Feedback Folks!!!

dr.bollocko · 15-05-2013 08:24PM

1ZRed wrote: »

From what loads of the veterans who've been here years have said it seems to be the opposite

Veterans were saying that in 2006 when I started posting too. They also said it about every other forum. And reddit. And wherever else.

No matter where you're posting online there's somebody who was there first who swears it was better years ago before you were there.

dr.bollocko · 15-05-2013 08:41PM

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Very few posts are illegible in my experience and the reason the grammar Nazism clause is in the charter is becuase it was happening on a daily basis and multiple times. Mostly pulling on small points to try and belittle or flame a poster. It happened enough that it needed to be addressed.

Analogous to the above we also have a no txtspk rule in the charter. This allows us to call the lazy to task if needed. But as Micky said. Grammar nazism is mostly used to simply insult or belittle other posters.

1ZRed · 15-05-2013 08:47PM

dr.bollocko wrote: »

Veterans were saying that in 2006 when I started posting too. They also said it about every other forum. And reddit. And wherever else.

No matter where you're posting online there's somebody who was there first who swears it was better years ago before you were there.

That seems very reasonable actually, maybe it's the cyclical nature of the forum and how it seems to keep repeating itself that makes it appear that way.

I'd like the religion and politics threads to die down a bit as well as the dole bashing and scumbag threads because sometimes that's all there is in AH and they're always the same.

mathepac · 15-05-2013 09:01PM

Thanks to whoever altered the offensive thread title, posted by a moderator apparently.

Deleted User wrote: »

.... All feedback is welcome and will be taken on board

Apparently not. No need for the smiley, I get the ironic joke.

Which moderator decides whether all feedback is welcome or only constructive contributions as defined by a different moderator? You can't keep changing the thread rules mid thread or is that just for my benefit?

Note the rush by moderators to thank the moderator for attempting to reprimand me mid-thread while I'm complying with the thread rules specified in the OP.

K-9 · 15-05-2013 09:08PM

1ZRed wrote: »

That seems very reasonable actually, maybe it's the cyclical nature of the forum and how it seems to keep repeating itself that makes it appear that way.

I'd like the religion and politics threads to die down a bit as well as the dole bashing and scumbag threads because sometimes that's all there is in AH and they're always the same.

I do think they are cyclical with troughs and peaks, religion probably more common lately which is driven by events, gun threads would be another example lately.

There's a big demand for them though, plenty of new and old posters are interested, and posters who are sick of them can just skip the thread and concentrate on the lighter stuff or whatever they want to read.

TheUsual · 15-05-2013 09:10PM

I love After Hours my favourite place for news as well as humour, because people do post some interesting threads that aren't on the news yet.

Mods do a grand job, no complaints from me.
I have a number of head-bangers on my ignore list, so I don't have to read their twittering replies but the mods have to read all posts to make sure there's nothing offensive.
So fair play lads and lasses for going through so much daily posts, especially Boston or Ohio news stories, must be like a tidal wave of posts for ye.

Threads I don't like are trolling ones like, for example, that guy who picked a fight with 2 lads over a ball and his dog in a park. It never happened, but he loves the attention, so the thread is huge now.

K-9 · 15-05-2013 09:23PM

mathepac wrote: »

Thanks to whoever altered the offensive thread title, posted by a moderator apparently.Apparently not. No need for the smiley, I get the ironic joke.

Which moderator decides whether all feedback is welcome or only constructive contributions as defined by a different moderator? You can't keep changing the thread rules mid thread or is that just for my benefit?

Note the rush by moderators to thank the moderator for attempting to reprimand me mid-thread while I'm complying with the thread rules specified in the OP.

Mod:

You didn't give feedback on AH, just the par for the course general grumble on moderation.

crockholm · 15-05-2013 09:51PM

How about if a poster becomes insulting or aggressive towards another poster, that instead of an automatic ban for the former,a mod could let the latter know that if they feel sufficiently abused,said poster would be banned.

Just speaking from experience,someone ruffled me up a little and was subsequently banned,pity,as I enjoyed the posters input in other fora. It also left me without the opportunity of a rebuttal.

Hpoe it's not seen as brown-nosing but Mickey Dolenz is an excellent Mod,he can enter a thread,be argued with forcefully,yet there is never a damoclean sword over your head,plus whatever political/religious/social opinions he holds,posters of the opposite opinions don't end up as league of bastards fodder.

pablomakaveli · 15-05-2013 09:56PM

I'd back the calls for less locking of threads.

If a new thread blatantly needs to be in another forum like "Wheres the best pubs in Cork?" or "My dogs leg is falling off need advice" then obviously they should be moved or locked.

If a thread is created that might be political or religious etc in nature make for a good discussion than let it be. Sometimes a more relaxed "down the pub" style discussion in AH can style be enjoyable. Some potentially good threads just get locked if the mods don't like them. Let the users be the judge in that case. If its crap it will slide off the front page and be forgotten.

Just an example i started a thread (admittedly it was a couple of years ago i think) that was about weird or strange phobias. I was looking for a light hearted AH style discussion but a mod moved it to the phobias forum where it was quickly locked for not being a serious enough topic. So basically what could have potentially enjoyable thread died a quick death due to being moved prematurely.

Bipolar Joe · 15-05-2013 09:59PM

crockholm wrote: »

Hpoe it's not seen as brown-nosing but Mickey Dolenz is an excellent Mod,he can enter a thread,be argued with forcefully,yet there is never a damoclean sword over your head,plus whatever political/religious/social opinions he holds,posters of the opposite opinions don't end up as league of bastards fodder.

This. This right here is all the feedback you need. All Mods be more like Mickey.

keith16 · 15-05-2013 10:33PM

There are way too many threads with very poor quality OPs. Sometimes just a link and nothing else.

They could be interesting topics but generally I don't even bother clicking on the link and subsequently I won't post. Only occasionally the OP is reprimanded and asked to give some input / context.

This, IMO, needs to be enforced more strictly. From the charter:

Not every news story needs a thread on After Hours. Don't just post up a link to a news article just because nobody else has. Add something to it. Your own point of view.
If you do start a thread, be prepared to contribute to it yourself, especially if you expect others to do so.

harney · 15-05-2013 10:36PM

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

This. This right here is all the feedback you need. All Mods be more like Mickey.

If you start a .... we love Mickey... chant I'm leaving

Bipolar Joe · 15-05-2013 10:38PM

harney wrote: »

If you start a .... we love Mickey... chant I'm leaving

Admit you love the Mickey, Harney.

harney · 15-05-2013 10:40PM

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

Admit you love the Mickey, Harney.

Public forum dude, public forum

Havermeyer · 15-05-2013 10:43PM

Add tl;dr to the 'pointless posts' list. It's as annoying as the 'yore ma' crap.

If a poster feels that a post is too long, and then chooses not to read it, why do they then need to tell everybody?

It's a pretty lousy reply, imo, and adds nothing to a discussion.

K-9 · 15-05-2013 10:51PM

keith16 wrote: »

There are way too many threads with very poor quality OPs. Sometimes just a link and nothing else.

They could be interesting topics but generally I don't even bother clicking on the link and subsequently I won't post. Only occasionally the OP is reprimanded and asked to give some input / context.

This, IMO, needs to be enforced more strictly. From the charter:

I'll have to repeat the report the posts cliche, if an op is just a link or a copy and paste job we do act, we can't get every single example but the vast majority are usually acted on.

As with the consistency point raised earlier, reporting posts will help big time with stuff like that, we can't catch everything on such a big forum. If you think you've been carded for a post and somebody else later on hasn't, report it, sometimes it gets missed.

Fighting Irish · 15-05-2013 11:06PM

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

The swear filter is a site wide feature. Some threads are unsuitable and sometimes need to be killed.

Well as long as the topic is ok and people are still discussing it, why lock it?, boards is the only forum i've ever visited where the mods seem to love locking threads

Fighting Irish · 15-05-2013 11:07PM

TPD wrote: »

Thanked for the swear filter bit. If it's site wide, fair enough I suppose.. but even then, the T&Cs do say nobody under 13 is allowed. At 13 I was cursing like a sailor and would have had enough cop on to evade any swear filters anyway, as lots of people do.

that's all well and good, but people are allowed get around the swear filter so what's the point?

Fighting Irish · 15-05-2013 11:08PM

nummnutts wrote: »

Add tl;dr to the 'pointless posts' list. It's as annoying as the 'yore ma' crap.

If a poster feels that a post is too long, and then chooses not to read it, why do they then need to tell everybody?

It's a pretty lousy reply, imo, and adds nothing to a discussion.

it's a boards thing, people around here love copying each other, blast with piss, your ma etc etc

keith16 · 15-05-2013 11:11PM

K-9 wrote: »

I'll have to repeat the report the posts cliche, if an op is just a link or a copy and paste job we do act, we can't get every single example but the vast majority are usually acted on.

As with the consistency point raised earlier, reporting posts will help big time with stuff like that, we can't catch everything on such a big forum. If you think you've been carded for a post and somebody else later on hasn't, report it, sometimes it gets missed.

Oh, completely understand that. Wasn't in anyway having a go at mods.

I used to report posts like this, but don't bother anymore. I don't know if I'm being too precious about it - whenever I report a post, I often hesitate and think "am I just being a bit, prissy here?

Maybe if a reported post is somehow auto acknowledged with a "thank you, this is a valid report and we have acted on it" or a "this post was ok and we haven't acted on your report, but thank you anyway" type thing??

I know I don't report posts in general because I'm never sure if it has been acted on positively or otherwise.

ringadingding · 15-05-2013 11:14PM

Can we ban the use of the words ' coke and hookers' whenever the word mod is mentioned ?

It's as tiresome as your Ma, thinly veiled etc etc

Tombi! · 15-05-2013 11:15PM

I disagree that you do act at times when the OP is barely more than a link.
Posting something like "what does AH think" or "I don't have an opinion" is just another way of saying "hey, argue for my entertainment". The few times I did report things like that, it's rare that they're act upon.

Wibbs · 15-05-2013 11:20PM

nummnutts wrote: »

Add tl;dr to the 'pointless posts' list. It's as annoying as the 'yore ma' crap.

If a poster feels that a post is too long, and then chooses not to read it, why do they then need to tell everybody?

It's a pretty lousy reply, imo, and adds nothing to a discussion.

And you can feck off for a start. If I didn't have TL;DR I'd break the servers and your patience

I can kinda see the locking threads too early point, though I've found 90%(may not be a real figure) of the time it's for a damn good reason. With such threads it's usually based on well worn experience of the subject matter and how it's gonna go down. It's pretty rare I'd see a novel thread idea get closed.

Generally speaking and with respect to nummnutts

...

TL;DR IMHO AH is pretty damn AOK at the mo*.

*One of my fave forums on Boards from day one. And I've loved it in all it's incarnations. Always guaranteed to cause a WTF moment at least once a day and long may that continue.

Micky Dolenz · 15-05-2013 11:32PM

Fighting Irish wrote: »

Well as long as the topic is ok and people are still discussing it, why lock it?, boards is the only forum i've ever visited where the mods seem to love locking threads

There are often many reasons for locking a thread. We will certainly take it on board and maybe look at giving more detailed reasoning as sometimes it isn't obvious.

Fighting Irish wrote: »

that's all well and good, but people are allowed get around the swear filter so what's the point?

Again, this is a site wide feature and probably more suited to site feedback.

El Guapo! · 15-05-2013 11:34PM

I like AH, and generally it's a good forum. The modding is pretty spot on most of the time too.
The only thing is, I find myself coming in here less and less because it seems to be the same old threads regurgitated every week.
People are quick to say a thread has been done to death, (the legalise weed threads for example, which I agree have been done to death), yet abortion threads and catholic church threads are practically done every week. Fair enough, they may start off with a different spin on them based on a recent news story etc. but by the second page it's the same old thread again. It drags on and on until its locked or a fresh one is started.
It just gets very tiresome and I find myself coming into AH, looking at the list of threads on the first page and leaving again. It's always the same stuff.

Oh, and one more thing.
No more apples in the vending machine please.

K-9 · 16-05-2013 12:01AM

keith16 wrote: »

Oh, completely understand that. Wasn't in anyway having a go at mods.

I used to report posts like this, but don't bother anymore. I don't know if I'm being too precious about it - whenever I report a post, I often hesitate and think "am I just being a bit, prissy here?

Maybe if a reported post is somehow auto acknowledged with a "thank you, this is a valid report and we have acted on it" or a "this post was ok and we haven't acted on your report, but thank you anyway" type thing??

I know I don't report posts in general because I'm never sure if it has been acted on positively or otherwise.

The vast, vast majority of posts are acted on in some way, whether that be keeping an eye on a thread, to keeping an eye on a poster and your reported post might get acted on in a later thread to an outright ban. Please don't think it is ignored, just because somebody doesn't get a card, a ban or a thread ban, doesn't mean it hasn't been noted.

There are very, very few reported posts that aren't of some value to mods, and we do appreciate reported posts.

darced · 16-05-2013 12:06AM

This post has been deleted.

Fighting Irish · 16-05-2013 12:12AM

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

I disagree that you do act at times when the OP is barely more than a link.
Posting something like "what does AH think" or "I don't have an opinion" is just another way of saying "hey, argue for my entertainment". The few times I did report things like that, it's rare that they're act upon.

people who report things other than spammers, should be banned

K-9 · 16-05-2013 12:14AM

Fighting Irish wrote: »

people who report things other than spammers, should be banned

Constructive feedback.

Kinder Bueno · 16-05-2013 12:15AM

What I've noticed since I joined is the total lack of tolerance of joking about the travelling community yet every other ethnic minority seem to be fair game.

Feedback Folks!!!

Comments