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

(Site is a graveyard - How can boards save itself?) Any update?

1434446484970

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 91,031 ✭✭✭✭JP Liz V1




  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 41,597 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    My approach has always been that tweets have utility in helping make a point but should not constitute the point in and of themselves outside of a thread for memes and links. This is my mentality as a Politics mod though. I'm not speaking on behalf of any other mod.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Administrators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,563 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Big Bag of Chips


    Unless the content is very offensive it is usually left to show posters why a certain post was actioned, why a poster was banned etc.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,984 ✭✭✭✭Ha Long Bay


    If the poster is previously thread banned would it not make sense to delete the post and just add a note to state why the post was deleted.

    This would still act as a reminder to all.

    Also any feedback regarding the twitter link dumping?



  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 20,608 Mod ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    I think it would depend on the content of the post tbh. That's just how I see it though, mod might be able to give a better reason for either leaving the comment with a visible warning or deleting the post.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I actually don't agree. I think if you express an opinion there is onus on you to back it up, especially if it's contentious one, or an opinion that is provably incorrect. It is a discussion forum.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,984 ✭✭✭✭Ha Long Bay


    That's a valid opinion. I would think though thread banned which in theory does not happen lightly should mean just that and the content of the post deleted with a mod note if possible and a sanction.



  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 20,608 Mod ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    The threadban could be because of an accumulation of lesser transgressions, rather than an one outright offensive post.

    It's not a black and white issue, someone could just be a timesink over a period of time and haven't adjusted their posting style despite repeated warnings.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,984 ✭✭✭✭Ha Long Bay


    It's still a thread ban though. We won't agree on this so ill leave it there.

    I was giving feedback not dictating how rules should be applied.

    I would add as a suggestion if a poster racks up say 3+ thread bans in CA it's time to start looking at further actions.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 18,942 CMod ✭✭✭✭The Black Oil


    Site is a graveyard - How can boards save itself?

    I'd hope it can. Vanilla was and remains a disaster, with any progress being very slow and half baked. The how part of the above question is really difficult answer. I can't of any message board I've used elsewhere that's thriving now. Participation is so much less. It's not instant gratification form of browsing the web a la social media, it never was. That was a strength, imo. I come to boards for a lot of reasons - fun, sharing, learning, chatting and to get a sense of what the Irish online community is thinking. I might come across an article on here that I'll then pass on IRL. There is still a lot knowledge here across cooking, games, sport/fitness, cars, music, gardening, tech and phones and so on, and importantly, a willingness to engage. Vanilla aside, the TV forum suffers simply because there are too many TV shows airing and fewer still get much traction on here (if it's subtitled, good luck), unless a few posters are devoted to it or it becomes a real word of mouth type of show, with half the internet glued to it.

    Unfortunately, with political topics and social issues, I feel this is a symptom of the wider shift in the internet. Group A says something, Group B shouts back, state of ya and the pitchforks come out. Twitter pre-Musk was an example of this. Myself, I left an IRL committee after 7 years partly due to how some of this was spilling over into communication and group dynamics. Last year, a big follow up to a very successful 2022 project was later disbanded, not even getting to the point of terms of reference or anything written. Due to internal politics. Something about the past several years that makes holding the middle ground feel difficult and frustrating, I don't mean in the sense of labels…I wish debates were largely kept to points on the merit. I've not watched the full thing, but it's Stephen Fry and Jordan Peterson countering political correctness in a debate. Fry cites Oscar Wilde's line about the Oxford manor or 'the ability to play gracefully with ideas' and this disappearing from our world.



  • Advertisement
  • Administrators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,563 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Big Bag of Chips


    You've posted the same question 7 times now and been given the same answer from multiple people. It's not that big a deal to leave the post on the thread and warn/forum ban whatever the poster. There are far more pressing issues to be dealt with. If a post is offensive it will always be removed. If it's not offensive it might be left there.



  • Administrators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,563 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Big Bag of Chips


    Yes, it's a discussion forum. But you have no control over anyone else. So if a poster posts an opinion and doesn't feel bothered to back it up or prove it or debate it then there's nothing you can do about that. I'd suggest not getting too worked up over it when it happens. Mildly irritated maybe, but then move on.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,487 ✭✭✭Vote4Squirrels


    It’s the case surely that something can be against the rules - say it is widely off topic but it’s not offensive then it would stay up, is that right ?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,984 ✭✭✭✭Ha Long Bay


    I posted 7 times in a feedback thread each time addressing other posters and raising questions.

    Thanks for your feedback.



  • Administrators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,563 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Big Bag of Chips


    Moderator discretion is always used. One moderator may decide to delete it. Another would leave it.

    I don't know why this tiny thing has become a 2 page issue!! It's a complete non-issue.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,487 ✭✭✭Vote4Squirrels


    For sure! Sorry I just peeped in at the end of th discussion!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,373 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    If it is a poster expressing an opinion, how they see things, and it is just a post or two, that's one thing.

    But when it happens again and again, as poster derail(s) a thread with dodgy claims, scurrilous rumours, doesn't engage with challenges to the content, doesn't support the claim with evidence or links to garbage source…

    That's much more than a mild irritation… and should be subject to mod action.

    And tbh if people weren't that bothered about it they probably wouldn't still be here on boards posting away, at least not in contested forums like CA.

    A lot of people are moving on, they keep going and don't come back.

    That leads me onto the elephant in the room, which is that the contributions we haven't heard about, which is the 'exit interviews' of the people who left.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Of course, I'm not suggesting that people should be forced to reply, but if I express opinion on here I do feel an onus to back it up when asked and I think most people do too.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,606 ✭✭✭nachouser


    I can see another week or so of this and BBOC will be like, yeah, I'm done.

    Own your posts and get over it. None of us are Descartes. It's a message board.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,150 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    It's kind of the nature of anonymous discussion boards though isn't it: a lot of people are going to claim things as fact that they can't really back up.

    It's irritating for sure, but the way I read what BBoC had to say was that you have to accept after a while that if the evidence to back up claims isn't forthcoming then there isn't much at the end of the day that you can really do about it. It isn't a court of law, you can't force people or obligate them to supply references or evidence etc.

    It would be great if everyone was stringent about it and posted only verifiable facts, but, let's face it, a lot of the appeal for some people about places like boards is that you can just say things, without having much to back it up.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 295 ✭✭Soc_Alt


    The only people left are legacy posters who are trying to save their post counts and join dates.

    Everyone else moved on.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I don't disagree, but I think if a poster continuously did this I think it would be OK if other posters pointed it out to them. Would that be derailing the thread? Possibly.

    I'm thinking of a very specific example in a forum on here where a poster(a/c closed a long time ago) would continuously post very reactionary comments, but hardly ever reply if those posts were challenged. It went on for years, changed the whole tone of that forum and imo had a detrimental affect on the whole culture of the place. I always thought that this was called "soapboxing", but I now think I might be getting my internet forum definitions mixed up.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 35,373 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Iirc I have seen mod warnings on thread in CA for not posting constructively.

    To me that would fall under that heading.

    It seems like soap boxing, hit and run posting or maybe flame baiting / drive by trolling.

    Lot of lingo!

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Posts: 6,597 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    One of the biggest complaint of some in this discussion is been asked to support their claims with evidence. This is because a lot of posters are arguing purely from opinion and claiming it as fact.

    Should we accept that this sort of soapboxing as acceptable behaviour within a discussion ? It's highly disruptive to developing a discussion and yet it's what many want to be given a free pass on.

    So in the context of this discussion I think soapboxing in this way should be actionable and should not be accepted behaviour. We can't force a person to support their position but we should be able to sanction and complain when it's the whole basis of a person's debate.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,819 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    But often we are not talking about opinions, we are talking about claimed facts.

    It's very common for a poster to make a certain claim (for example, the government spend X on a certain project, or that there unemployed people are entitled to X, or that there are X number of immigrants, etc), and not provide any evidence for that.

    In response posters go out of their way to examine this - they find and offer evidence or even proof that this is not the case, and the original poster does not acknowledge or respond in any way.

    This is a form of bad faith posting that is absolutely poisonous in CA, but virtually unmoddable under current rules. Some of these thoroughly debunked claims have been doing the rounds for years.

    I can't tell you the number of times I've typed out a reply to somebody, and then started to ask myself…."do I really want to do this? Do I really want to start post this and get no reply, or else get involved in some pointless back and forth with that poster who history tells me is a bad faith poster? Do I really want to be getting replies from a bunch of other posters asking irrelevant questions, or offering whataboutery or strawman arguments?"

    And in the end I just don't bother, because it's just not worth it.



  • Administrators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,563 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Big Bag of Chips


    It has been raised before should Moderators fact check posts. I'm going to tell you now, no!

    There is enough time taken up actually moderating without having to chase posters around asking them to back up their claims. Posters themselves can do this on thread, but posters then also need to accept that if a poster doesn't come back that there's nothing you can do about that.

    As I said before Moderators can't just ban someone because other posters don't like them or find them irritating to deal with. A picture of trolling, bad faith etc has to be built up before a moderator can step in. Not everyone is equal. Not everyone is confident in their argument and someone might post something they absolutely believe to be true because they read it somewhere else. They then come here and repeat it but find it difficult to find evidence of. It doesn't mean much other than the poster is influenced by what they hear, but not articulate enough to stand behind their point. That's not against the site rules though!

    You never know who you are replying to here. Sometimes people will be trolling for a reaction. Sometimes people will honestly believe something but can't really say why. You can discuss all you like, but you can't demand answers or expect to change someone's mind. As I said if people worried more about their own posting habits than those of others the place would be a lot less hostile.



  • Posts: 6,597 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    It's a pattern of behaviour which is the issue. What certain contributors want here is to be able to make statements and not be asked to support them with evidence - they want that to be part of the charter. Why ? Because they know their positions are not evidence based and never will be. They want protection.



  • Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 56,252 Mod ✭✭✭✭Necro


    Especially in CA! I can understand a more technical forum requiring a poster to provide evidence, a Science or a Geography forum for example. There you would have a lesser volume of posts so the mod can monitor the forum a lot easier.

    But in CA - absolutely not. What I used to do was, using reported posts I'd go into the thread and do a scan of a page or two before and after the report for context (because, nine times out of ten if a thread gets heated there's going to be at least one or two more questionable posts, sometimes more), and then action the post if it was warranted, or sometimes post an on-thread warning to get the thread back on track.

    Absolutely no time to fact check when you might have 50-100 reported posts to get through after work!



  • Administrators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,563 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Big Bag of Chips


    A pattern of behaviour will be addressed. But it has to be a pattern. This is where reporting posts is important. One or 2 posts alone isn't an issue. A pattern of posts will build a picture that moderators can deal with.

    But I have to say, I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt. I tend to think that someone posting something and then unable to back it up isn't exactly "firing on all cylinders" so I know to largely avoid interacting with that poster. That you can't have an intelligent conversation or reasonable debate because they simply don't possess the skill. It's quite easy to avoid interacting with them! Especially on busy threads. I have nobody on my ignore list, but I do ignore quite a few posters and immediately skim past their posts. Because I know if I read them I'll get annoyed and feel compelled to reply! But I've learned nothing I say, no matter how intelligent or articulate I think my argument might be, nothing I say will ever change these people's minds! And that's ok. I don't need to. I don't have to live with these people, I don't have to work beside them, I don't have to socialise with them. So I simply move past and live a less stressful life than if I felt it my duty to make them argue with me!

    It makes life so much simpler when you accept that!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,819 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    A picture of trolling, bad faith etc has to be built up before a moderator can step in.

    Agreed, but I would say that the lack of moderators/moderation/presence on threads/familarity with poster history means that it's almost impossible for this picture to be built up, or as you say later, for a pattern to be established.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement