Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Changes to Boards.ie Ltd. company structure

Options
1246

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Loughc
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 24,727 Mod ✭✭✭✭Loughc


    jimmynokia wrote: »
    The Journal has got a bad name of late for deleting valid factual comments that dont suit their narrative or break their rules along with agenda pushing articles lets hope it dont go like that here

    It won’t as the journal aren’t mods or admins here and they can’t control our content. Only our community can control the content.


  • Options
    #93
    jimmynokia
    Registered Users Posts: 6,467 ✭✭✭jimmynokia


    Loughc wrote:
    It won’t as the journal aren’t mods or admins here and they can’t control our content. Only our community can control the content.

    Good to hear. Boards is a great site and community with valid information, news and insights.


  • Options
    #94
    Gatling
    Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Loughc wrote: »
    It won’t as the journal aren’t mods or admins here and they can’t control our content. Only our community can control the content.

    But would there be a possibility in the future that they literally take over and impose their own agenda and set the legal department on anything that they don't want discussed?

    Interesting times
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • Options
    #95
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Gatling wrote: »
    But would there be a possibility in the future that they literally take over and impose their own agenda and set the legal department on anything that they don't want discussed?

    Interesting times
    Trust me G, while some mods might go along with that, a much larger percentage would kick back in a big way.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #96
    kneemos
    Registered Users Posts: 20,408 ✭✭✭✭kneemos


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Trust me G, while some mods might go along with that, a much larger percentage would kick back in a big way.


    He who can't pay the piper gets told what to do.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Since a lot of this is about ad revenue and making a business profitable (which makes sense) I have a concern, thejournal.ie is renowned for moderating to advertisers concerns and comments derogatory of brands advertising on the site or opinions that go against the brands 'social image' are often removed. Considering you will likely be featuring ads from the same brands and businesses can you guarantee that boards.ie bending rules to suit advertisers will not become an issue ?


  • Options
    #98
    Kuva
    Closed Accounts Posts: 870 ✭✭✭Kuva


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Trust me G, while some mods might go along with that, a much larger percentage would kick back in a big way.

    They can move on, theirs always more Mods.


  • Options
    #99
    kneemos
    Registered Users Posts: 20,408 ✭✭✭✭kneemos


    Like the mods give a shoite.


  • Options
    #100
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Kuva wrote: »
    They can move on, theirs always more Mods.
    True K, but it's been my observation that it's harder to find people who will do it, and could do it. Especially for the heavy traffic forums. TBH and I've been here a while and started out modding PI, which was bloody heavy traffic, and had a few others that needed a lot of attention at the time, I wouldn't do it now. Why? Because in the past *harp music* there was more of a sense of a wider community, where Boards beers were a thing and got large enough numbers and there was more a connection to the place and the feeling, daft as it may sound, of actually contributing to an Irish online community. That's less in play overall, though can be in play in local forums. That's a part of the wider choice of scattergun social media I suppose. Which brings the good and bad.
    kneemos wrote: »
    Like the mods give a shoite.
    Do they give as much of a shite as they might have ten years ago K? No, generally not as much, but a shite most do give. Less about Boards as an overall community, but very much where it might concern their local end of it. I can say that if we got a missive from on high that we have to start promoting Slant A, mods and admins would most definitely kick up stink and shedloads would walk away. I would and I'd not be alone.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #101
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,285 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Well whatever you think, I do give a shoite. I commit a hell of a lot to this site, and have done so for a number of years, be it modding, Cmodding, Adminning, or supporting the annual SSF appeal or other charitable causes. I also post extensively across the site contributing to numerous discussions, including feedback threads like this.

    Now if this site goes up in flames I would be very disappointed. Would it mean much to me over time? - there re many other things I can and do occupy my time with including a very rewarding job. Yes I would miss the place, but I would also get over it.

    Now if the "powers that be" started dictating content I would step down as an Admin. I would probably make my feelings known and I may back off or even withdraw from using the site completely. I have used this site to document much of my life and feelings over nearly a decade. I get a hell of a lot out of this place, but I. like many others (including I presume the naysayers in this thread), would not accept any interference like that - it would destroy the site, so why the hell would anyone even think about it?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    kneemos
    Registered Users Posts: 20,408 ✭✭✭✭kneemos


    Beasty wrote: »
    Well whatever you think, I do give a shoite. I commit a hell of a lot to this site, and have done so for a number of years, be it modding, Cmodding, Adminning, or supporting the annual SSF appeal or other charitable causes. I also post extensively across the site contributing to numerous discussions, including feedback threads like this.

    Now if this site goes up in flames I would be very disappointed. Would it mean much to me over time? - there re many other things I can and do occupy my time with including a very rewarding job. Yes I would miss the place, but I would also get over it.

    Now if the "powers that be" started dictating content I would step down as an Admin. I would probably make my feelings known and I may back off or even withdraw from using the site completely. I have used this site to document much of my life and feelings over nearly a decade. I get a hell of a lot out of this place, but I. like many others (including I presume the naysayers in this thread), would not accept any interference like that - it would destroy the site, so why the hell would anyone even think about it?



    Sooooo the site is moderated and controlled to within an inch of its life but if the new owners don't want a few of their advertisers upset you're willing to walk.


  • Options
    #103
    dudara
    Registered Users Posts: 33,519 ✭✭✭✭dudara


    kneemos wrote: »
    Like the mods give a shoite.

    I don’t think I’d be wrong to say that most mods do actually give a sh*te.

    Personally I do this because I have gotten a lot from Boards and I want to support this community. When HQ told the Admins about this news, I actually raised a lot of the same concerns as people are sharing here. I too would be skeptical about what could happen in the longer term.

    To put it simply, I still remain a tad skeptical. But no one can predict the future. What I do know about the present day is that we have a vocal user base who are not shy about sharing their opinions, and a strong opinionated group of mods. I’m not concerned right now.


  • Options
    #104
    muffler
    Registered Users Posts: 45,820 ✭✭✭✭muffler


    kneemos wrote: »
    Like the mods give a shoite.
    I think you're talking through your hole if Im being honest


  • Options
    #105
    muffler
    Registered Users Posts: 45,820 ✭✭✭✭muffler


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Trust me G, while some mods might go along with that, a much larger percentage would kick back in a big way.
    and it aint that long ago that the journal kicked mods in the nuts by reopening an old wound just when it was almost healed :mad:


  • Options
    #106
    s3rtvdbwfj81ch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭s3rtvdbwfj81ch


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    can you guarantee that boards.ie bending rules to suit advertisers will not become an issue ?

    What you mean like allowing an active shill to throw money at them and get a legit presence on the site?

    Or a dodgy lotto gambling company placing advertorials without the gambling aware notices?

    Things like that, is it?


  • Options
    #107
    Cabaal
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,462 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    Gatling wrote: »
    But would there be a possibility in the future that they literally take over and impose their own agenda and set the legal department on anything that they don't want discussed?

    Interesting times

    Would be a very big job to do that,
    There's ALOT of mods on boards.ie,


  • Options
    #108
    CruelCoin
    Registered Users Posts: 4,468 ✭✭✭CruelCoin


    dudara wrote: »
    To put it simply, I still remain a tad skeptical. But no one can predict the future. What I do know about the present day is that we have a vocal user base who are not shy about sharing their opinions, and a strong opinionated group of mods. I’m not concerned right now.

    Any chance that Sean lad could come back to answer some more questions put to him?


  • Options
    #109
    Boards.ie: Mark
    Boards.ie Employee Posts: 5,461 ✭✭✭✭✭Boards.ie: Mark
    Boards.ie Employee


    Kuva wrote: »
    Only have to look at Feedback to see what I say is true.

    Post thanking was removed so that the admin/Mod thanks wh*ring to everything happening the community didn't want was less of a two finger salut.

    Shut the whole thing done when you get sick of all the complaining.

    Stupid smiley face --> :)

    We outlined at the time that Feedback was being distorted and was being used by some with nefarious purposes. It went through some changes and was reviewed before being opened up in its current format, which supports thanks as was requested. As we've said, those who can't provide feedback because they don't meet the criteria (or simply want to provide it in public), can e-mail us or send via Private Message.

    Equally stupid smiley face --> :D
    CruelCoin wrote: »
    That doesn't really make much sense.
    This is a set of private enterprises where people work at the behest and instruction of the owner. Just because the legal paperwork has changed, it does not mean that suddenly x company is now magically able to work with y company by cross selling ads, etc.

    They've always been able to do that.

    "Now we can work together better" is a smokescreen if indeed both companies have been owned by the same people all this time.

    It'd be nice if we got told the real reason for the change.

    This streamlines and formalises the sales process and offerings, and means that the sales team (as a whole) can more effectively sell ads. No ulterior motive here.
    sexmag wrote: »
    What? So you're saying volunteers of this sight who agreed to work on it for free will just call shiz out with higher ups if they feel something is not right.....because???? Why? They can be unmoded and umadminded (not words I know but couldn't think of anything else right now) with a click and there's nothing the can do about it, it wouldn't be a big fuss,wouldn't go public's as it's not a court case.

    The higher ups have sweeping control of everything and everyone on this site and you expect us to believe that thos is all kept in check by the non paid admins and mods???

    Pull the other one lads

    Edit: I fully endorse and agree that distilled media, the journal.ie and boards.ie are separate entities with no affiliation and would in now way ever try to plan or execute a strategy that would sway interest in distilled medias favour and knowingly doop or disieve the user of boards.ie

    *cough* *cough*

    Wow what happened i blacked out for a second?

    As randylonghorn says, the threat of being de-modded isn't much of a threat. Mods selflessly give up free time to provide an integral - and often thankless - service and they will only do that if they value the site and what it is doing. This also ties into the idea that content, etc. will be clamped down on. As DeVore so eloquently put it, "without our admins and mods and users ... we're f**ked."

    Now, while I wouldn't stretch so far as to say "fear" as deco nate did, I can understand why there might be some nervousness. But that's why Sean has outlined what's happening, why it's happening, and what changes are to come.

    How can I? User's guide to some features on the new site



  • Options
    #110
    kneemos
    Registered Users Posts: 20,408 ✭✭✭✭kneemos


    Needs new management anyway. The current lot are obviously making a balls of it


  • Options
    #111
    Loughc
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 24,727 Mod ✭✭✭✭Loughc


    kneemos wrote: »
    Needs new management anyway. The current lot are obviously making a balls of it

    What would you do differently?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    kneemos
    Registered Users Posts: 20,408 ✭✭✭✭kneemos


    Loughc wrote: »
    What would you do differently?


    Keep the local forums,lose most of the rest,stop infantalising its members.


  • Options
    #113
    Loughc
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 24,727 Mod ✭✭✭✭Loughc


    kneemos wrote: »
    Keep the local forums,lose most of the rest,stop infantalising its members.

    And how would you generate revenue to cover the costs to maintain the site?


  • Options
    #114
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    Loughc wrote: »
    And how would you generate revenue to cover the costs to maintain the site?

    Its impossible to come up with an answer of any use without knowing what ARE the costs to maintain the site?

    Hardware, software, licenses, running costs, staff, rent/heat/light?

    What does each cost annually?

    What are other costs?


  • Options
    #115
    kneemos
    Registered Users Posts: 20,408 ✭✭✭✭kneemos


    Loughc wrote: »
    And how would you generate revenue to cover the costs to maintain the site?


    The drop in revenue is presumably due to the drop in usage. If what you're doing isn't working maybe a change is needed?


  • Options
    #116
    Loughc
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 24,727 Mod ✭✭✭✭Loughc


    kneemos wrote: »
    The drop in revenue is presumably due to the drop in usage. If what you're doing isn't working maybe a change is needed?

    I never said there was a drop in revenue, I was asking how you would raise revenue for boards if you were in charge?


  • Options
    #117
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,285 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    kneemos wrote: »
    Needs new management anyway. The current lot are obviously making a balls of it
    I take it you have never been involved in the running of any business?


  • Options
    #118
    Tokyo
    Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,655 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tokyo


    kneemos wrote: »
    Racism gets a free reign anyway.
    kneemos wrote: »
    It's a children's website basically. Can't use swear words or be mean to other posters.
    If it wasn't true it would be comical.

    Definitely working though. No need for changes.
    kneemos wrote: »
    He who can't pay the piper gets told what to do.
    kneemos wrote: »
    Like the mods give a shoite.
    kneemos wrote: »
    Sooooo the site is moderated and controlled to within an inch of its life but if the new owners don't want a few of their advertisers upset you're willing to walk.
    kneemos wrote: »
    Needs new management anyway. The current lot are obviously making a balls of it


    Genuine question - why are you still here?

    I appreciate the need for feedback both positive and negative is critical of the site - it keeps us on our toes and hopefully drives the site in a direction that most people want to see the site going in. But these are nothing but backhanded swipes piggybacking on the comments of others that add absolutely nothing to the conversation.

    Admin: Please don't post in the thread again.


  • Options
    #119
    Boards.ie: Sean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 212 ✭✭Boards.ie: Sean


    sexmag wrote: »
    What? So you're saying volunteers of this sight who agreed to work on it for free will just call shiz out with higher ups if they feel something is not right.....because???? Why? They can be unmoded and umadminded (not words I know but couldn't think of anything else right now) with a click and there's nothing the can do about it, it wouldn't be a big fuss,wouldn't go public's as it's not a court case.

    The higher ups have sweeping control of everything and everyone on this site and you expect us to believe that thos is all kept in check by the non paid admins and mods???

    Pull the other one lads

    Edit: I fully endorse and agree that distilled media, the journal.ie and boards.ie are separate entities with no affiliation and would in now way ever try to plan or execute a strategy that would sway interest in distilled medias favour and knowingly doop or disieve the user of boards.ie

    *cough* *cough*

    Wow what happened i blacked out for a second?

    I would say, as one of those 'higher ups', that if we did have sweeping control over everything and exercised that control then we won't be having this conversation in the first place because we would have deleted all these critical posts and banned all the users who wrote them. We haven't and we didn't.

    If the theory is that we censor things we don't like then look this thread or any of the other threads that I've been posting in to see some fairly robust feedback to me and the team, none of which was censored even though some of the comments are highly critical of the decisions we've taken.

    We don't have some hidden agenda to only have content on the site that we like or endorse (if we did selling advertising would be sooo much easier). When deciding whether you believe this or not I'd just ask that people use conversations such as this as indicators of the fact that control of what is said on the site is in the hands of our users (as long as it says within our Terms of Use, of course) and we are happy to take whatever feedback there is on the chin and respond to it as best we can.

    One of the regular conversations we have with advertisers is that if they advertise on Boards they need to understand that the power of the platform comes from the fact that it is driven by our users and that means that at times the content won't always be what they'd like to see (this is what I meant when I said it would be much easier to sell advertising if this wasn't the case, some advertisers get a bit scared by that and decide not to book with us). However, we are firm on that line, we haven't compromised on that principle to date, nor will we.


  • Options
    #120
    Boards.ie: Sean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 212 ✭✭Boards.ie: Sean


    deco nate wrote: »
    Good, I hope it's true.
    Given some trouble with off shore gambling sites ads not conforming as of 2 days ago.

    I really hope for the best


    Edit:



    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057901419


    Tbh, I find this kind of advertise disgusting.
    To Say the least.

    On that specific issue (a recent sponsored post on Boards promoting a lottery website that do not contain a message encouraging responsible gambling) that was a mistake (not a deliberate one), we hold our hands up on it and are grateful to our users for alerting us to it.

    Our position on gambling is:
    We will carry gambling ads on the site - there is a precedent for this, we have carried ads such as Paddy Power on the site for many years and will continue to do so
    It is our policy that all gambling ads must to compliant with industry standards and codes of practice

    In the case of the sponsored post in question, we went back to the advertiser, requested that the content is updated to include the necessary message around responsible gambling and informed them that if this was not done then we would remove the post from the site. Once we did that the content was updated as requested.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    Boards.ie: Sean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 212 ✭✭Boards.ie: Sean


    CruelCoin wrote: »
    That doesn't really make much sense.
    This is a set of private enterprises where people work at the behest and instruction of the owner. Just because the legal paperwork has changed, it does not mean that suddenly x company is now magically able to work with y company by cross selling ads, etc.

    They've always been able to do that.

    "Now we can work together better" is a smokescreen if indeed both companies have been owned by the same people all this time.

    It'd be nice if we got told the real reason for the change.

    Don't know what to tell you other than the real reason for the change is exactly what we've said in this thread.

    Boards and Journal Media operated two independent sales teams, combining those teams and selling across the two sites makes sense for both companies. Sure, we could leave things as they are but we could be carrying lots of costly inefficiencies (trying to coordinate two independent sales team so we don't overbook the sites, running two independent and separate ad servers resulting in lots of increased setup times for cross site campaigns and increased costs, each of the sales teams lacking expertise in the other site negating a lot of the benefits of selling both sites as a package .. I could go on).

    So, if we are going to sell across both sites then the question is ... how to you structure things to be as efficient as possible and that makes most sense in terms of running the two businesses? And looking at the various options the most efficient way to do it is as we have proposed.

    The decision is that simple! There is no other hidden agenda, it is simply looking at how best to run the business for the future. But making that decision only when we can give the guarantee (as we have done repeatedly in this thread) that from a site and community perspective nothing will change.

    Now people might be sceptical and that is their prerogative but I'd ask them to judge us by our actions rather than immediately assuming the worst. If in the weeks and months ahead particular agendas are being pushed on the site by management, if users are being censored and removed, if the advertisers can do whatever they want on the site ... then fair enough, kick up blue muder or walk away or both.

    But we've said that isn't going and even if you don't believe us 'higher ups' at least give us the chance to show you that we mean it before assuming that we don't!


Advertisement