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

2456714

Comments



  • This post has been deleted.




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

    Perhaps that's all the useful feedback there actually is?




  • This post has been deleted.




  • ....... wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.
    Maybe you didn't read my post

    Nearly 60% got personalised replies from Admins

    Nearly 20% ended up with a dedicated Open Feedback discussion

    Nearly 12% may be within what you define as not "deemed useful"

    But don't let facts get in the way of a good spin




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

    While we were not having the same volume of Feedback as before, I think we still got some genuinely good feedback / questions in that period. The question we are asking here now is how to continue that in a new Feedback format.


  • Advertisement


  • kneemos wrote: »
    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.

    And as been said repeatedly, honest, constructive feedback is welcome. Name calling and rabble rousing (and yes, that’s what I consider such statements to be) is not helpful or constructive.




  • All of the above.
    Thanking posts would be a lot easier.

    +1
    This, it's easy to do, easy to manage.

    The only other thing I'd mention would be actual feedback response from staff (and or owners of boards) is required. Mods and Admins can only action so much and nothing in terms of the actual physical structure of the site or the over-arching ethos of the board. Dav when he was on boards was very proactive and engaging IMO, Niamh and whoever else it is now aren't.




  • Beasty wrote: »
    Maybe you didn't read my post
    Nearly 60% got personalised replies from Admins

    do you think any other company would find that acceptable if that was their own response rate to customers? Stop trying to say a number like 60% is a positive thing, it's a terrible response rate
    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 I'll give you that one

    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 How hard is it then to reply and direct people to it?

    1 was nothing to do with Feedback and the poster found the correct forum for their question removing the need for a PM unless they proactivly PM'd you to say that what harm in a PM to say its not really feddback you should try here or here though instead?

    1 was a site development question about slowness of the site which had been resolved no it hasn't, the site is still painfully slow at times but regardless that doesn't mean a response was not required

    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.

    So 1 out of 26 that didn't need to be actively replied to... And you wonder why people get disillusioned with the current process and situation?




  • I got no response whatsoever for weeks for a suggesting politics cafe be joined with AH as there is literally a handful of folk using it.

    Apparently there was a feedback thread there for the few that had bothered to apply to use it.
    I was advised to go there.




  • This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement


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

    That just about sums it up for me.

    I'd also like to know the numbers who actually read the feedback forum then and now.

    Now here is something to consider boards.ie are quite happy to take (needed) money from companies to host the Talk to... forums where the companies concerned have no moderation rights but when it comes to their own "Talk to..." forum they want premoderation.




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

    I can understand why you say that, but how many times do you submit feedback to a big company, only to hear nothing in return? When I think of it in that light, I don't think we're doing too badly.

    Boards is definitely a little special (compared to other organisations) in that users have a very direct line of feedback and they have a strong expectation that they will get a response. I don't think many other organisations have a userbase/customers that expect so much from them.

    This is both good and bad. It means that Boards has engaged and interested users, but it also places huge demands on resources to engage with and respond to that Feedback. We are trying to figure out a healthy way to do this, hence this discussion.

    In response to the comments on Feedback vs DRP vs Helpdesk - I hear you. I don't think I was fully clear on Help Desk until I was a CMod. So I definitely agree that structure should be looked at.




  • This post has been deleted.


  • Boards.ie Employee


    Thanks for the input so far. As we're having an open discussion on Feedback, I would like to ask people why they would like Feedback as it was? Complaints levelled at Feedback in the past have included that nothing is done, that the same stuff is being raised again, threads have descended into in-fighting, and there are accusations of circling wagons on both "sides". Yes, there has been some food for thought and good ideas suggested, but it's certainly worth talking about ways that Feedback could be improved.

    I can, however, see the merit in the Thanks button from this thread (but again, we need to avoid the idea of point scoring or "us vs them" situations - we're all Boardsies after all).

    In terms of constructive criticism, it's a matter of how the point is delivered. Saying mods are Nazis isn't constructive; saying, "perhaps mods could lighten up on x or y" is something that we can work with.




  • Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Totally agree.

    I can, however, see the merit in the Thanks button from this thread (but again, we need to avoid the idea of point scoring or "us vs them" situations - we're all Boardsies after all).

    More than this thread though. If someone raises an issue, how many people think its even a thing. Unless maybe you're thinking of doing away with "Thanks" altogether? That's not someting I'd disagree with but I struggle to think of anything to replace it with.
    In terms of constructive criticism, it's a matter of how the point is delivered. Saying mods are Nazis isn't constructive; saying, "perhaps mods could lighten up on x or y" is something that we can work with.
    Agree




  • Thanks for the input so far. As we're having an open discussion on Feedback, I would like to ask people why they would like Feedback as it was? Complaints levelled at Feedback in the past have included that nothing is done, that the same stuff is being raised again, threads have descended into in-fighting, and there are accusations of circling wagons on both "sides". Yes, there has been some food for thought and good ideas suggested, but it's certainly worth talking about ways that Feedback could be improved.

    I can, however, see the merit in the Thanks button from this thread (but again, we need to avoid the idea of point scoring or "us vs them" situations - we're all Boardsies after all).

    In terms of constructive criticism, it's a matter of how the point is delivered. Saying mods are Nazis isn't constructive; saying, "perhaps mods could lighten up on x or y" is something that we can work with.

    I'd say it was a necessary evil rather than something you can tame and control.

    If a large number of uses have an objection to say a format change (only an example) your current solution is to make it as hard as possible for that group to express their objection. The old method would have lead to the complaint that despite lots of objections nothing was done.

    At least in the old system users had the chance to have their say. That say might even have been just a thanks to some negative post that a user agreed with but at least that left the user with the feeling of having a say. The current system just shouts "we don't want to know".




  • I'll be honest and say I would'nt have any faith in this having a positive resolution

    For a few reasons:

    A) No we are not all boardsies, the posters are the customers, the mods, admins and staff are representatives of the company. If you don't believe that go work in any sector as a volunteer and see how far you'll get acting the maggot with the customer just because you're not being paid. Most of the mods and admins cannot accept that and wind their necks in

    B) When your customers are giving you feedback, you shut up and you listen. You don't troll them, you don't try to derail their threads, you don't circle the wagons and you don't dogpile them.

    You can already see the first post trying to define what is acceptable as feedback so point B is off to a flying start, same old, same old

    Here's how you run a feedback forum. You appoint a couple of mods for admin purposes. You don't allow other mods to post, they can have their own hidden forum (and they already do) That prevents the snark, dogpiling and derailing that will occur otherwise

    You listen and if everyone keeps telling you the same thing, you take if away and come up with a response.

    Won't happen because the mod's and admins put in place systems that will protect their positions first. Classic sign of a bureaucracy.




  • Bambi wrote: »

    A) No we are not all boardsies, the posters are the customers, the mods, admins and staff are representatives of the company.
    Just to be clear, Mods and Admins are as much "customers" around here as anyone else. I may input into what goes on, but no-one can suggest I am any less passionate than anyone else about the future of this site

    When I buy the site, things may be different though:pac:




  • Given all the hurdles and layers of bureaucracy that are being put in place now, I just can't see why anyone would bother involving themselves in that process at all. It's almost like it's been designed to disencourage people from using Feedback and I don't see any of these proposals changing that.

    From the very outset you're defining the terms of what you deem to be 'acceptable' feedback and this all just seems to be an extension of those changes to the system from last year.

    Again I'm left with the question, why would anyone bother?




  • Beasty wrote: »
    Just to be clear, Mods and Admins are as much "customers" around here as anyone else. I may input into what goes on, but no-one can suggest I am any less passionate than anyone else about the future of this site

    When I buy the site, things may be different though:pac:


    Passion has nothing to do with this, that's a strawman

    Like I said, it will fall at the first hurdle because you want to have your cake and eat it

    You're representing the company, you should either accept the responsibility that came with the role or just revert to being a normal user.


  • Advertisement


  • Again I'm left with the question, why would anyone bother?

    Twice - once last night, and once this morning, I typed about a fairly long response, and then just said to myself 'f**k it, I actually don't care what they do.'

    Not constructive I know, but that's my feeling on it. The more I see of feedback, the more I think that the 'your feedback is really important to us' line is actually just a pretense.

    Kersplat's post (post #2) is exactly how I feel, and it seems to me to be so obvious that I can't understand how it wasn't obvious before such drastic, sweeping changes were made.




  • Listen, Feedback just breeds circular discussions on the same old chestnuts.
    By the time posters vent their personal frustrations about rule 46 sub section 21.1b of the Rugby Forum Charter there's been another 50 comments upvoted on Reddit or wherever.
    Talking about the rules of talking is a waste of time & just sterilises conversations.
    There should only be 2 rules on every forum:
    (1) Boards.ie is an actively moderated discussion site.
    If this offends you in any way please feel free to use the competition.
    (2) Don't be a c*nt.




  • 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 sums up a lot of what the problem is about.

    dudara wrote: »
    I can understand why you say that, but how many times do you submit feedback to a big company, only to hear nothing in return? When I think of it in that light, I don't think we're doing too badly.
    .

    This really grinds my gears to be honest. What does it matter what other companies do? Boards.ie is not Apple Inc. You product is your userbase, so bear that in-mind when doing comparisons.

    Thanks for the input so far. As we're having an open discussion on Feedback, I would like to ask people why they would like Feedback as it was? Complaints levelled at Feedback in the past have included that nothing is done, that the same stuff is being raised again, threads have descended into in-fighting, and there are accusations of circling wagons on both "sides". Yes, there has been some food for thought and good ideas suggested, but it's certainly worth talking about ways that Feedback could be improved.

    I can, however, see the merit in the Thanks button from this thread (but again, we need to avoid the idea of point scoring or "us vs them" situations - we're all Boardsies after all).

    In terms of constructive criticism, it's a matter of how the point is delivered. Saying mods are Nazis isn't constructive; saying, "perhaps mods could lighten up on x or y" is something that we can work with.

    Do you not believe that those points leveled in Feedback in the past had merit? I really don't want to go over old ground, but the most vocal threads from memory, seemed to be about issues users where having with the site itself. Search, App, Redesign,etc...

    Circling the wagon type posts, can easily be ignored, snipped or deleted, and is a minor issue when it comes to the restrictive nature that currently exists. How many times have we seen "awkward" threads in the past swiftly locked and a "under review" message posted, only for that thread to slowly fade away?

    Harping on about the "Nazi" comment is a bit of a strawman, and I do not think the poster who made the comment expects to be able to directly insult any Mod/User/Whomever in Feedback.

    Trying to control users opinions through the thanks system (your us V them comment) is futile. Discussion boards by their nature require and encourage cohorts.

    Open up Feedback as it was. Put some restrictions on it wrt Posts and Time on website and put a mod in-place to deal with the "unacceptable" posts.


  • Boards.ie Employee


    IITYWYBMAD wrote: »
    ...

    Harping on about the "Nazi" comment is a bit of a strawman, and I do not think the poster who made the comment expects to be able to directly insult any Mod/User/Whomever in Feedback.

    That's a fair comment. To use a different example, it's one thing saying "Search is ****"; it's another to say specifically what you don't like and what could be improved. That's why the discussion on Search weightings was started; we're also looking at implementing Google Search. Unfortunately, there have been some technical hitches in the backend, which has resulted in some site slowness of late as pointed out above, which has taken priority.




  • This post has been deleted.




  • That's a fair comment. To use a different example, it's one thing saying "Search is ****"; it's another to say specifically what you don't like and what could be improved. That's why the discussion on Search weightings was started; we're also looking at implementing Google Search. Unfortunately, there have been some technical hitches in the backend, which has resulted in some site slowness of late as pointed out above, which has taken priority.

    So you want us to elaborate on what we don’t like AND include what we’d improve ?

    I’m not the sort of person that has all these answers. So I’ll more than likely say nothing at all.




  • Have it like it was, restrict it to min posts and time on site. Bish bash bosh done




  • So you want us to elaborate on what we don’t like AND include what we’d improve ? I’m not the sort of person that has all these answers. So I’ll more than likely say nothing at all.

    I think the most important thing for me, as a mod would be that if someone has some feedback, I really would appreciate it if they made it constructive and elaborate a little bit on why they don't like something rather than simply saying that they do not like it without really substantiating it.

    Saying something is crap but not really saying any more than that doesn't help me understand exactly where a user is coming from and the rationale behind their feelings and feedback, which may very well be valid.




  • devnull wrote: »
    I think the most important thing for me, as a mod would be that if someone has some feedback, I really would appreciate it if they made it constructive and elaborate a little bit on why they don't like something rather than simply saying that they do not like it without really substantiating it.

    Saying something is crap but not really saying any more than that doesn't help me understand exactly where a user is coming from and the rationale behind their feelings and feedback, which may very well be valid.

    That's a fair point. However, on subjects like those mentioned above, sometimes the answer is in the question.

    I'm not looking to concentrate on the specifics, but statements like "The App is crap", "The search is not working" , "The redesign is confusing (something I think even the CEO agreed on without any elaboration)" are answers in themselves. Most users would not have the technical know-how to suggest why, what and how.

    Again, and back to the point of the thread, Feedback was working fine, as was, until (imo) the decision was taken to shut it down, because of the weight of negative and justified opinion, instead of addressing the issues. I can also understand why.


  • Advertisement


  • I would like to see obvious transparency & maybe templates for reporting feedback.
    eg:
    I would change...

    because of this...

    and my idea is...

    Maybe you don't have an idea for a solution & just want to bring up a topic, then this should be moved to a section for potential open discussion before coming back to feedback for an admin response.

    And have a specific response time just like in the hosted forums. Offer a solution to the original poster and give them time to respond to see if it's a good enough resolution.

    I would see this as the flow:
    1. Poster opens feedback thread
    2. Admin judges whether it's a discussion thread or a change request thread. Discussion threads go to open discussion for a period of time (a week?) before returning to feedback with a majority consensus on what people would like to change. Change request threads must get a response from an admin.
    3. (Change request) Admin responds with acceptance (and actions that have/will be taken), decline (and reasons why) or clarifying questions, extra information.
    4. Admin then waits for 1 week before closing thread for OP to respond.

    Also, no "+1" or "I agree" comments allowed & all feedback that has been actioned should be recorded in a single place to show that feedback is actually taken on board.

    I may have rambled on a bit, but there is a semblance of sense in there somewhere


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement