Wolfe Tone wrote: » Darragh just be honest and say it is about the advertising.
copacetic wrote: » What is a disgrace is when someone takes time to explain in detail where they are coming from and all they get back is a concerted personal attack that appears to have nothing to do with the important topic being discussed.
TheZohan wrote: » A change that needs to happen? Says who? Look at the Feed Forward forum, a lot of it is change for the sake of change bull crap. The site is what it is and is growing, you don't need to meddle with this.I can recall a thread being deleted by you Darragh because a competitor of the company mentioned was in negotiations re: advertising. That's not to run the site, it's a bloody disgrace that the likes of this is going on behind the backs of users.
My name is URL wrote: » Reputation and advertising can go hand in hand, surely? I get the impression (though could be completely off the mark) that it's more about Boards wanting to position itself as something more than an online community tbh. If celebrities and other media organisations have a dim view of what boards is about then it's harder for them to do so. Personally, I don't see why the site needs to be changed from what it is atm. I still don't like the amount of abuse which is present in many threads though.
We're a platform for communities, certainly - we see that in many forums - but I'd be confident in saying that the community (as TheZohan would have you believe exists) is a tiny percentage of the overall userbase on Boards.ie - and I point to projects like /Vote or the feedback we get around new initiatives as evidence. Boards.ie is not a community website - it's a website for communities. We certainly don't think of it in the office as a "community" website, but hey, it's a big website - happy to be open to correction on it. See, from where I'm sitting, with far more access to the statistics and knowing how many threads we get on site a week (approximately 7,000), how many posts we get a day (approximately 20,000) and how many users log in a week (29,500+ last week) coupled with the traffic the site gets (over 4.6 million uniques since January 1), what I'm seeing is most people don't care. They don't know or want to know. They come to read the topics they're interested in, participate in the forums they want to and post about what they want rather than think "Oh, I'm part of a community here". To say Boards.ie is a "community" is like saying there's a mobile phone community in Ireland - that anyone with a mobile is part of a community. They're not - people just use the site.
If celebrities and other media organisations have a dim view of what boards is about then it's harder for them to do so.
My name is URL wrote: » Personally, I don't see why the site needs to be changed from what it is atm.
TheZohan wrote: » If you see a personal attack may I suggest that you report it via the report button.
Darragh wrote: » Just so you know, I've reported that comment. I'm telling you this because I want to be as honest about it as I am about everything else.
TheZohan wrote: » Can you pm me, thanks.
Darragh wrote: » And so it continues. Okay, so what is abuse? Well, I don't think that it's necessary to call someone - anyone - a c*nt. I don't think it's necessary to refer to someone, as in Snyper's examples earlier, saying "so and so is a bignose cnut" or "so and so is a wanker" when you're discussing them or work they did. I suppose in some ways it depends on the forum culture and the tone of the thread, but overall I don't think it adds anything to the conversation, or is necessary and/or more to the point, is something that someone would say to the person face to face. It's like commenting on the post, not the poster as per our site guidelines. Legal is a concern, yes, but not solely the primary one. Reputation is as big as abuse. Once again it comes down to what people want the site to be known for, what people want their membership to reflect and what people think of Boards.ie when they hear it. "That site where everyone just abuses everyone" is not particularly the reputation I want, but is, unfortunately, one of the reputations we have. I realise this is a big change for the site in some respects, but it's one that needs to happen. That's why we're having this debate in public. I realise too I can be shown a few thousand examples of where abuse has gone unchecked but that really does have to stop. Is there any case someone can make where we SHOULD allow abuse?
Darragh wrote: » No. You want to have an open discussion, let's have one. I have nothing to hide, but you've just accused me in writing of doing something that affects this site and its users and that is something we need to deal with.
TheZohan wrote: » I think it would be best if we have the discussion off thread first and then post the results. It's not hiding anything it's just good housekeeping, you'll understand when you pm me. You currently have your profile set to no Pm's.
it's a bloody disgrace that the likes of this is going on behind the backs of users.
Darragh wrote: » It's me primarily. I'm still waiting for the proof. Are you now also accusing Dav of possibly doing the same thing?
Darragh wrote: » going back to an earlier post in this thread that I made, Boards is not an online community .
Wolfe Tone wrote: » The reason why I said that Darragh is that you doubted the reaction to the interview would lead to any more celebs doing interviews. Strangely that reaction was deleted and you cite legal reasons. In the last few minutes I have reported two posts both of which clearly insult the owner of a pub. If we are going to be consistent surely these must be deleted too to remove the possibility of boards being sued for defamation(you claimed boards was at a risk of this, I disagree with regards to insults) as a result of insults. You go on about the sites reputation, and not wanting it to be one of people getting slagged. It is my opinion that this boils down to money, nothing to do with users. Its my opinion that the thread was deleted in a foolish attempt to censor the reaction and not scare off potential interviews with more celebs. And fair enough. I just dont like to be misled. I dont think that the thread was deleted for legal reasons whatsoever.
Wolfe Tone wrote: » In the last few minutes I have reported two posts both of which clearly insult the owner of a pub. If we are going to be consistent surely these must be deleted too to remove the possibility of boards being sued for defamation(you claimed boards was at a risk of this, I disagree with regards to insults) as a result of insults.
It is my opinion that this boils down to money, nothing to do with users.
Darragh wrote: » I'm not citing legal reasons with that thread.
Darragh wrote: » And so it continues. Okay, so what is abuse? Well, I don't think that it's necessary to call someone - anyone - a c*nt. I don't think it's necessary to refer to someone, as in Snyper's examples earlier, saying "so and so is a bignose cnut" or "so and so is a wanker" when you're discussing them or work they did. I suppose in some ways it depends on the forum culture and the tone of the thread, but overall I don't think it adds anything to the conversation, or is necessary and/or more to the point, is something that someone would say to the person face to face. It's like commenting on the post, not the poster as per our site guidelines.
Darragh wrote: » Legal is a concern, yes, but not solely the primary one. Reputation is as big as abuse. Once again it comes down to what people want the site to be known for, what people want their membership to reflect and what people think of Boards.ie when they hear it. "That site where everyone just abuses everyone" is not particularly the reputation I want, but is, unfortunately, one of the reputations we have. I realise this is a big change for the site in some respects, but it's one that needs to happen. That's why we're having this debate in public. I realise too I can be shown a few thousand examples of where abuse has gone unchecked but that really does have to stop.
Darragh wrote: » Is there any case someone can make where we SHOULD allow abuse?
TheZohan wrote: » A change that needs to happen? Says who? Look at the Feed Forward forum, a lot of it is change for the sake of change bull crap. The site is what it is and is growing, you don't need to meddle with this.
I can recall a thread being deleted by you Darragh because a competitor of the company mentioned was in negotiations re: advertising. That's not to run the site, it's a bloody disgrace that the likes of this is going on behind the backs of users.
Charming, just pop that out there, when you admit that you're not even sure it's true. The irony considering the discussion of defamation that's been going on in this thread. That's really no way to post dude. In fact, that's disgraceful.
Wolfe Tone wrote: » Going by whats being said Darragh would have to sue the company he works for!
Darragh wrote: » Firstly I didn't ask for any threads to be removed or deleted. I posted my comment in that thread and then left it open for discussion. What you're referring to is the exchange below...............................
Just on this point. Both yourself, Dav and a few admins (can't remember which off the top of my head but I could check if needs be) said that my actions (re: the sticky and the mcsavage thread) could have got the site in legal trouble.
southsiderosie wrote: » If someone makes a living on their looks, then criticism of their looks should be up for grabs. If someone makes a living on heaping abuse on others for laughs, why would people on boards not be able to do the same? Just as the forum shapes the tone of the debate, so should the person being discussed. I think the bigger problem here though is that there seems to be a perception among users that comments are being labeled as "abuse" when they apply to individuals who are powerful and/or wealthy enough to have a solicitor call the admins. Whether this is true or not, it is how it comes across from the user end.
NeedaNewName wrote: » I think Darragh has been quite open and honest in his discussion in this thread and has mentioned that advertising is important, it now pays wages and keeps the site ticking over.
This isn't about advertising - I don't earn anything more if we have more advertisers. We have a company who handles our sales. If the shareholders want the site to earn more money, then that's their job. Not mine.
This isn't anything to do with advertising. To confine the conversation to that is not only short sighted, it's actually insulting AND shows me how little you understand the actual operation of a site like that. Advertising is all well and good but if we dropped all rules, regulations and guidelines tomorrow, stopped all moderation and opened the floodgates (completely ignoring the legal side of things) and had not only abuse, but porn, torrents and all the other stuff we keep out of the forums, we'd still get advertising, albeit not of the quality that we aspire to. You won't see (m)any dodgy ads on this site simply because when we're told about them, we get rid of them and they're pretty much always on the Google network anyways.
TheZohan wrote: » I'm 90% certain it was a thread deleted by you with a footnote re advertising, if it wasn't you then it was Drav and I apologise unreservedly. Is it yourself or Drav that deals with advertising?
TheZohan wrote: » I can recall a thread being deleted by you Darragh because a competitor of the company mentioned was in negotiations re: advertising. That's not to run the site, it's a bloody disgrace that the likes of this is going on behind the backs of users
a statement that tends to injure a person’s reputation in the eyes of reasonable members of society
Des wrote: » Normal users don't have access to deleted threads, anywhere.
snyper wrote: » ..and there is the issue It really imo has little to do with Dave mac and more to do with some members fear of losing what they love. Members do feel part of a communitty here, im a proud boardsie, and while i couldnt care less if some halfwit calls boardsies fcukwits, others do care - and some members fear the idea of the community changing to something other than what they have come to love.
Are you happy to be a member of a website that is primarily known for abuse?
snyper wrote: » Darragh, i feel you might be taken the criticism here too personal, and also i think some parties are too vehemently against any commercialisation of the site But the one thing i strongly disagree with is saying boards.ie is not an online community -if its not a community, its just another website.
