Female, LGBTQI+ or People of Colour Mods

muffler wrote: »

If you dont like the place then close the door gently on your way out.

Thank you for your contribution and for reinforcing my point.

Esel

I could be wrong, but to me "Thank you for your contribution" in the context of this thread comes across as being sarcastic and passive-aggressive.

Esel wrote: »

I could be wrong, but to me "Thank you for your contribution" in the context of this thread comes across as being sarcastic and passive-aggressive.

I'm trying to be polite and validate every contribution even the horrible ones.

Tom Mann Centuria

I don't like the word retard, I don't particularly like the way one thread on AH has indeed become sleazy but I don't think either is an indication of any particular problem on boards.

I don't think it's any different from any other website, in fact it's considerably less problematic for the reasons you outline op, than most other sites I can think of.

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

I don't like the word retard, I don't particularly like the way one thread on AH has indeed become sleazy but I don't think either is an indication of any particular problem on boards.

I don't think it's any different from any other website, in fact it's considerably less problematic for the reasons you outline op, than most other sites I can think of.

Thank you for your contribution.

That's a really good word to describe the thread.

This is my second run in with a moderator and the other time it was ignored when i criticised what I see as bias in the mods.

Maybe posters are right. Maybe the site is not for me.

I hate, honestly hate, seeing that thread on the opening page consistently and the, as you said, sleazy content, it's upsetting and I am not trans I can't imagine what it's like to be trans or the family of a trans person who has to see that.

I come here to talk about Aldi products, i know boring, maybe it's not my place as a moderator has suggested to pose suggestions but perhaps the constant questioning of minorities can be relegated to a forum where they don't appear on the opening page.

Fr_Dougal

Sterling Worried Mackerel wrote: »

Thank you for your contribution and for reinforcing my point.

It feels like you might be part of the problem. You’re assuming gender of posters and mods alike.

Tom Mann Centuria

Sterling Worried Mackerel wrote: »

Thank you for your contribution.

That's a really good word to describe the thread.

This is my second run in with a moderator and the other time it was ignored when i criticised what I see as bias in the mods.

Maybe posters are right. Maybe the site is not for me.

I hate, honestly hate, seeing that thread on the opening page consistently and the, as you said, sleazy content, it's upsetting and I am not trans I can't imagine what it's like to be trans or the family of a trans person who has to see that.

I come here to talk about Aldi products, i know boring, maybe it's not my place as a moderator has suggested to pose suggestions but perhaps the constant questioning of minorities can be relegated to a forum where they don't appear on the opening page.

But what site would you feel happy on, because if you go to Reddit, it's worse, Twitter it's worse. General sites are always going to have something you might want to avoid. I like reddit, but search new on the front page and it can be a sewer. Twitter is as good/bad as who you follow, but also who they follow or interact with, who you might object to, can appear on your timeline.

Follow the forums you like and just click straight on that tab, then hopefully you'll enjoy the site more.

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

It feels like you might be part of the problem. You’re assuming gender of posters and mods alike.

Thank you for your contribution.

My point being that dissenting voices aren't welcome?

I'd like to know how you view me as part of the problem unless the problem is having someone disagree.

Most are open about their gender and sexuality.

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

But what site would you feel happy on, because if you go to Reddit, it's worse, Twitter it's worse. General sites are always going to have something you might want to avoid. I like reddit, but search new on the front page and it can be a sewer. Twitter is as good/bad as who you follow, but also who they follow or interact with, who you might object to, can appear on your timeline.

Follow the forums you like and just click straight on that tab, then hopefully you'll enjoy the site more.

Thank you for your contribution and advice.

I think because this is Boards the self-proclaimed largest online community in Ireland i expect more. Maybe my life has been to sheltered.

hullaballoo

It's funny. In all the years I've been an admin and in all the mods I have been involved in appointing and of all of the questions I have asked of mods, never have I even thought to ask what their sexuality, gender or race was.

And now that I start down the long road of thinking about it, I am struggling to find any reason whatsoever why I ever would consider asking those questions.

I suppose those aspects of moderators' lives will have to remain a mystery to me, unless of course these things have some kind of fundamental relevance to my consideration of their judgment or character, which seems to be the inevitable conclusion on this path.

Tom Mann Centuria

Sterling Worried Mackerel wrote: »

Thank you for your contribution and advice.

I think because this is Boards the self-proclaimed largest online community in Ireland i expect more. Maybe my life has been to sheltered.

I just think the internet, even in the mainstream, is generally a much darker and seedier place than boards.

Only you can really decide if boards is a place you want to post/read though.

hullaballoo wrote: »

It's funny. In all the years I've been an admin and in all the mods I have been involved in appointing and of all of the questions I have asked of mods, never have I even thought to ask what their sexuality, gender or race was.

And now that I start down the long road of thinking about it, I am struggling to find any reason whatsoever why I ever would consider asking those questions.

I suppose those aspects of moderators' lives will have to remain a mystery to me, unless of course these things have some kind of fundamental relevance to my consideration of their judgment or character, which seems to be the inevitable conclusion on this path.

Thank you for your contribution.

I think then that's a shame and I feel it's sad for moderators like JoeyParrot for example.

Is it because Boards.ie sees it's social obligation filled by having a forum for LGBTQIA+ but when threads spread into the main pages it's different.

I think a lack of diverse voices is evident on the forums if even you are uncomfortable with it.

It reminds me of people who say I don't see colour, which is very easy for a white person to say.

Do you not think the obsession with trans peoples genitalia is, sleazy, to rob the word from another poster?

Does it ever cross your mind that Boards isn't a welcoming place for women, LGBTQI+ (Outside that forum) or People of Colour?

Beasty

There's a place on this site for pretty much everyone except for those who simply want to stir things

The site caters for probably close to a complete range of topics, and posters often find personal "gems" among particularly some of the less active forums

When it comes to the larger forums there is much more of a tendency to consider posts in light of forum specific rules. Two particular forums that immediately come to mind are Politics and Soccer - two very different forums but for very good reason having quite strict rules and typically very experienced mods

Others like AH and Current Affairs cater for discussion in a more "laid back" form. Yes civility is expected and there is more of a tendency for some posters to troll in such forums

When it comes to choosing mods, there are several hundred already in place. Some very experienced, some less so, and with some of those "smaller" forums they may hardly ever have to deal with issues within the relevant forums. That highlights there is no "one size fits all" in terms of the characteristics of moderation and indeed moderators

One thing we will never ask a prospective mod is anything about their sex/sexuality, religion, race, age etc. All posters on this site are entitled to their anonymity and that applies equally to moderators. If posters and or mods choose to reveal such personal information that is entirely up to them. However we are not in a position (nor would ever want to) "verify" such statements

As is stated repeatedly, particularly in Feedback, we are all unpaid volunteers. There are 2 "verified" staff, Niamh and Mark, who you will see on occasion along with some of the site developers. They are the only people who "work" on the site and get paid for doing so

So OP, in suggesting more diversity, and given the parameters I've set out, firstly you (and we) can never "know" what backgrounds moderators come from (although we may be able to make educated guesses) and given we all do this for no personal reward, it's also a case of "beggars cannot be choosers" to some extent. We will look for certain characteristics in posts and posting styles, but have no other meaningful "data" to go on

cdeb

I think you come across a bit racist by suggesting that, say, black people would make better moderators than white people. (And similarly with your other labels)

This kind of categorising of people is deeply unhelpful. Would it not be better to see everyone as people rather than focusing on the colour of their skin? Because to focus purely on skin colour isn't diversity, it's literally the definition of racism.

I don't think the skin colour/gender/sexual orientation of moderators is any of your business to be quite honest.

Dravokivich

Don't you dare thank me for my contribution as its anything but!

What do you think would change from a moderation perspective based on gender, orientation or race?

What makes either of these any more likely to be sympathetic qualities? As this seems to be the basis of your OP.

banie01

Are genitalia or gender now on display as part of a Mod's Sig?
Reducing your dissatisfaction with a Mod's opinion to a belief of gender bias?
Really?

Fúck me that's a stretch.
In a medium that removes gender, accent, visual cueing and race from being an immediate concern or trigger...

You are claiming sleight?

I've seen a lot of stupid posts on boards, but often they are part of an overarching performance, like Songhua, or Mr Feg.
Is this what your post intends OP?

To shine a light on the stupidity of gender shaming on a forum where gender is generally a guess?

Gatling

I beginning to think we're looking at one of bigger wind ups on boards for a while ,
Look at the toxic masculinity but I'm a little old dear who's lived a sheltered ,
Suddenly I want mods based on their sexualities and race and ethnicity , beliefs.


It's such a shame this is allowed to continue

I do think that a diverse team of mods isn't in itself an inherently bad concept

But going about aiming for it, and how you ensure it, is- as always with these things- the kicker

I also think that the suggestion is stronger made when not such an obvious swipe at the existing mods while in a sitewide tantrum tbh

Beasty wrote: »

There's a place on this site for pretty much everyone except for those who simply want to stir things

The site caters for probably close to a complete range of topics, and posters often find personal "gems" among particularly some of the less active forums

When it comes to the larger forums there is much more of a tendency to consider posts in light of forum specific rules. Two particular forums that immediately come to mind are Politics and Soccer - two very different forums but for very good reason having quite strict rules and typically very experienced mods

Others like AH and Current Affairs cater for discussion in a more "laid back" form. Yes civility is expected and there is more of a tendency for some posters to troll in such forums

When it comes to choosing mods, there are several hundred already in place. Some very experienced, some less so, and with some of those "smaller" forums they may hardly ever have to deal with issues within the relevant forums. That highlights there is no "one size fits all" in terms of the characteristics of moderation and indeed moderators

One thing we will never ask a prospective mod is anything about their sex/sexuality, religion, race, age etc. All posters on this site are entitled to their anonymity and that applies equally to moderators. If posters and or mods choose to reveal such personal information that is entirely up to them. However we are not in a position (nor would ever want to) "verify" such statements

As is stated repeatedly, particularly in Feedback, we are all unpaid volunteers. There are 2 "verified" staff, Niamh and Mark, who you will see on occasion along with some of the site developers. They are the only people who "work" on the site and get paid for doing so

So OP, in suggesting more diversity, and given the parameters I've set out, firstly you (and we) can never "know" what backgrounds moderators come from (although we may be able to make educated guesses) and given we all do this for no personal reward, it's also a case of "beggars cannot be choosers" to some extent. We will look for certain characteristics in posts and posting styles, but have no other meaningful "data" to go on

Thank you for your contribution.

I suppose it boils down to boards not being a welcoming place for some people as I've outlined. Has there been a week in the last however many years that transpeople haven't been off the main page?

It's well and good to say these things don't matter but when they are a barrier then it's problematic.

I want to say as openly and honesty as I can the way you lead your contribution with

"There's a place on this site for pretty much everyone except for those who simply want to stir things".

The implication is that I am a 'stirrer' and the people I disagree with who use the sleaziest of language, who name call me, aren't.

That is a common theme I've noticed on the forum as I explore the site, I don't always contribute to the threads I read, I just want recommendations on Aldi products.

Yet the pull to take a stand for voices that aren't here who are constantly reduced to their genitalia is strong.

I'm sorry mods don't like my style, whatever that is, but respectfully I think mods should focus on content more and clean up the obsession with trans people and genitalia.

A poster summed it up and understood my frustrations. It would be nice and reassuring that just once the mods, the active mods on these topics understood the frustration seeing such hateful, sleazy and spiteful things on the threads.

cdeb wrote: »

I think you come across a bit racist by suggesting that, say, black people would make better moderators than white people. (And similarly with your other labels)

This kind of categorising of people is deeply unhelpful. Would it not be better to see everyone as people rather than focusing on the colour of their skin? Because to focus purely on skin colour isn't diversity, it's literally the definition of racism.

I don't think the skin colour/gender/sexual orientation of moderators is any of your business to be quite honest.

I can't thank an All Lives Matter contribution. Asking for equality doesn't make me a racist.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Sterling Worried Mackerel wrote: »

Thank you for your contribution.

I just feel if a man told me how to speak or how to respond to him in the real world before I retired I’d have a case with HR.

Would these men speak to their colleagues like this in work?

It’s intimidating.

For a place that has so many topics about the above, there is a distinct lack of voices from such, and if a woman gets a bit uppity she's shot down.

Now, I have only come across you as a poster here yesterday so that's a plus in your favour, but the problem as I see it here is not your ideas or point of view but the way you choose to express those ideas and point of view.

Your first sentence in the above post...

Thank you for your contribution.

is fine in itself. But posting it and variations of it 16 times so far in the thread is trolling, in this case posting for effect.

There is a basic etiquette in posting that, thus far, I have not seen from you. Most posters is a new site or forum would spend some time reading and learning how the particular forum, its posters and mods operates before posting and adjusting their posting style to remain within the forum standards.

All I have see is you trying to impose your views on other posters.

This is a discussion site, we discuss events and ideas and posters viewpoints of those events and ideas. Sometimes viewpoints you have may not gather the acclaim you seek for them. It's up to you to convince others that your belief is the correct one and argue your point with civility. Sometimes you may win a discussion sometimes not but it's only through discussion that understanding the alternate viewpoint and reaching a common middle ground that progress can be made.

As to your diversity claim, mods are chosen for their ability to maintain and uphold the charter and their ability to choose the correct course of action to remedy any issues that may appear in forums under their charge.

Their sex, colour, creed, sexual preference or any other issue is far from our minds when asking posters if they would be interested in modding a forum. I don't even know any of the above about any poster or mod here until or unless they choose to reveal such about themselves.

Why? Because it's largely immaterial in their ability to function as a mod or a poster.

I certainly am not going to ask a poster what their sex, creed, colour, sexual orientation, hair colour or choice of holiday destination is as it has no place in an anonymous forum.

It's tough on ginger sun-magnets like myself but there you go.

cdeb

Sterling Worried Mackerel wrote: »

I can't thank an All Lives Matter contribution. Asking for equality doesn't make me a racist.

Judging people by their skin colour makes you racist.

You don't help yourself by misrepresenting the very point I made. In fact, you ignored most of it.

Dravokivich wrote: »

Don't you dare thank me for my contribution as its anything but!

What do you think would change from a moderation perspective based on gender, orientation or race?

What makes either of these any more likely to be sympathetic qualities? As this seems to be the basis of your OP.

Thank you for your contribution.

There's an unhealthy obsession with trans people on the boards.

A poster posted picture of blackface and used the term retard.

If the mods were more diverse then yes I believe the content wouldn't be as sleazy and hateful.

Danzy

Sterling Worried Mackerel wrote: »

Most are open about their gender and sexuality.

This is very far from the truth.

Deleted User wrote: »

I do think that a diverse team of mods isn't in itself an inherently bad concept

But going about aiming for it, and how you ensure it, is- as always with these things- the kicker

I also think that the suggestion is stronger made when not such an obvious swipe at the existing mods while in a sitewide tantrum tbh

Thank you for your contribution.

That's, as you say the kicker, progress often comes kicking and screaming.

Buford T. Justice XIX wrote: »

Now, I have only come across you as a poster here yesterday so that's a plus in your favour, but the problem as I see it here is not your ideas or point of view but the way you choose to express those ideas and point of view.

Your first sentence in the above post...

is fine in itself. But posting it and variations of it 16 times so far in the thread is trolling, in this case posting for effect.

There is a basic etiquette in posting that, thus far, I have not seen from you. Most posters is a new site or forum would spend some time reading and learning how the particular forum, its posters and mods operates before posting and adjusting their posting style to remain within the forum standards.

All I have see is you trying to impose your views on other posters.

This is a discussion site, we discuss events and ideas and posters viewpoints of those events and ideas. Sometimes viewpoints you have may not gather the acclaim you seek for them. It's up to you to convince others that your belief is the correct one and argue your point with civility. Sometimes you may win a discussion sometimes not but it's only through discussion that understanding the alternate viewpoint and reaching a common middle ground that progress can be made.

As to your diversity claim, mods are chosen for their ability to maintain and uphold the charter and their ability to choose the correct course of action to remedy any issues that may appear in forums under their charge.

Their sex, colour, creed, sexual preference or any other issue is far from our minds when asking posters if they would be interested in modding a forum. I don't even know any of the above about any poster or mod here until or unless they choose to reveal such about themselves.

Why? Because it's largely immaterial in their ability to function as a mod or a poster.

I certainly am not going to ask a poster what their sex, creed, colour, sexual orientation, hair colour or choice of holiday destination is as it has no place in an anonymous forum.

It's tough on ginger sun-magnets like myself but there you go.

I'm not going to read past the assertion that thanking and validating posters contributions is trolling.

jam_mac_jam

Sterling Worried Mackerel wrote: »

Thank you for your contribution.

I suppose it boils down to boards not being a welcoming place for some people as I've outlined. Has there been a week in the last however many years that transpeople haven't been off the main page?

It's well and good to say these things don't matter but when they are a barrier then it's problematic.

I want to say as openly and honesty as I can the way you lead your contribution with

"There's a place on this site for pretty much everyone except for those who simply want to stir things".

The implication is that I am a 'stirrer' and the people I disagree with who use the sleaziest of language, who name call me, aren't.

That is a common theme I've noticed on the forum as I explore the site, I don't always contribute to the threads I read, I just want recommendations on Aldi products.

Yet the pull to take a stand for voices that aren't here who are constantly reduced to their genitalia is strong.

I'm sorry mods don't like my style, whatever that is, but respectfully I think mods should focus on content more and clean up the obsession with trans people and genitalia.

A poster summed it up and understood my frustrations. It would be nice and reassuring that just once the mods, the active mods on these topics understood the frustration seeing such hateful, sleazy and spiteful things on the threads.

The reason that your style is not suited is that you are trolling. Quite deliberately. And then gaslighting.

Name calling and sarcasm. And when you are pulled up on it it's all sweetness and light. You blatantly name called people and then denied it. You are not arguing in good faith.

There are plenty of people who can have different views and not name call.

It's also incredibly racist and sexist to ask what race or sex people are on an anonymous website. Why are you judging people on those terms rather than their character?

banie01

Gatling wrote: »

I beginning to think we're looking at one of bigger wind ups on boards for a while ,
Look at the toxic masculinity but I'm a little old dear who's lived a sheltered ,
Suddenly I want mods based on their sexualities and race and ethnicity , beliefs.


It's such a shame this is allowed to continue

I want mods to include their photo, pro-nouns and qualifications!

Gatling

banie01 wrote: »

I want mods to include their photo, pro-nouns and qualifications!

Boards on zoom.

That way it's all transparent we can literally see into to each others world as we discussed topic's live in HD

TheBlackPill

banie01 wrote: »

I want mods to include their photo, pro-nouns and qualifications!

And their home addesses too. So if they are not woke enough i can doorstep them to discuss their moderation further