A discussion on the rules.

Xenophile · 30-11-2013 10:08PM

So my post has been moved to Discussion of the Rules.At the age of 66.7 and being Managing Director of my own company for forty years if I have what I consider to be a good observation on politics and current affairs so I will take it to After Hours where very many intelligent and well informed people go to express their point of view and also have the opportunity of communicating with like minded people. You may interested to hear that..........

."Brevity is a great charm of eloquence." - Marcus Tullius Cicero ..........

..Brevity is the sister of talent” Anton CHEKHOV, letter to A.P. Chekhov, April 11, 1889

“It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche

“Be sincere, Be brief, Be seated.”
― Franklin D. Roosevelt

Life is too short to stuff a mushroom.”
― Shirley Conran

“Writing is 1 percent inspiration, and 99 percent elimination.”
― Louise Brooks

Black Swan · 30-11-2013 10:45PM

Xenophile wrote: »

so I will take it to After Hours where very many intelligent and well informed people go to express their point of view and also have the opportunity of communicating with like minded people.

The AH mods just closed your "Great to see that Brevity is tolerated here!" original post.

K-9 · 01-12-2013 01:29AM

Black Swan wrote: »

The AH mods just closed your "Great to see that Brevity is tolerated here!" original post.

There's a great example of a one line post which is very pointed!

Opening posts in threads need to have some meat to them, ideally a link with something to back up your view, basically a reason why you have arrived at your opinion.

Scofflaw · 01-12-2013 01:31AM

Xenophile wrote: »

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.

In a nutshell, if you'll pardon the expression, the issue is that brief OPs generate brief responses.

The longer version - if you've managed to distill an idea down to a pithy comment, that's splendid. Unfortunately, such talent is actually rare, but always inspires emulation. As a result, a pithy OP is invariably followed by posters attempting to match the brevity of the OP, but as a rule without the same degree of content. The thread in AH is a perfect example of this.

As such, we resist brief OPs. It would be preferable, having demonstrated your powers of pithiness, to follow it with a longer explanation - a gloss, if you like - both for those who haven't the mental acuity to decipher the original pithy observation, and in order to stimulate even in those who do the urge to discuss the observation rather than simply to attempt to rival your pithiness.

cordially,
Scofflaw

hotfoot · 01-12-2013 03:00PM

How about a forum where the users are the mods . When a post gets a certain number of dislikes the post is deleted.

Better still a forum without mods the thread usually will just wear itself out.

Scofflaw · 01-12-2013 08:41PM

hotfoot wrote: »

How about a forum where the users are the mods . When a post gets a certain number of dislikes the post is deleted.

Better still a forum without mods the thread usually will just wear itself out.

There are already forums that cater for that. You can check the noise to signal ratio on YouTube for yourself.

cordially,
Scofflaw

hotfoot · 02-12-2013 11:00AM

Scofflaw wrote: »

There are already forums that cater for that. You can check the noise to signal ratio on YouTube for yourself.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I googled this and just see technical explainations ?

nesf · 02-12-2013 11:07AM

hotfoot wrote: »

I googled this and just see technical explainations ?

Modless zones existed early in the history of the Internet. Very, very quickly there was an insertion of individuals to act as Admins mainly because a) potential legal hassle, b) internet trolling had just been invented and c) it was discovered that often when in large groups online and "anonymous" people can act much worse than they do in face to face meetings.

Boards.ie does indeed have more moderation than most sites that I've been on but it's far from the strictest or most moderated (believe me, I'm a member of one site which would permaban nearly all of the users here if they behaved as they did as even a handful of very minor transgressions can get you site-banned).

Scofflaw · 02-12-2013 04:59PM

hotfoot wrote: »

I googled this and just see technical explainations ?

Ah, sorry - "signal to noise ratio" has a colloquial meaning similar to the technical meaning. "Signal" is meaningful communication, "noise" is non-meaningful.

So "signal" might be posts worth reading for the general reader, while "noise" is everything else - off-topic, insults, chit-chat, trolling, spam, and general rubbish.

Of, say, 100 Youtube comments on a given video, maybe 20-25% are about the video, of which a far smaller percentage actually contribute anything to the reader's understanding of the video. The other 75-80% of the comments are accusations of ******ry, offers to earn $$$ from home, arguments about someone's accusation of ******ry, etc etc.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Tramps Like Us · 02-12-2013 07:59PM

Youtube has improved somewhat with the google plus stuff.

Scofflaw · 02-12-2013 08:02PM

Tramps Like Us wrote: »

Youtube has improved somewhat with the google plus stuff.

Sure - an alternative to moderation is forcing people to reveal their identity. I know which one I prefer, by a very very wide margin!

cordially,
Scofflaw

Villain · 02-12-2013 11:57PM

Comparing boards to youtube comments is just nonsense and unless your posting via Thor your identity here is pretty easy to get if needed.

Scofflaw · 03-12-2013 12:12AM

Villain wrote: »

Comparing boards to youtube comments is just nonsense and unless your posting via Thor your identity here is pretty easy to get if needed.

Cogent argument, that - "just nonsense". I guess that settles thing, then.

As for identities, yes, it's possible for the Gardai to trace posters if necessary, but that's entirely different from being immediately identifiable to other posters.

amused,
Scofflaw

K-9 · 03-12-2013 12:45AM

Villain wrote: »

Comparing boards to youtube comments is just nonsense and unless your posting via Thor your identity here is pretty easy to get if needed.

Maybe politics.ie is a better example, it just isn't my cup of tea, but it's a great news resource if you're a politics news junkie. I'd recommend subscribing to its RSS or newsfeed to read the headline threads there, rather than wasting hours reading through the comments.

Scofflaw · 03-12-2013 12:50AM

K-9 wrote: »

Maybe politics.ie is a better example, it just isn't my cup of tea, but it's a great news resource if you're a politics news junkie. I'd recommend subscribing to its RSS or newsfeed to read the headline threads there, rather than wasting hours reading through the comments.

I was going to use politics.ie as an example, and maybe it is a closer example, but dang it I always wind up using it as an example.

On the other hand, Youtube is a reasonable comparison from all except the point of being US-dominated. The comments on a video, particularly an advocacy video of some kind, are supposed to be about that video - instead, as I said, they're largely just drivel. Even politics.ie doesn't sink to the levels a Youtube comment thread can reach very rapidly, because even it is not unmoderated.

But there's a fairly general rule, which is that the less moderated somewhere is, the higher the proportion of posts which add absolutely nothing to anybody's understanding of anything at all.

cordially,
Scofflaw

hotfoot · 03-12-2013 12:29PM

In the early days of forums and internet chat it was easy to get worked up and sensitive about posts and users. There are still new users unaccostumed to the abuse one must remember its virtual . You get accustomed to it and its only a quickly passing phase now for me.
There still exists gang attacks I suspect on Boards too perhaps even with a mods help.

Villain · 03-12-2013 12:47PM

Scofflaw wrote: »

I was going to use politics.ie as an example, and maybe it is a closer example, but dang it I always wind up using it as an example.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Well Politics.ie is a better example only thing is they encourage free speech and even took steps (if not really applicable) to move hosting out of the state when people had a go at Bertie and his lawyers came knocking for IP's.

The mods also haven't shown the same level of bias as they have here in the past.

nesf · 04-12-2013 06:42AM

Villain wrote: »

Well Politics.ie is a better example only thing is they encourage free speech and even took steps (if not really applicable) to move hosting out of the state when people had a go at Bertie and his lawyers came knocking for IP's.

The mods also haven't shown the same level of bias as they have here in the past.

Do you really think moving around hosting removes your need to hand over IPs? Seriously? Also, you're truly delusional if you think P.ie didn't remove a crapton of posts about the Mahon tribunal. The mods there are less active generally than the ones here about most things but they're just as fast at taking down defamatory material as the mods on this site because they're stuck with the same legal system boards.ie is and would rather not fight a landmark case out in the High Court over some keyboard warrior wanting to claim Scofflaw is a corrupt bastard who arranged the rezoning of 100 acres in the 90s for a tenner and half a ham sandwich.

Villain · 04-12-2013 07:46AM

nesf wrote: »

Do you really think moving around hosting removes your need to hand over IPs? Seriously? Also, you're truly delusional if you think P.ie didn't remove a crapton of posts about the Mahon tribunal. The mods there are less active generally than the ones here about most things but they're just as fast at taking down defamatory material as the mods on this site because they're stuck with the same legal system boards.ie is and would rather not fight a landmark case out in the High Court over some keyboard warrior wanting to claim Scofflaw is a corrupt bastard who arranged the rezoning of 100 acres in the 90s for a tenner and half a ham sandwich.

Did you miss the "(if not really apllicable)" in my post?

Black Swan · 04-12-2013 10:06AM

Villain wrote: »

The mods also haven't shown the same level of bias as they have here in the past.

No one is value free (Max Weber, Economy & Society). We have mods that range from left to right in political orientation when posting. Then again, they are individuals, each with unique backgrounds and personalities, and may exhibit that uniqueness given the topic of the discussion or argument. So if you attempt to place them all in one over-simplistic bias category, chances are that you will be committing a nominal error subject to the limitations associated with dichotomies (Jacques Derrida, Points).

Furthermore, we don't always agree when posting in our private Politics Mods forum (e.g., such a disagreement occurred yesterday), among the many over the years. In working with my fellow Politics mods, I attempt to respect their unique individual orientations; i.e., respecting more their "I" rather than a misleading over-simplified "we" categorisation (Ayn Rand, Anthem).

When modding, not posting, I have observed that our current Politics forum(s) mods attempt to be objective to the best of their abilities when implementing the charter and Terms of Use guidelines. If they didn't, I feel confident that the Admin would ask them to leave. But modding is not a science, it is a art, and to "err is human" (Alexander Pope, An Essay on Criticism), and we all err at times, no matter how hard we try.

Villain · 04-12-2013 11:03AM

Black Swan wrote: »

No one is value free (Max Weber, Economy & Society). We have mods that range from left to right in political orientation when posting. Then again, they are individuals, each with unique backgrounds and personalities, and may exhibit that uniqueness given the topic of the discussion or argument. So if you attempt to place them all in one over-simplistic bias category, chances are that you will be committing a nominal error subject to the limitations associated with dichotomies (Jacques Derrida, Points).

Furthermore, we don't always agree when posting in our private Politics Mods forum (e.g., such a disagreement occurred yesterday), among the many over the years. In working with my fellow Politics mods, I attempt to respect their unique individual orientations; i.e., respecting more their "I" rather than a misleading over-simplified "we" categorisation (Ayn Rand, Anthem).

When modding, not posting, I have observed that our current Politics forum(s) mods attempt to be objective to the best of their abilities when implementing the charter and Terms of Use guidelines. If they didn't, I feel confident that the Admin would ask them to leave. But modding is not a science, it is a art, and to "err is human" (Alexander Pope, An Essay on Criticism), and we all err at times, no matter how hard we try.

You can quote who you like but the bias of pro FF and anti Sinn Fein that was observed here for years speaks for itself. It was always obvious to posters but what changed recently was the fact that a previous mod confirmed that was the case.

I have laughed a few times when former admins took to social media and had a go at Minister Sherlock etc and the so-called Irish SOPA stopping free speech, Boards.ie did it nicely back in Bertie's hay day and it wasn't just to protect Boards they blocked links to externally hosted opinions also.

hotfoot · 04-12-2013 11:14AM

Scofflaw wrote: »

There are already forums that cater for that. You can check the noise to signal ratio on YouTube for yourself.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Not sure what you mean 'noise to signal ratio ' .I googled it and searched you tube just got a technical explaination . ?

Scofflaw · 04-12-2013 11:41AM

Villain wrote: »

You can quote who you like but the bias of pro FF and anti Sinn Fein that was observed here for years speaks for itself. It was always obvious to posters but what changed recently was the fact that a previous mod confirmed that was the case.

I have laughed a few times when former admins took to social media and had a go at Minister Sherlock etc and the so-called Irish SOPA stopping free speech, Boards.ie did it nicely back in Bertie's hay day and it wasn't just to protect Boards they blocked links to externally hosted opinions also.

Given that none of the current mod team were mods at the time, I'm not sure what the relevance of your reminiscences is supposed to be? Nice to chat and all that, but it's not actually a discussion of the rules.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw · 04-12-2013 11:43AM

hotfoot wrote: »

Not sure what you mean 'noise to signal ratio ' .I googled it and searched you tube just got a technical explaination . ?

Er, see the earlier set of responses to your earlier posting of this point, to which you already replied?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Villain · 04-12-2013 12:13PM

Scofflaw wrote: »

Given that none of the current mod team were mods at the time, I'm not sure what the relevance of your reminiscences is supposed to be? Nice to chat and all that, but it's not actually a discussion of the rules.

cordially,
Scofflaw

True to some extent I suppose and I should start posting more again to get a feel for how things are now but it was in the context of my earlier suggestion that mods should be more open about instructions they have received from Cat Mods or Admins or even what they have agreed in the Mod forum, e.g. be open and explain why they aren't allowing discussions on X but are on Y

Scofflaw · 04-12-2013 12:36PM

Villain wrote: »

True to some extent I suppose and I should start posting more again to get a feel for how things are now but it was in the context of my earlier suggestion that mods should be more open about instructions they have received from Cat Mods or Admins or even what they have agreed in the Mod forum, e.g. be open and explain why they aren't allowing discussions on X but are on Y

Well, speaking as one of the two Soc Cat Mods, we don't give any instructions to the mods on what discussions are allowed, and we in turn don't get any from the Admins. We get the occasional heads-up that something is sub-judice (a rule which doesn't apply, afaik, to tribunals) or libelous, but it's on the basis of "you might want to look at this".

It's not a chain of command, even if it looks like one. Everybody volunteers, so I have no more power to order a mod to do something they don't want than I do to order a cat about. I could do it, I suppose, and if I was lucky the cat might want to do what I was ordering, but those two things would probably be unrelated. Mostly I'd be wasting my time and annoying the cat.

And the level of 'integration' between mods, cmods, and admins is actually very loose. Medieval, really - at the level of sending a messenger off into the wilderness with a dispatch for so-and-so, not hearing anything for ages, asking around, and eventually discovering that nobody's heard from them for six months, plus they probably weren't the right person in the first place, and you might actually be the relevant person yourself, but nobody told you that, or how to do whatever it was you were asking them to do.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Black Swan · 04-12-2013 08:08PM

Scofflaw wrote: »

Well, speaking as one of the two Soc Cat Mods, we don't give any instructions to the mods on what discussions are allowed, and we in turn don't get any from the Admins. We get the occasional heads-up that something is sub-judice (a rule which doesn't apply, afaik, to tribunals) or libelous, but it's on the basis of "you might want to look at this".

It's not a chain of command, even if it looks like one. Everybody volunteers, so I have no more power to order a mod to do something they don't want than I do to order a cat about. I could do it, I suppose, and if I was lucky the cat might want to do what I was ordering, but those two things would probably be unrelated. Mostly I'd be wasting my time and annoying the cat.

And the level of 'integration' between mods, cmods, and admins is actually very loose. Medieval, really - at the level of sending a messenger off into the wilderness with a dispatch for so-and-so, not hearing anything for ages, asking around, and eventually discovering that nobody's heard from them for six months, plus they probably weren't the right person in the first place, and you might actually be the relevant person yourself, but nobody told you that, or how to do whatever it was you were asking them to do.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I love this post, especially the cat metaphor. I've modded awhile, and have Cmodded Region, Sports, and now Science, and there is a lot of truth in what Scofflaw says.

K-9 · 04-12-2013 08:17PM

moxin wrote: »

From the forum charter

Can this also apply to those defending or supporting state violence on civilians?

Actions by non-state forces have been condemned and any posts promoting those actions have been dealt with but this has not been applied to posts who defend or otherwise support state violence on civilians. Examples would be those posts defending the killings by state forces of civilians in NI, Syria, Iraq etc.

Just on this, I remember banning somebody for egging on state armed forces recently enough and did so in the past as well. Nobody reported the example I gave so I can only add the oft repeated line that users should help us out by reporting posts. It really is a big help for mods and extension users.

Chips Lovell · 04-12-2013 08:17PM

Boards.ie is a FF shop? I've heard it all now.

Villain · 04-12-2013 08:50PM

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Boards.ie is a FF shop? I've heard it all now.

Maybe not now but have a look back to Bertie's time on the forum, it was rather sickening to be honest!

A discussion on the rules.

Comments