Advertisement
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards
Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

Feedback on the current Feedback format

  • #1
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 55,607 admin Beasty


    As mentioned in the recent AH thread where site-wide feedback was provided, we are now starting an open discussion on site Feedback, and the changes introduced last year.

    The conditions set out in the charter for this forum remain in place – that means anyone wishing to contribute to this thread must have been on the site for a minimum 3 months, and must have a postcount of 100 or more.

    We appreciate the changes introduced last year were received poorly by many posters who would usually contribute to threads in the Feedback forum. Those changes were explained at the time, and were made, in my view, in the best interests of the site. We wanted to give the new format an extended run to see how it turned out. We have seen that now, and also have seen comments made in the AH thread.

    We would like to find a way to re-introduce a more open feedback format, but equally feel it important to encourage a wider participation in site-wide feedback discussions in the way we saw it in the AH thread. Hopefully we can get wider perspectives, and I would encourage those posters who feel they have something to contribute to this and future Open feedback threads, in whatever format is in place, to do so.

    So to kick this off I’ve one or two suggestions over how Feedback could be provided in a more open fashion than we currently allow.

    The first point I would like to make is that the Feedback forum is for site-wide feedback – we expect it to be constructive feedback. That does not mean it must be positive, and there are certainly going to be situations where negative or critical feedback will be given. However I will re-emphasise the term “constructive”. We all want to see feedback that is posted with the intention of improving things, and not becoming a place simply to have a whinge.

    We also recognise that posters do need to have avenues to complain about things they are not happy with. We currently have the DRP where posters can challenge cards or bans handed out at a forum level. This thread is not for discussing the DRP process itself – we did have a separate discussion on that a while ago.

    There has been in place a process to deal with other “complaints”. That has involved initially discussing the issue with local mods and if not satisfied escalating it to the relevant CMod(s). All this is supposed to happen via PM, and not within open threads. Beyond the CMod level a thread can be started in Help Desk, which is a better format for dealing with disputes as it has pre-moderation of replies to an OP, allowing some control to avoid unnecessary commentary or other intervention by posters who may have a chip on their shoulder. One problem with this approach is I suspect many posters do not see the Help Desk as a place for resolving disputes, and it also deals with other issues. My own thought therefore was why not have an equivalent to the DRP, perhaps headed “Other Disputes” to deal with complaints about mods, forums or indeed categories.

    We have also been discussing forum feedback threads with the wider mod community. Some have taken onboard comments made in the AH thread and introduced permanent feedback stickies. There is no “one size fits all” solution here though. I would certainly encourage mods to run feedback threads at appropriate intervals (so, for example, the Soccer forum already runs one every year, during the close season) – I do not think an annual or indeed biennial feedback thread is the answer for everyone, but I do think that running them occasionally allows the userbase the opportunity to provide some input into how a forum is run. I would add though that in-forum feedback threads should not become places for complaints about specific rules, mods or indeed their actions. Maybe examples of moderation could be provided to inform discussion, but these should not be turned into an in-depth “inquest” into something that has happened in the forum

    TL/DR – the shorter version of my own suggestons:

    Feedback for constructive site-wide feedback
    DRP for contesting cards or bans
    “Other Disputes” forum for other disputes at mod, forum or indeed category level
    More (or perhaps more regular) forum feedback threads within the relevant forums


«13456714

Comments



  • Open Feedback to the way it was previously with the conditions that you can only post if you've been a member for x months and have x posts. Time and posts to be decided.

    Some who troll feedback are well known, cut out the crap and just ban them when they act the bollox.

    I honestly believe it's as easy as that. It won't be perfect but what's in place now is immeasurably worse.




  • This post has been deleted.




  • Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.
    Only building on this as a thought; would it make sense to have a generic forum to start threads in (let's call it Helpdesk) and then depending on the type of issue have it moved to the appropriate forum? Dispute a card? Moved to DRP, complains the mods in forum X is unfair? Helpdesk. Want a new function? Development team etc.

    Obviously adds workload but would resolve the whole "not sure where to post" issue.




  • I'm no great fan of "Thanks" how else are we to signify ideas / posts we agree with or support?




  • Nody wrote: »
    Only building on this as a thought; would it make sense to have a generic forum to start threads in (let's call it Helpdesk) and then depending on the type of issue have it moved to the appropriate forum? Dispute a card? Moved to DRP, complains the mods in forum X is unfair? Helpdesk. Want a new function? Development team etc.

    Obviously adds workload but would resolve the whole "not sure where to post" issue.

    Or a similar idea with a conspicuous sticky with live links to the other various forums? That way people would know where they had posted without being redirected.


  • Advertisement


  • KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    Open Feedback to the way it was previously with the conditions that you can only post if you've been a member for x months and have x posts. Time and posts to be decided.

    Some who troll feedback are well known, cut out the crap and just ban them when they act the bollox.

    I honestly believe it's as easy as that. It won't be perfect but what's in place now is immeasurably worse.

    Exactly this. Trying to control everything to the nth degree is off putting and far too restrictive. With hidden more specific feedback, via pm and then help desk, this is a far too frustrating route to air things. Waiting for a yearly forum specific thread too is often no good as a year is a long time to forget things.

    The way it was might not have worked well for admins, but for ordinary users it worked far better than what was since or what I being proposed by beasty. A no tolerance approach to rereg complainers and some minor postcount/reg date restrictions I best for most people.

    It won't happen, as this is probably a box ticking exercise in a process that has already been pretty much decided, but I can hope I'm wrong. The end process will be very similar to what beast has outlined, I have no doubt.




  • Even the lack of a thanks button in here makes it far harder to find out what most people think as not everyone might want to post just to say something someone else has already posted, which might make it seem that not many people hold a certain view.




  • Thanks for that 5star ;)




  • 5starpool wrote: »
    Even the lack of a thanks button in here makes it far harder to find out what most people think as not everyone might want to post just to say something someone else has already posted, which might make it seem that not many people hold a certain view.

    +1




  • Put it back the way it was with the stipulation that if someone is taking the piss they'll get a friendly pm from a mod to reign it in. Posting a mod warning on thread only riles people up more i think and starts an Us vs Them debacle


  • Advertisement


  • This post has been deleted.




  • ....... wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    Couldn't agree more. I've started threads before and they didn't get approved and when I complained about them not being dealt with I was told I had never started them.

    It gets so frustrating you just give up.




  • This post has been deleted.




  • 9or10 wrote: »
    Thanks for that 5star ;)

    Ha, I hadn't seen your point, apologies! However I needed to post to show I thought the same anyhow.




  • Beasty wrote: »
    The conditions set out in the charter for this forum remain in place – that means anyone wishing to contribute to this thread must have been on the site for a minimum 3 months, and must have a postcount of 100 or more.
    Hello :pac:
    We appreciate the changes introduced last year were received poorly by many posters who would usually contribute to threads in the Feedback forum.
    We would like to find a way to re-introduce a more open feedback format
    The first point I would like to make is that the Feedback forum is for site-wide feedback – we expect it to be constructive feedback.
    Take these three quotes writ large, and you have your feedback problem.

    The most serious structural impediment of this website is its insistence on receiving feedback only within an Overton frame of reference that it considers conducive to its mission. This has the appearance of open-mindedness ("we would like to more feedback") but ultimately cones back within that conservative group-think window ("changes were received poorly, but we're only welcoming constructive feedback"). As an organisation, boards.ie is absolutely appalling at receiving, digesting, and acting upon feedback of its key userbase.




  • This post has been deleted.




  • I actually prefer the feedback forum the way it is now. In the old one, people were often making noise for the sake of it and threads went off course/degenerated pretty quickly.

    I would feel comfortable posting in the feedback forum now, whereas previously I wouldn't have.




  • KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    Open Feedback to the way it was previously with the conditions that you can only post if you've been a member for x months and have x posts. Time and posts to be decided.

    Some who troll feedback are well known, cut out the crap and just ban them when they act the bollox.

    Pretty much sums it up.

    Open Feedback back up to genuine posters who wish to submit genuine feedback, and have a genuine discussion. Serial whingers and trolls need not apply. Undoubtedly easier said than done, but take it as a baseline, and work from there.




  • I'm struggling to think of anything good that came out of Feedback during the last four or five years of its existence.

    In my opinion it's a place that is dominated by trolls and people who love the sound of their own voice. You couldn't control it then and you won't control it now.

    In short it's best days are behind it and you should let it go.




  • ....... wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    I've just gone through all the unapproved threads since the current format was introduced

    There are 26 in total, although the last one was on 22 November

    15 received individual responses from Admins via PM

    1 more would have received a PM but they closed their account before I could send it

    5 were raising the closure of the Spurs forum and Hosted forums generally. We did allow a single discussion on the Spurs forum and an Open discussion on the future of Hosted forums generally

    1 was nothing to do with Feedback and the poster found the correct forum for their question removing the need for a PM

    1 was a site development question about slowness of the site which had been resolved

    2 were specific forum complaints where posters should have been engaging the local mods initially. I think those should have been responded to via PM, but unfortunately slipped through the net along with one more that was not approved and also not followed up. I think we need to hold our hands up on these 3.


  • Advertisement


  • I actually prefer the feedback forum the way it is now. In the old one, people were often making noise for the sake of it and threads went off course/degenerated pretty quickly.
    Earthhorse wrote: »
    I'm struggling to think of anything good that came out of Feedback during the last four or five years of its existence.
    To be honest, one of the things that made me think long and hard about accepting a role as Admin was seeing how Feedback had descended in a chaotic fashion in recent years. And it was not the re-reg trolls that were the problem - they could be dealt with swiftly. It was long-standing users who seemed to rejoice at piling in to any thread where they could have a dig at Mods, CMods, Admins or Office staff to then accuse the Admins of "circling the wagons". Sometimes you need to find a way of fending off unnecessary and sometime vindictive "feedback" that was nothing more than a whinge because someone had a gripe with the way the site was evolving

    One of the refreshing things about the AH thread was it actually allowed posters who would normally go nowhere near Feedback to comment on how they thought things were. And yes there were criticisms as well as comments supportive of things around here. But I'll use that term again, generally any criticisms were well set out and "constructive". That approach is far more likely to get a positive response and a willingness to change things.

    I would also add though, that whatever posters may feel individually about the site, only a very small proportion contribute to "Feedback" discussions, and there is a danger that those shouting loudest get there way leaving many who may be perfectly satisfied having to accept change they don't actually want. Hence we need to consider wider implications of feedback suggestions on the site




  • Beasty wrote: »
    As mentioned in the recent AH thread where site-wide feedback was provided, we are now starting an open discussion on site Feedback, and the changes introduced last year.

    The conditions set out in the charter for this forum remain in place – that means anyone wishing to contribute to this thread must have been on the site for a minimum 3 months, and must have a postcount of 100 or more.

    We appreciate the changes introduced last year were received poorly by many posters who would usually contribute to threads in the Feedback forum. Those changes were explained at the time, and were made, in my view, in the best interests of the site. We wanted to give the new format an extended run to see how it turned out. We have seen that now, and also have seen comments made in the AH thread.

    We would like to find a way to re-introduce a more open feedback format, but equally feel it important to encourage a wider participation in site-wide feedback discussions in the way we saw it in the AH thread. Hopefully we can get wider perspectives, and I would encourage those posters who feel they have something to contribute to this and future Open feedback threads, in whatever format is in place, to do so.

    So to kick this off I’ve one or two suggestions over how Feedback could be provided in a more open fashion than we currently allow.

    The first point I would like to make is that the Feedback forum is for site-wide feedback – we expect it to be constructive feedback. That does not mean it must be positive, and there are certainly going to be situations where negative or critical feedback will be given. However I will re-emphasise the term “constructive”. We all want to see feedback that is posted with the intention of improving things, and not becoming a place simply to have a whinge.

    We also recognise that posters do need to have avenues to complain about things they are not happy with. We currently have the DRP where posters can challenge cards or bans handed out at a forum level. This thread is not for discussing the DRP process itself – we did have a separate discussion on that a while ago.

    There has been in place a process to deal with other “complaints”. That has involved initially discussing the issue with local mods and if not satisfied escalating it to the relevant CMod(s). All this is supposed to happen via PM, and not within open threads. Beyond the CMod level a thread can be started in Help Desk, which is a better format for dealing with disputes as it has pre-moderation of replies to an OP, allowing some control to avoid unnecessary commentary or other intervention by posters who may have a chip on their shoulder. One problem with this approach is I suspect many posters do not see the Help Desk as a place for resolving disputes, and it also deals with other issues. My own thought therefore was why not have an equivalent to the DRP, perhaps headed “Other Disputes” to deal with complaints about mods, forums or indeed categories.

    We have also been discussing forum feedback threads with the wider mod community. Some have taken onboard comments made in the AH thread and introduced permanent feedback stickies. There is no “one size fits all” solution here though. I would certainly encourage mods to run feedback threads at appropriate intervals (so, for example, the Soccer forum already runs one every year, during the close season) – I do not think an annual or indeed biennial feedback thread is the answer for everyone, but I do think that running them occasionally allows the userbase the opportunity to provide some input into how a forum is run. I would add though that in-forum feedback threads should not become places for complaints about specific rules, mods or indeed their actions. Maybe examples of moderation could be provided to inform discussion, but these should not be turned into an in-depth “inquest” into something that has happened in the forum

    TL/DR – the shorter version of my own suggestons:

    Feedback for constructive site-wide feedback
    DRP for contesting cards or bans
    “Other Disputes” forum for other disputes at mod, forum or indeed category level
    More (or perhaps more regular) forum feedback threads within the relevant forums

    Why not ? Surely one of the biggest problems is the inconsistency between one forum & another especially for new users. Why should it be up to the mods of a forum to decide if they will allow feedback ? They should welcome it because willing consensus will make their jobs easier.

    Your emphasis on constructive hints at not being open to dissent. Boards has a long history of asking our opinions & then closing ranks to ignore them. I personally had a situation where a Mod asked for feedback, on a feedback thread & then used it to get me banned. People need to know that they can comment without fear of repercussions.

    Every forum should have a permanent ongoing feedback sticky. It's easier for the mods as they don't have to deal with PMs. But more importantly it is open & it definitely needs a thanks button. If people are abusive then ban them. The PM a Mod system is archaic, hidden & reeks of wanting to contain comment rather than welcoming it.

    A good Mod, CMod & Admin will welcome feedback. Companies spend a fortune to get it as it's such a valuable business resource.




  • Beasty wrote: »
    To be honest, one of the things that made me think long and hard about accepting a role as Admin was seeing how Feedback had descended in a chaotic fashion in recent years. And it was not the re-reg trolls that were the problem - they could be dealt with swiftly. It was long-standing users who seemed to rejoice at piling in to any thread where they could have a dig at Mods, CMods, Admins or Office staff to then accuse the Admins of "circling the wagons". Sometimes you need to find a way of fending off unnecessary and sometime vindictive "feedback" that was nothing more than a whinge because someone had a gripe with the way the site was evolving

    One of the refreshing things about the AH thread was it actually allowed posters who would normally go nowhere near Feedback to comment on how they thought things were. And yes there were criticisms as well as comments supportive of things around here. But I'll use that term again, generally any criticisms were well set out and "constructive". That approach is far more likely to get a positive response and a willingness to change things.

    I would also add though, that whatever posters may feel individually about the site, only a very small proportion contribute to "Feedback" discussions, and there is a danger that those shouting loudest get there way leaving many who may be perfectly satisfied having to accept change they don't actually want. Hence we need to consider wider implications of feedback suggestions on the site


    Nobody is going to go to feedback to say well done. The very nature of it ensures negative comments as it's where you go when you have a complaint.
    Most of the posts in the old forum were genuine imo and came from a real desire to see improvement. The fact nothing changed meant the same complaints were made repeatedly.Also remember some really good ideas coming out of the old forum




  • kneemos wrote: »
    Nobody is going to go to feedback to say well done. The very nature of it ensures negative comments as it's where you go when you have a complaint.
    Most of the posts in the old forum were genuine imo and came from a real desire to see improvement. The fact nothing changed meant the same complaints were made repeatedly.Also remember some really good ideas coming out of the old forum

    In fairness, Beasty isn't asking for "well done". What's not wanted is "boards is a load of bollox. Why? Just is. Nazi mods." Etc. Instead what is wanted is constructive criticism, "boards is going downhill. I believe the issues are x, y and z. Maybe try xy to fix it?"

    Or along those lines.




  • KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    Open Feedback to the way it was previously with the conditions that you can only post if you've been a member for x months and have x posts. Time and posts to be decided.

    Some who troll feedback are well known, cut out the crap and just ban them when they act the bollox.

    I honestly believe it's as easy as that. It won't be perfect but what's in place now is immeasurably worse.
    5starpool wrote: »
    Exactly this. Trying to control everything to the nth degree is off putting and far too restrictive. With hidden more specific feedback, via pm and then help desk, this is a far too frustrating route to air things. Waiting for a yearly forum specific thread too is often no good as a year is a long time to forget things.

    The way it was might not have worked well for admins, but for ordinary users it worked far better than what was since or what I being proposed by beasty. A no tolerance approach to rereg complainers and some minor postcount/reg date restrictions I best for most people.

    It won't happen, as this is probably a box ticking exercise in a process that has already been pretty much decided, but I can hope I'm wrong. The end process will be very similar to what beast has outlined, I have no doubt.
    5starpool wrote: »
    Even the lack of a thanks button in here makes it far harder to find out what most people think as not everyone might want to post just to say something someone else has already posted, which might make it seem that not many people hold a certain view.
    Put it back the way it was with the stipulation that if someone is taking the piss they'll get a friendly pm from a mod to reign it in. Posting a mod warning on thread only riles people up more i think and starts an Us vs Them debacle
    KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    In fairness, Beasty isn't asking for "well done". What's not wanted is "boards is a load of bollox. Why? Just is. Nazi mods." Etc. Instead what is wanted is constructive criticism, "boards is going downhill. I believe the issues are x, y and z. Maybe try xy to fix it?"

    Or along those lines.

    All of the above.

    Thanking posts would be a lot easier.




  • KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    In fairness, Beasty isn't asking for "well done". What's not wanted is "boards is a load of bollox. Why? Just is. Nazi mods." Etc. Instead what is wanted is constructive criticism, "boards is going downhill. I believe the issues are x, y and z. Maybe try xy to fix it?"

    Or along those lines.


    The purpose of feedback is to see how people feel about your product not to dictate how they should tell you their opinion.

    Nazi mods is constructive criticism,it's how someone feels about the level of moderation on the site.




  • Discodog wrote: »
    Why not ? Surely one of the biggest problems is the inconsistency between one forum & another especially for new users. Why should it be up to the mods of a forum to decide if they will allow feedback ? They should welcome it because willing consensus will make their jobs easier.
    Yes we strive for consistency, but only where it is appropriate. This may be within a forum, across a category or across the site. We are discussing the idea of "regular" feedback threads with the mods at present. Some are bought into the idea of permanent feedback stickies. Some point out, based on their own experience within their forums, that it would be incredibly difficult if not impossible to manage. The problem is (and this had become a problem for the site wide Feedback forum) is that anyone with a gripe goes off to start a discussion where they seek to dissect every mod action they do not like. There are some forums (particularly the larger ones) where this simply will not work. I am suggesting that in those cases mods should seek to run regular threads - that may be every year or perhaps every couple of years. In the meantime if anyone has a complaint that they cannot resolve directly with the mods, we have something perhaps a little more descriptive than "Help Desk" where such complaints can be raised and dealt with, with input from users, Mods, CMods and Admins as appropriate. It's perhaps better codifying what we have at present by providing clarity there are processes to deal with issues/complaints/suggestions at all levels, and not simply for someone to think they can garner a bit of support for what may be a relatively minor local issue by kicking off a site-wide Feedback thread
    Discodog wrote: »
    emphasis on constructive hints at not being open to dissent. Boards has a long history of asking our opinions & then closing ranks to ignore them. I personally had a situation where a Mod asked for feedback, on a feedback thread & then used it to get me banned. People need to know that they can comment without fear of repercussions.
    I deliberately stated feedback can be positive or negative so long as it is constructive. People can comment precisely as I set out above, leaving the opportunity for things to be dealt with at an appropriate level




  • kneemos wrote: »
    Nazi mods is constructive criticism,it's how someone feels about the level of moderation on the site.

    I respectfully disagree. It’s a childish comment and lazy in thought. It’s also really aggravating and designed to stoke the fires rather than offer something constructive. I really hope that posters who come to Feedback to share their concerns can do it better than throwing out an insult. That’s all we’re asking for.




  • kneemos wrote: »
    The purpose of feedback is to see how people feel about your product not to dictate how they should tell you their opinion.

    Nazi mods is constructive criticism,it's how someone feels about the level of moderation on the site.

    Paint it how you like, it's not constructive.


  • Advertisement


  • dudara wrote: »
    I respectfully disagree. It’s a childish comment and lazy in thought. It’s also really aggravating and designed to stoke the fires rather than offer something constructive. I really hope that posters who come to Feedback to share their concerns can do it better than throwing out an insult. That’s all we’re asking for.


    It's the sentiment you should be concerned about not the terminology.

    Maybe someone was annoyed and frustrated by what they saw as unnecessary interference from a mod. Not everything is black and white.
    I have to say not being able to take a bit of straight talking and forthright criticism as a company is not good.

    There may have been a few trolls in the old forum,but from what I saw of it was real complaints,moderation in particular has been a bug bear for years now.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement