A discussion on the rules.

Permabear · 27-11-2013 04:09PM

This post has been deleted.

Scofflaw · 27-11-2013 05:21PM

To be fair, it's not a question of "clinging on". The system requires that somebody ask to be demodded, so if people really are inactive, nothing happens until someone with some responsibility does something about it. And, er, that would be the Category Mod, particularly if they have first-hand knowledge of the forum...I should actually ask for sceptre to be demodded.

At the end of the day, mods are volunteers. They're not being paid, and it's up to them whether they feel they can or are putting in the time. Everybody has patches where RL prevents modding, and it's easy enough to keep thinking that once things settle down, you'll be active again.

The balance of complaints that we're under/over modding seems roughly normal, I have to say. We're in a sort of a political trough at the moment, after the existential levels of excitement from 2008-2011/12. But we might have that discussion too.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Permabear · 27-11-2013 05:56PM

This post has been deleted.

Villain · 27-11-2013 06:04PM

Levels of excitement? You mean protecting Bertie and FF, the forum quality has decreased a lot over the last few years and the fragmentation has made it a pain to follow.

I think a complete re-think is needed and I would argue for removing several sub-forums and keeping it simple. I also think new mods are needed and they should be selected from a cross section of political supporters.

I also think Mods need to come clean on directions Cat Mods and Admins give in General, I know the mods in the past were following orders re Bertie and I think its only fair that Boards are up front when they are taking a political stance.

Permabear · 27-11-2013 06:10PM

This post has been deleted.

Villain · 27-11-2013 06:11PM

It was the case and I know mods were following directions to ensure that was the case.

Scofflaw · 27-11-2013 06:14PM

At no point have I ever even been asked my political views, let alone told to enforce any, or told anyone else to enforce any. I'm not sure when you think the Politics forum was "following orders re Bertie", but it's certainly not since 2008.

regards,
Scofflaw

Permabear · 27-11-2013 06:17PM

This post has been deleted.

oscarBravo · 27-11-2013 06:18PM

All moderators follow directions to protect boards.ie from the possibility of a defamation suit. If you think that the website was acting on specific instructions to protect a specific political party... well, there's no cure for an over-active imagination.

Villain · 27-11-2013 06:23PM

Lol that comment seems to have drawn some of those involved out of the woodwork, a Mod who was involved at the time confirmed this to me. As oscarBravo says boards.ie has a right to protect itself from lawsuits, my reason for mentioning it was at the time what was said publicly was different from what was said to mods.

I simply said

Villain · 27-11-2013 06:24PM

Check out pages 13 and 14 on this thread and if you have the time or interest you will find some threads in feedback also

Permabear · 27-11-2013 06:44PM

This post has been deleted.

Villain · 27-11-2013 07:02PM

Hold on that wasn't my aim and I'm not going to drag that argument up again but it's from as simple as you make it out to be.

My point was a mod at the time confirmed to me this year that the mods were under instruction with regard to Bertie.

Chips Lovell · 27-11-2013 07:42PM

Mods in all forums are under instruction to remove potentially libellous remarks. That is a very different thing from being under instruction to protect certain politicians and political parties.

Villain · 27-11-2013 08:06PM

Well that's not what happened in the past, it was not a simple case of prevent libelous remarks, again I'm going on what I was told, it was a long time ago and perhaps it will never happen again but if it does it should be laid out in public what and why.

oscarBravo · 27-11-2013 08:08PM

I was a moderator of this forum at the time, and I was categorically not told to protect any political parties.

Scofflaw · 28-11-2013 03:48AM

It does happen - when the CMod has enough time between RL commitments to notice that a mod hasn't enough time between RL commitments...

I appreciate the concern, which is a real one. On the other hand, if we were lucky, it might be the case that subdivision might lead those whose interests are not those catered for by the subforums to see more threads of interest to them. We'll see how it goes!

cordially,
Scofflaw

Nodin · 28-11-2013 06:20AM

You have somebody in mind......?

Crooked Jack · 28-11-2013 07:15AM

This certainly doesnt seem to be the case when posters make repeated, unfounded accusations against Sinn Fein politicians. there are serious double standards issues in the politics forum. if i were to accuse enda kenny of being a murderer im sure the mods would pull me up on it, and rightly so. but its a free for all when it comes to Sinn Fein

nesf · 28-11-2013 12:53PM

Bear in mind that you don't necessarily see a mod when they're modding. When I was a mod here Sceptre for instance wasn't that active visibly but I'd often log in to find a bunch of spam, completely out of line posts or whatever having been dealt with overnight when he spotted them. None of this would be visible to anyone except the offending poster whose post had been deleted.

Also, an awful lot of moderating is not acting. It's watching, weighing up decisions and so on. When you see someone banned or a thread closed, there's quite often the views of three or four mods behind that action. Not always views that agree with each other either.

Inactivity is bad. Someone taking a break really is not and the last thing you want on the forum is a burnt out mod making bad call after bad call. Or losing a good mod because they were getting stressed out from having to deal with too much (it was very common for us to take breaks at different times during and after election season because the workload during them normally approached actual job levels).

Permabear · 28-11-2013 10:14PM

This post has been deleted.

Nodin · 28-11-2013 11:53PM

O wonderfully clear.

Crooked Jack · 29-11-2013 12:08AM

I must confess, I generally love Nodin's "snide" insinuations, they're usually hilarious

Scofflaw · 29-11-2013 01:00AM

Although this is a discussion on the rules, it is not a rules-free zone. Cards can and will be handed out for the usual things, such as uncivil handbaggery.

moderately,
Scofflaw

nesf · 29-11-2013 03:51AM

Well, think about it, who gets made a mod here? Is it the people with a drum to beat heavily on a topic who pop up on every thread or the ones who are more to the middle ground and as likely to read a thread and go "eh, don't want to get involved in that spat" as join in the melee? I know that's a false dilemma.

The tone and quality of the forum have gone to crap over the past five to six years. No argument from me about that. It's got feck all to do with the mods posting a lot though and has been a feature across the site since 2005 or so. I won't spell out the reasons, with a little thought they should be obvious.

Permabear · 29-11-2013 12:57PM

This post has been deleted.

nesf · 29-11-2013 09:40PM

We'll have to agree to disagree about the potential remedies.

MadYaker · 29-11-2013 09:55PM

I think anyone who uses the terms gravy train or gombeen should be given a weeks ban.

Scofflaw · 29-11-2013 10:01PM

Tempting...

cordially,
Scofflaw

Xenophile · 30-11-2013 09:27PM

Could some of the Moderators here tell me why we are not allowed to post short to the point comments and observations here without being accused of "posting random thoughts that just popped into our head" .

You are just encouraging posters to write essays full of padding in order to get posted here whereas many of the best ideas can be succinct short and to the point.

A discussion on the rules.

Comments