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

Banned from immigration thread.

ToweringPerformance

I was banned from the immigration thread in current affairs after being told by Ten of Swords that i couldn't discuss the issue due to an "anecdote" i had told in the thread. Is talking about issues that effect my family seen as an anecdote now by Boards.ie?

Should we all just stop taking about issues that effect us or our loved ones directly because we don't produce evidence of that situation. I'm not going to put personal family information and names on a public forum for goodness sake. Said moderators didn't then have the decency to respond to me by PM.

Boards.ie really has to do better than this if it wants to regain some of it's market share in the discussion world. It's no wonder the site is dying on it's knees when one can't even talk about real world issues, all you are left with is an echo chamber of nothingness.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Spear

Moved to the proper place.

Furze99

This issue amongst many others was raised on the Site is a Graveyard thread:

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058344179/site-is-a-graveyard-how-can-boards-save-itself-threadbanned-users-in-1st-post

Apparently this rule against anecdote is applied on certain specific threads and these must be a warning on Page 1 of same. If it were applied across the site, it would collapse within a couple of days for obvious reasons.

It doesn't make any sense to me but it does apparently to those who moderate. You need to avoid anecdote, so instead of saying 'my student daughter lost her job to a non national who was happy with less wages' you write something like 'young people are being disadvantaged in lower paid jobs by non nationals undercutting them'. When asked for proof & reports by the obvious trolls, you simply ignore them or reply - 'sorry, no anecdote allowed'.

Of course it's noticeable that some posters of certain views seem to avoid the anecdote sanction as their stories are deemed valid..

No white smoke as promised I note yet as a result of the above extensive thread…

Beasty

I presume you are referring to the refugee thread as the immigration one is closed

Posters use so called anecdotes to troll such threads. It's quite a straightforward choice. If we allow anecdotes and posters go down this route the thread will be closed, as has happened with prior immigration and refugee threads.

We facilitate discussion by banning anecdotes.

ToweringPerformance

If people are unable to talk about real world effects of mass immigration then what's the point. If something is directly effecting someone's life it's pertinent to the discussion.

Boards is not a discussion site if real world scenarios are banned.

malinheader

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122098064#Comment_122098064

I would have no problem with bans as long as they were the same rules for both sides of argument. Which I think is clear to see there is not.

ToweringPerformance

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122098249#Comment_122098249

Of course there is not. The people who moderate the forum pick and chose which anecdotes are allowed and which aren't hence why there is little balance.

Beasty

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122098373#Comment_122098373

How many have you reported?

_Kaiser_

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122100367#Comment_122100367

See, this is part of the problem.

I dare say that most posters have never reported a post. They read it, reply to it (maybe exposing themselves to mod actions in the process which is often the intent), or they ignore it and move on.

However, I'd be pretty confident that those doing the reporting are the same ones who are often behind many of the in-thread problems in the first place, or who are "known" generally for disruptive behaviour/posting under the guise of balance.

How far back do mods read when they get a report? How much is the context/intent/provocation/responded to poster's history factored into a decision to threadban someone.

In the thread in question I would say there are up to half a dozen regular posters whose only real contributions are to cause disruption to the discussion though this applies to most of the longer running "controversial" threads. It's very obvious from the tone and content of their posts, the repetitive and selective nature of their responses, the "funny"/dismissive/one-line type response etc.

Again it's very obvious from reading through the thread who they are, yet while the threadban list in the OP's continue to grow, these posters (often the same ones across multiple threads) seem to escape unscathed. It doesn't go unnoticed either, and THAT is what annoys others who are trying to engage honestly.

"Report them" is a cop out that relies on users to do the work. If mods haven't the time to review in the manner suggested above, or aren't familiar with the posters I refer to (hard to believe as it carries over between threads) then that's a bigger issue probably best addressed by simply adding more mods (and as I've repeatedly said, preferably from outside the normal limited gene pool that is usually the well for such things).

It's also fair to say that personal bias or even conflicts of interest may be a factor in some of the decisions, but in that case I would certainly hope that mods (regardless of level) would refer the report to someone else to review.

If posters are asked and indeed expected to use and trust in the process, that process needs to be as transparent as possible, and demonstratably balanced and fair - something which the current approach often fails on. You/mods may disagree with that statement, but the onus is on the mod team to improve that perception, not push it back on the users.

thegame983

What kind of loser reports someone?

Hungry Burger

For some strange reason anecdotes like: “I see Ukrainians driving around my town in flash cars” is not allowed

However anecdotes such as: “I live three doors down from a Direct Provision centre and there’s no hassle at all and they’re a great bunch of lads involved in the Tidy Towns committee” are allowed.

Beasty

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122102133#Comment_122102133

Have you reported it?

[Deleted User]

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122102204#Comment_122102204

why would you report that? Strange reply

Beasty

Because the poster is complaining that no action was taken

If it's not reported how are we expected to know such an anecdote was posted?

Firblog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122102222#Comment_122102222

So mods don't moderate a 'forum' they only moderate reported posts?

[Deleted User]

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122102222#Comment_122102222

the poster you quoted shared a real life contradiction. I’d love for you to address it. What you are suggesting is bizarre and would lead to hundreds of posts being reported instead of having and applying clearly consistent rules.

Imo your reply was a real fob off one. Report it so we can ignore it type thing, lazy stuff. Again would love your input on the post you “fobbed off”, this insight would address a lot of the concerns being raised. Nobody knows where they stand with moderation and what’s accepted because it’s so inconsistent and you like to hide it away.

Backstreet Moyes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122102053#Comment_122102053

To be honest iv started to lately out of curiosity.

The only conclusion I can come to is that I must be doing something wrong.

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122098064#Comment_122098064

And yet here you are wasting your time posting and arguing on a website you supposedly do not find satisfying. That is the bit I don’t get! When I find a website that is not meeting my needs I move on as do most people I know, so boards must hold some attraction for you, to keep you coming for more.

dmakc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122102315#Comment_122102315

Just because it's not, doesn't mean it can't be. Bang of arrogance off this reply too.

The poster is giving some feedback, maybe take some of it on board instead of "like it or shove it"?

There are certain agitators in this thread that would tell you it's black when they know it's white. It's a game to them. Posters with some sense shouldn't need to depend on the report button, but these agitators are painfully obvious to see, and can derail pages of discussion with deflection and citation requests (followed in formulaic fashion with dismissal of author once handed to them). There isn't one post specifically that can necessarily be referred to, nor am I bothered enough to go constantly reporting, but you just need to give it a read every once in a while to see the bad faith posting (trolling?) from the half dozen as someone referred to above.

Cookie_Monster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122102222#Comment_122102222

by being active members and contributors to the fora they are supposed to be moderating

ToweringPerformance

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122102315#Comment_122102315

The cheek of me for wanting the site to be improved.

I should have known better.

Backstreet Moyes

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122102315#Comment_122102315

A poster can like the content and still raise issues.

Their are some great posters with great knowledge and then the handful who make threads unbearable.

It really is no surprise to see you are a mod based on your contribution.

Go to page 638 on the immigration thread and see a post that will articulate the issues with the thread better than I ever could.

It has 52 likes and will probably reach 100 before the mods remove it.

Beasty

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122102273#Comment_122102273

Current affairs is the busiest forum on the site. It generates around 50% of all reports across the site. And two of us deal with the vast majority of those reports. So of course we become the subject of complaints because we have to deal with the worst complainants. We are without doubt the two busiest Mods/CMods/Admins on the site

Where do you suggest I find the time to read every post in every thread (or indeed every post in every controversial thread in CA, which is again where most of the posts are made)? We added more mods, but the forum is very intimidating and there is only one other mod doing much in the forum

It has always been the case across the site that mods are expected to deal with reports. There has never been a requirement to proactively moderate. We deal with reports. If we find the time to actually read threads (which for example I was able to do when I was a mod of Cycling), then we may pick things up. If there is a new thread that is likely to become controversial we may try and take a look before it gets out of hand, but that may simply be impractical.

I have spent the whole weekend travelling (well I was pretty static at the Springsteen gig in Cardiff last night!) and the only modding/Adminning I have done is to nuke a spammer who created 30+ threads and 78 posts in less than an hour this morning.

ToweringPerformance

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122102415#Comment_122102415

Just read that post now and you are indeed correct it more or less tells it like it is on that thread. There are one or two posters who i suspect work for NGO's who are constantly online and have zero interest in any sort of balanced discussion and i suspect spend the majority of their time reporting others in the hope they get banned when they bring up real world effects of immigration on themselves, their family or the wider community.

It's highly frustrating but given the mods attitude here nothing will change and they aren't interested or view it as an issue. I'm all for banning people who come on and call others names, bully or just act the general dick with others on thread but banning someone for bringing up a real life event that has effected them is just pathetic tbh.

Beasty

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122102396#Comment_122102396

I became a mod of CA precisely because I did not intend getting actively involved in the controversial topics it caters for. There is quite a background to how the forum came into being (which was the subject of many Feedback discussions when we were trying to make the politics Cafe concept work). This was a last chance to try and get something covering this sort of conversation that could work and I became a mod as we felt we needed Admin input to try and avoid having to kill it off (another 2 or 3 Admins were initially on the mod list, but one of them had major connectivity issues with the new platform and the others never really got into this side of things after the migration). We knew it would be controversial, and it has proven incredibly difficult to find people to mod it, meaning I have stuck with it when ideally I would have dropped off moderating it once we had a full team of active mods

The issues were exacerbated with the migration to Vanilla, when we lost the confidence of a lot of mods due to the initially very limited modding tools (and they are still quite a way off some of the powers we had on the old platform). I have the advantage of Admin powers which has meant I could deal with some particularly nasty trolls a bit more directly (resulting in some very nasty threats made towards me, as well as attempts to doxx me). There are actually hundreds of users of this site I know in the real world, many from the cycling community, and I only put up with all this **** because I really want this site to survive and hopefully flourish

You may not like the way I go about it, but I only have the interests of this site at heart. I don't want those nasty trolls thinking they can drive me off this site by intimidation.

_Kaiser_

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122102438#Comment_122102438

Sorry Beasty, but all I see here is excuses, deflection and whataboutery. You've not addressed the points raised nor those in my earlier post.

I don't doubt that you're a busy guy. You've often posted about your commitments and lifestyle as you have again above, but in this context it's irrelevant I'm afraid.

Now read on before you react. This is why it's important to have the context - or if you will, there's method to my madness as will become clear.

The solution isn't this approach of sporadically and reactively engaging with the forum you are asked to moderate, as you (by your own admission) don't have all the facts and are only responding to a reported post made by someone for reasons unknown (but often I'd say as a result of them being unable to engage properly in the discussion and feeling slighted that their views aren't just being accepted or validated - dammit).

I could mention usernames and probably get lots of posters reading this agree with me, but instead I'll ask this somewhat rhetorical question - of the reports you get in CA over say a week or a month, how many are logged by the same posters? What reasoning is given? Are there trends that emerge? Or maybe firstly, is any sort of analysis like this actually done?

Adding more mods is, as I said earlier, the way to go. I'm not sure what you mean by the forum itself being intimidating though - maybe the scale of the effort involved to mod it, or dealing with angry/abusive user PMs? There is no excuse for the latter, but again context and details are important too. Why are they angry/frustrated?

Regardless though, if the mods selected aren't comfortable with the role then add new ones. Expand the gene pool as I suggested and you might find more willing posters who also might bring a fresh perspective in the process as well.

In truth, as I said, there are maybe half a dozen serial offenders who cause most of the disruption in CA threads. Now no one wants an echo chamber and every thread should have representation and discussion of all "sides" of the issue, but these particular posters only contributions seem to be to wind up the majority through contrarianism, baiting, gaslighting and so on. Again, it's very obvious to other or regular posters in the thread/forum and it's worrying that it's not necessarily the same for the mods who are asked to oversee and take actions.

What you're asking is for posters to in fact generate more reports (when you're basically saying that the mods are struggling to deal with reports effectively already). How is that a solution? More reactive bannings and sanctions based on half-reviewed complaints? Do you not see the futility and circularity of this idea. You're basically asking posters to make the situation worse for the remaining mods that there are.

Fundamentally it doesn't make sense and it doesn't benefit anyone nor address the underlying issues. If anything it makes that need for fresh perspectives even more important as well as helping to share the load among more than just 2 mods, one of whom is only sporadically able to engage because of his real world commitments anyway.

I'm deliberately asking provocative questions here to hopefully prompt you to stop and think about it and how making life harder for yourself as a mod - as you're asking - really benefits neither yourself, the forum itself or the users who suffer the consequences (and not just the direct actions taken).

[Deleted User]

Just another disgruntled mods are bullies thread. They keep picking me .....😭

_Kaiser_

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122102481#Comment_122102481

This was posted as I was typing the above but it provides a better insight to your perspective and for that I thank you. I agree that it's not an easy role and you - or anyone - shouldn't be driven anywhere by intimidation. That's always unacceptable regardless of where it comes from or what "side" they're on.

Nevertheless, I'd ask you consider the points being raised by myself and others in the same sense that you would want others to read the above. It's actually a really good post IMO as it shows the person behind the mod if that makes sense - so again, fair play for that.

But please understand that I and others "complaining" are doing so because we too have only the best interests of this site at heart. Like you, if we didn't we just wouldn't bother or bother saying anything either.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122102512#Comment_122102512

Now duplicating the same ground as was only recently discussed in detail in this very active thread...

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058344179/site-is-a-graveyard-how-can-boards-save-itself-threadbanned-users-in-1st-post

ToweringPerformance

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122102481#Comment_122102481

You are telling us how modding the site effects your real life and i am sorry you have to put up with that sh1t but when someone wants to discuss real life situations that effect them and their's you or other mods ban them because in your eyes it's an "anecdote". Once again it's obvious some anecdotes are allowed it seems and some are not.

The fact is by banning people who want to share real world real life situations you and the mod that banned me are in fact enabling the site to not flourish or survive but in fact peter out over an extended period of time. If this happens it will be a loss to the online community in Ireland yes but people will naturally migrate towards other forums that allow more open speech and expression of their views. Having a basket of people with views that aren't aligned with others is vital in any forum especially one that as you say you hope will flourish.

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122102415#Comment_122102415

Raising issues is normal, getting banned is not. At the point you have to accept that just because you want to discuss something or express a certain view, there no obligation on the forum to facilitate it and you have to decide if you want to continue using that service.