IAA Discussion - ground rules. Feedback wanted.

Steve · 11-05-2012 11:32pm #1

Hello all.

Following on from the previous thread about the IAA forums being closed, we would like your thoughts on establishing some ground rules on what discussion should be hosted here.

Historically, we have not allowed threads about this because - well - you could ask them directly on their own public forum.

Bear in mind the following:

1. Boards is not the IAA, we cannot demand answers to questions that only members are entitled to ask and there are avenues open to ask those questions.

2. Accusations of any wrongdoing are prohibited on boards because of libel legislation - if paid-up voting members have issues with what's going on then they need to contact them directly, not through here.

3. Wouldn't it be better if we could all get along..

So, please post your thoughts on how we could facilitate IAA discussion here without it descending into madness as it has in that past.
This is YOUR forum, it does not belong to the mods (well, actually it belongs mostly to the site owners but you get what I mean) so if we are to lift the ban on discussing IAA stuff then everyone has to buy into how we do it.

Please stay on-topic, the floor is yours.

MerryDespot · 12-05-2012 8:46am

On the non-members posting looking for info only open to iaa members - perhaps posters should e obliged to pst their iaa member number in their post title or at the end of their post? That way it is informally limited to those who are iaa members and as such have a genuine reason to post, rather than simply stirring.

Inari · 12-05-2012 9:00am

It doesn't need any special rules, or additional governing. I have never liked the heavy-handed "No IAA discussion. Period" since this is a discussion forum, and the IAA are the national governing body. You should never have to worry about segueing into parallel discussions, as that stifles the board of any stimulating topics.

Realistically the only rules that should be are the ones that already are:
No defammatory posts
Debate the point, not the poster

Doesn't that already cover it all? I mean the elephant in the room is that where IAA discussion is concerned you have one side of the fence looking for answers to questions that make them look/feel good, and the other doing the exact same for their side - rather than outright ban that discussion, just nurture better more helpful discussion. No point in everyone looking to the past - it doesn't help any.

gerrowadat · 12-05-2012 11:18am

The community is polarised on the IAA. With any issue where opinions differ, you're going to get trouble.

Most IAA threads started are troll threads. This includes andy_g the other day -- he knows who the IAA are, and is perfectly free to ask them about their plans himself. The thread wasn't helpful, no matter what spin you put on it. Steve, it's kind of disappointing that you didn't spot that a mile off.

All IAA discussion is going to do is bring the tinfoil hats out of the woodwork, so it's probably best if the membership let the committee know that they don't feel like closing down the forums is a good idea.

Also, given that two of the three active mods on here are close associates and regular customers of an extreme anti-IAA zealot, and have displayed massive bias on here for as long as they've been mods, I'm also not confident that IAA discussion on here will be fair and balanced in how it's administered when it inevitably descends into he-said she-said nonsense, as it always does.

andy_g · 12-05-2012 11:21pm

As I said elsewhere recently I do think that the Iaa should have some form of presence here on boards without the usual chaos that comes with it.

A Q&A section would be a good spot here on boards for the Iaa since all registration on the iaa site has been discontinued.

Anyway my 2cents for the moment.

gerrowadat · 12-05-2012 11:39pm

andy_g wrote: »

As I said elsewhere recently I do think that the Iaa should have some form of presence here on boards without the usual chaos that comes with it.

A Q&A section would be a good spot here on boards for the Iaa since all registration on the iaa site has been discontinued.

Anyway my 2cents for the moment.

They have a news thread, which they really should be updating more. Discussion rarely goes well.

andy_g · 12-05-2012 11:53pm

Yes while i agree they have a news thread its exactly that for news not discussion like this thread for setting down the guidelines for open discussion around the iaa.

Also in regard to allowing discussion new players that dont know what the iaa actually is may see the thread and ask about the iaa and may even become member's.

As people keep saying maybe if there was new blood on the committee there maybe more people that are return to the iaa in a new hope of it actually rebuilding it's trust.

Inari · 13-05-2012 12:09am

...there is new blood on the committee.

I hate to have to call a spade a spade, but seriously...this is Ireland. We tend to have a problem with everything, and love a good moan. If you walk into any pub, you will hear a hefty majority of people slating the government. These people will sound like they know something about the current (and past) situation, but when you grill them you realise it's only what's filtered down to them from more knowledgeable people...and that's exactly what we get with people about the IAA.

People moan about things that they A) do not understand/comprehend, or

want to understand/comprehend. If people were truly interested in the good of the association then people would be a lot more constructive, supportive and in general, active. But we're not. Moan we shall. And that's the way it will likely remain.

I am all for free discussion, and think it should be allowed, but why does it need separate rules? Where is the conspiracy and fear? Boards.ie has rules in place against defamatory posts, and moderators are there to enforce without bias, so wherever it gets personal you just warn, snip where necessary and keep discussion on track.

I understand Dave's points, but I just dislike banned topics...it's...stifling.

jayod30 · 13-05-2012 3:18am

If you check the the IAA FB page you'll see the explanation as to why they have been quiet of late, moving house, funeral, work, etc, etc. Judge them at the end of their tenure, not after a few months. Juggling work, family, IAA ain't an easy feat by any means.

War Machine 539 · 13-05-2012 10:04am

Can someone explain to me either on thread or via PM, what all the hatred of the IAA is actually about? Seems no one has anything nice to say about it!

gerrowadat · 13-05-2012 12:19pm

andy_g wrote: »

As people keep saying maybe if there was new blood on the committee there maybe more people that are return to the iaa in a new hope of it actually rebuilding it's trust.

What? The current committee are entirely 'new blood'. What are you talking about?

gerrowadat · 13-05-2012 12:22pm

War Machine 539 wrote: »

Can someone explain to me either on thread or via PM, what all the hatred of the IAA is actually about? Seems no one has anything nice to say about it!

Inari's post pretty much covers it. Irish people begrudge what they don't understand or can't control. The last time the IAA committee actually managed to get its main batch of naysayers to write down what they saw as problems, it was all either untrue or based on rumour or flawed understanding - http://www.irishairsoft.ie/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=401

Case in point: andy_g thinks the committee needs 'new blood' when it's entirely new blood. Rumour, hearsay, old information.

War Machine 539 · 13-05-2012 12:48pm

Cheers for that Gerrowadat, still no idea whats happened to create such a negative opinion of the IAA though, the link you posted seemed to paint IAA in a good light - which is by no means a criticism, but didn't really answer my question. I am trying to word this delicately so as not to offend anyone, but seeing as you wrote the post on the IAA forums, could I hear from someone, perhaps not quite so high up in the association I suppose, whose input might not be so biased? I have went back through Boards looking for info, but most threads descend into petty squabbling!
PMing me would probably be best,so as not to clog this thread.

I ask because I have been considering joining, but I want to know if it is worthwhile joining and I can't be sure given the barrage of negative criticism I have seen the IAA take.

Again I must stress this, I have worded this as delicately as I can, I am not trying to upset anyone, but this subject given past history is like walking on eggshells, and I am not out to upset or annoy anyone, I am just looking for unbiased information!

Gatling · 13-05-2012 12:52pm

Wow still can't beleave no 14 is still up despite the complete bull **** statement it is .
Iaa discussion should be free and open on here. boards .ie is the home of irish airsoft we all have a right to discuss our governing body free from personal attacks and insults ,its a community not a private club for a few select members or posters

Lemming · 13-05-2012 1:35pm

jayod30 wrote: »

If you check the the IAA FB page you'll see the explanation as to why they have been quiet of late, moving house, funeral, work, etc, etc. Judge them at the end of their tenure, not after a few months.

That sentence underscores why moving IAA interactions to social media is a bad idea, the operative words being "if you check the IAA FB page". Before I go any further I shall preface what I say by saying that I am no longer a member of the IAA (instead the UKAPU) for various reasons, the most obvious being that I no longer reside in the country.

Why the IAA move to FB/social media is a bad idea:

Not everyone has facebook accounts, or even wants them (I can include IT workers in that statement since I know several personally). If you simply want to read what the IAA has been saying, you can't without signing up to a third party's terms & conditions of which the IAA has no control over.
It is not a good medium for communicating anything other than short sound-bites.
It is not a stable medium; facebook have changed their layouts, site behaviour, and their T&C several times over in the last couple of years.
It is not an appropriate medium for official communication with members & public alike.

By all means take advantage of social media like facebook, twitter, etc. but to enhance communications, not substitute. Reliance on social media places a poor light on the association when stood next to other official or representative organisations.

TheDoc · 13-05-2012 2:42pm

Steve wrote: »

1. Boards is not the IAA, we cannot demand answers to questions that only members are entitled to ask and there are avenues open to ask those questions.

We dont need IAA to answer. We should be able to discuss IAA issues and affecting issue. The thing isnt bout getting them involved, its about discussing airsoft issues relevant, its an airsoft board.

2. Accusations of any wrongdoing are prohibited on boards because of libel legislation - if paid-up voting members have issues with what's going on then they need to contact them directly, not through here.

nothing unusual here

so if we are to lift the ban on discussing IAA

Also to point out it was never appended to the forum charter, and was a big dirty ad hoc ruling.

The most stupid in a running line of stupid boards rules.

Its an airsoft forum to discuss about airsoft, and the game nationally. The IAA is part of it, they represent all airsofters members or not, and discussion about them shouldnt be sidelined.

gerrowadat · 13-05-2012 3:00pm

War Machine 539 wrote: »

Again I must stress this, I have worded this as delicately as I can, I am not trying to upset anyone, but this subject given past history is like walking on eggshells, and I am not out to upset or annoy anyone, I am just looking for unbiased information!

Not at all, no offense taken. Find out information as you like, but validate it and take anything you hear with a grain of salt (including of course what I say).

For the record, I haven't had anything to do with the IAA since 2009, and haven't even attended a meeting in over a year :-)

gerrowadat · 13-05-2012 3:03pm

TheDoc wrote: »

Also to point out it was never appended to the forum charter, and was a big dirty ad hoc ruling.

The most stupid in a running line of stupid boards rules.

Its an airsoft forum to discuss about airsoft, and the game nationally. The IAA is part of it, they represent all airsofters members or not, and discussion about them shouldnt be sidelined.

I think the last time it was looked at, there was a lot of uppity about how if the IAA has time on here, IASRA had to as well.

IASRA fell on its ass and died due to lack of common sense, but I guess it wasn't all for nothing. According to their website, it looks like they finally discovered how babby is formed.

War Machine 539 · 13-05-2012 3:41pm

gerrowadat wrote: »

Not at all, no offense taken. Find out information as you like, but validate it and take anything you hear with a grain of salt (including of course what I say).

For the record, I haven't had anything to do with the IAA since 2009, and haven't even attended a meeting in over a year :-)

Believe me, given the controversy that seems to follow anything the IAA touches, I will be taking anything I hear with a salt mine.

Cheers for the info!

TheDoc · 13-05-2012 4:05pm

gerrowadat wrote: »

http://www.irishairsoft.ie/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=401

This was lol

fayer · 13-05-2012 5:03pm

Democracy is founded on free speech and the right to discuss and debate the actions and activities of government and those that govern, while I see the points that IAA threads on here normally get derailed by the tin-foil hats, I think discussion should be open.

This is not the place to post a question to the IAA, doing this is not the way to get a response, and some times is simply people soap boxing / trolling.

I agree with Lemming, the Facebook route is amateur, this is not a team kids there running, its a recognized national governing body. Social media is a resource that should be used, but as a secondary information tool, not as the only single avenue you use.

In a court of law the appearance of bias is bias enough. I think boards and the mods should look long and hard at themselves in this respect. No offense to anyone, but when mods are regulars / friends of / marshals on the site of an outspoken detractor of the association and several of its past committees, it makes it hard for any activities related to these individuals or threads to be considered impartial, even when they might well be impartial and fair.

Its possible that political threads (and we are talking about politics here) will require simply more man power than the mods can provide to insure that logic and sanity prevail.

In general we should be allowed to debate the actions of those that represent us, but this arena carries the large shadow of bias in my opinion.

Steve

Nuke1973 · 13-05-2012 6:55pm

Well i for one don't mind if the IAA is open for discussion on boards and I'll do my best to answer queries here be they from members or not. The association represents all airsofters in Ireland, even the ones who are net (yet) members.

As has been pointed out it is all new blood on the committee this year and this has steepened the learning curve a little and we hope to co-opt a few new committee members shortly to help with the work load.

Also the facebook page is a tool and while we recognise that not everyone wants to partake in social media we would be remiss to ignore it.

We are not perfect, but we are all airsofters with the best of intentions for the community at heart. The biggest issue as I see it is that Irish airsoft has lost it's sense of community. All the bitching, moaning and fighting that goes on(not talking about the IAA) undermines the sport and will kill it eventually if we can't all pull in the same direction. I'm not saying everyone has to be friends but when it's about the sport then put the petty grudges and personal grievences to one side and just play the game we all love.

Pat Noonan,
IAA PRO

Steve · 18-05-2012 1:47am

Good feedback so far, please keep it coming.

I know we can apply existing bards rules to this but, in fairness, that would mean having to sanction and / or ban people when things inevitably get nasty.. nobody wants that if we can avoid it..

Steve · 31-05-2012 9:29pm

Any more opinions?

I'd like to have consensus on this soon - let's say by the weekend just to put a time limit on it.

o1s1n · 06-06-2012 10:59am

If it can be discussed without descending into a farcical airing of dirty laundry than it would be nice to see the community has matured enough to allow it.

I've been out away from airsoft for a long time so for all I know it's completely different now - but back in times passed it took so much effort to moderate (from removing libelous posts, to blatant personal insults, floods of PMs to trawl through - even some death threats) that we just had to put a stop to it. It was far too time consuming - not to mention just plain stressful for everyone involved.

It does seem a bit more sedate in here now though. So it's probably time to give it another go.

TheDoc · 06-06-2012 7:02pm

o1s1n wrote: »

If it can be discussed without descending into a farcical airing of dirty laundry than it would be nice to see the community has matured enough to allow it.

I've been out away from airsoft for a long time so for all I know it's completely different now - but back in times passed it took so much effort to moderate (from removing libelous posts, to blatant personal insults, floods of PMs to trawl through - even some death threats) that we just had to put a stop to it. It was far too time consuming - not to mention just plain stressful for everyone involved.

It does seem a bit more sedate in here now though. So it's probably time to give it another go.

<snip>

There are a number of reason why the talk will be fine and and should be encouraged

1) The modded threads back then was when IASRA was in its inception. That horse of ****e is long gone and there won't be two sides fueding like that for some time. Moderators did a decent job in removing the bollox, yet allowing the conversation and debates to flow and continue. Significantly more workload, yet now we have double the mods, there is no excuse.

2) Its the national organisation, how on gods earth you can expect to have a community forum, where you cant talk about decisions and things about the national governing body, is ludacrous. Its like the Soccer forum banning talk about the FAI. What? Because the IAA post and read here we have to be all tight arsed about it?

3) There is more slander and libel that goes on elsewhere on the site by the second then what gets posted here. So it needs to be stopped being used as an excuse to avoid having actually interesting threads and debates, either site wide things get tougher and more strict, or you can let it slide like most other forums do, its used way to much here as an excuse for harsh moderation.

Fair enough you need to cover your arses, but it will only ever be the same old same old who ever threaten legal action, and has been pointed out more then enough, its always empty threats with no followup, mostly because their is the realisation it is not slanderous or libellous considering there is documented proof. Thats not relating to any specific incidents or individuals, but the clever people don't make claims without having their arses covered.

I've got atleast 4-5 legal threats from previous or current posters here and it got to the point where it was embarrassing, having to e-mail and ring asking did they maybe spell the address wrong or something. For obvious outragous things like name calling and the likes, thats fair enough. But if its a valid comment or statement, that has an benefit to the discussion as a counter arguement or whatever, it should be allowed to stand once it is not absolutely disgusting or obviously requires moving.

4) The forum is dead. There is **** all traffic that comes through anymore, and even less actual interesting threads or discussions. This can probably be drawn back to link with about the time that the IAA discussion was first put aside. Everyone loves a bit of drama, but the IAA threads also revealed the most thrilling and stimulating discussions, debates and arguements this forum ever had.

From it, people got involved, and eventually ended up helping working with the IAA. People got educated and got their views across. Alot of people earned the communities respect by putting forward calculated and proper arguements and counter arguements.

The loss of the IAA discussions ment a loss in interest in the forum, a loss of thrill and getting a bit of grit between your teeth getting in for a row. As such most influential people in the community lost interest and have gone elsewhere.

Whilst there is other and probably more potent reasons for the exodus of alot of former regulars, it cannot be ignored the fact that the loss of these core individuals will most likely result in the IAA discussions that take place henceworth, to be extremely easily moderated, maintaned and run.

In fairness just look at the quality and content of threads in the last few weeks/months against the ones from the absolute pinnacle of IAA threads. Its easy moderation.

And at the end of the day, we have had 150 million conversations about moderation , and I'm not getting into it again, since it just falls on deaf ears all the time, but you cannot just outlaw conversation and discussions to make your moderation life easier.

As Oisin said, back when he was modding the IAA threads, and just general population of the forum was as high as it ever was, and in fairness it was daunting to mod.

But there was himself, TheMaster, KDouglas and lemming and possibly one more or something. And they got by fine, and were for the most part amicible in how they dealt with stuff. For alongtime there was only like 1-2 active mods

We now have Andy,Thermo,Steve,Deburca and Dogwatch, for possibly the quietest period of the forum. There should be absolutely ZERO workload on you for moderation, and re-opening the IAA discussions won't bring anymore.

Dogwatch · 06-06-2012 7:57pm

TheDoc wrote: »

<snip>

There are a number of reason why the talk will be fine and and should be encouraged

1) The modded threads back then was when IASRA was in its inception. That horse of ****e is long gone and there won't be two sides fueding like that for some time. Moderators did a decent job in removing the bollox, yet allowing the conversation and debates to flow and continue. Significantly more workload, yet now we have double the mods, there is no excuse.

2) Its the national organisation, how on gods earth you can expect to have a community forum, where you cant talk about decisions and things about the national governing body, is ludacrous. Its like the Soccer forum banning talk about the FAI. What? Because the IAA post and read here we have to be all tight arsed about it?

3) There is more slander and libel that goes on elsewhere on the site by the second then what gets posted here. So it needs to be stopped being used as an excuse to avoid having actually interesting threads and debates, either site wide things get tougher and more strict, or you can let it slide like most other forums do, its used way to much here as an excuse for harsh moderation.

Fair enough you need to cover your arses, but it will only ever be the same old same old who ever threaten legal action, and has been pointed out more then enough, its always empty threats with no followup, mostly because their is the realisation it is not slanderous or libellous considering there is documented proof. Thats not relating to any specific incidents or individuals, but the clever people don't make claims without having their arses covered.

I've got atleast 4-5 legal threats from previous or current posters here and it got to the point where it was embarrassing, having to e-mail and ring asking did they maybe spell the address wrong or something. For obvious outragous things like name calling and the likes, thats fair enough. But if its a valid comment or statement, that has an benefit to the discussion as a counter arguement or whatever, it should be allowed to stand once it is not absolutely disgusting or obviously requires moving.

4) The forum is dead. There is **** all traffic that comes through anymore, and even less actual interesting threads or discussions. This can probably be drawn back to link with about the time that the IAA discussion was first put aside. Everyone loves a bit of drama, but the IAA threads also revealed the most thrilling and stimulating discussions, debates and arguements this forum ever had.

From it, people got involved, and eventually ended up helping working with the IAA. People got educated and got their views across. Alot of people earned the communities respect by putting forward calculated and proper arguements and counter arguements.

The loss of the IAA discussions ment a loss in interest in the forum, a loss of thrill and getting a bit of grit between your teeth getting in for a row. As such most influential people in the community lost interest and have gone elsewhere.

Whilst there is other and probably more potent reasons for the exodus of alot of former regulars, it cannot be ignored the fact that the loss of these core individuals will most likely result in the IAA discussions that take place henceworth, to be extremely easily moderated, maintaned and run.

In fairness just look at the quality and content of threads in the last few weeks/months against the ones from the absolute pinnacle of IAA threads. Its easy moderation.

And at the end of the day, we have had 150 million conversations about moderation , and I'm not getting into it again, since it just falls on deaf ears all the time, but you cannot just outlaw conversation and discussions to make your moderation life easier.

As Oisin said, back when he was modding the IAA threads, and just general population of the forum was as high as it ever was, and in fairness it was daunting to mod.

But there was himself, TheMaster, KDouglas and lemming and possibly one more or something. And they got by fine, and were for the most part amicible in how they dealt with stuff. For alongtime there was only like 1-2 active mods

We now have Andy,Thermo,Steve,Deburca and Dogwatch, for possibly the quietest period of the forum. There should be absolutely ZERO workload on you for moderation, and re-opening the IAA discussions won't bring anymore.

WARNING ISSUED FOR BACK SEAT MODERATION AND OFF TOPIC

WolfPack · 07-06-2012 1:31am

TheDoc wrote: »

<snip>
The loss of the IAA discussions ment a loss in interest in the forum, a loss of thrill and getting a bit of grit between your teeth getting in for a row. As such most influential people in the community lost interest and have gone elsewhere.

<Snip> Off topic

Vents · 07-06-2012 5:03pm

Dogwatch wrote: »

WARNING ISSUED FOR BACK SEAT MODERATION AND OFF TOPIC

This is a joke right? It just seems to be missing this

andy_g · 07-06-2012 5:14pm

Vents wrote: »

This is a joke right? It just seems to be missing this

This is the IAA Discussion and ground rules feedback thread, not a moderation issue's thread take it to pm with the mod involved.

Moderation Discussion is not permitted on thread.

Tommyboy71 · 07-06-2012 10:19pm

I think that if an open IAA thread is put back up here, it should be moderated by an impartial Mod i.e. Someone who does not feel as if they have been "wronged"* by any past committee or committee member.

I would like to see Steve or even a non-airsoft Mod for the job. As it is an information channel for a Sports membership and committee, I cannot see why this would not be possible. This person should be free from any coersion for moderation decisions made.

There is too much history between the majority of the current mods and the past IAA committes/committee members for impartial moderation to take place. I don't say this to stir the pot but simply to state a fact.

My 2 cents. Do with it as you please.

* Wronged = online or face to face slagging matches, personal grudges etc.

IAA Discussion - ground rules. Feedback wanted.

Comments