The slow death of forums *see OP for Admin warning and update 28/02/18*

retro:electro

Like I said earlier, moderation is an issue but so is poster etiquette. You need to be accountable for what you write. If posters make it their business to take over each and every thread with inane drivel about your personal life then you can't expect a mod to come and rescue you when it doesn't go in your favour. Be responsible for what you write or don't bother with the nitty gritty details that people really don't need to know about. Mods can only do so much. We are all grown ups here and have a responsibility to stand over what we write without the need for hand holding by mods.

evolving_doors

....... wrote: »

Really?

You really think posts with those phrases made a positive contribution to the site?

Well I didn't say they made a positive contribution in the mood sense. But yes in the positive direction of numbers sense.
But now that I think about it I thought it was funny banter...
Although there was the time when I made fun of some posters mother, the guy asked how I could saw those awful things cos his mother was dead... and he was going to find out where I lived and come after me! That was the day I knew AH had become serious.

Wibbs

GreeBo wrote: »

Nonsense.

I'm not going into one topic and randomly bringing up another and I didn't say anything of the sort. I said "defending" as in responding to existing posts on the subject and choosing a contrary side to the majority.

Which is, depending on the forum, whataboutery. EG if a poster on the Ladies Lounge is discussing how she feels her career is stalling because of what might be glass ceiling environment and someone comes along and starts debating that men face their own glass ceiling, that's whataboutery.

It seems you are trying to avoid people with differences of opinion posting together.

Nope. I am saying in more specialty forums discussing/defending/whatever stuff from another specialty forum is usually, not always, but usually whataboutery.

find myself posting in defense of cyclists in the motors forum and motorists in the cycling forum

Why do you feel the need to be defining anybody?

Anyway, in diverse general forums, AH being the biggest and best, Politics, Atheism others, it invites opposing views, including what might be seen as whataboutery in other forums. There is a difference. If you can't understand that I dunno what to say. Never mind that on reddit you'd be down voted for that kinda thing, with Facebook, you'd not last long on a group page "defending" off topic interests.

Thats a hell of a way to run a discussion board...into the ground.

*DRAMATIC MUSIC!!* Nope, as I say reddit and arsebook are huge sites and in the case of reddit are specifically designed to engender echo chambers.

.......

This post has been deleted.

the_pen_turner

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Another rule that needs to be reinforced is the ‘no chat’ rule in AH threads. We have over half a dozen threads that have turned into circle jerks, and stop new posters from getting involved. Take the chitchat to FlirtTar or one of those fora.

I actually think that rule is stupid and is ruining the thread . it works in TA and TH but not in others. this is a discussion forum. what is the point of just having someone say a story or opinion if the rest of us cant ask questions or have an opinion on it. stinginess thread is a great example of that. I using that as an example because it is me that got reprimanded (mildly) for it.
what's the point in following and contributing stories to threads like that if you cant counter the story or disprove it.

same for the cool pic threads. it would be great to be able to talk about the pics or even ask a question or two. why not have people posting in that thread. there are only a few posts a week to that thread as it is. surely discussion would be a good thing.

look at the dash cam thread, this is a good example of removing that chat rule. the thread is revitalised and is thriving. obviously it needs a close eye from mods because someone will see a cyclist in the background minding their own business and start a huge anti cyclist rant

IvyTheTerrible

anna080 wrote: »

Like I said earlier, moderation is an issue but so is poster etiquette. You need to be accountable for what you write. If posters make it their business to take over each and every thread with inane drivel about your personal life then you can't expect a mod to come and rescue you when it doesn't go in your favour. Be responsible for what you write or don't bother with the nitty gritty details that people really don't need to know about. Mods can only do so much. We are all grown ups here and have a responsibility to stand over what we write without the need for hand holding by mods.

I think some people have difficulties differentiating discussion from harassment.

KERSPLAT!

evolving_doors wrote: »

Well I didn't say they made a positive contribution in the mood sense. But yes in the positive direction of numbers sense.
But now that I think about it I thought it was funny banter...
Although there was the time when I made fun of some posters mother, the guy asked how I could saw those awful things cos his mother was dead... and he was going to find out where I lived and come after me! That was the day I knew AH had become serious.

Ah will you stop. That's when you knew AH had become serious, because some lad said he'd track you down for slagging his dead mother? That's a specific, keyboard warrior, reaction from a single individual, if that's how you base your opinion on a forum your opinion isn't worth much.

Wibbs

anna080 wrote: »

Mods can only do so much. We are all grown ups here and have a responsibility to stand over what we write without the need for hand holding by mods.

+1. Down the years I've seen a fair few posters do this. Over share or overload on a personal hobby horse and when people naturally react to that go running to teacher mods to "stop the bullying". And if there is actual bullying and it's not just yelling shark on a crowded Australian beach for effect then you nip that in the bud. And it can sometimes be bullying, but in my experience with non troll average users it's more usually not.

evolving_doors

GreeBo wrote: »

Drop in post count not quality.

Well....quality is subjective. AH had that irreverent humour so to see toilet humour very often etc wasnt out of place.
Heck... even the guy who offered to kick people in the head became a legend.
It all became soooo serious.

GreeBo

Wibbs wrote: »

Which is, depending on the forum, whataboutery. EG if a poster on the Ladies Lounge is discussing how she feels her career is stalling because of what might be glass ceiling environment and someone comes along and starts debating that men face their own glass ceiling, that's whataboutery.

I know exactly what whatboutery is, hence why I used it in my example.
My point is that, for example, in a thread about a near miss between a car and a bike, on the motors forum its the bikes fault, on the cycling forum its the cars fault.
Often blame is somewhere in the middle, any time I point out failings on either side the result is a torrent of either "well what about all the cyclists I see breaking red lights?!" or "sure I saw 11teen cars with no lights today".

Wibbs wrote: »

Nope. I am saying in more specialty forums discussing/defending/whatever stuff from another specialty forum is usually, not always, but usually whataboutery. Why do you feel the need to be defining anybody?

Other than AH, what forums would you say are not specialty? I kinda thought that was the point in having your own forum?

I'm not arbitrarily defending people, if I'm reading a thread where I feel someone has been harddone by I will respond, irrespective of what forum I am in. Again, I thought discussion was the point of this discussion board?

Wibbs wrote: »

Anyway, in diverse general forums, AH being the biggest and best, Politics, Atheism others, it invites opposing views, including what might be seen as whataboutery in other forums. There is a difference. If you can't understand that I dunno what to say. Never mind that on reddit you'd be down voted for that kinda thing, with Facebook, you'd not last long on a group page "defending" off topic interests.

Now you are just strawmanning, argue the points I made, not the ones you made up to argue against yourself.

Wibbs wrote: »

Nope, as I say reddit and arsebook are huge sites and in the case of reddit are specifically designed to engender echo chambers.

You mean like specialized forums on boards where I shouldnt post my contrary views?

GreeBo

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

Ah will you stop. That's when you knew AH had become serious, because some lad said he'd track you down for slagging his dead mother? That's a specific, keyboard warrior, reaction from a single individual, if that's how you base your opinion on a forum your opinion isn't worth much.

There have always been loonies on here.

i remember receiving PMs about some nice person wanting to arrange to meetup so he could show me how brave he was, and that was at least 10 years ago.

GreeBo

Maybe reducing the number of forums would force people of opposing opinions together and balance things out a bit via reasoned debate.

Then again, maybe it would just turn into the Thunderdome and end it all.

Pac1Man

GreeBo wrote: »

Maybe reducing the number of forums would force people of opposing opinions together and balance things out a bit via reasoned debate.

Then again, maybe it would just turn into the Thunderdome and end it all.

Oh I don't know. Imagine the super religious being forced into After Hours. Be like the crusades.

Wibbs

GreeBo wrote: »

You mean like specialized forums on boards where I shouldnt post my contrary views?

TBH I'd be more thinking why anyone would want to. *shrug*

KERSPLAT!

Wibbs wrote: »

TBH I'd be more thinking why anyone would want to. *shrug*

Why anyone would want to post contrary views?

jimmycrackcorm

There are certain forums where some of the mods are lifers. Once they take a dislike to a poster then that forum becomes a no go area. Those forums are dying because multiple posters get the same treatment. You can see it where long standing active posters end up giving up.

There is no point complaining to CMods or above as effectively boards treats mods as the equivalent of free jobbridge employees, so no rocking the barrel.

Removing this concept of mod permanent tenure would breathe some life back into those forums, with new mods that aren't stuck in a rut.

GreeBo

Pac1Man wrote: »

Oh I don't know. Imagine the super religious being forced into After Hours. Be like the crusades.

Its the merging of Christianity with Atheism & Agnostics that I'd be watching.

They are another two perfect examples of group think and bias.
In either forum you can pretty much say what you want about the other side without fear of any retribution from moderators.

Try to make a reasoned point against the local consensus and you will be pilloried out of existence.

Something else to look at might be the rule of not bringing back up zombie threads. In the Ladies Lounge I notice they are quickly locked. The OP might be asking a question from years ago but the topic could still be of interest and provide information for others.

evolving_doors

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

Ah will you stop. That's when you knew AH had become serious, because some lad said he'd track you down for slagging his dead mother? That's a specific, keyboard warrior, reaction from a single individual, if that's how you base your opinion on a forum your opinion isn't worth much.

Well its just a personal account of one incident which I THINK summed up the changing nature of AH. I'm not blaming mods either (although politics should have been allowed to be a topic of discussion but that's an aside). To be honest I used to find the racial/ethnic stereotypes funny at one stage too but that had to go. Hence also my assertion if things getting serious.
But ya sure my opinion mightnt be up to your standards (SSSSSORRY!), but feck it , im entitled to give it without the ballyragging thanks very much.

GreeBo

Wibbs wrote: »

TBH I'd be more thinking why anyone would want to. *shrug*

https://www.boards.ie/content/about-us wrote:

Boards.ie is a discussion forum

Seriously? Are you that jaded of being here that you want to discourage discussion and debate?
To my earlier point, perhaps you have been modding for too long.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

KERSPLAT!

evolving_doors wrote: »

Well its just a personal account of one incident which I THINK summed up the changing nature of AH. I'm not blaming mods either (although politics should have been allowed to be a topic of discussion but that's an aside). To be honest I used to find the racial/ethnic stereotypes funny at one stage too but that had to go. Hence also my assertion if things getting serious.
But ya sure my opinion mightnt be up to your standards (SSSSSORRY!), but feck it , im entitled to give it without the ballyragging thanks very much.

I'm entitled to call you out on your, flawed IMO, opinion. Apologies for the "ballyragging" :rolleyes:

Insect Overlord

GreeBo wrote: »

Try to make a reasoned point against the local consensus and you will be pilloried out of existence.

The advice across the site when I joined up was always that new posters should lurk for a while, read a few threads, and get a good handle on the tone of a forum before trying to become a part of it. There was a certain respect for the existing community and how they ran things. You've been here since 2003 so you should remember that yourself. Jumping in to rock the boat and play Devil's Advocate isn't always the best idea.

rainbowtrout

evolving_doors wrote: »

In fairness though that was at the time of union disputes.
Croke park 1 threads: tempers were hot cards bans handed out
Croke park 2 threads: tempers were hot cards bans handed out
Croke park 3 threads: tempers were hot cards bans handed out
Haddington road 1 threads: tempers were hot cards bans handed out.
Haddington road 2 threads: tempers were hot cards bans handed out
And then all the appeals/pm's that followed.

To say that there was a lack of modding is a bit disingenuous to all the time spent behind the scenes deleting/warning/carding/explaining/taking abuse in pm's etc.
And yes there were a lot of non-teachers who were entertained and given the go-ahead to flame bait as they were not precluded from commenting. That was a mistake. We also considered going down the closed-forum route but things died down,(plus freezing troubled threads earlier on helped).
What was being expected of mods then was to 'chair' the discussion in real-time... so what would typically happen is folk would go at each other late at night and it would be up to the mod to do clean up the next day (and all that came with that). With that 1 particular train-wreck thread in 2015 which I let continue we also opened up a feedback thread to air grievances afterwords. Reading it again it was pretty 50/50 https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057499595
Also at the time there was essentially 1 mod. The previous mod who's boots I took has commented on this thread and that's worth a read of why they stepped down.
The current inactive mod that was brought in had to go back to the real-world for various reasons. I've asked that their name be removed 3 times but it hasn't been done, either way another mod had been brought in!

So hear it is... the mod 'explaining' will now turn into 'mods moaning about modding'. When you're explaining you're loosing.

Actually that's not at all true. Even going by your response to me at the time on the feedback thread you linked here, you expected people to moderate themselves, and that doesn't work.

Nobody can see behind the scenes. On thread warnings were never issued in T&L like they are in AH. If posters knew an issue was dealt with then they wouldn't be as annoyed.

Nobody ever expected a thread to be modded in real time. But it was frustrating to see mods posting on train wreck threads and not issue any warnings, if they are posting in the thread then they've read the thread.

None of the regular posters that posted in that feedback thread post in T&L anymore,which is a shame as they made a good contribution. I still post there but it's not somewhere I visit as much as I used to and there are certain threads I will just avoid now.

GreeBo

Insect Overlord wrote: »

The advice across the site when I joined up was always that new posters should lurk for a while, read a few threads, and get a good handle on the tone of a forum before trying to become a part of it. There was a certain respect for the existing community and how they ran things. You've been here since 2003 so you should remember that yourself. Jumping in to rock the boat and play Devil's Advocate isn't always the best idea.

Why does your posting history matter if you are making "a reasoned point"?

Unless its a closed shop of a forum, which is exactly the point I and others are making.

No one welcomes someone dropping in to troll, but *anyone* should be allowed to post a contrary opinion.

tomwaterford

evolving_doors wrote: »

But ya sure my opinion mightnt be up to your standards (SSSSSORRY!), but feck it , im entitled to give it without the ballyragging thanks very much.

Noone stopped yous from giving your opioions....but surly people are allowed question it??

(Sure as fcuk...I have opioion/beliefs alot of people dislike,)


To walk the line between calling out people giving critism of a forum and not giving impression of circling the wagons and being too defensive is an impossible tightrope to walk??

evolving_doors

GreeBo wrote: »

There have always been loonies on here.

i remember receiving PMs about some nice person wanting to arrange to meetup so he could show me how brave he was, and that was at least 10 years ago.

My point though was that it had gone from commonplace to slag 'yor ma' and then suddenly it wasn't 'a thing' anymore, to the point where posters weren't familiar with the slagging that was the order of the day within the forum as a whole.
Was that down to the mods?
No generally I don't think so. I think it was just a societal shift. The worst you could say nowadays and get away with is quoting 'a great bunch of lads' from father Ted.

GreeBo

evolving_doors wrote: »

'a great bunch of lads' from father Ted.

I'm sorry, did you just assume my gender?

Insect Overlord

GreeBo wrote: »

Why does your posting history matter if you are making "a reasoned point"?

Unless its a closed shop of a forum, which is exactly the point I and others are making.

No one welcomes someone dropping in to troll, but *anyone* should be allowed to post a contrary opinion.

I don't believe I mentioned posting history. I just noted that you registered in 2003 and thought you might recall how things operated around here in the early days.

Oftentimes a contrary opinion seems of great importance to one poster in a given moment, but the regulars have already dealt with the same point countless times over the years from seagull posters who never contribute anything else. It gets tedious.

Neyite

Deleted User wrote: »

Something else to look at might be the rule of not bringing back up zombie threads. In the Ladies Lounge I notice they are quickly locked. The OP might be asking a question from years ago but the topic could still be of interest and provide information for others.

I'm not commenting on Ladies Lounge but more so on all forums - I think a more inclusive approach would be to split out the new posters post into a thread of it's own with a friendly note explaining why and lock the old one. Or move a thread /post to an appropriate place rather than just locking it.

Which would you prefer as a new user:

"Mod:
Hiya Persepoly, you posted on an old thread so I've given you a new one to get more up to date answers."

"Mod:
Hiya Persepoly, I've moved your thread over to a more suitable forum as you might not get much answers where you were"

Rather than

MOD: Zombie thread. Locked. Do not bring up Zombie threads.

Mods have an important role to play in setting the tone for their fora. Even in PI where it's supposedly the strictest forum on here, a misguided new user gets a welcome and a nudge towards the charter rather than slapping an infraction or a ban on them immediately.