Charter

Graham

anna080 wrote: »

If it's 50 posts minimum rule for one, then it should be a 50 posts minimum for all.

I'm not particularly a fan of the 50 post minimum but understand some limited restrictions may be necessary, that said I don't understand why we would want to exclude anyone from responding if they have identified themselves to the satisfaction of the mods.

retro:electro

Graham wrote: »

I'm not particularly a fan of the 50 post minimum but understand some limited restrictions may be necessary, that said I don't understand why we would want to exclude anyone from responding if they have identified themselves to the satisfaction of the mods.

Nothing is stopping them for taking to other platforms to clarify things if that's what they want to do. Or from setting up an account now and getting active so if they ever need to clarify anything they meet the threshold. I think the 50 minimum posts should stay. It's the only way to keep the one post wonders from rocking in and causing a shlt storm. These are usually posters who are completely unfamiliar with boards posting ethos and usually call us all jealous bltches and at times a lot worse.

Graham

Sariyah Poor Suspicion wrote: »

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.

Most bloggers blog under their own name and much of the discussion on boards is personal about the bloggers, that warrants an exception from the commercial interaction rules in my opinion.

Graham

anna080 wrote: »

Nothing is stopping them for taking to other platforms to clarify things if that's what they want to do.

I don't get that. Why would we want to force them to another platform?

Why would we want to exclude them?

What would boards or its members gain from excluding them?

retro:electro

Graham wrote: »

I don't get that. Why would we want to force them to another platform?

Why would we want to exclude them?

What would boards or its members gain from excluding them?

Sorry, why am I getting quizzed here? I'm giving my opinion on the charter and how I'd like the posting requirements to stay as is. I dont owe you an explanation as to why that is. You don't have to agree with me. I don't really care.

noaddedsugar

Sariyah Poor Suspicion wrote: »

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.

You obviously feel very strongly on this issue and are determined to make it about one particular person,fair enough that's your prerogative.

I find listening to all sides interesting. I'm on a UK website where there was a large thread about UK bloggers, some of the bloggers themselves joined in and it was a very interesting read to hear things from their side too. Personally I'd hate to see an arbitrary 50 posts get in the way of that if a blogger did want join in. Anyway, I've said how I feel on it, you've said how you feel, I don't see the point in talking in circles.

Graham

anna080 wrote: »

Sorry, why am I getting quizzed here? I'm giving my opinion on the charter and how I'd like the posting requirements to stay as is. I dont owe you an explanation as to why that is. You don't have to agree with me. I don't really care.

I'm attempting to discuss the proposed changes to the charter and understand why some of the proposed elements are necessary?

If you don't want to discuss it, that's ok.

SusieBlue

noaddedsugar wrote: »

You obviously feel very strongly on this issue and are determined to make it about one particular person,fair enough that's your prerogative.

I find listening to all sides interesting. I'm on a UK website where there was a large thread about UK bloggers, some of the bloggers themselves joined in and it was a very interesting read to hear things from their side too. Personally I'd hate to see an arbitrary 50 posts get in the way of that if a blogger did want join in. Anyway, I've said how I feel on it, you've said how you feel, I don't see the point in talking in circles.

Its being made about one particular person because only one particular blogger has ever posted here, albeit using multiple different accounts each time.

wyrn

The 50 posts and 3 month old account is unique to this Social Media & Blogging forum, it's in other forums too. So it's not about posters here being defensive (I know no one has used that term but I just want to clarify that it's a commonly used tool on boards).

If a business wants to defend their actions or despite a post in say, the Consumer Issues forum - they are directed to get in contact with boards and register a business account. Bloggers don't have to do this even the ones who are self employed (and I personally don't mind that).

I'd be in favour of keeping the 50 post / 3 month rule after seeing what some of the bigger blogger followers act like (e.g. being flying monkeys and sending horrible messages to the blogger's ex partner). Wouldn't like to see the same happen here. I don't think it has but it could be a potential future issue.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Graham wrote: »

Most bloggers blog under their own name and much of the discussion on boards is personal about the bloggers, that warrants an exception from the commercial interaction rules in my opinion.

I think anything personal shouldn't be allowed. Anything they choose to disclose on a public platform is fair game but anything that isn't, shouldn't be up for discussion

retro:electro

Graham wrote: »

I'm attempting to discuss the proposed changes to the charter and understand why some of the proposed elements are necessary?

If you don't want to discuss it, that's ok.

I've addressed my reasons why I feel they're necessary.
If you want to ignore them, that's okay.
I've no desire to engage in a running dialogue of "but whyyyyy" with you.

wyrn

Graham wrote: »

Most bloggers blog under their own name and much of the discussion on boards is personal about the bloggers, that warrants an exception from the commercial interaction rules in my opinion.

What's to stop them from contacting the mods and asking them to post a response on their behalf?

Also I'd be wary of letting a blogger being able to flout the rule if they saw a post that was disparaging about them. They'd naturally want to refute it but in doing so, they might not have read the whole thread and this could exasperate things. Take the products from Ali Express thread - that was a thread that evolved from people finding so many different things about certain bloggers (it wasn't all just "they're ripping us off") there was the names & country on the order list visible on the website, there was the many articles which were subsequently edited months later etc... it wasn't just a bunch of people ranting (which is probably what it would look to an outsider who hadn't read everything) it was so much more.

SusieBlue

Graham wrote: »

I'm attempting to discuss the proposed changes to the charter and understand why some of the proposed elements are necessary?

If you don't want to discuss it, that's ok.

I'll preface this by saying I'm not trying to be argumentative or passive aggressive in any way, but I'm genuinely so curious as to why you are so passionate about the charter of a forum you had never posted in till last week?

I honestly had never seen your username so much as thank a post in the whole time I've been reading this forum until you posted here last week.
So I'm just wondering what suddenly piqued your interest?

wyrn

Would a compromise be acceptable to the mods?

How about 1 megathread where anyone can post regardless of when you signed up and how many posts you have. That way you won't lose any genuine new posters who might have signed up just to post on Social Media & Blogging - particularly those who might have a technical question and can't wait the 3 months e.g. how to check if followers are real? Ans use Social Blade. (I know that's not a time sensitive question but I couldn't think of any off hand)

Graham

wyrn wrote: »

What's to stop them from contacting the mods and asking them to post a response on their behalf?

I genuinely can't see the benefit to stifling responses from anyone, bloggers included.

One of the great things about boards is it's open, it's inclusive. I'd like to see it stay that way. Many of the proposed rules are heading in the opposite direction:

Restrict posts.
No bloggers.
No newbies.
Self-moderation from the existing users.

Lead

wyrn wrote: »

Would a compromise be acceptable to the mods?

How about 1 megathread where anyone can post regardless of when you signed up and how many posts you have. That way you won't lose any genuine new posters who might have signed up just to post on Social Media & Blogging - particularly those who might have a technical question and can't wait the 3 months e.g. how to check if followers are real? Ans use Social Blade. (I know that's not a time sensitive question but I couldn't think of any off hand)

That's not a bad idea

wyrn

Graham wrote: »

I genuinely can't see the benefit to stifling responses from anyone, bloggers included.

One of the great things about boards is it's open, it's inclusive. I'd like to see it stay that way. Many of the proposed rules are heading in the opposite direction:

Restrict posts.
No bloggers.
No newbies.
Self-moderation from the existing users.

No, it's not. Sex & Sexuality used to be for subscribes only. I know there's more subscriber only forums. There's also invite only forums like Online Dating and Ranting & Raving. Then there's the read only forums and then there's the soccer forum. No clue what way it is now but it's been through so many iterations because of all the hassle they've had. Couldn't mention MCD at one stage. There's the website we're not allowed to speak their name. The banlist is now private.

Like it or not, boards has become quite restrictive. Boards HQ is the one that's stifling responses and conversations (and yes for good reason in many cases). It's not us in Social Media & Blogging who are trying to shut down posts. Just trying to make posting more constructive. Nothing that has been suggested here is radical or anyway new when compared to other sections on boards.

Graham

wyrn wrote: »

No, it's not. Sex & Sexuality used to be for subscribes only. I know there's more subscriber only forums. There's also invite only forums like Online Dating and Ranting & Raving. Then there's the read only forums and then there's the soccer forum. No clue what way it is now but it's been through so many iterations because of all the hassle they've had. Couldn't mention MCD at one stage. There's the website we're not allowed to speak their name. The banlist is now private.

Like it or not, boards has become quite restrictive. Boards HQ is the one that's stifling responses and conversations (and yes for good reason in many cases). It's not us in Social Media & Blogging who are trying to shut down posts. Just trying to make posting more constructive. Nothing that has been suggested here is radical or anyway new when compared to other sections on boards.

All of those have fairly justifiable reasons, participant privacy in the first 2 you mentioned, historical troublemaking for some of the others or private/affinity groups in yet more.

I'm not particularly trying to convince any of those that disagree with me to change their positions, I'd just like the least/less restrictive options to be considered in the new forum charter.

For the record, I'd be broadly supportive of anything that as you suggest makes posts more constructive.

SpillingTheTea

If bloggers/influencers want to comment, they should adhere to the rules like everyone else.
The fact of the matter is, since we’ve all fought hard to get Social Media/Blogging open, and the mods implemented the 3 month and 50 post rule, I feel as though it’s one aspect of the threads that has genuinely worked really well.
There has been none of the old ‘if you don’t like, don’t follow’ posts coming in from people only signing up to give us that great nugget of advice while simultaneously derailing topics, and that’s the reason why it’s set up.

wyrn

One nice thing about this forum is that you can say "I'm not that gone on product x selling for y price when you can buy the brand version for around the same price" or "I wonder what the quality is like".

You can't really ask those types of enquiring questions* on a bloggers social media or DMs because for the vast majority of times it seems people are just automatically blocked and branded haters**. Oh and all the negative comments are removed and only the positive are left. It's gotten to the stage where lawyers are being threatened***.

*Don't get me wrong, I know some people are out to cause trouble. I'm referring to the genuine people like myself who might be curious.

** Yes, not all bloggers do this but enough of them do it to make a serious worry about contacting them.

*** Obviously if anything defamatory is said then they should seek out legal advice. I'm talking about those who threaten legal action directed at negative posts (I haven't really seen that here on boards but certainly on Instagram & FB).

retro:electro

WhiteRoses wrote: »

I'll preface this by saying I'm not trying to be argumentative or passive aggressive in any way, but I'm genuinely so curious as to why you are so passionate about the charter of a forum you had never posted in till last week?

I honestly had never seen your username so much as thank a post in the whole time I've been reading this forum until you posted here last week.
So I'm just wondering what suddenly piqued your interest?

I'd like to know the answer to this also

Graham

anna080 wrote: »

I'd like to know the answer to this also

Thanks for asking but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be relevant to the charter discussion.

A discussion of members blogging interests would be a good topic for a thread though.

retro:electro

Graham wrote: »

Thanks for asking but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be relevant to the charter discussion.

A discussion of members blogging interests would be a good topic for a thread though.

I didn't ask it

You should start a thread so.

idunno78

Re bloggers posting! It’s a hard one to call! On one hand I think if they can prove they are genuine then they should be allowed post. But on the other it will just (more then liikly, depending on the blogger) run into big massive mess with no constructive chat! Let’s face it thTs what will happen!

I’d be very surprised if bloggers did join in this chat so I don’t think there is any need to actually make this happen!

I’d say if anything take away the 3 months and leave the 50 post!

Also new posters are always welcome just not the one post wonders posters!!! Just adding that bit!!

Lougarden

Quote idunno78 "I’d be very surprised if bloggers did join in this chat so I don’t think there is any need to actually make this happen!"

Has happened!

Lindy97

It has happened but I think the majority would rather go on snapchat or instagram with an inspiration meme about haters. They have no desire whatsoever to engage with anyone who isn't rammed up their arses

Neyite

Sariyah Poor Suspicion wrote: »

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.

I'm a reader /lurker in this forum - I'm interested in the threads but don't feel I know enough to actually contribute, but I can expand on this bit.

Boards do allow a second account in certain cases - with prior mod permission and as long as you use it soley for that purpose. So, for example, posters might want to post a personal issue, or post about trying for a baby but not want others to know so as long as they keep the second account for that purpose, its usually fine with the mods.

I'd suggest that if a blogger wants to keep their boards account separate /private from their blogger persona, (and I can see that some might want to) that a verified account (like in the AMA forum) be set up by mods/office for a small fee if need be. That they get one dupe account for the purposes of the right of reply/rebuttal. And that the same rules apply to that account that they would expect on their private boards account. If they already are a poster elsewhere, then they know enough to read a charter and behave in accordance with that charter.

That way boards might benefit from increased traffic from followers following the blogger over here, blogger benefits from the right of reply/rebuttal of statements made, posters get mature discussion and points clarified and answered and it's good all around.

/goes back to lurking.

idunno78

Double post

idunno78

I’m talking the proper bloggers not the person your on about! I wouldn’t call her a blogger compared to the others ! A journalist not a blogger! Anyhow she isn’t a blogger anymore, right!!!???

dudara

Anyone who has a blog is a blogger. I’m a blogger, many people are bloggers. I know several other regular posters on Boards who write blogs.

What’s happened recently is that the perfectly acceptable noun “blogger” has become conflated and confused with this low level tedious celeb culture, when in fact, the term is much much broader.

EDIT: In fact, I personally wouldn’t consider these “influencers” to be bloggers for the most part. The manner in which the noun is currently used is demeaning or insulting to the many people who actually blog.

Speaking with my Admin hat on, about this 50 post thing. I may receive a report that someone is dual-accounting. I investigate and I see that the old account has stopped posting and is no longer active and has been replaced by a new account. I’m not going to take Admin action against someone for doing that. But their history might be considered when deciding what action to take.