Bambi wrote: » How would one go about this
Toto Wolfcastle wrote: » I don't agree that moderation is killing the place, but there are certainly mods who take moderation way way too seriously. There are mods who suck the fun out of the forum by enforcing the 'no off-topic posts' rule completely with no room for a bit of common sense. I don't think this is done out of badness, just eagerness. And if you're a new user who happens to post in one of these forums and the first reply you get is from a mod giving out to you in bold, why would you bother to come back? It also pushes existing users away. I post almost exclusively in one forum these days, but I used to at least read a lot of others that I don't go near now.
Spanish Eyes wrote: » Fear of saying something out of line (moderation policy) is killing this place.
kneemos wrote: » Don't think it's for fear of saying something put of line,but they've taken away the element of self regulation that exists on other sites,if something is out of line or idiotic people will respond accordingly. It used to be like that here more so but now it's left to the mods to control and it's turned bland and nit picky. Less moderation doesn't mean it will turn into a monster of some sort,reddit for example works fine with little or none,as do most others I'm sure. There's a definite overbearing feel about the place.
intheclouds wrote: » Ah lads, why cant we just go back to this - so much info on screen! No ads!https://web.archive.org/web/20110505195603/http://www.boards.ie/
LizT wrote: » I'd forgotten the site used to look like that. I miss it. Using that look, the first time you click onto boards, you get around 50 thread titles displayed on the front page. Using the legacy site, you get about 25 (and you can click for more, so it's taking twice as many clicks to get the same amount of threads. I know it technically loads more threads as you get 3 pages of them but it takes more clicks) Using the beta site you get 12 threads displayed (and the first one you see is a "sponsored post"), at least I do anyway. Am I the only one who doesn't see the sense in this? I'm far more likely to use the home page if I have 50 threads available to me to click into.
Faith wrote: » Control Panel -> Edit Options -> Forum Skin. Change to something other than "Beta".
Toto Wolfcastle wrote: » I don't agree that moderation is killing the place, but there are certainly mods who take moderation way way too seriously. There are mods who suck the fun out of the forum by enforcing the 'no off-topic posts' rule completely with no room for a bit of common sense. I don't think this is done out of badness, just eagerness.
gandalf wrote: » Imho one of the biggest strengths of boards is the fact it is moderated. Personally as an ex-mod I think the DRP process has weakened this. I would be oldskool and an advocate of the Judge Dredd line of moderating "I am the Law".
LizT wrote: » I'd forgotten the site used to look like that.
Why is it that every redesign is resulting in users having to make more clicks to get to where they want to go?
Mountainsandh wrote: » Same here, so much to offer with 50 threads on display. Any forum I've ever read has had a similar, simple, accessible layout. I don't have the motivation and/or time to click to see what's inside a forum with a succinct front page. But if a thread title titillates my curiosity, I'll find the time. And the variety of threads that used to be displayed meant there could be 4 or 5 I'd be interested in; now I'd be lucky if there's one.
Wibbs wrote: » I agree with the rest of your post G, but not this. It kinda worked when it was a smaller community, but more than once a couple of mods went a bit rogue too. And it increased the gap between posters and mods. That's still an issue on Boards and there are/have been mods who are over zealous(see above), no need to encourage it.
KERSPLAT! wrote: » So much this. As was pointed out before, so many posters, mods and cmods, in this thread and others, are providing constructive feedback but it doesn't seem like it will be taken on board. They'll plough on until it's too late.
Esel wrote: » Do the admin have any clout in the business side of Boards though?
Faith wrote: » The thing that really frustrates me is the concrete thinking in Boards HQ. It's like they can't possibly look at a situation in more than one way. For months (years?) we've had posters complaining about new layouts, and all HQ ever respond with is "Well, yeah, but this is how we're doing it". They've poured so much money into this redesign that they're terrified to admit they were wrong, so they're plowing ahead with it despite vocal, reasoned opposition.
Esel wrote: Do the admin have any clout in the business side of Boards though?
gandalf wrote: » Touch was ****e
Wibbs wrote: » Secondly designers are coming from the visuals, even GUI designers, so if it looks "modern" and "slick" it's fine. Thirdly design leaves far more wriggle room for bullshít.
Permabear wrote: » This post had been deleted.
Boards.ie is also quite hard to find your way around; something that Coughlan acknowledges and wants to improve. At the moment boards is free to use and makes its money through advertising and “Talk To” forums, where companies like Bank of Ireland and UPC, to give just two examples, set-up their own forums and get customer feedback on their companies and services. For the ordinary user, Coughlan says, “I want to find ways to increase ease of access. And then there are conversations happening on boards.ie which are very relevant to what’s going on in Ireland . . . There is the potential to shape those conversations and inform people about them.”
smash wrote: » Well that went well, didn't it?
Wibbs wrote: » Going on current evidence no, he doesn't have "good ideas". Reads like the usual business puff piece to me.
LuckyLloyd wrote: » Leaving aside the debate about the design direction, there's the more straightforward question of competent delivery. I volunteered to test a beta version of the iOS app and didn't bother beyond a half hour or so after receiving it
smash wrote: » ............... :rolleyes: I think what sums it up nicely is this statement: Coughlan seems to have a mystical attachment to the word entrepreneur.