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

Forum feedback

smacl

I'm creating a sticky here which is to be used for all feedback on this forum. Feel free to discuss what you feel should and should not be allowed on this forum and raise any issues in relation to moderation.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

[Deleted User]

smacl wrote: »

Mod: We're going to try this to see how it pans out. Note that it is in addition to other recommended behaviour for specific threads and does not replace it.

I suggested this eons ago and it was dismissed as being sectarian or some such phrase.
Respect by the athiests who come on here for the charter would be a start. They would be banned on other forums for continued flouting of the charters. Seems undue leniency is given on this forum.

smacl

SouthWesterly wrote: »

I suggested this eons ago and it was dismissed as being sectarian or some such phrase.
Respect by the athiests who come on here for the charter would be a start. They would be banned on other forums for continued flouting of the charters. Seems undue leniency is given on this forum.

Mod: As a mod I'm relatively new here and can only make changes going forward, hence this thread. Where you see a post that you consider breaches the charter, please report it stating how and where it breaches the charter and I will deal with it accordingly.

[Deleted User]

SouthWesterly wrote: »

I wouldn't have even called it covert. It was and is overtly mocked. Despite the reporting of such posts it has continued from the same people.

So much for the charter!

I'm surprised the charter is so important to you here seeing as how it's not so important to you in the Atheist forum.
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=114090299&postcount=626

John Hutton

smacl wrote: »

Mod: As a mod I'm relatively new here and can only make changes going forward, hence this thread. Where you see a post that you consider breaches the charter, please report it stating how and where it breaches the charter and I will deal with it accordingly.

Hiw will this work, is there like a drop down, or do you just type something into the thread title, what should it be? (For consistencies sake!)

Peregrinus

John Hutton wrote: »

Hiw will this work, is there like a drop down, or do you just type something into the thread title, what should it be? (For consistencies sake!)

To the right of each post you should see an icon of a red triangular traffic sign with an exclamation mark inside it. Click on that to report the post. You'll be taken to a screen where you can input a few lines of text to say why you think the post is problematic.

smacl

John Hutton wrote: »

Hiw will this work, is there like a drop down, or do you just type something into the thread title, what should it be? (For consistencies sake!)

On other forums such as here the subject is tagged with square brackets. When you create a post in these forums it gives you the option to prefix the title. I'll ask the powers that be to add a drop down list here but for now, just manually add a prefix of Christians only or similar and I'll moderate accordingly.

smacl

Following a very speedy response from Mark in Admin we now have the option to prefix new posts as [All], i.e. designed to be open to all posters, and [Christians Only], i.e. this question is aimed at Christians only and you would prefer that non-Christians do not post on this thread. I would ask any non-Christians who post here to respect these tags and will moderate accordingly. Posting without a tag assumes that the thread is intended for all posters.

I would further ask anyone posting in a thread tagged as [Christians Only] to also particularly consider the charter with respect to intolerance towards creeds, beliefs, lifestyles or opinions that differ from one's own, as this tag is effectively limits the right to reply for non-Christians.

And before anyone cheeky asks, no this tag does not apply to moderation

John Hutton

smacl wrote: »

Following a very speedy response from Mark in Admin we now have the option to prefix new posts as [All], i.e. designed to be open to all posters, and [Christians Only], i.e. this question is aimed at Christians only and you would prefer that non-Christians do not post on this thread. I would ask any non-Christians who post here to respect these tags and will moderate accordingly. Posting without a tag assumes that the thread is intended for all posters.

I would further ask anyone posting in a thread tagged as [Christians Only] to also particularly consider the charter with respect to intolerance towards creeds, beliefs, lifestyles or opinions that differ from one's own, as this tag is effectively limits the right to reply for non-Christians.

And before anyone cheeky asks, no this tag does not apply to moderation

That was very speedy fair play

Manach

I’ve been posting on this forum for a while. The difference I’ve noticed is that while other fora are usually populated by posters who are interested in the community’s common interest, the Christianity forum is another arena in the Kulterkamf. One suggestion is to split the forum into one devoted to Religious discussions and another one with a charter devoted to interfaith/intra-faith dialog that is based on discussing news and issues about Christianity. However this has been floated as an idea before without avail. So another suggestion, to borrow from Reddit, is to allow flors to at least identify tpeople's stances.

smacl

Manach wrote: »

I’ve been posting on this forum for a while. The difference I’ve noticed is that while other fora are usually populated by posters who are interested in the community’s common interest, the Christianity forum is another arena in the Kulterkamf. One suggestion is to split the forum into one devoted to Religious discussions and another one with a charter devoted to interfaith/intra-faith dialog that is based on discussing news and issues about Christianity. However this has been floated as an idea before without avail. So another suggestion, to borrow from Reddit, is to allow flors to at least identify tpeople's stances.

Not a reddit user, so not quite sure what you mean by the above. Short term plan is to keep it simple by enforcing the charter more strictly than has been done in the past with a focus on dealing with those primarily using this forum to vent their woes with the Church. A&A forum already does that to a large extent so it is not like their being denied a voice.

While not a huge fan of censorship, I'm also going to delete one-liners that are in clear breach of the charter on the basis that they primarily attract more of the same. Where the same posters do this repeatedly without making any useful contribution to the discussion in hand, the plan is to first infract and then ban them. I'm open to people's thoughts on the above.

Most importantly perhaps, I'd ask all of you who do want to engage in pertinent discussion continue doing so. The additional moderation is intended to encourage rather than stymie discussion and without your input the forum is going nowhere.

Hotblack Desiato

smacl wrote: »

I would further ask anyone posting in a thread tagged as [Christians Only]

This decision imho sets a poor precedent for Boards in general.

Imagine how ridiculous it would be in Politics if you could tag a thread "How do you think the government is doing? [Fine Gael voters only]" or in Soccer "Pep Guardiola is a fraud [Non-City fans only]" ?

I read the Soccer forum a good bit and post there from time to time. It can get quite tribal and has needed a lot of mod intervention at times. But even there, there are no threads which are off-limits to people because they support the wrong "side".

It is often alleged in Politics and CA and (so far, rightly) strenuously denied - that there is the moderation of opinions not charter breaches. Have we now introduced this - moderation of opinions?

Have the admins approved this? I'd like to hear their reasoning on this and why a basic principle of Boards - that forums and threads belong to everyone not to a clique - has been tossed aside.

to also particularly consider the charter with respect to intolerance towards creeds, beliefs, lifestyles or opinions that differ from one's own, as this tag is effectively limits the right to reply for non-Christians.

And straight away we hit the first problem. The right to reply of posters within normal Boards rules of civility, etc. has been taken away. Talk about people but don't be too nasty about them as we've banned them from responding...

John Hutton

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

This decision imho sets a poor precedent for Boards in general.

Imagine how ridiculous it would be in Politics if you could tag a thread "How do you think the government is doing? [Fine Gael voters only]" or in Soccer "Pep Guardiola is a fraud [Non-City fans only]" ?

I read the Soccer forum a good bit and post there from time to time. It can get quite tribal and has needed a lot of mod intervention at times. But even there, there are no threads which are off-limits to people because they support the wrong "side".

It is often alleged in Politics and CA and (so far, rightly) strenuously denied - that there is the moderation of opinions not charter breaches. Have we now introduced this - moderation of opinions?

Have the admins approved this? I'd like to hear their reasoning on this and why a basic principle of Boards - that forums and threads belong to everyone not to a clique - has been tossed aside.

And straight away we hit the first problem. The right to reply of posters within normal Boards rules of civility, etc. has been taken away. Talk about people but don't be too nasty about them as we've banned them from responding...

But what if it were a (shudder) Fine Gael forum?

John Hutton

I think the changes are worth a chance if people don't take the proverbial with the "Christians Only" option

Hotblack Desiato

Got a mod warning for this part of this post:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=114838081&postcount=9

All of the Irish hierarchy who covered up abuse (did any NOT?) deserved to go to prison as well, but there is zero chance of any investigation into their crimes here.

because it is a "sweeping statement relating to abuse".

Now if I'd said:

"All of the Irish hierarchy covered up abuse" then yes, that would be a sweeping statement. But that's not what I said.

I don't think it's controversial to say that people who obstruct justice should face sanction.

"did any NOT?" is asking a question, albeit in a pointed fashion. Afaik all of the dioceses received unfavourable reports for covering up abuse and failing to report allegations to the police. So who among the hierarchy has clean hands? We'll never know. As for the abuse superthread, the only reason a thread on Pell exists is because of his abuse trial so by that logic all posts in the thread should be moved there.

Hotblack Desiato

John Hutton wrote: »

But what if it were a (shudder) Fine Gael forum?

There is no way such a suggestion for a forum would be entertained, and rightly so.

John Hutton

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

There is no way such a suggestion for a forum would be entertained, and rightly so.

Way to dance around the point.

Why won't you give the changes a chance? No one has even started a Christians only thread. All that has happened thus far, is what you wanted, enforcement of the current charter.

[Deleted User]

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

This decision imho sets a poor precedent for Boards in general.

Imagine how ridiculous it would be in Politics if you could tag a thread "How do you think the government is doing? [Fine Gael voters only]" or in Soccer "Pep Guardiola is a fraud [Non-City fans only]" ?

I read the Soccer forum a good bit and post there from time to time. It can get quite tribal and has needed a lot of mod intervention at times. But even there, there are no threads which are off-limits to people because they support the wrong "side".

It is often alleged in Politics and CA and (so far, rightly) strenuously denied - that there is the moderation of opinions not charter breaches. Have we now introduced this - moderation of opinions?

Have the admins approved this? I'd like to hear their reasoning on this and why a basic principle of Boards - that forums and threads belong to everyone not to a clique - has been tossed aside.

And straight away we hit the first problem. The right to reply of posters within normal Boards rules of civility, etc. has been taken away. Talk about people but don't be too nasty about them as we've banned them from responding...

From the belief that the point of Boards is to facilitate discussion and the difference between restricting some threads and keeping the current free for all is a reduction in discussion versus an eventual end to all discussion through user flight, then for me it's clear which choice to make.
If something like a safe space is what is needed then I'd be in favour of it, if it's not already too late for the forum

Hotblack Desiato

They turned the Islam forum into a "safe space" and it died completely.

Hotblack Desiato

John Hutton wrote: »

Way to dance around the point.

It's not dancing around the point. It is the point.

Why won't you give the changes a chance? No one has even started a Christians only thread. All that has happened thus far, is what you wanted, enforcement of the current charter.

This was proposed before more than once here in the past, and rejected. So what changed? The concept of having threads only certain posters are allowed to post in is repellent.
Anyway I give it about a week until the "who is a real Christian" arguments start.

[Deleted User]

Rather than create christian-only threads I'd have thought a reiteration that the Christian forum was a space for those of that faith.

In the same way that it is poor form- and against charter- for theists to post in A&A as if their beliefs were to be respected as they would sometimes wish, surely there was room for atheists/agnostics to give the same courtesy (enforced by mods as required) to not turn up in a Christian space in full pugnacity?

Time and a place, and all that.

Disappointing to see this, personally- don't see it solving anything and disappointing that it was seen as required.

Hotblack Desiato

Theists are perfectly free to post in A&A within its charter, same as non-Christians were perfectly free to post in Christianity within its charter - until now.

[Deleted User]

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Theists are perfectly free to post in A&A within its charter, same as non-Christians were perfectly free to post in Christianity within its charter - until now.

I don't think that contradicts anything I said tbh.

If the Christianity charter needed beefing up to set the boundaries more clearly to those who needed to enter the space to argue from an A/A perspective, then surely that's the obvious step?

Theists that enter A/A forum and do not behave in the spirit of respecting that *that space* operates from *that perspective* are dealt with robustly- and rightly so

I see no reason whatsoever that the Christian forum couldn't be moderated in the same manner, tbh

smacl

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Got a mod warning for this part of this post:

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=114838081&postcount=9

because it is a "sweeping statement relating to abuse".

Now if I'd said:

"All of the Irish hierarchy covered up abuse" then yes, that would be a sweeping statement. But that's not what I said.

I don't think it's controversial to say that people who obstruct justice should face sanction.

"did any NOT?" is asking a question, albeit in a pointed fashion. Afaik all of the dioceses received unfavourable reports for covering up abuse and failing to report allegations to the police. So who among the hierarchy has clean hands? We'll never know. As for the abuse superthread, the only reason a thread on Pell exists is because of his abuse trial so by that logic all posts in the thread should be moved there.

As per the charter, there is a specific mega-thread for this, see below.

PDN wrote: »

Please note that there are certain megathreads to which particular subjects should be confined. This is because these subjects tend to overrun and hijack other threads. We cannot sticky these threads as boards.ie has a strict policy as to how many stickies are permitted in each forum. They are as follows:

1. Creationism and Evolution - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056402682

2. Protestant -v- Catholic Debates - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057593813

3. Atheist -v- Theist / Existence of God Debates - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=93795311

4. Clerical Child Abuse - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055855692

5. Homosexuality - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056713191

Thank you for helping us keep the Christianity Forum tidy and running smoothly.

smacl

John Hutton wrote: »

But what if it were a (shudder) Fine Gael forum?

This is very much the scenario here in my opinion. From the charter;

1. The purpose of this forum is to discuss Christian belief in general, and specific elements of it, between Christians and non-Christians alike. This forum has the additional purpose of being a point on Boards.ie where Christians may ask other Christians questions about their shared faith. In this regard, Christians should not have to defend their faith from overt or subtle attack.

The bolded section illustrates a need for threads which are restricted to Christians, should they feel the need for them. I don't see it as any way controversial, but should it cause problems we can look at it again.

nthclare

Let's face it Smacl, your moderation isn't exactly the best.

So you're a moderator in the Christianity forum and Atheism and Agnosticism forum too.

The Atheism and Agnosticism forum has the worst moderators in the whole site.

What a joke, which side is your slice of bread buttered???

I think there should be a clear out of moderators and get rid of the dinasaurs and have neutral moderators.

smacl

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't think that contradicts anything I said tbh.

If the Christianity charter needed beefing up to set the boundaries more clearly to those who needed to enter the space to argue from an A/A perspective, then surely that's the obvious step?

Theists that enter A/A forum and do not behave in the spirit of respecting that *that space* operates from *that perspective* are dealt with robustly- and rightly so

I see no reason whatsoever that the Christian forum couldn't be moderated in the same manner, tbh

With respect, I don't think atheists have ever felt squeezed out of the A&A forum by an excess of Christian interlopers, of which there have been plenty. This has however been the case here as stated in posts on the board, reported posts and PMs. The charters on both forums are different to best suit their audiences, I think many on the A&A forum enjoy having their stance on religion challenged as a mechanism to discuss and refine it. While some here may be of a similar mind, others are not and hence the charter is explicit about Christians not having to defend their faith.

This isn't the A&A forum it is the Christianity forum, and like it or not, to post here you have to follow the local charter.

The White Wolf

John Hutton wrote: »

What if I want to discuss my beliefs with like minded individuals?

I don't disagree with the general thrust of what you said but it doesn't really work if Christians are a minority on this forum and essentially "crowded out" does it?

Yeah I get that and would encourage such a forum direction. I'm not religious but being a bystander to a forum where like minded individuals discuss their beliefs sounds much more interesting to me than a forum where atheists are asking people to justify their faith (which btw, never gets the desired result they want).

You need look no further than the first page of this thread to see what the problem is; I saw an interesting thread, came in expecting to see the viewpoints of religious posters but what I saw instead was the usual crap.

But I've been looking at this forum since 2008 and it was the same then as it is now. Unfortunately it's never going to change. Might be worth trying out a place like Reddit instead to see if their is a community that might give you what you're looking for.

smacl

nthclare wrote: »

Let's face it Smacl, your moderation isn't exactly the best.

So you're a moderator in the Christianity forum and Atheism and Agnosticism forum too.

If you have any question with my moderation in general, please feel free to raise it with the CMods and admins. If you have any specific issues with how I moderate this forum please raise them here so that they can be openly discussed.

The Atheism and Agnosticism forum has the worst moderators in the whole site.

Mod warning: This is not a thread for discussion of moderation of the A&A forum, please discuss A&A moderation there should you feel the need to do so. Do not raise it here again as it is off-topic.

What a joke, which side is your slice of bread buttered???

My role is to moderate each forum according to the local charter of that forum in an impartial manner, my personal beliefs and biases don't enter into it.

smacl

The White Wolf wrote: »

Yeah I get that and would encourage such a forum direction. I'm not religious but being a bystander to a forum where like minded individuals discuss their beliefs sounds much more interesting to me than a forum where atheists are asking people to justify their faith (which btw, never gets the desired result they want).

You need look no further than the first page of this thread to see what the problem is; I saw an interesting thread, came in expecting to see the viewpoints of religious posters but what I saw instead was the usual crap.

But I've been looking at this forum since 2008 and it was the same then as it is now. Unfortunately it's never going to change. Might be worth trying out a place like Reddit instead to see if their is a community that might give you what you're looking for.

It can only really change by a concerted effort to change by all involved. In terms of moderation, I'll make every effort to create a space where that can occur but it really comes down to the posters here to keep the conversations going.

While I appreciate that you're a long time poster here, my own involvement here as moderator is relatively recent. In that respect, I'd kindly ask you not to suggest posters move the conversation to Reddit until we've given more recent changes an opportunity to take effect.

Elwood_Blues

Maybe I'm missing the point but if you want to discuss religious topics with more Christians then shouldn't you be signing up to
https://www.christianforums.com/forums/