nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Boards is becoming a Ghost Town

WarZ

Is it just me or is boards.ie becoming extraordinarily quiet? It's something I've started to notice and its making me go elsewhere (Reddit is incredibly busy in comparison). I'm not sure if its because the quality of posting is taking such a dive or if its because of over zealous moderation. Perhaps both. I think a balance needs to be struck; posting needs to be better but at the same time a lot of mods in the forum have over exerted their influence to the extent where we've lost so many great posters. The site is becoming too nany-esque however I'm aware the site was suffering from a huge problem with trolls and racists. I'm just wondering what are the thoughts of the admins on this issue?

Seems like boards is dying out.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

The Moldy Gowl

Bongalongherb wrote: »

Just incase folk were wondering about my odd comment above, It was a test in regards to moderation on this thread. I should have received at least an infraction from my post but I did not receive anything as I should have been infracted at least from my forwarded comment in regards to Nody.

Well there ye go, the proof is there, there is no over-moderation or red card bans/infractions.

Now there is a slight possibility that I am on every moderators ignore list, in this case they might not even notice I have posted a comment at all interestingly.

It's awfully hard to get an infraction in feedback though.

Look at this thread and the mod warning. It's ****e like this that puts me off posting in lots of threads.

http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057593226/1/#post99600722

Bongalongherb

Nody wrote: »

How did you know?! I was promised no one would see it...

Problem is not only PC but a question of deciding what's acceptable in general. I'd agree if people had thicker skin in general things would run smoother (I may be jaded but I think I'm seeing more outrage on various topics compared to earlier times and this is not limited to boards) but at some point you'll end up with a line drawn to say what's ok and what's not. Some people will disagree with where that line no matter where it's placed though and people will threaten to leave because it's to tough/lenient and it will choke/scare away people.

And there's always calls for one or the other and judgement calls if it was over the line or not (i.e. the easy once such as "All "insert group" should burn in a fire because they are "insert appropriate slur" is not a problem but the borderline cases which may drive people to leave because "it's not dealt with").

*edit* Wibbs I agree on the redesign; I expressed my dislike for the category change and the new design but for this I'm just another user rather than a Mod complaining about it :P

People are too fussy these days, every word seems to anger some person in some odd way. The times of speaking freely are slowly degrading into a robotic state of political correctness.

Hang on a second, that was a close one... If I had have farted there I would have been ostracised by the environmentalist extremists next door. One day soon a person will not be able to fart naturally in their own back garden. Trust me on that one. The government will employ robotic fart detector robots to surveill all green premises and then forward the methane fart information to the governmental meteorological room for analysis regarding carbon credits.

We're all fcuked, doomed.

smash

Wibbs wrote: »

This reduction to a couple of headings was pointed out by many at the time, but that was pretty much ignored and here we are. The new site layout has been roundly criticised and though the current layout has gained a reprieve because of that negative reaction, my feeling is too much time effort and money has been burnt through for it to be ditched at this stage.

The thing is that the information is plugged in and the structure is there. It's not a huge amount of work to fix what's broken on the new layout, in fact it's mostly CSS edits and a few HTML tweaks. Nothing that can't be fixed within a few days at most, with the majority of fixes being done in a few hours alone. The big issue is that whoever did this has too much pride in admitting they did it wrong and is refusing point blank to accept it.

Bongalongherb

Just incase folk were wondering about my odd comment above, It was a test in regards to moderation on this thread. I should have received at least an infraction from my post but I did not receive anything as I should have been infracted at least from my forwarded comment in regards to Nody.

Well there ye go, the proof is there, there is no over-moderation or red card bans/infractions.

Now there is a slight possibility that I am on every moderators ignore list, in this case they might not even notice I have posted a comment at all interestingly.

Nody

Bongalongherb wrote: »

Name these dick-heads please. It's time Nody came clean about the fungershank in Germany last week.

How did you know?! I was promised no one would see it...

Why not, it sounds more enticing than the ... 'But' part. Better off leaving the 'but' out of it and focus on getting a good laugh instead of everything locked as PC.

hallelujah.

Problem is not only PC but a question of deciding what's acceptable in general. I'd agree if people had thicker skin in general things would run smoother (I may be jaded but I think I'm seeing more outrage on various topics compared to earlier times and this is not limited to boards) but at some point you'll end up with a line drawn to say what's ok and what's not. Some people will disagree with where that line no matter where it's placed though and people will threaten to leave because it's to tough/lenient and it will choke/scare away people.

And there's always calls for one or the other and judgement calls if it was over the line or not (i.e. the easy once such as "All "insert group" should burn in a fire because they are "insert appropriate slur" is not a problem but the borderline cases which may drive people to leave because "it's not dealt with").

*edit* Wibbs I agree on the redesign; I expressed my dislike for the category change and the new design but for this I'm just another user rather than a Mod complaining about it :P

Wibbs

Nody wrote: »

That is not a mod mindset though;

Oh it very much can be. I've seen it for myself. Quite a few have a subtle and not so subtle them v us vibe.

look at anything from speeding limits to laws about contracts to anything else with rules. They are not written for "how would a decent person act" because then we'd not need them but rather to set an established line in the sand and state this is the minimum we expect in this scenario.

Sure, but if you keep drawing more and more lines in the sand, then fewer and fewer people will want to play on your beach. Or something.

TBH I don't think the moderation(too much/too little*) is close to the main issue for the majority of the decline that we're seeing and I don't see any increase or decrease in oversight will change it(though the former won't help). Competing platforms, too many forums, that are too hard to find and the drive to "update" Boards are the main stressors.

EG Links earlier reckoned that the Ladies Lounge lost numbers because of nastiness, because such nastiness is an issue for them. Now I'm not saying it can't be an issue BTW, as it can be, but as I pointed out tLL had more of that in the past and still had higher numbers posting. I'd bet that if one was to look at the timeline the graph for tLL posting dropped steadily after the category change. I'd further bet the number of muppets has dropped alongside the number of posters and again that is down to the category rejig. Neither can find it as easily anymore.

This reduction to a couple of headings was pointed out by many at the time, but that was pretty much ignored and here we are. The new site layout has been roundly criticised and though the current layout has gained a reprieve because of that negative reaction, my feeling is too much time effort and money has been burnt through for it to be ditched at this stage.

*Though I would say mods are not the best source to look to for this. Never mind that Boards has always had a reputation for "over moderation" and this didn't have much if any effect in the past. If anything it increased numbers, because enough people were tired of retards on Youtube/4Chan type "discussion". If Boards keeps it's head then I do reckon more will join up/come back.

Bongalongherb

Name these dick-heads please. It's time Nody came clean about the fungershank in Germany last week.

With the cool folks we'd have a boards wide charter stating "Be cool to each other (with a guitar riff playing)" and it would work but,

Why not, it sounds more enticing than the ... 'But' part. Better off leaving the 'but' out of it and focus on getting a good laugh instead of everything locked as PC.

hallelujah.

Nody

Wibbs wrote: »

I do feel that too often mods can get into that mindset because of the dickhead/cool folks ratio they may deal with. Any suggestions to improve things may be done more with the dickheads in mind and too often that can put off the cool folks.

That is not a mod mindset though; look at anything from speeding limits to laws about contracts to anything else with rules. They are not written for "how would a decent person act" because then we'd not need them but rather to set an established line in the sand and state this is the minimum we expect in this scenario.

With the cool folks we'd have a boards wide charter stating "Be cool to each other (with a guitar riff playing)" and it would work but in reality that's not the line that needs to be drawn but rather to set the minimum required level for the dickheads to achieve.

evolving_doors

Wibbs wrote: »

The touch site is also for the chop in favour of this new "improved" layout G. Now somebody is listening as the main site got a temporary reprieve and will keep going for at least this year. I presume that covers touch too.

Nooooooooo.....

Ah shur maybe we're just set in our ways. At the end of the day it's just a bunch of text which ever way we look at it... as long as they keep the 'latest threads' feed for some random clickbait to wander around different forums.

They are keeping the 'latest threads' aren't they??

Wibbs

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I was just making the point that its disheartening when people feel the need to throw such vitriol at volunteers.

Ah sure AC. Nature of the beast really. Like the poor, we'll always have dickheads. They're a tiny minority though. Which can be hard to square because of being the focus of them in any role like this. It's akin to working on an IT helpline, where it would be all too easy to believe that people were cross eyed aggressive morons who couldn't find their arse with both hands and a map. And GPS. The overwhelming majority may not actively tell you're doing OK, but their silence should speak volumes.

I do feel that too often mods can get into that mindset because of the dickhead/cool folks ratio they may deal with. Any suggestions to improve things may be done more with the dickheads in mind and too often that can put off the cool folks.

ancapailldorcha

Wibbs wrote: »

OK ACD and I would share your frustration if I was getting similar. H - and this illustrates my point against the notion of more moderation - in both those latter cases including the mod being a tool the existing framework covers that and pretty clearly. If you get a PM suggesting you are small of cock and you should use same on yourself in a fashion that would require the physical flexibility of an Indian fakir then that's straight to report the PM and they will at best get warned, more likely they'll be taking time off for that nonsense. That has been the case since I first signed up to Boards. No difficulty in drawing that line, nor escalation of moderation/oversight required.

Now you would be in pure WTF? territory if you reported such PM's and nothing was done about it. I'd be beyond shocked to find that was the case though.

I didn't want to derail the thread. I was just responding to Permabear's point about more rigid moderation when it isn't quite that straightforward much of the time. I reported the PMs and they were actioned very quickly. I was just making the point that its disheartening when people feel the need to throw such vitriol at volunteers.

Wibbs

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It's often quite difficult to draw a clear line though. Anyone blatantly disregarding the rules tends not to last long at all. It's the slower burners who only put a toe out of line every now and again that are the bigger problem. Dealing with them can be quite stressful at times. I can only deal with so many PMs mocking my sexual prowess or encouraging me to self sodomise myself (that one from a mod) before needing a break.

OK ACD and I would share your frustration if I was getting similar. H - and this illustrates my point against the notion of more moderation - in both those latter cases including the mod being a tool the existing framework covers that and pretty clearly. If you get a PM suggesting you are small of cock and you should use same on yourself in a fashion that would require the physical flexibility of an Indian fakir then that's straight to report the PM and they will at best get warned, more likely they'll be taking time off for that nonsense. That has been the case since I first signed up to Boards. No difficulty in drawing that line, nor escalation of moderation/oversight required.

Now you would be in pure WTF? territory if you reported such PM's and nothing was done about it. I'd be beyond shocked to find that was the case though.

Wibbs

the groutch wrote: »

there are some categories where the mods are never seen or heard from except to dole out infractions/bans.

I reckon part of that came from when Boards started to get more "commercial". There was a time when moderators were pretty much always brought in from the userbase and community within a particular forum. Now and this goes double for the higher traffic forums it's more often than not the choice of a "safe pair of hands". I've seen this most in a forum like After Hours. I'd be enough of a regular in there to know enough of the "locals" and with quite the proportion of new mods drafted in over the last few years my usual reaction was a) good luck and b) who? Personally speaking I don't like seeing mods who never or almost never post in their forums. Feels far more like "management". That increases the them and us feeling.

A feeling that was always quite high in the DNA of Boards.ie. Over moderation is an issue at times yes, but more, it's the culture of moderation that is heavily focused upon here like no other forum I've been on anywhere else. In any of the other forums I peruse moderators are either absent, or present but rarely seen and almost never referred to. Maybe it's the Irish psyche and their odd love/hate thing with authoritaaay or something.

I'd agree with most of PB's recommendations. I'd certainly be behind the major culling of forums and I've made that suggestion for quite a while. Politics is the letter perfect example. Science could do with a winnow out too, as could games, TV and a host of others. Among my forums, the Sex and Sexuality forum is dead. An ex forum, pining for the fjords. Limp as it were. Best off closed and preserved for posterior. There was a rejig planned but that got nowhere.

As far as just one site? Maybe and I can see the logic. The problem is that the beta is a complete bloody disaster. If it was made the only way to view the site, the site would be dead within the month. I firmly believe that and I also firmly believe unless they can basically copy the functionality of the existing site - which has the still big problem of being a PITA after the category rejig - it'll be a slow death regardless.

Leadership? Six of one, half dozen of the other for me. For years DeVore was Boards in many ways. The focus anyway. Must have been a head wreck and TBH I'm glad for him he uses the site as another user. He paid his dues for long enough and the community feeling has changed a lot since then. The other admins are seen often enough too. They're also volunteers so I'd not be pressuring them into more work. They have enough. The office varies and mostly is pretty good with engaging, though the management are completely unknown. Nada heard from them at all from what I've seen. Dav is around a lot too. The recent silence with the Beta bugs and suggestions thread dropped the ball, but Dav was quick to put his hands up there.

As for moderation? It varies and I believe it's less about stringency, but more about being too heavy handed, too lacking in a simple sense of humour, a sense of delicacy at times. I've been guilty of it myself. Too much middle management thinking and that also gets some all too quick to "run to teacher" when ideas are challenged. I can think of quite a few users who use this as a way of targeting other users and their ideas. IMH this site needs more moderation like it needs a hole in the head.

ancapailldorcha

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I think there could be an argument made for two though: Desktop and mobile/tablet. Four is simply too many, there I agree.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

This is one idea. It was stated above that the older interface made exploring the site much easier. That's one idea. Otherwise, I'd agree. Pick one or the other.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I've always felt really guilty doing this, like the telltale child in a classroom. Good point though.

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It's often quite difficult to draw a clear line though. Anyone blatantly disregarding the rules tends not to last long at all. It's the slower burners who only put a toe out of line every now and again that are the bigger problem. Dealing with them can be quite stressful at times. I can only deal with so many PMs mocking my sexual prowess or encouraging me to self sodomise myself (that one from a mod) before needing a break.

Myrddin

@Permabear, some good points there

the groutch

smash wrote: »

This relies on user reporting, which I admit I just couldn't be bothered with any more unless it's blatant spam or scam posts. Then there's people on the opposite end of the spectrum who report everything.

this would be less of a problem if as suggested they make sure mods are significantly active within the forum(s) they moderate.

there are some categories where the mods are never seen or heard from except to dole out infractions/bans.

smash

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

This relies on user reporting, which I admit I just couldn't be bothered with any more unless it's blatant spam or scam posts. Then there's people on the opposite end of the spectrum who report everything.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

NyOmnishambles

o1s1n wrote: »

I'd also like to add that since the topics were changed I don't browse forums outside of my favourites at all now.

I don't actively avoid it, its just that previously it was so easy to do that it just happened naturally, as odd as that might sound.

Its like with every iteration of boards, less information is available on screen at once and youve to click down through more categories etc.

That little bit of extra hassle might not seem like much design wise but it really stops people from exploring the site.

Also, much to my annoyance but not necessarily everybody elses, they keep burying the New Posts link further and further away in the depths of the menus

I had heard it mentioned that not many people use it but found that hard to believe, probably not many use it now that it is even further buried but I find it a really handy feature and use it to stumble on threads and forums I wouldn't otherwise navigate too

It kind of ties in with the thinking that the more and more they try to make the site easy to navigate the less useful it is becoming

I don't mind change and wouldn't be one to give out about Boards trying but when you make something less useful and then seem to resist taking that feedback on board then that is not a good path

Plus at least get the layout working properly before trying to foist it on the masses because that is a sure way to kill any goodwill to a new venture

Wibbs

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Just to say... I'm happy..,,using the touch site so unaware of the gui grumblings.
Tis grand.

The touch site is also for the chop in favour of this new "improved" layout G. Now somebody is listening as the main site got a temporary reprieve and will keep going for at least this year. I presume that covers touch too.

Myrddin

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

"But that's not the way we think stickies should be used"

Just to play devils advocate here, & from my own personal understanding of stickies...threads should be 'stuck' because they are either locked like a charter for example, or quite important but not often posted in...to prevent them from falling down into the ether. I've never understood why hugely popular and regularly posted in threads are stuck in forums, there's no need at all if they're so busy and actively bumped all the time.

That said, hiding important threads like charters and other stuck threads behind another click is something I'm not a fan of personally.

evolving_doors

Just to say... I'm happy..,,using the touch site so unaware of the gui grumblings.
Tis grand.
We're all getting old so just a bit nostalgic for yor ma etc..
If you want to discuss a topic on a mature level , or ask for advice then boards is the place, ya sure , mods don't tolerate dikery (and sometimes people get the boot without a proper explanation). But if you want little or no moderation of debate or free for all spam then there's f other places.

Cookie_Monster

o1s1n wrote: »

Its like with every iteration of boards, less information is available on screen at once and youve to click down through more categories etc.

That little bit of extra hassle might not seem like much design wise but it really stops people from exploring the site.

This, a million times this!!!

But seems to be a common theme on the interwebs these days, dumb everything down as much as possible or hide as much info as possible, not sure why. Modern site design is appallingly bad.

Lovely Bloke

"But that's not the way we think stickies should be used"

Wibbs

+1 the recent Beta rollout makes this even worse. I mean who thought the idea of moving forum stickies to yet another level was a good one? Take one of the most popular and viewed threads on the site, the daily weather forecast in the weather forum. It's a sticky because, well it deserves to be one. Now it's not immediately visible in the beta site. Stickies are important threads, now gone stealth. That's before we get to forum charters and all that. I'd have loved to have been at that meeting. The mind genuinely boggles.

dinorebel

hullaballoo wrote: »

It's hackneyed at this stage but people (not just the young uns) have a dreadfully poor attention span these days as well.

I'd disagree w

o1s1n

I'd also like to add that since the topics were changed I don't browse forums outside of my favourites at all now.

I don't actively avoid it, its just that previously it was so easy to do that it just happened naturally, as odd as that might sound.

Its like with every iteration of boards, less information is available on screen at once and youve to click down through more categories etc.

That little bit of extra hassle might not seem like much design wise but it really stops people from exploring the site.

Wibbs

Baldy Conscience wrote: »

Many people have stated this, but it's being ignored.

Used to be that I'd hover over (for example) "Science" and then the drop down would come, and I'd see the list of "sciency" topics and go into them one by one. I literally never do that any more, because nothing happens automatically any more. It's effort. I've no particular interest in any of the science topics at all, so I don't make the effort to go into them.

But "The Office" either don't understand the issue there, or are of the opinion that there is a huge horde of people just waiting for a major site redesign before actually posting. How many different "betas" have we seen in the last couple of years? Has the posting base increased or decreased?

+1. Never mind the real world costs in time, effort and money these rejigs have accrued. The "I don't even…" meme really springs to mind here.

smash wrote: »

But on these platforms(specifically facebook) there's no expectation of anonymity because they're your personal profile. Forums are different as they're an open discussion medium where you don't need to disclose personal information. This works for good and for bad as on one end people don't have to put out details they don't want to, but on the other hand there's no personal responsibility for trolling and targeting.

Hence trolling and targeting is jumped on by mods here. Again Boards is much more proactive on this front compared to other forums.

Given that you can't resurrect old threads, one option is to hide inactive threads over a certain age. This would knock SEO on a business level but it would make 'post stalking' a whole lot more constrained and give at least the illusion of some privacy.

Illusion indeed and IMH that's an awful idea.

I also suggested before that boards could charge for account removal or destruction if people really wanted it.

You own, or should own your words and opinions. If you don't want to own them, then don't post them. I personally would be dead set against this except in criminal cases.

I'm more so talking about the reason for people closing accounts and starting new ones repeatedly to limit their digital footprint.

While in most cases attracting more attention to themselves. It would be my opinion that most cases of account closure is more to do with a temporary flounce and storm off in a huff than any limiting of their digital footprint. The fact that so many keep coming back, often within the same day says much. Hell, I've seen one example where they came back to the same thread. Yeah, way to go deep undercover dark web alright. That's James Bond stuff alright, where he tells everybody his name and every gimp behind every bar in the known world knows his drinks order.

I can understand links to blogs/fb etc in signatures for regulars of say the photography or beauty blogging forums who are trying to gain an audience for their work. It's when they step outside of their regular space that they realise how vulnerable they are.

You see, maybe I'm just old or something, but I just don't get this. You want attention so you seek it out by firing your deets* and opinions onto the interwebs for all to see, but you only want the right type of attention and feel entitled to it? Hate to break it to folks but the world doesn't work like that the online world most certainly doesn't. IMH we need this hammered into people at school from an early age.

Again Boards.ie is one of the most proactive in dealing with online stalking, bullying and comes down very hard on it. No matter how proactive they are you still can't legislate for the naive.

Private forums are becoming popular around here for a reason

Private forums are popular enough, but from what I've gleaned over the years there are few that survive in rude health for very long. There are a lot of dead ones I believe. And don't for one minute imagine low level group manipulation, trolling and cliquish behaviour doesn't go on in them either.

*I'm down with the kidz.

the groutch

the moving of certain threads from AH to smaller outlying forums because AH apparently "isn't for chat" certainly isn't helping.

smash

Wibbs wrote: »

Social networks are upping their privacy more from government influences than anything else. People are only too happy to put their personal details up in public, indeed many are downright competitive about it. Never underestimate the interwebs attention seeker. They're everywhere, or Facebook, twitter, snapchat et al wouldn't be so damned popular.

But on these platforms(specifically facebook) there's no expectation of anonymity because they're your personal profile. Forums are different as they're an open discussion medium where you don't need to disclose personal information. This works for good and for bad as on one end people don't have to put out details they don't want to, but on the other hand there's no personal responsibility for trolling and targeting.

Wibbs wrote: »

As for people feeling "safe", how can a forum like Boards make things any safer? There is an expectation that you're a grown adult, you've a choice of username, more you've a choice of your personal details you put out there.

Given that you can't resurrect old threads, one option is to hide inactive threads over a certain age. This would knock SEO on a business level but it would make 'post stalking' a whole lot more constrained and give at least the illusion of some privacy. I also suggested before that boards could charge for account removal or destruction if people really wanted it.

Wibbs wrote: »

You can be as anon and safe as you want, or not. Somewhere like Boards is a lot less personal and vulnerable than somewhere like Facebook. I have no clue who you are, so long as you make the choice not to tell me who you are. As I pointed out at the time of the international celeb phone hack; there are no pics of my willie on the interwebs, because I don't take pictures of my willie and upload them to the interwebs. Blindingly obvious but there you go.

I'm more so talking about the reason for people closing accounts and starting new ones repeatedly to limit their digital footprint.

Wibbs wrote: »

More than once I've had fellow Board's folk PM me complaining that they were being "stalked on Boards", only for me to find that they had a link to their blog/facebook account in their profile. Yep people can be that slow on the uptake. There is nothing that Boards or any forum can do about this and what can be done has already been done with bans on doxxing etc(including getting the cops involved in some cases).

I can understand links to blogs/fb etc in signatures for regulars of say the photography or beauty blogging forums who are trying to gain an audience for their work. It's when they step outside of their regular space that they realise how vulnerable they are. Private forums are becoming popular around here for a reason.