems, for the most part calm. Not sure if that's the right word. Most claims have some sort of credible back up. No wild random claims. There was a couple of closed threads that I did raise an eyebrow at but compared to previous closures, it wasn't as galling. Annoying, yes but not helpdesk bad. I like the mix of posts and I hope we see more of the likes of posts about how to get more organic traffic and SEO help. I love that there's an introduce and plug yourself thread. I've gone and checked all of the posters out. I found the post about blogger insurance very illuminating and that explains an awful lot.

How to improve the charter? I'm not sure. I'd be in favour of keeping the 50 post / 3 month rule or even lowering the limits but I do think a limit needs to be kept. Maybe we need to include a new rule about not asking certain questions like "if you don't like the blogger then don't follow them". There was something similar in the Radio forum chater

• "Off-topic" posts may be edited (to remove off-topic content) or deleted by moderators at their discretion. Offenders may be infracted or banned depending on the severity of the offense. Posts and threads considered off-topic include (but are not restricted to):
  • those of the “if you don’t like it, change the channel” variety
• Both pro- and anti- show opinions are equally welcome. Therefore, anyone who greets a post praising [Presenter X] with "Hi [Presenter X]" gets a one day ban - no exceptions.

In regards to a couple of these threads being an echo chamber, I kinda get why that could be seen but on the other hand, I find it refreshing. I know some of us are members of certain groups on FB and they can be very much an echo chamber. These threads tend to be the mirror image of those posts which I don't think is intentional. Those posts might be posting about a new product and it seems that the praise is based on the name attached to it rather than quality. Whereas posters here tend to be a bit more critical. I do think most posters here are very open minded to hearing alternative view points.

If we've learned anything from this forum, it's where to buy a €5 knock off of Jo Malone candles!

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Just on the point of new users/50 posts/three months rule, i think if that's to be applied then it's across the board without special allowances being made for select posters.

noaddedsugar

Sariyah Poor Suspicion wrote: »

Just on the point of new users/50 posts/three months rule, i think if that's to be applied then it's across the board without special allowances being made for select posters.

I think it is a little different when you are the blogger that people are talking about. Personally I think that if the blogger/person being talked about wants the right to reply they should be allowed it. It's unfair imo to allow a bunch of people to speculate about someones life but not allow the actual person to put their side across because they haven't got the arbitrary 50 posts.

SpillingTheTea

noaddedsugar wrote: »

Sariyah Poor Suspicion wrote: »

Just on the point of new users/50 posts/three months rule, i think if that's to be applied then it's across the board without special allowances being made for select posters.

I think it is a little different when you are the blogger that people are talking about. Personally I think that if the blogger/person being talked about wants the right to reply they should be allowed it. It's unfair imo to allow a bunch of people to speculate about someones life but not allow the actual person to put their side across because they haven't got the arbitrary 50 posts.

Well the rules need to be the same for everyone regardless. What’s to prove that they are who they say they are?

noaddedsugar

SpillingTheTea wrote: »

Well the rules need to be the same for everyone regardless. What’s to prove that they are who they say they are?

That would be up to them to prove to the mods. In your opinion the rules need to be the same for everyone, I feel that if you want to talk about someone on a public forum the least you could do is allow them to reply to it if they want to.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

noaddedsugar wrote: »

I think it is a little different when you are the blogger that people are talking about. Personally I think that if the blogger/person being talked about wants the right to reply they should be allowed it. It's unfair imo to allow a bunch of people to speculate about someones life but not allow the actual person to put their side across because they haven't got the arbitrary 50 posts.

There's the required amount on her original account, which anyone else would be sitevanned for FYI

SpillingTheTea

noaddedsugar wrote: »

SpillingTheTea wrote: »

Well the rules need to be the same for everyone regardless. What’s to prove that they are who they say they are?

That would be up to them to prove to the mods. In your opinion the rules need to be the same for everyone, I feel that if you want to talk about someone on a public forum the least you could do is allow them to reply to it if they want to.

Yes... when they have been on boards for 3 months and have at least 50 posts. It works. Tbh, I would actually appreciate and like if some bloggers/influencers were to come in and clarify a lot of issues raised and I think it should be encouraged, but if we just make one rule for them and another for others, then it’s not fair.

In the sake of fairness and to keep the social media/blogging threads from descending into chaos, this rule should be kept as is.

Graham

noaddedsugar wrote: »

I feel that if you want to talk about someone on a public forum the least you could do is allow them to reply to it if they want to.

+1

If the mods are satisfied in a new posters credentials I don't see anything at all wrong with allowing them to participate regardless of any catch-all rules. That's particularly important if that person is the subject of discussion.

retro:electro

Let's be honest, there's only one blogger (or whatever her profession is this week) who ever joins the discussion here. She has had three or four accounts over the years, and bizzarly makes a new account every time she wants to say something, when her old accounts are perfectly viable and have the minimum posting requirements. If it's 50 posts minimum rule for one, then it should be a 50 posts minimum for all.

noaddedsugar

Sariyah Poor Suspicion wrote: »

There's the required amount on her original account, which anyone else would be sitevanned for FYI

You appear to be talking about a specific person. I am not. I am talking in general, I don't think it is fair not to allow people the right to reply when you are talking about them.

I am coming at it from a place of someone who runs social media pages and has just started a blog. Although my niche is not something that is ever going to generate any controversy or discussion of me as a person because it isn't a personal type website, I know if I came across people discussing me/my business I would appreciate being able to give my side. You can disagree with this, the mods can disagree with this, I don't mind.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

If I want to talk about my furniture company on boards or use boards to gain exposure, I would be directed to the office and given rates I could pay in order to do so. I can't just join up and start talking with my customers and my potential customers with a "business" account.

If a bloggers business/profession is excluded then fair enough but the rules should apply to everyone instead of giving preferential treatment to one industry over another.

If there is a registered account with the required posts and time frame then why are new accounts belonging to the same person being excluded from the rules? AFAIK boards has a one account at a time policy.