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

NollagShona

The ability to “hide” threads would be awesome

GreeBo

pilly wrote: »

But it's not engaging in discussion if you just take ten quotes from the thread and state categorically "wrong", "doesn't exist", "no".

That is not a discussion in any sense of the word whatsoever.

I don't think you've experienced the particular type of posting that people are talking about tbh.

Agreed its not, and yes I have seen all too many of those posts/threads.

But unfortunately I dont think thats solely whats being discussed here.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who has been involved in or at least witnessed a debate where it eventually results in a couple of posters debating back and forth (without resorting to childish one liners) actually making points and rebuttels, only to see the thread locked with a "we are done here" or an on thread warning about it being boring.

What exactly is wrong with people continuing the debate after others have left it? Can't they just be left until they either reach a consensus or give up trying?
Or at worst, split into a separate thread?

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

If you read my earlier post from today you’ll see where I quoted a poster in one on the chat threads calling posters in this thread with an opposing view ‘****’. That’s pretty hostile, but it’s not the main issue.

I suppose the main difference is the type between Andy’s thread and the chat thread is that Andy’s is a proper discussion thread, good craic, and everyone joins in and it will eventually run its course. The chat threads cater for a minority, cliquey, take up a lot of real estate on the front page, and are not what AH is about.

AH is banter, pop in and fast moving, easy to join in on a thread. I agree that the dole/terrorist/Muslim threads can be jading, but there are some diamonds in there too.

I know it's been pointed out that a core group in the chat threads makes up most of the quantity of the posts, but I disagree that means it's catering for a minority or that it's cliquey. I'm looking at the "Where are you" and "Trivially Annoyed" threads now and there are dozens and dozens of posters in each outside the top five with lower number of posts. I myself made a post in the Happy thread before Christmas just because something really nice happened and I was happy about it, the response was "that's really nice". Where is the cliqueyness you're seeing? Think I unfollowed the thread again a couple of days later and it vanished from my mind again.

And twenty posters is a not inconsiderable fraction of the regular posters on AH. There are 400 viewers and 200 members on AH as of this post, what is the problem with catering to 5 or 10% of that number who reeeeally like those threads?

.......

This post has been deleted.

Boom_Bap

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

The old AH never allowed chat threads, it was part of the Charter. FlirtTar was created to cater for the chatty threads. Even this round of threads initially started off with a No Chat rule, then someone jokingly changed it to No Hats, and when V2/3 came around, the No Chat rule was forgotten about.

The banter of AH will still exist without the chat threads, it has done for many, many years. Andy’s coffee thread is a recent example of that.

The banter is rare outside those 3 or 4 threads. I'm not saying it's not in other threads, but it's sometimes hard to see. There was never a dedicated chat thread in AH, I believe that is what the ruling has always been.

I posted earlier in the this thread about how the rules have changed and evolved in the threads, which is why the specific No Chat rule has been removed, it's not longer required as the threads have matured and are not bogged down with chat. The No Hats is a joke making fun of the stiffness that used to be in place from the mods. The rule is not forgotten, just no longer required and in your face reminders removed as the threads rarely go off on chats.

I would love, absolutely love for more light hearted and fun threads in AH, if that happened I would definitely reconsider my stance on these type of thread.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

GreeBo wrote: »

Agreed its not, and yes I have seen all too many of those posts/threads.

But unfortunately I dont think thats solely whats being discussed here.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who has been involved in or at least witnessed a debate where it eventually results in a couple of posters debating back and forth (without resorting to childish one liners) actually making points and rebuttels, only to see the thread locked with a "we are done here" or an on thread warning about it being boring.

What exactly is wrong with people continuing the debate after others have left it? Can't they just be left until they either reach a consensus or give up trying?
Or at worst, split into a separate thread?

In fairness that type of proper debate rarely happens in AH and, when it does, rarely is the reason for thread closure.

GreeBo

pilly wrote: »

I have found PI to be THE most hostile forum on here. People are just waiting to see a new PI come up so they can jump on it and criticise/judge the OP, it's pathetic.

Thats individual posters, not the moderators.

Sometimes people don't want to hear what others have to say about the situation if it doesn't fit with their own views and they throw a strop, thats life.

In my experience the mods are quick to respond to these people and deal with them appropriately.

_Dara_

Deleted User wrote: »

Can I ask you- what do you want AH to be, in terms of a forum? Are you not going down the road of lots more rules and regulations, which is something that will stifle what's meant to be "social and fun".?

A lot of private forums have these type of threads as it keeps a level of lightheartedness balance to other more serious and rule based discussion threads.

If a social forum such as AH doesn't have a "release valve" the tension can quickly escalate in that forum. From my position, I really don't see the problem of ignoring threads you don't want to post in.

One chat thread in a public forum is all that is needed. Other forums on the site implement this rule very well. Private forums are different, they are already small groups of forum members.

And seriously the next poster who utters a variation of the inanity that is “If you don’t like them, don’t read them” is getting a puck in the tits from me.

GreeBo

Zoey Famous Aftershave wrote: »

In fairness that type of proper debate rarely happens in AH and, when it does, rarely is the reason for thread closure.

This pseudo-feedback thread isnt limited to AH, in fact its only recently turned towards AH specific comments.

My point is a general one.

GreeBo

_Dara_ wrote: »

One chat thread in a public forum is all that is needed. Other forums on the site implement this rule very well. Private forums are different, they are already small groups of forum members.

And seriously the next poster who utters a variation of the inanity that is “If you don’t like them, don’t read them” is getting a puck in the tits from me.

We need two AHs.
AH Cafe and AH Pub.

Remotely serious stuff goes to the Cafe, lighthearted stuff goes to the Pub.

I'll submit the forum request post-haste!

gifted

GreeBo wrote: »

We need two AHs.
AH Cafe and AH Pub.

Remotely serious stuff goes to the Cafe, lighthearted stuff goes to the Pub.

I'll submit the forum request post-haste!

Who decides light hearted? And who decides remotely serious stuff?

Tom Mann Centuria

GreeBo wrote: »

We need two AHs.
AH Cafe and AH Pub.

Remotely serious stuff goes to the Cafe, lighthearted stuff goes to the Pub.

I'll submit the forum request post-haste!

Hehehe.

I think we need 2 forum request forums. One for serious requests.......

pilly

pilly wrote: »

But it's not engaging in discussion if you just take ten quotes from the thread and state categorically "wrong", "doesn't exist", "no".

That is not a discussion in any sense of the word whatsoever.

I don't think you've experienced the particular type of posting that people are talking about tbh.

Proof?

tomwaterford

gifted wrote: »

Who decides light hearted? And who decides remotely serious stuff?

Me :cool:



Guess whoever starts thread??......would be of opioion there should be less forums vs starting more

Beasty

GreeBo wrote: »

We need two AHs.
AH Cafe and AH Pub.

Remotely serious stuff goes to the Cafe!

What? - political type stuff and the like? Could see a demand for that, but think it would need a snappier name

Anyone any ideas?

:pac:

_Dara_

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

It also tends to end up that the chat spills over into other threads as the same group tends to follow each other and continue their closed discussions or arguments elsewhere.

This is a good point. I have certainly seen this happening. Nothing worse than uninteresting in-joking spilling into threads from elsewhere.

GreeBo

gifted wrote: »

Who decides light hearted? And who decides remotely serious stuff?

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest the moderators do?

Just looked there. The Stickied threads are a bit useless to be honest. Probably best to have one all encompassing sticky called After Hours Bible or something with links to the charter, legendary threads and whatever else.

_Dara_

GreeBo wrote: »

We need two AHs.
AH Cafe and AH Pub.

Remotely serious stuff goes to the Cafe, lighthearted stuff goes to the Pub.

I'll submit the forum request post-haste!

LOL.

But no no no: non-serious threads and chat threads are not one and the same.

Tom Mann Centuria

Beasty wrote: »

What? - political type stuff and the like? Could see a demand for that, but think it would need a snappier name

Anyone any ideas?

:pac:

Cafe Politico.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

_Dara_ wrote: »

LOL.

But no no no: non-serious threads and chat threads are not one and the same.

Could you give an example of the type of threads you would like to see more of?

GreeBo

_Dara_ wrote: »

LOL.

But no no no: non-serious threads and chat threads are not one and the same.

Nothing to stop each new AH forum from having a chat sub-forum.

I'd call them AH Pub Chat, AH Cafe Chat

Or just "AHahahahah Cafe" & "AHhhh Pub"

Boom_Bap

Beasty wrote: »

What? - political type stuff and the like? Could see a demand for that, but think it would need a snappier name

Anyone any ideas?

:pac:

Hot Beverage and Light Snack Political Round Table

GreeBo

gifted wrote: »

Who decides light hearted? And who decides remotely serious stuff?

Though more seriously, the thread would be light hearted if it was in the Pub and more serious if it was in the Cafe.

tomwaterford

_Dara_ wrote: »

LOL.

But no no no: non-serious threads and chat threads are not one and the same.

Surly any long running version of those will just become a chat thread in the end



I know many I loose interest in after a while and I unsubscribe and move on....and let the last people still interested work away?

Fr_Dougal

Main forum: After Hours
Sub forum: AH Chat away

pilly

GreeBo wrote: »

Agreed its not, and yes I have seen all too many of those posts/threads.

But unfortunately I dont think thats solely whats being discussed here.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who has been involved in or at least witnessed a debate where it eventually results in a couple of posters debating back and forth (without resorting to childish one liners) actually making points and rebuttels, only to see the thread locked with a "we are done here" or an on thread warning about it being boring.

What exactly is wrong with people continuing the debate after others have left it? Can't they just be left until they either reach a consensus or give up trying?
Or at worst, split into a separate thread?

If you have only two posters left then they can continue by private message.

I kind of agree with your points but in AH especially it does get very boring when one post is taking up pages of texts. If I'm that into the subject then I'll go and look in specialist forums, if you know what I mean.

I suppose what I'm trying to say, is the same as what someone else said a few posts back, AH should be quick, snappy, light hearted, not pages of text from one or two posters.

pilly

GreeBo wrote: »

Thats individual posters, not the moderators.

Sometimes people don't want to hear what others have to say about the situation if it doesn't fit with their own views and they throw a strop, thats life.

In my experience the mods are quick to respond to these people and deal with them appropriately.

I agree, I never said it was the moderators.

GreeBo

pilly wrote: »

I agree, I never said it was the moderators.

PI is an excellently moderated, welcoming and helpful forum.

That was my post that you replied to...so I'm confused.

GreeBo

pilly wrote: »

If you have only two posters left then they can continue by private message.

I kind of agree with your points but in AH especially it does get very boring when one post is taking up pages of texts. If I'm that into the subject then I'll go and look in specialist forums, if you know what I mean.

I suppose what I'm trying to say, is the same as what someone else said a few posts back, AH should be quick, snappy, light hearted, not pages of text from one or two posters.

Ok so how about 3?

If no one else is posting then they are not impacting on anyone else, why should they have to take it to PM?

My point is not AH specific or indeed related to AH at all, its general feedback on the site.

Also, one thread takes up the same amount of space regardless of how many posts or how many posters are in it...so I dont follow that point?