nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Why is Boards so quiet?

Jobs OXO

Hi have been on the site with previous (now closed) accounts for a good number of years. I have never seen it so quiet. Sunday morning and looking at latest posts traffic seems so slow. Is no one posting anymore? AH doesn't seem to be much craic anymore. Anyone notice the same? Any ideas how to improve the situation ?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

pjohnson

dfx- wrote: »

Arguably the stand out post on the thread here so far with not enough attention paid to it.

So because of one post everything is hunky dory? Thats the spirit!

Cookie_Monster

dfx- wrote: »

Arguably the stand out post on the thread here so far with not enough attention paid to it.

are you actually serious? What does the post actually add to the discussion? Sure, it's a nice sentiment and one I'm sure many people share but it is utterly, utterly irrelevant to this topic.

The fact that you single it out over anything else said so far shows nothing but contempt for everyone else's suggestions and contributions that are actually relevant IMO

Tom Mann Centuria

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

are you actually serious? What does the post actually add to the discussion? Sure, it's a nice sentiment and one I'm sure many people share but it is utterly, utterly irrelevant to this topic.

The fact that you single it out over anything else said so far shows nothing but contempt for everyone else's suggestions and contributions that are actually relevant IMO

See where you're coming from but I think it was more an ideologically right of centre poster, who's been here years, and seen lots of moderation has no issue and some earlier feedback in this forum was, as is often the case, saying the right aren't allowed a voice on boards. So it is relevant, to me anyway, in that regard, even if the conversation has moved on to much more general discussion.

(definitely needed at least one more full stop in that post somewhere)

Edit: (or maybe less commas)

Murrisk

Wibbs wrote: »

by another daft notion brought in, closed accounts.

Boards.ie had no choice on this one, no? I don't they ever wanted to bring it in.

Wibbs

Murrisk wrote: »

Boards.ie had no choice on this one, no? I don't they ever wanted to bring it in.

From what I've gathered they got crap advice from a single source and ran with it and implemented it arseways.

Boards gets a lot of ambulance chasers threatening to take them to court and the legal system here encourages it. You think you have "freedom of speech" in Ireland. Try saying or pointing anything that upsets people with deep pockets and you'll see how far your freedom goes. That's why the whole MCD thing was in play and I suspect a few subjects get locked/disappear because of the real chance Boards ends up in court. One case could shut this site down. People often forget that.

JJJJNR

We need a good recession to bring the numbers up.

Murrisk

Wibbs wrote: »

From what I've gathered they got crap advice from a single source and ran with it and implemented it arseways.

Then they need to lose the 'Close account' dealie.

This highlights a problem I have boards.ie, they are too darn jittery. The poster I've agreed with most on this was whoever (Lir?) criticised the 'No speculation' warnings. They really stifle discussion. People speculate, it's normal and instinctive. We might not have freedom of speech but you can't let that rule things, IMO. What's the point of a discussion site if things can't be discussed? Maybe boards.ie should just pack it in.

Wibbs

Murrisk wrote: »

Then they need to lose the 'Close account' dealie.

well they have hidden the closed account title under usernames, but yeah I agree.

This highlights a problem I have boards.ie, they are too darn jittery. The poster I've agreed with most on this was whoever (Lir?) criticised the 'No speculation' warnings. They really stifle discussion. People speculate, it's normal and instinctive. We might not have freedom of speech but you can't let that rule things, IMO. What's the point of a discussion site if things can't be discussed? Maybe boards.ie should just pack it in.

As I said one court case could close the site. MCD could well have. Even if you win such a case the costs are crazy. If you lose, game over.

That's the problem with having a homegrown Irish site. Ambulance chasers and perpetual "I'm gonna sue you" types won't have the wherewithal to go after Facebook, Reddit and the like, but local sites are a far easier target. Boards would be about the biggest one, because of the profile of the place.

Now Boards itself has affected the law, because they have fought cases, so it improved the lot of similar sites in Ireland*. There is some way to go though. From what I gather - legal folks will clarify - sites are held to the same laws as newspapers in Ireland, but are very different entities.

Still there is a balance to be set even within those restrictions and I feel the balance is and has been askew for quite a while.

*IIRC one change was there is some time leeway between say a defamatory post showing up and the site/mod deleting it?

The_Valeyard

Deletion of posts by mods always looks dodgy and carding people for a post which was deleted appears utterly stupid in my opinion.

Maybe old mods and administrators need to be retired and new mods brought on board. People with fresh ideas and thoughts who are not worn down by the grind of set in their ways or attached to cliches.

Pelvis Parsley

The risk of litigation is ridiculously overstressed. I remember himself throwing a hissy fit a year or two back when I had the temerity to suggest that most legal "issues" were on foot of boiler plate solicitors letters, and could be resolved by firing one back.

He was making out that they had to keep a team of international law firms on retainer.

One wonders how the hundreds of other discussion sites around the place manage. They're not all corporate behemoths. Most of them don't have staff either, or an absentee CEO.

Pelvis Parsley

The_Valeyard wrote: »

Deletion of posts by mods always looks dodgy and carding people for a post which was deleted appears utterly stupid in my opinion.

Maybe old mods and administrators need to be retired and new mods brought on board. People with fresh ideas and thoughts who are not worn down by the grind of set in their ways of attached to cliches.

What is just as ridiculous, and I've seen it so many times; one jobsworth comes along and cards a poster. Then, another mod, or above, happens along, and escalates the sanction to a ban. Possibly with another little card. So then you have one offence, and three punishments. You can see why people don't bother.

dudara

Pelvis Parsley wrote: »

What is just as ridiculous, and I've seen it so many times; one jobsworth comes along and cards a poster. Then, another mod, or above, happens along, and escalates the sanction to a ban. Possibly with another little card. So then you have one offence, and three punishments. You can see why people don't bother.

In general, there should not be multiple sanctions on one post, so if you see this happening please raise the matter to a CMod or Admin. There may well be circumstances where the first action needed correcting, but in the vast majority of cases, one action is sufficient.

JCX BXC

Can I ask why no points are being addressed? Is it an ego or something? Or are ye hoping that we'll run our little rant and head back into the dictatorial forums?

People are leaving, and bloody good posters too, why did this being brushed under the carpet? Is it not happening in yer minds?

There's only so many of these threads that can be made before swades of people begin to leave. It'll be a sad day when it comes!

pjohnson

JCX BXC wrote: »

Can I ask why no points are being addressed? Is it an ego or something? Or are ye hoping that we'll run our little rant and head back into the dictatorial forums?

People are leaving, and bloody good posters too, why did this being brushed under the carpet? Is it not happening in yer minds?

There's only so many of these threads that can be made before swades of people begin to leave. It'll be a sad day when it comes!

Well certain types of points get addressed.

dfx- wrote: »

Arguably the stand out post on the thread here so far with not enough attention paid to it.

Wibbs

Pelvis Parsley wrote: »

One wonders how the hundreds of other discussion sites around the place manage. They're not all corporate behemoths. Most of them don't have staff either, or an absentee CEO.

Most are not companies based in Ireland PP. That makes a big difference. The Irish ones that are here are much smaller than Boards, so don't come up on radar nearly so much. However if some ambulance chaser found say PROC or Politics.ie and decided to take a case those sites are gone. As I say even if you win the costs will cripple a small outfit. And I you lose... There was a bloggist a couple of years back who was sued for defamation over a comment they made on their locally hosted blog and they lost. IIRC they had to pay well over a hundred grand in costs and damages.

Beasty

sparrowcar wrote: »

Not sure if this has been mentioned already but could it be that unemployment rates have significantly reduced since 2012 and those who continued in employment during the tough years are under more pressure during their working day. I basically suggesting there are less idol hands to populate boards.ie.

In addition it's become much more common for companies to block forum sites like boards.ie etc as they are generally counter productive in the workplace?

I've mentioned it elsewhere, but there is little doubt there was a big increase in traffic as the recession started to bite back around 2008, with a peak probably through those recession years, with numbers heading back down as people are generally busier at work than they were 5 years ago. Equally, as I have already alluded to in this thread, traffic is still significantly higher that it was before the credit crunch devastated the Irish economy. I agree many people simply seem to have less time for sites like this nowadays

testaccount123

Pelvis Parsley wrote: »

What is just as ridiculous, and I've seen it so many times; one jobsworth comes along and cards a poster. Then, another mod, or above, happens along, and escalates the sanction to a ban. Possibly with another little card. So then you have one offence, and three punishments. You can see why people don't bother.

If Boards stop this sort of carry on they'll lose even more traffic. The only reason half of us log on is to see what comical nonsense the mod crew get up to next.

Murrisk

Wibbs wrote: »

well they have hidden the closed account title under usernames, but yeah I agree.

Hiding it isn't the same thing though I think it was a good idea.

As for litigation, I think they are still being too careful. There is probably already enough material on the site to bring it down if someone was so inclined.

Beasty

Murrisk wrote: »

As for litigation, I think they are still being too careful. There is probably already enough material on the site to bring it down if someone was so inclined.

Only the office can comment as they see any and all threats of legal action. However the mere fact the site has not been brought down could well be testimony to the care it has taken, particularly in potentially inflammatory situations. I am aware of certain individuals and organisations in the sports area who employ people to actively search for online content that can lead to legal action.

Now the way this site works is mods have to act if in doubt, but only when something "dodgy" is reported to them. We are though very much in shades of grey, and few mods have any legal training (and those that do are not in a position to verify their qualifications for the benefit of the site owners), hence we are encouraged to err on the side of caution

me_right_one

Incidentally, why was my post deleted? The one that read:

"In my opinion, mods should be paid. There should be far less of them, they should be former professionals in their field, and it should be their full-time job to police their own area. NO AGENDA PUSHERS. Their sole function should be to cut out bad language and personal attacks (eg being called a paedo because you're a Catholic). Thats it. Everything else should be fair game.

This way, the mods emotion / bias would be lessened, and the pressure on them ("I only do this voluntarily, I have a life you know") would be eased. I would happily pay for such a service."

Was this accidental? Because there's nothing inflammatory or offensive in it whatsoever. If anything, its pro-mod!?!?!?!?!

Murrisk

Beasty wrote: »

hence we are encouraged to err on the side of caution

And that's to the detriment of the site. As someone said earlier, the 'No speculation' warnings are being deployed far too easily these days, that is something has absolutely increased and the the point of farcical at times. Legal action has always been a possibility so why the jitteriness now?

For example, I was recently reading back on a thread from two years back in the Aviation forum on the Germanwings crash. The idea of it maybe being an intentional act was suggested by a number of posters. They weren't saying it was most definitely the case, they were just putting it forward as one of many possibilities. A mod warning was given to not discuss that notion further. I just couldn't figure why not. Why should that not have been considered and discussed along with all the other possibilities? After all, it's not like it would have been unprecedented. And again, nobody was talking definitively. And then it turned out to be right on the money. Some of the contributors to the thread speculated that it was the case based on the information that been released and their own knowledge. That's the 'head in the sand' stuff that people have been talking about. A kind of "We don't want that to be the case so let's ignore it". Very frustrating to read at times.

TherapyBoy

me_right_one wrote: »

Incidentally, why was my post deleted? The one that read:

Was this accidental? Because there's nothing inflammatory or offensive in it whatsoever. If anything, its pro-mod!?!?!?!?!

Post #183

TherapyBoy

Murrisk wrote: »

And that's to the detriment of the site.

The site having to be shut down due to some frivolous lawsuit would probably be more detrimental. Mostly trying to find a happy medium of keeping discussion going & not getting sued, it's not easy & not everyone will be happy about it.

me_right_one

TherapyBoy wrote: »

Post #183

Thank you TherapyBoy. I stand corrected

TherapyBoy

me_right_one wrote: »

Thank you TherapyBoy. I stand corrected

Happy to help!

Murrisk

TherapyBoy wrote: »

The site having to be shut down due to some frivolous lawsuit would probably be more detrimental. Mostly trying to find a happy medium of keeping discussion going & not getting sued, it's not easy & not everyone will be happy about it.

IMO, the happy medium hasn't been achieved, it's veering too much towards the cautious side in the last few years.

TherapyBoy

It's a risky game to be pushing the line though.

Murrisk

TherapyBoy wrote: »

It's a risky game to be pushing the line though.

It's a messageboard. It gets shut down, our lives will go on. Better that than neutered discussion.

Beasty

Murrisk wrote: »

It's a messageboard. It gets shut down, our lives will go on.

And what about those who have invested money in the site? Equally it provides full time employment to some. Like it or not it's a business. It's certainly not in the interests of the owners or employees to allow the site to die, or get killed off via some legal claim. I am sure they would much prefer a return to growth, but ultimately they set the tone in terms of risks the site is prepared to take. The Admins and mods are tasked with ensuring the site deals with those risks as the owners and employees desire.

Murrisk

Beasty wrote: »

And what about those who have invested money in the site? Equally it provides full time employment to some. Like it or not it's a business. It's certainly not in the interests of the owners or employees to allow the site to die, or get killed off via some legal claim. I am sure they would much prefer a return to growth, but ultimately they set the tone in terms of risks the site is prepared to take. The Admins and mods are tasked with ensuring the site deals with those risks as the owners and employees desire.

In none of this is there any mention of the people who are the product - the users. And that seems to be why there is never any proper addressing of the good points made on these types of threads. There seems to be a bit of complaceny like "Sure these are empty threats, the people posting here will come back anyway, even if we don't deal with their issues".

But Niamh has admitted that usership is down. How much lower will it be able to drop? And what then will happen to the employees and investors? How will the business survive?