Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1…8687899192…98

Comments

  • Options
    #2642
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    Beasty wrote: »
    I think I'm looking at a different front page.

    The first 20 threads currently have:
    the 8th
    Is Islam right - not sure that's "current affairs"
    this thread (better suited to Feedback)
    Starbucks - don't see any issue with that one)

    Having said that I've no idea who Ms Whitmore is

    Only the thread on the 8th has gained significant traction

    With you on the Whitmore issue, no idea who she is I'm assuming maybe she's an Irish singer or something, haven't Googled her as not really interested in finding out :D

    I'd say the thread on the 8th would belong in CA.
    Chemical weapon used on civilians in Syria + Airstrikes would also belong in CA.
    The Belfast Rape trial one would also go into CA.
    Sexual assualt list posted in boys toilet in Cork school too.

    I went a few pages in and I think these would be good candidates for a Current Affairs forum.

    Threads like the funny houses/flats to rent, trivial things that annoy you, the stingiest thing you've ever seen a stinge 2, I bet you didn't know that and the unnerving and creepy thing that has ever happened to you - these are solid examples of threads that speak to the real definition of AH, I might be wrong but I don't think the threads I listed up top fit the bill.

    What do you think?


  • Options
    #2643
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 8,856 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Beasty wrote: »
    I think I'm looking at a different front page.

    In fairness, I was probably commenting on the sentiment of the threads in general over the last few weeks as opposed to a more precise evaluation as you have taken.

    As per previous post, there have been a lot of "depressing" topics discussed, many of which dominated the front page for weeks on end that just created an overall feeling of depression within AH.

    Hope I've clarified my comment a little better.


  • Options
    #2644
    Green Peter
    Registered Users Posts: 955 ✭✭✭Green Peter


    I just got the maddest ban for absolutely nothing in the Mayo GAA forum. It's no wonder threads are dying. The standard of moderation is terrible and getting worse.


  • Options
    #2645
    Boom_Bap
    Moderators, Music Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,730 Mod ✭✭✭✭Boom_Bap


    Green Peter wrote: »
    I just got the maddest ban for absolutely nothing in the Mayo GAA forum. It's no wonder threads are dying. The standard of moderation is terrible and getting worse.

    If it's the maddest ban ever, you should take it up in the DRP forum.


  • Options
    #2646
    Boards.ie: Mark
    Boards.ie Employee Posts: 5,461 ✭✭✭✭✭Boards.ie: Mark
    Boards.ie Employee


    From what I can see you were banned because you posted in a thread that you were told not to. You should contact the moderator about the thread ban if you feel that was unjustified, while bans can be disputed in the Dispute Resolution Forum.

    How can I? User's guide to some features on the new site



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2647
    jmayo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,152 ✭✭✭✭jmayo


    Green Peter wrote: »
    I just got the maddest ban for absolutely nothing in the Mayo GAA forum. It's no wonder threads are dying. The standard of moderation is terrible and getting worse.

    Aren't you from Galway or Roscommon ?:mad:


  • Options
    #2648
    Omackeral
    Registered Users Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    jmayo wrote: »
    Aren't you from Galway or Roscommon ?:mad:

    Ha ha well if that’s your measuring stick you may as well close the soccer forum!


  • Options
    #2649
    Green Peter
    Registered Users Posts: 955 ✭✭✭Green Peter


    jmayo wrote:
    Aren't you from Galway or Roscommon ?


    My great grandmother was from Mayo!


  • Options
    #2650
    riffmongous
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,664 Mod ✭✭✭✭riffmongous


    Deleted User wrote: »
    In fairness, I was probably commenting on the sentiment of the threads in general over the last few weeks as opposed to a more precise evaluation as you have taken.

    As per previous post, there have been a lot of "depressing" topics discussed, many of which dominated the front page for weeks on end that just created an overall feeling of depression within AH.

    Hope I've clarified my comment a little better.
    Couldn't agree more with this, the place is much too serious at times


  • Options
    #2651
    5rtytry56
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,828 ✭✭✭5rtytry56


    riffmongous wrote: »
    the place is much too serious at times

    Some mod reports to fairly fair comment posts in Computers and Technology forum as well as Creative Writing are taken far too seriously by the presidinf moderators


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2652
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    Hate to say it, but some of the moderation on the 'Repeal the 8th' thread is a disgrace..............

    This is supposed to be a discussion forum but yet it's clear that users are only welcome on that thread if their views are prochoice (in the long term at least). Initially any users who are against repealing the 8th will be let post but slowly and surely they will have their views attacked, posts reported, and invariably end up thread banned (especially if arguments are being made which they struggle with). Which is why there are only a handful of users expressing prolife views left on the thread.

    Five weeks ago I was banned from the thread and accused of 'baiting' and 'flaming' . When I PM'd the mod (who coincidentally is the AH mod who has posted the most prochoice opinions on the thread) they replied citing the views I had posted on body autonomy, how I felt about abortion in the context of DS, that I didn't think people were 'real' who had unnecessary abortions. So basically I was banned for posting my views.

    I have tried to appeal the thread ban as I would like to take part in the discussion (what with the referendum mere weeks away now) but despite starting the thread over five weeks ago, it remains ignored (apart from Beasty doing what he could to try and get it looked at).

    Aside from thread bans the moderation of prolife users in general on the thread is ridiculous. Recently seen a mod (the same one) chastising a user for posting the same argument again and again. This shows just how biased *some* of the moderation is as surely they can see that prochoice users do that also. 'My body, my choice' just one example. It's hardly something prolife users have the monopoly on now in fairness. Also, prolife users have been actioned for making comments which are deemed to be insulting to those who are prochoice but yet it's seems perfectly fine to suggest that those with prolife views are 'evil' and 'sociopaths'.

    In the OP of the thread there is a link to a Prochoice propaganda site also (disguised as objective information). The site was set up by two feminist lawyers known for their prochoice views and who ignore all the pitfalls of what repealing the 8th will mean. They also link to many opinion pieces which are staunchly prochoice and contain a lot of misinformation.

    Look, I know the referendum is a polarizing topic, one which is bound to attract trolls and therfore must be a difficult thread to moderate (only likely to get more difficult over the next three weeks or so) but could we not just at least try to have a more balanced approach and impartiality. It's difficult enough trying to make an argument for it is why we should be voting No on a site which is largely populated by those who are prochoice without having other factors to contend with also. Users (on either side) looking to get those they disagree with banned doesn't help either (which was highlighted here).


  • Options
    #2653
    TheValeyard
    Registered Users Posts: 12,266 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    Id agree with Outlaw Pete. If pro life, keep your head down and stay quiet is the motto.

    Fcuk Putin. Glory to Ukraine!



  • Options
    #2654
    baylah17
    Closed Accounts Posts: 790 ✭✭✭baylah17


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Hate to say it, but some of the moderation on the 'Repeal the 8th' thread is a disgrace..............

    This is supposed to be a discussion forum but yet it's clear that users are only welcome on that thread if their views are prochoice (in the long term at least). Initially any users who are against repealing the 8th will be let post but slowly and surely they will have their views attacked, posts reported, and invariably end up thread banned (especially if arguments are being made which they struggle with). Which is why there are only a handful of users expressing prolife views left on the thread.

    Five weeks ago I was banned from the thread and accused of 'baiting' and 'flaming' . When I PM'd the mod (who coincidentally is the AH mod who has posted the most prochoice opinions on the thread) they replied citing the views I had posted on body autonomy, how I felt about abortion in the context of DS, that I didn't think people were 'real' who had unnecessary abortions. So basically I was banned for posting my views.

    I have tried to appeal the thread ban as I would like to take part in the discussion (what with the referendum mere weeks away now) but despite starting the thread over five weeks ago, it remains ignored (apart from Beasty doing what he could to try and get it looked at).

    Aside from thread bans the moderation of prolife users in general on the thread is ridiculous. Recently seen a mod (the same one) chastising a user for posting the same argument again and again. This shows just how biased *some* of the moderation is as surely they can see that prochoice users do that also. 'My body, my choice' just one example. It's hardly something prolife users have the monopoly on now in fairness. Also, prolife users have been actioned for making comments which are deemed to be insulting to those who are prochoice but yet it's seems perfectly fine to suggest that those with prolife views are 'evil' and 'sociopaths'.

    In the OP of the thread there is a link to a Prochoice propaganda site also (disguised as objective information). The site was set up by two feminist lawyers known for their prochoice views and who ignore all the pitfalls of what repealing the 8th will mean. They also link to many opinion pieces which are staunchly prochoice and contain a lot of misinformation.

    Look, I know the referendum is a polarizing topic, one which is bound to attract trolls and therfore must be a difficult thread to moderate (only likely to get more difficult over the next three weeks or so) but could we not just at least try to have a more balanced approach and impartiality. It's difficult enough trying to make an argument for it is why we should be voting No on a site which is largely populated by those who are prochoice without having other factors to contend with also. Users (on either side) looking to get those they disagree with banned doesn't help either (which was highlighted here).
    Pure petty rubbish and an abuse of this thread to take cheap shots at moderators.


  • Options
    #2655
    uptherebels
    Registered Users Posts: 1,587 ✭✭✭uptherebels


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Hate to say it, but some of the moderation on the 'Repeal the 8th' thread is a disgrace..............

    This is supposed to be a discussion forum but yet it's clear that users are only welcome on that thread if their views are prochoice (in the long term at least). Initially any users who are against repealing the 8th will be let post but slowly and surely they will have their views attacked, posts reported, and invariably end up thread banned (especially if arguments are being made which they struggle with). Which is why there are only a handful of users expressing prolife views left on the thread.

    Five weeks ago I was banned from the thread and accused of 'baiting' and 'flaming' . When I PM'd the mod (who coincidentally is the AH mod who has posted the most prochoice opinions on the thread) they replied citing the views I had posted on body autonomy, how I felt about abortion in the context of DS, that I didn't think people were 'real' who had unnecessary abortions. So basically I was banned for posting my views.

    I have tried to appeal the thread ban as I would like to take part in the discussion (what with the referendum mere weeks away now) but despite starting the thread over five weeks ago, it remains ignored (apart from Beasty doing what he could to try and get it looked at).

    Aside from thread bans the moderation of prolife users in general on the thread is ridiculous. Recently seen a mod (the same one) chastising a user for posting the same argument again and again. This shows just how biased *some* of the moderation is as surely they can see that prochoice users do that also. 'My body, my choice' just one example. It's hardly something prolife users have the monopoly on now in fairness. Also, prolife users have been actioned for making comments which are deemed to be insulting to those who are prochoice but yet it's seems perfectly fine to suggest that those with prolife views are 'evil' and 'sociopaths'.

    In the OP of the thread there is a link to a Prochoice propaganda site also (disguised as objective information). The site was set up by two feminist lawyers known for their prochoice views and who ignore all the pitfalls of what repealing the 8th will mean. They also link to many opinion pieces which are staunchly prochoice and contain a lot of misinformation.

    Look, I know the referendum is a polarizing topic, one which is bound to attract trolls and therfore must be a difficult thread to moderate (only likely to get more difficult over the next three weeks or so) but could we not just at least try to have a more balanced approach and impartiality. It's difficult enough trying to make an argument for it is why we should be voting No on a site which is largely populated by those who are prochoice without having other factors to contend with also. Users (on either side) looking to get those they disagree with banned doesn't help either (which was highlighted here).

    Stop acting the victim. The only person who can get you thread banned is yourself.
    To many pro lifers think they can post what they want, unsupported claims, outright lies, scaremongering etc and them cry they are getting attacked when this is pointed out to them.
    Just because a mod doesn't agree with you doesn't make it biased if anything they are far too lenient


  • Options
    #2656
    uptherebels
    Registered Users Posts: 1,587 ✭✭✭uptherebels


    Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »
    Id agree with Outlaw Pete. If pro life, keep your head down and stay quiet is the motto.

    No they just need to support their claims, stop trolling and actually discuss rather than soapbox


  • Options
    #2657
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Hate to say it, but some of the moderation on the 'Repeal the 8th' thread is a disgrace..............

    Some was but now the standard of moderation on the thread has gone up quite a bit I might say, it would be unfair on the efforts made to improve it to say it's a disgrace.
    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    This is supposed to be a discussion forum but yet it's clear that users are only welcome on that thread if their views are prochoice (in the long term at least). Initially any users who are against repealing the 8th will be let post but slowly and surely they will have their views attacked, posts reported, and invariably end up thread banned (especially if arguments are being made which they struggle with). Which is why there are only a handful of users expressing prolife views left on the thread.

    That is not the case at all, posters from both sides have been unable to keep it reasonable and have ended up threadbanned, myself included. The sensible users expressing pro-life views so far have been open and honest and do contribute fairly, there's one in particular who just nips in and out and doesn't respond to queries or challenges on people looking to have his statements and claims address, but that's about it.
    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Five weeks ago I was banned from the thread and accused of 'baiting' and 'flaming' . When I PM'd the mod (who coincidentally is the AH mod who has posted the most prochoice opinions on the thread) they replied citing the views I had posted on body autonomy, how I felt about abortion in the context of DS, that I didn't think people were 'real' who had unnecessary abortions. So basically I was banned for posting my views.

    Ah Pete come on now. You absolutely cannot make statements like this - "
    A healthy woman (who is pregnant from consensual sex) that would choose to have her healthy preborn baby's heartbeat stilled, is not a real woman to me, no." that's far too insulting and misogynistic and you know full well it is, that's a horrible thing to say about a woman, comment on the circumstance, not the individuals! We exchanged PM's and I was more than happy to talk to you pleasantly and I think overall you're a damn decent bloke who is usually spot on with posting, but that wasn't right man.
    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Aside from thread bans the moderation of prolife users in general on the thread is ridiculous. Recently seen a mod (the same one) chastising a user for posting the same argument again and again. This shows just how biased *some* of the moderation is as surely they can see that prochoice users do that also. 'My body, my choice' just one example. It's hardly something prolife users have the monopoly on now in fairness. Also, prolife users have been actioned for making comments which are deemed to be insulting to those who are prochoice but yet it's seems perfectly fine to suggest that those with prolife views are 'evil' and 'sociopaths'.

    If it's who I'm thinking about, he was banned for being a bollox and giving other people's views and opinions instead of his own, he wasn't actually contributing and was avoiding questions asked to him left right and centre. People like that have no place in a reasonable discussion. Some pro-life views have been very, very extreme Pete, with someone suggesting a "rape panel" to judge whether or not a woman was actually raped if she was pursuing that grounds to gain access to abortion, I don't agree with some of the name calling and I make a point of asking the pro-choice posters to nip that in the bud.
    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    In the OP of the thread there is a link to a Prochoice propaganda site also (disguised as objective information). The site was set up by two feminist lawyers known for their prochoice views and who ignore all the pitfalls of what repealing the 8th will mean. They also link to many opinion pieces which are staunchly prochoice and contain a lot of misinformation.
    There is no misinformation provided and all of the links put up have been scrutinised, just because they are pro-choice doesn't mean they cannot be impartial, you know that.

    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Look, I know the referendum is a polarizing topic, one which is bound to attract trolls and therfore must be a difficult thread to moderate (only likely to get more difficult over the next three weeks or so) but could we not just at least try to have a more balanced approach and impartiality. It's difficult enough trying to make an argument for it is why we should be voting No on a site which is largely populated by those who are prochoice without having other factors to contend with also. Users (on either side) looking to get those they disagree with banned doesn't help either (which was highlighted here).

    Of course it's polarizing Pete and you know yourself there has been a heap of pro-life trolls (you are not a pro-life troll whatsoever so please don't think I'm making this assumption towards you) that have come on purely to stir the pot, and that shouldn't be allowed, because that then increases the hostility (shouldn't even be any) towards genuine pro-lifers looking for a reasonable discussion, it puts up an air of suspicion. Pro-lifers are more than welcome in the thread but there has been numerous that have tried to spout off opinion as fact, lie about things, and when confronted with impartial evidence refuting their claims, they blank it! That's detrimental to a discussion and if that's how people want to carry on, then they should not be posting in that thread.

    I am more than happy to discuss pro-life views but there has been an unholy amount of horrific misogynistic attitudes shown towards women in that thread and it isn't right. One poster mentioned what about the father (this poster was pro-life) and it was buried amongst the crap spewed out by the trolls.


  • Options
    #2658
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,754 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    I have tried to appeal the thread ban as I would like to take part in the discussion (what with the referendum mere weeks away now) but despite starting the thread over five weeks ago, it remains ignored (apart from Beasty doing what he could to try and get it looked at).
    Apologies for that HD thread Outlaw Pete - I've just provided an update over there and hopefully one of the CMods will be along shortly

    On the topic of the 8th, I have simply not been following the thread (I don't get a vote). I fully recognise it is a very contentious topic with very polarised views being expressed. I know at least one Admin has been keeping quite close to the discussion, but I'll have a look through a few pages later on.

    Having seen some comments resulting in challenges to mod actions in that thread, my suspicion is that in allowing such a contentious topic to be discussed in a place like AH, we will inevitably see some extreme points being made. I will say very clearly now that I would be definitely on the Yes side of the argument, but I will try and look at it objectively. However I would not want this thread to turn into a discussion of moderation of that thread. That is one point that should be dealt with in the Help Desk forum

    Equally the topic itself is probably one that would better sit in the "Current Affairs" forum being requested by Discodog. It's arguably far too serious for many who look for a bit of light heartedness in AH, and it's possible that the mods are acting as much out of the reactions some comments are getting, be it in the thread itself or reported posts (and I've just mentioned elsewhere that topic, within 2 or 3 threads in AH alone, has resulted in around 500 reported posts since the turn of the year)


  • Options
    #2659
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    Ah Pete come on now. You absolutely cannot make statements like this...

    Then why did you PM me saying you hoped my threadban was reversed? :P

    Look, the point is, prochoicers have said much much worse about prolifers on that thread (like they're 'evil', 'sociopathic' etc). I merely said those who choose abortions (when everyone concerned is healthy) aren't 'real' to me. Prochoicers have been called murderers on that thread for heaven sake. Thread banning a user for saying what I did is laughable in that context.

    Anyway, I'll leave it there and see how I get on with the appeal.
    Beasty wrote: »
    Apologies for that HD thread Outlaw Pete - I've just provided an update over there and hopefully one of the CMods will be along shortly

    No problem, Beasty, that's grand, thanks.


  • Options
    #2660
    feargale
    Registered Users Posts: 8,636 ✭✭✭feargale


    I'm on the fence re Repeal the 8th and I have paid very little attention to the main boards thread on the issue.
    Having said that I would like to see a respectful free and fair debate.
    I have read OutlawPete's "offending" post and the comments on it by the offended mod and I find the latter's comments ridiculous.

    Here is post 9996 in that thread by DublinMeath:

    "Well maybe you have to look at the some of the people/organisations who make up the retain group to get an answer to that.
    Take Justin Barrett for example, youth defence apparently now claim he never had a leadership role in the organisation, bit strange as hes on record as having been so, as are his and their links to neo nazi organisations
    John McGuirk a f*ckwit since his student days, enough said.
    The Sherlocks, well pretty much anti everything
    David Quinn, Breda O'Brien just as bad, and religion hasn't ever had a positive view of women having power or choice.
    Basically you've a group of people who believe in discrimination against people as a fundamental core of their being. People that twisted can't fathom other people not being as twisted as they are."

    Now I ask you, has OutlawPete posted anything as offensive as that? Yet that post is allowed to pass without any reaction or infraction.

    If a mod has strong opinions on an issue should he or she not leave the modding of the relevant thread to those who can moderate it without favour or disfavour to either side?


  • Options
    #2661
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    No problem, Beasty, that's grand. Thanks.



    Then why did you PM me saying you hoped my threadban was reversed? :P

    Look, the point is, prochoicers have said much much worse about prolifers on that thread (like they're 'evil', 'sociopathic' etc). I merely said those who choose abortions (when everyone concerned is healthy) aren't 'real' to me. Prochoicers have been called murderers on that thread for heaven sake. Thread banning a user for saying what I did is laughable in that context.

    Anyway, I'll leave it there and see how I get on with appealing it.

    Because I do hope it's reversed! For the reasons I've previously stated regarding your posting history and overall demeanour :)

    I don't agree with any name-calling on the thread from either side and the ball needs to be played rather than the man but the sheer volume of posts in that thread alone is enormous, it's a lot of content that probably takes ages flicking through.

    I wish you the best with appealing it, I do disagree with you on several things but I look forward to (hopefully!) discussing them with you on the thread if the ban is lifted dude.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2662
    TheValeyard
    Registered Users Posts: 12,266 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    uptherebels wrote: »
    No they just need to support their claims, stop trolling and actually discuss rather than soapbox

    No matter what they claim. you wont agree with there claims, zero chance of that.. So they are shouted down with mod support while pro choice reign supreme. Its why i wont comment in there. Also it will follow you around boards.

    Fcuk Putin. Glory to Ukraine!



  • Options
    #2663
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users Posts: 6,483 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    Ah come on. This was sort of a feedback thread. Now it is turning into another abortion thread.


  • Options
    #2664
    uptherebels
    Registered Users Posts: 1,587 ✭✭✭uptherebels


    Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »
    No matter what they claim. you wont agree with there claims, zero chance of that.. So they are shouted down with mod support while pro choice reign supreme. Its why i wont comment in there. Also it will follow you around boards.

    I'll never agree with unsupported claims regardless who makes them.

    Ya it's all one big pro choice conspiracy.

    There is a reason why they don't provide evidence of their claims and it ain't cause their lazy.
    And being challenged on your views when in the minority is not being shouted down
    There is a serious persecution complex with pro lifers , it's getting tireing at this stage.


  • Options
    #2665
    TheValeyard
    Registered Users Posts: 12,266 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    Fighting Tao wrote: »
    Ah come on. This was sort of a feedback thread. Now it is turning into another abortion thread.

    Yep. Im out. Just end up another attack session. Later. Ive wolves to hunt.

    Fcuk Putin. Glory to Ukraine!



  • Options
    #2666
    Graces7
    Registered Users Posts: 32,634 ✭✭✭✭Graces7


    Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »
    No matter what they claim. you wont agree with there claims, zero chance of that.. So they are shouted down with mod support while pro choice reign supreme. Its why i wont comment in there. Also it will follow you around boards.

    As one who was thread banned for the reasons well stated here... I watch new pro-life posters coming on the thread and know it is a matter of time before they get banned. The pattern in very clear. And consistent.


  • Options
    #2667
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,754 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Graces7 wrote: »
    As one who was thread banned for the reasons well stated here... I watch new pro-life posters coming on the thread and know it is a matter of time before they get banned. The pattern in very clear. And consistent.
    I've already stated - if anyone wants to discuss the specifics of moderation of that thread or challenge their thread bans start a thread in Help Desk. This thread should not be used to try to dissect what is happening in a specific thread

    Thanks


  • Options
    #2668
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Again this is a symptom of the same issue cropping up again and again - AH being moderated as something that it isn't. If people want a serious discussion on the 8th amendment, they should be posting about it in the Politics forum. If people are posting in an abortion thread on AH, they should expect that a lot of people in it will take the piss. And the thread should be moderated in the context of it being on AH, and therefore not subject to the rules about serious discussion that the Politics forum is subject to. If people start reporting posts in the thread for not taking the issue seriously or keeping up a political standard of debate (citations, evidence, etc) then the mod response should be "if that's what you're after, you're literally posting on the wrong forum for it. Politics is that way. --->"

    This is what we used to do when people tried to treat AH like a serious discussion space - just tell them to either accept AH's irreverent culture for what it is, or feck off and post somewhere else. Why did this change?


  • Options
    #2669
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    A big problem is members acting like unintentional(?) bots. You can have an environment were certain members never post, unless something is posted they don't like or don't want to see. Then the lads come out of the woodwork to shut discussions down, otherwise you've tumbleweeds rolling through. It's a pretty toxic environment for a chat forum and as people have posted, you often have something typed and ready to go and figure it's not worth the hassle. If you do post it quickly turns from a debate to a tit for tat 'you sunk my battleship' match.


  • Options
    #2670
    Kuva
    Closed Accounts Posts: 870 ✭✭✭Kuva


    That's an awfully boring line up on the first page AH, 2 abortion threads, gay cake, foreskin mutilation in Iceland, pavee judges, new taxes, and the umpteenth it's offensive society thread (behaviour specific to boards as far as I can see) all site development needs to stop until we get a disappear this crap thread option.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2671
    Omackeral
    Registered Users Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    Kuva wrote: »
    That's an awfully boring line up on the first page AH, 2 abortion threads, gay cake, foreskin mutilation in Iceland, pavee judges, new taxes, and the umpteenth it's offensive society thread (behaviour specific to boards as far as I can see) all site development needs to stop until we get a disappear this crap thread option.

    Nothing stopping you coming up with engaging threads yourself.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement