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

Pac1Man

I can understand the viewpoints of both G and W here.

GreeBo

Pac1Man wrote: »

I can understand the viewpoints of both G and W here.

Thanks PM.:pac:

jackofalltrades

Skylinehead wrote: »

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.

This is part of the problem that leads to posters becoming frustrated.
Even though there's supposed to be a ban, some political threads are allowed and some aren't.
The criteria behind this never being fully explained either.

.......

This post has been deleted.

.......

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

GreeBo, how do you thank this poster using the ultra cool initials greeting!?

Skylinehead

jackofalltrades wrote: »

This is part of the problem that leads to posters becoming frustrated.
Even though there's supposed to be a ban, some political threads are allowed and some aren't.
The criteria behind this never being fully explained either.

Yeah I can understand that, it happens. We'd allow a thread on a big event now and again but even disregarding that there's a thread on Trump right now.

Beasty

But there's a political angle to most threads in AH. I guess though it's a very difficult line to draw and some may see some of these discussions as more "fun" and not overly analysing political detail, which the Cafe and main Politics forums can do

Indeed if you cut off this discussion in AH, I doubt whether many would migrate over to either of those political forums

_Dara_

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Sly wording there. Say no and it sounds like I'm unaware. I think no system is perfect and this works fine. I've seen plenty of cards overturned. The ones that aren't: it's always pretty obvious why not.

.......

This post has been deleted.

_Dara_

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Well, I disagree.

And 'wagon-circling' needs to be given a rest as a phrase. If admins agree with each other, it might be that they... actually agree with each other.

I can't stand people playing the victim. Take some fucking responsibility.

The most I've ever done is sent an indignant PM when I've been reprimanded. And then with that out of my system, I just build a bridge and shimmy over it.

Fr_Dougal

Skylinehead wrote: »

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.

Look what the politics threads have been replaced with, absolute tripe like ‘what are you doing’ ‘where are you’ etc., it’s like Facebook with all the ‘u ok hun’ type chatty drivel.

I’d prefer a political thread any day of the week.

Fr_Dougal

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Look what the politics threads have been replaced with, absolute tripe like ‘what are you doing’ ‘where are you’ etc., it’s like Facebook with all the ‘u ok hun’ type chatty drivel.

I’d prefer a political thread any day of the week.

For you it is absolute tripe but for others it's something good. I defend them because human connections are important to me and I think they bring a bit of that to the site. I like to interact with people who are more than just an opinion but who share little snippets of their lives. Of course not everyone likes those threads but I firmly believe there is space for both political discussion and "what are you eating" around these parts.

There is one poster who has lit up After Hours with her updates regarding her baby who is very unwell. That to me isn't tripe it's heartwarming and brings out the good in others and maybe even gives a bit of perspective.

hatrickpatrick

evolving_doors wrote: »

The drop in posts could also be accounted for with the discouragement of the following phrases:

Have you tried blasting it with pi55

Yor ma

Thinly Veiled.

That's what happened with the Nazis.

First world problems!

Again though why? Taking the piss is part of being Irish and memes are a part of any online community. It's moronic to try and curate a forum into a "serious" place when the majority of its users come from a culture which in general doesn't take life that seriously to begin with.

retro:electro

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Look what the politics threads have been replaced with, absolute tripe like ‘what are you doing’ ‘where are you’ etc., it’s like Facebook with all the ‘u ok hun’ type chatty drivel.

I’d prefer a political thread any day of the week.

Not everyone wants to get involved in heavy debate. At first I thought those "where are you now" type threads weren't for me, but often they're the only remaining threads that embody any kind of community spirit or "old school" warmth. Do you ever post in them? It's a superficial response to rebuff them and perceive them in the same light as Facebook fluff. Some of my favourite posters post in those kinds of threads.

hatrickpatrick

Deleted User wrote: »

For you it is absolute tripe but for others it's something good. I defend them because human connections are important to me and I think they bring a bit of that to the site. I like to interact with people who are more than just an opinion but who share little snippets of their lives. Of course not everyone likes those threads but I firmly believe there is space for both political discussion and "what are you eating" around these parts.

Agreed. The problem is that Boards now has no space for political discussion, both politics forums are top-down curated one way or the other (P.General with its very strict limits on what constitutes legitimate discussion, P.Cafe with its entry barriers which are the surest way to murder a forum, as evidenced by literally every other forum I've ever seen try this over the years)

Why can't we just have a politics forum in which people can post controversial opinions and tear down other controversial opinions, with the simple caveat that if you don't like it you can f*ck off to one of the curated ones? That was originally the whole purpose of splitting the general and cafe forums in the first place, and then the Cafe slowly began to reintroduce the idea of a curated space, which just entirely defeats the purpose of its existence.

Sometimes it's ok to just let conversations and arguments happen organically. Nobody is going to leave the site altogether because someone pisses them off in a discussion - and if they do, then in my view Boards' culture just isn't for them.

Regarding political discussion I don't feel comfortable to post in the new version of the Cafe or the Politics Forum. I'm not a natural debater and would be conscious of how my views come across. Personally a bit more leeway in After Hours for such topics would be a good thing but then are we turning After Hours in to a one stop shop?

hatrickpatrick

Deleted User wrote: »

Regarding political discussion I don't feel comfortable to post in the new version of the Cafe or the Politics Forum. I'm not a natural debater and would be conscious of how my views come across. Personally a bit more leeway in After Hours for such topics would be a good thing but then are we turning After Hours in to a one stop shop?

I was an extremely frequent contributor to the old PC (appropriate abbreviation :D:D) but I refuse on principle to sign up for the new one which is so elitist towards both new users and people with political views which get them modded more often than people like me. I do sometimes read it and it seems that it's a shadow of what it was before they made it elitist in this manner anyway so I guess I'm not missing much...

.......

This post has been deleted.

Fr_Dougal

Deleted User wrote: »

For you it is absolute tripe but for others it's something good. I defend them because human connections are important to me and I think they bring a bit of that to the site. I like to interact with people who are more than just an opinion but who share little snippets of their lives. Of course not everyone likes those threads but I firmly believe there is space for both political discussion and "what are you eating" around these parts.

anna080 wrote: »

Not everyone wants to get involved in heavy debate. At first I thought those "where are you now" type threads weren't for me, but often they're the only remaining threads that embody any kind of community spirit or "old school" warmth. Do you ever post in them? It's a superficial response to rebuff them and perceive them in the same light as Facebook fluff. Some of my favourite posters post in those kinds of threads.

Well then maybe one large chat thread might be an idea, I understand what you’re saying, but at the moment we have about half a dozen threads that are all chat.

tomwaterford

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Well then maybe one large chat thread might be an idea, I understand what you’re saying, but at the moment we have about half a dozen threads that are all chat.

This is a good compromise

The farming forum used not have chat thread years ago,and after about half way through the first page of anything it used just decend into off topic chat and just be woeful cliquey boring sh1te....

but with chat type threads it has made others better....but Idk how applicable this is to AH....

Fr_Dougal

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Well then maybe one large chat thread might be an idea, I understand what you’re saying, but at the moment we have about half a dozen threads that are all chat.

Throw all lighthearted topics in to the one thread and all political discussion in to another?

retro:electro

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Well then maybe one large chat thread might be an idea, I understand what you’re saying, but at the moment we have about half a dozen threads that are all chat.

I disagree. Some of those threads are AH's most engaging and active threads. Killing them off and making a megathread will do what exactly? Most likely reduce forum activity even more. The biggest gripe users have with those threads is that they're "Facebooky" then it's easy avoid them. I don't think they're replacing political content either. Some of those threads have been running for years.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

anna080 wrote: »

I disagree. Some of those threads are AH's most engaging and active threads. Killing them off and making a megathread will do what exactly? Most likely reduce forum activity even more. The biggest gripe users have with those threads is that they're "Facebooky" then it's easy avoid them. I don't think they're replacing political content either. Some of those threads have been running for years.

Yeah I'm not particularly interested in those threads but it's easy not to read them like I don't think people are making a choice between "Will I post about what I'm eating, or will I post my thoughts on Syria, because I will only do ONE!"

Presumably there's a trickle down between people who engage a lot with those threads and then browse around.

Skylinehead

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

P.Cafe with its entry barriers which are the surest way to murder a forum, as evidenced by literally every other forum I've ever seen try this over the years)

Except soccer

I do agree on the Cafe though, it was supposed to be craptalk about politics, with the main Politics forum being the more "legitimate" option. I don't know why it was closed, exactly. The whole point of casual discussion was a bit destroyed by needing access requests. Now, there's no difference between the two, except it's a bit deader.

riffmongous

I'm not a fan of the mega chat threads but if others enjoy them then fair enough, good for them and if it keeps people around then great. But one problem I still have its that there are so many of them, and coupled with all the other mega threads and political stuff, sometimes when I check the main page of AH it feels like there isn't any new content/threads there at all.

GreeBo

riffmongous wrote: »

I'm not a fan of the mega chat threads but if others enjoy them then fair enough, good for them and if it keeps people around then great. But one problem I still have its that there are so many of them, and coupled with all the other mega threads and political stuff, sometimes when I check the main page of AH it feels like there isn't any new content/threads there at all.

I think a mega chat type thread works well in specific forums, but AH is by definition nonspecific, so we are basically talking about turning AH Forum into 1 thread?

_Dara_

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yeah, most people speaking up haven't been treated unfairly. They just don't want to admit that they were wrong. Trying to save face and all that. The odd time, the complaints are justified and those ones are usually rectified. If you've complained and the outcome hasn't changed, chances are the sanction was fair. In probably 99% of DRP disputes I've read that did not result in an amendment, it's been obvious that the sanction was deserved.

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Nobody has lied about me or treated me unfairly. I deserved all sanctions taken against me. Stop adding things on to my posts that I did not say or even imply.

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

For the small percentage of sanctions that are unfair. And those are usually amended or overturned.

riffmongous

GreeBo wrote: »

I think a mega chat type thread works well in specific forums, but AH is by definition nonspecific, so we are basically talking about turning AH Forum into 1 thread?

No no, I want the opposite, many more threads with more varying topics. Now how to achieve that I'm not so sure, I'd prefer to see anything serious moved elsewhere and AH kept light hearted, but I don't think it would be possible without huge complaints and everyone would just need migrate back in the end

hatrickpatrick

Skylinehead wrote: »

Except soccer

I do agree on the Cafe though, it was supposed to be craptalk about politics, with the main Politics forum being the more "legitimate" option. I don't know why it was closed, exactly. The whole point of casual discussion was a bit destroyed by needing access requests. Now, there's no difference between the two, except it's a bit deader.

Difference with soccer is that nobody gets banned for supporting Man City over Man U, and then potentially gets refused access because of their history of supporting Man City over Man U. The entire problem on the politics forums is the "unspoken rules" mentioned over the last few pages (for instance, thou shalt not be a cultural nationalist), and the curated politics cafe membership allows the mods to selectively make sure those views can't be expressed.

That's at the heart of this whole issue. Applied to soccer, imagine if supporting a certain team essentially made you "persona non grata" not only to the forum's users (which is fine) but also to those in charge (which is not).