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

evolving_doors

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

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

In your opinion my opinion was flawed so you say my opinion isn't worth much.
Who feckin died and made you the king of Opinions?
:rolleyes: x2

Neyite

Neyite wrote: »

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.

Well certainly not the final example

I think something which allows the discussion to continue freely because it's a shame when an interesting topic gets locked up simply for being too old.

Neyite

Deleted User wrote: »

Well certainly not the final example

I think something which allows the discussion to continue freely because it's a shame when an interesting topic gets locked up simply for being too old.

Mods have the functionality to merge, move, separate out new posts to their own threads so locking it should really be as a last resort.

GreeBo

Insect Overlord wrote: »

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.

You said new users should lurk for a while before posting, i.e. their posting history.

I'm fully aware of how things work around here.

Insect Overlord wrote: »

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.

Ahh, so new posters are tedious to you.
Perhaps the topic is new to them and to the other new users on the site?

Perhaps every post should be pre-moderated to see if it meets with your criteria for interesting enough?

No bloody wonder new users are not signing up with attitudes like yours.

You appear to want to only chat with people you know about new things that you all agree on.

I'm honestly baffled to be having this conversation with you!

/edit
Amended following clarification that Insect Overlord finds dealing with drive-by posters as tedious.

GreeBo

Neyite wrote: »

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.

+1

PI is an excellently moderated, welcoming and helpful forum.

GreeBo

Neyite wrote: »

Mods have the functionality to merge, move, separate out new posts to their own threads so locking it should really be as a last resort.

There really shouldnt ever be a reason to lock a thread, just ban specific users out of it and let any relevant discussion continue. If there is none the thread will fade away of its own accord.

rainbowtrout

evolving_doors wrote: »

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.

Actually I think it was just the tediousness of going into AH, seeing 10 new threads and from the second post onwards it was a litany of yore ma/blast them with piss etc. It's not funny when it's done a few hundred times.

Neyite

GreeBo wrote: »

+1

PI is an excellently moderated, welcoming and helpful forum.

Maybe we could make it the training camp for new mods :pac:

Actually, that might not be an entirely awful idea - PI is very clear cut in it's rules, there's very little grey area to consider usually, we've a good mod interaction where we bounce stuff off each other all the time and learn from each other. It was the first forum I became a mod in and I was guided and supported by the others on the team all the way.

Neyite

Neyite wrote: »

Mods have the functionality to merge, move, separate out new posts to their own threads so locking it should really be as a last resort.

I'm using TLL as an example because it's where I see the closures happening. I might pm the mods there because I don't understand the reasoning behind it. Like you say there is the functionality to move or separate. Maybe those questions are asked behind the scenes.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Yeah I never got the locking bumped threads thing. What is the logic behind it?

Not sure if it's in the rules here but isn't it a general forum rule of thumb to search for the topic if you have a question rather than start a new thread?

It's almost always new or newish users who do it and locking the thread must really put them off.

Neyite

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm using TLL as an example because it's where I see the closures happening. I might pm the mods there because I don't understand the reasoning behind it. Like you say there is the functionality to move or separate. Maybe those questions are asked behind the scenes.

It could be simply down to the mods finding it easier to close a thread rather than other options if they are modding on their phone? I'm not sure, as I rarely use my phone for boards but I know a lot of mods do so some functionality might be harder to do on a phone.

Neyite

Keira Thankful Target wrote: »

Yeah I never got the locking bumped threads thing. What is the logic behind it?

Not sure if it's in the rules here but isn't it a general forum rule of thumb to search for the topic if you have a question rather than start a new thread?

It's almost always new or newish users who do it and locking the thread must really put them off.

And it's a rule that's directly contradictory to the zombie threads rule. Damned if you do and damned if you dont! :P

evolving_doors

tomwaterford wrote: »

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??

Well yes sure they can question it but to say it ain't worth much is bit royal.
It's a cheapshot tagline you could stick on the end of any refutation.

Well its just x ,
if you think that y
then your z

X= reduction of incident to being nothing (aka the snowflake assertion)
Y= restate my assertion
Z= conclusion that assertion isn't valid.

Buford T. Justice XIX

GreeBo wrote: »

You said new users should lurk for a while before posting, i.e. their posting history.

I'm fully aware of how things work around here, your condescending posts are neither required nor welcomed.



Ahh, so new posters are tedious to you.
Perhaps the topic is new to them and to the other new users on the site?

Perhaps every post should be pre-moderated to see if it meets with your criteria for interesting enough?

No bloody wonder new users are not signing up with attitudes like yours.

You appear to want to only chat with people you know about new things that you all agree on.

I'm honestly baffled to be having this conversation with you!

Ah come on now, that's being disingenuous in the extreme.

Regular posters would have seem the same topic reincarnated multiple times while, for the new poster, it's a brand new topic.

We see the same in F&F all the time, a new poster decides to come in preaching climate change or veganism or whatever is flavour of the month this week. Like all evangelicals, there is only one true belief system and they are astounded, absolutely flabbergasted, that anyone could have a different opinion and set out to convert the infidels.

It never ends well but the backbone of the forum are left, to a certain degree, to pull the p!$$ out of them.

Within 6 months, another will emerge with a similar evangelical calling:rolleyes:

GreeBo

Neyite wrote: »

Maybe we could make it the training camp for new mods :pac:

Actually, that might not be an entirely awful idea - PI is very clear cut in it's rules, there's very little grey area to consider usually, we've a good mod interaction where we bounce stuff off each other all the time and learn from each other. It was the first forum I became a mod in and I was guided and supported by the others on the team all the way.

I think every forum should be clear-cut in its rules, its FAR easier for everyone involved.
Some dont like it and prefer freedom, but freedom causes subjectivity which in turn leads to issues and work for mods, usually ending in cards and a locked thread.
i.e. everyone loses.

The rules of course can be changed if thats what people want, but so many forums have a charter that might as well not exist.

Skylinehead

Deleted User wrote: »

There are mods here in After Hours who never post. I don't understand that. I think it's important to show a bit of interest in the community you moderate so maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea to have the role for a limited time only.

We've only ever picked people who have at least some contribution in AH, so I don't know where that comes from. Yes there's a few who haven't been on in a while, but life happens.

Myself, I'm certainly not prolific in any sense, but I do post. Mainly in soccer these days. AH is less and less "fun" now, just look at the front page. Migrants, Trump, abortion. These are the big threads, and it's a bit sad. You still have people saying banning politics from AH was bad, for me it was the best thing to happen to the forum, and it's not gone far enough.

GreeBo

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

Ah come on now, that's being disingenuous in the extreme.

Regular posters would have seem the same topic reincarnated multiple times while, for the new poster, it's a brand new topic.

And thats exactly the point.
I dont see how its disingenuous at all to be honest. I dont see any other way of interpreting what Insect Overlord said?

New posters post things that he has already read and he finds it tedious to read them again.

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

We see the same in F&F all the time, a new poster decides to come in preaching climate change or veganism or whatever is flavour of the month this week. Like all evangelicals, there is only one true belief system and they are astounded, absolutely flabbergasted, that anyone could have a different opinion and set out to convert the infidels.

It never ends well but the backbone of the forum are left, to a certain degree, to pull the p!$$ out of them.

Within 6 months, another will emerge with a similar evangelical calling:rolleyes:

No one is advocating that trolls or deliberately contrary people are tolerated, but allowing regular posters to "pull the pi$$" out of other regular posters, just because they have a different opinion is a terrible way to run a forum *in my opinion*

The moderator should remove the poster if thats what they want, not allow a pack of braying dogs to tear them apart.

It sounds like a lot of long term moderators want to follow the Soccer Access Request model, which I think would be a deathnail for this place.

evolving_doors

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Actually I think it was just the tediousness of going into AH, seeing 10 new threads and from the second post onwards it was a litany of yore ma/blast them with piss etc. It's not funny when it's done a few hundred times.

But you do admit it was funny the first 199 times:pac:
So conversely you might think it a bit harsh if it was halted after the 10th time.
And I suppose everyone has their different funny line (I still find it funny:rolleyes:).

You could get passed it with a little mouse scroll nudge , I think it became banned outright though which maybe pre-empted it dying out. That irked me a bit so hence why I'm drawing parallels with the more 'serious' stuff. So maybe all the ethnic/racist/sexist stereotype slagging would have fizzled out too but was pre-empted and stamped out.

Mods can see from experience where things go a lot of the time and that irks people when they don't see it. Hence why folk are pi55ed off when threads are closed 'prematurely'.

KERSPLAT!

evolving_doors wrote: »

Well yes sure they can question it but to say it ain't worth much is bit royal.
It's a cheapshot tagline you could stick on the end of any refutation.

Well its just x ,
if you think that y
then your z

X= reduction of incident to being nothing (aka the snowflake assertion)
Y= restate my assertion
Z= conclusion that assertion isn't valid.

Context. You posted about a specific incident and how you knew then that AH had become serious. The opinion that AH is serious, based on one single incident, isn't worth much IMO. Take that however you want.

Edit. If this is the inane back and forth posters were talking about earlier. I completely understand now.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

GreeBo

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

Edit. If this is the inane back and forth posters were talking about earlier. I completely understand now.

Now you get it!:pac:

KERSPLAT!

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

Edit. If this is the inane back and forth posters were talking about earlier. I completely understand now.

See! :pac:

GreeBo

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Maybe we arent grown up enough to have loose forums such as AH?
Or if we do, they have to be kept funny and irreverent, no serious topics should/could be discussed without a serious, strict charter.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Mountainsandh

Keira Thankful Target wrote: »

Yeah I never got the locking bumped threads thing. What is the logic behind it?

Not sure if it's in the rules here but isn't it a general forum rule of thumb to search for the topic if you have a question rather than start a new thread?

It's almost always new or newish users who do it and locking the thread must really put them off.

+1
And what's more, this can allow older posters to discover threads they didn't know were there. I'm always curious at zombie threads, lots of interesting stuff just buried away that you'd only find if you're doing a very specific search.

.......

This post has been deleted.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Wibbs

GreeBo wrote: »

+1

PI is an excellently moderated, welcoming and helpful forum.

It is G and when I modded it I found it piss easy to moderate in the sense because of the nature of the forum the rules are extremely clear cut and there's little to no wriggle room. However you cannot apply the PI model to a forum like AH. Most people aren't annually retentive navel gazers who need rules for every little thing. You need flexibility. Never mind that if you go full time and motion middle management on a forum you can be sure some will rules lawyer all over the place.

GreeBo

Wibbs wrote: »

It is G and when I modded it I found it piss easy to moderate in the sense because of the nature of the forum the rules are extremely clear cut and there's little to no wriggle room. However you cannot apply the PI model to a forum like AH. Most people aren't annually retentive navel gazers who need rules for every little thing. You need flexibility. Never mind that if you go full time and motion middle management on a forum you can be sure some will rules lawyer all over the place.

I'm not sure I agree W. (;))

I think part of the problem with AH is that its trying to be cool and relaxed, but also allows people to talk about highly emotive, polarizing topics.

I dont think thats possible without someone pushing the boundaries too far.


Save the serious stuff for forums with serious charters.

Actually I think the anonymity is one of the biggest positives and negatives we have.
Some use it to express themselves in ways they otherwise couldnt, others use it to be a dick and hide behind it.