Can we talk about AH?

Skylinehead · 09-06-2019 8:59pm

Deleted User wrote: »

item three, imo, the mods have clearly stated isnt being breached.

Actually I've clearly stated the exact opposite, don't misrepresent me.

09-06-2019 9:01pm

Skylinehead wrote: »

Actually I've clearly stated the exact opposite, don't misrepresent me.

sorry, "the mods" isnt meant as a dictat. stramge of you to take is as one but thats your prerogative.

the majority of mods addressing the topic

obviously you have differed, as weve seen in the thread being discussed

Skylinehead · 09-06-2019 9:05pm

Deleted User wrote: »

sorry, "the mods" isnt meant as a dictat. stramge of you to take is as one but thats your prerogative.

the majority of mods addressing the topic

obviously you have differed, as weve seen in the thread being discussed

I don't think so. Which (AH) mod has said otherwise? The key word in the charter not being adhered to, by the way, is lighthearted.

09-06-2019 9:10pm

i dont be checking which mods/admins commenting in that capacity in the thread do so as AH mods so that wasnt stipulated

"lighthearted" is, youll forgive me for saying, a hell of a thing to decide to act upon against one or two individuals after almost seventy pages of that thread.

everyone else was lightheartedly throwing around the term "homophobic"?

i understand totally the disinclination of mods to litigate in-thread, and i dont know whether its in any way appropriate to do so here, but its not irrelevant to call the above out imo

Skylinehead · 09-06-2019 9:13pm

Deleted User wrote: »

i dont be checking which mods/admins commenting in that capacity in the thread do so as AH mods so that wasnt stipulated

"lighthearted" is, youll forgive me for saying, a hell of a thing to decide to act upon against one or two individuals after almost seventy pages of that thread.

everyone else was lightheartedly throwing around the term "homophobic"?

i understand totally the disinclination of mods to litigate in-thread, and i dont know whether its in any way appropriate to do so here, but its not irrelevant to call the above out imo

Sorry, think our wires got crossed there. I was stating that about AH in general, realise now you're talking about that specific thread.

gozunda · 09-06-2019 9:15pm

Odhinn wrote: »

It's been been high levels of trollery in two or three threads, tbh.

The complaints have not necessarily been thread specific imo. It comes across more as a general whinge directed at all AH ...

If there are genuine trolls - report them. However kiboshing all and sundry because some don't like contrary views is not helpful for any discussion.

09-06-2019 9:24pm

Skylinehead wrote: »

Sorry, think our wires got crossed there. I was stating that about AH in general, realise now you're talking about that specific thread.

thats fairer. if my reference to the modding in the specific thread is out of order so, ill delete (or feel free to do so)

Skylinehead · 09-06-2019 9:26pm

Deleted User wrote: »

thats fairer. if my reference to the modding in the specific thread is out of order so, ill delete (or feel free to do so)

In that thread, I stepped in yesterday after it was being utterly derailed. Have barely been in since tbh.

KikiLaRue · 09-06-2019 10:06pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

ive to be honest

everyone i see in this thread demanding mods gwt more involved is guiltier on the threads in question of items one and two

item three, imo, the mods have clearly stated isnt being breached.

Honestly it’s very hard not to get caught up in it and be civilized to someone when they are consistently posting anti-women, anti-traveller, anti-Muslim threads.

It’s not a side of myself I like but it’s very difficult not to bite back sometimes.

Faugheen · 09-06-2019 10:06pm

Buford T. Justice VI wrote: »

That's the fundamental issue here, I think.

It's like posters have, for the first time in their life, come across somebody that has an opposing viewpoint to themselves and don't have idea how to engage in a discussion.

Despite the ability of the internet to open the whole world to people, it seems like the first time they have pulled back the curtain and looked outside.

This isn't about 'viewpoints'. My posts in the thread were telling those who were saying it wasn't homophobic that it was so. The Met Police said it was, but the geniuses in the thread want to deny it and play it down.

There's having views and there's trying to deny and play down facts, like that homophobic attack thread.

09-06-2019 10:14pm

KikiLaRue wrote: »

Honestly it’s very hard not to get caught up in it and be civilized to someone when they are consistently posting anti-women, anti-traveller, anti-Muslim threads.

It’s not a side of myself I like but it’s very difficult not to bite back sometimes.

despite being on the opposite side of this one (tho i think ive managed to avoid blaming muslims for anything *just* yet to be fair to myself) i get that.

but i think that too many people are too quick to reach for that magical 'cancellation' point when they see someone disagreeing, and the tendency to therefore rush to declare something anti-x occurs

and once its been declared theres no way back because online discourse in 2019 doesnt allow for that type of battle line to be redrawn

and once one poster crosses or is deemed to have crossed such a line, all too often ~every other poster~ has to be "with us or agin us" and it goes to sh1t from there. at the very best case, anyone not onside in any way will simply be ignored in favour of the easy target.

essentially, 'gotcha!, now you're cancelled, lock thread' cannot be something the moderators of after hours should be asked to support, its the very opposite of good discussion

all imo obv

MrFresh · 09-06-2019 10:15pm

Beasty wrote: »

That would discourage new sign-ups big time. Equally I suspect that if we were starting afresh there would not be an access request process for Soccer. And on that particular point, yes we see each extreme of the spectrum in Soccer, but they are simply at each end of the East Lancs Road (Liverpool and Manchester for those not familiar with the geography) - that's very different from the extremism encountered in AH (which itself is arguably on the back of wider changes to the political environment in recent years)

Do many new posters sign up for After Hours? I would have thought that people new to Boards sign up for more niche forums and get drawn to AH after a while.

Skylinehead wrote: »

First and foremost, I want AH to be fun.

This. There have been some great threads in the past, even threads at people's expense (Maria Bailey), but so often they just turn nasty. It's an unwelcoming place for many people of different backgrounds.

09-06-2019 10:24pm

MrFresh wrote: »

It's an unwelcoming place for many people of different backgrounds.

id just point out that this is speculative. as well to claim that its an unwelcoming place for anyone looking to debate controversial issues, or who holds politically incorrect opinions that are quite common in any pub or workplace in the country.

no one poster or group can say why new posters may or may not be posting on AH or anywhere else and its a bit of a political act to hang any one cause on

Harry Palmr · 09-06-2019 10:31pm

RasTa wrote: »

Ask yourself why does the soccer forum need restrictions before posting and if it worked, why aren't we implementing the same to AH

If football forum was run like After Hours it would look like the Thunderdome for five minutes and then be shut down. The way AH has become an arena for bigotry and ugly idelogy is rather depressing, it used to be fun but now it's st*rmfr*nt for toddlers. The admims should change the whole basis of the forum and nuke anything that is designed for division and conflict based on race, religion, creed, sexuality, gender, nationality, science, and a few other things. All these broad topics are covered elsewhere on boards.ie with dedicated moderators and charters.

MrFresh · 09-06-2019 10:31pm

Deleted User wrote: »

id just point out that this is speculative. as well to claim that its an unwelcoming place for anyone looking to debate controversial issues, or who holds politically incorrect opinions that are quite common in any pub or workplace in the country.

no one poster or group can say why new posters may or may not be posting on AH or anywhere else and its a bit of a political act to hang any one cause on

Well if it comes to a choice between making someone feel bad because they were born a certain way or making someone feel bad because their "politically incorrect" view is subject to ridicule or challenge then I don't really see a dilemma.

09-06-2019 10:36pm

MrFresh wrote: »

Well if it comes to a choice between making someone feel bad because they were born a certain way or making someone feel bad because their "politically incorrect" view is subject to ridicule or challenge then I don't really see a dilemma.

its not really for me to reiterate what has been said pretty well by a few mods in here already the past while and ive no interest in trying to debate the framing youve chosen to put on it so yknow there we are

Sweetemotion · 09-06-2019 10:39pm

MrFresh wrote: »

Well if it comes to a choice between making someone feel bad because they were born a certain way or making someone feel bad because their "politically incorrect" view is subject to ridicule or challenge then I don't really see a dilemma.

What if you are born a white male and take pride in being so?

Blueshoe · 09-06-2019 11:10pm

Why does there need to be moderation?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 10-06-2019 12:08am

Blueshoe wrote: »

Why does there need to be moderation?

I’ve participated in moderator-less forums. They are an absolute mess.

MrFresh · 10-06-2019 7:25am

Sweetemotion wrote: »

What if you are born a white male and take pride in being so?

What if you are?

dulpit · 10-06-2019 9:35am

Sweetemotion wrote: »

What if you are born a white male and take pride in being so?

Not sure how that addresses the original point. If you are super proud of your white maleness - off with you. If, however, your pride in being in the majority results in you posting rubbish in AH regarding how yours is better than somebody else on something they cannot control (e.g. the colour of their skin, the country they are born in, their ethnicity, gender, sexuality, etc), that should be nipped in the bud.

klaaaz · 10-06-2019 10:00am

KikiLaRue wrote: »

Honestly it’s very hard not to get caught up in it and be civilized to someone when they are consistently posting anti-women, anti-traveller, anti-Muslim threads.

It’s not a side of myself I like but it’s very difficult not to bite back sometimes.

So now you see what it's like dealing with that bunch in AH

The same bunch who have a problem with women also have a special vitriol for trans people, specifically trans women, not trans men. Spot the trend!

Omackeral · 10-06-2019 12:08pm

Blueshoe wrote: »

Why does there need to be moderation?

Look at YouTube comments and you'll see. For example, on a video of someone un-boxing a blender you'll see the N-word.

Pawwed Rig · 10-06-2019 12:33pm

Omackeral wrote: »

Look at YouTube comments and you'll see. For example, on a video of someone un-boxing a blender you'll see the N-word.

This exactly. Unmoderated forums are hellholes.

Reati · 10-06-2019 9:03pm

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

About 50% of people are reregs at this stage.

Its amazing how much of the abusive posting in AH are from accounts that where recently registered in the last few months. It's at the pint where I just look at the created date now and don't bother replying if it's a newer account with a massive postcount.

Apogee · 10-06-2019 9:12pm

Reati wrote: »

Its amazing how much of the abusive posting in AH are from accounts that where recently registered in the last few months. It's at the pint where I just look at the created date now and don't bother replying if it's a newer account with a massive postcount.

I will repeat a suggestion I made previously regarding AH and trolling by re-regs. Put a 3 or 6 month quarantine on any new user before they can post in AH - you could also stipulate a minimum number of posts in other forums.

It won't stop them entirely, but it will slow down the most egregious behaviour.

klaaaz · 10-06-2019 9:20pm

To be fair, i've noticed a few re-regs of the "alt-right" or the "Irish version of it" persuasion today and the mods quickly acted to remove them. They were posters who were out to attack vulnerable groups rather than to engage in discussion.

Sweetemotion · 10-06-2019 9:56pm

I don't think it's fair to use "these" re-regs as a sign of a rise of the far right on boards. It's more than likely just one sad individual getting his jollys from it and the mods on the most part are quick to deal with it. It's impossible for them to read every post and be here 24/7.

Pawwed Rig · 10-06-2019 9:59pm

Apogee wrote: »

I will repeat a suggestion I made previously regarding AH and trolling by re-regs. Put a 3 or 6 month quarantine on any new user before they can post in AH - you could also stipulate a minimum number of posts in .

It would solve the AH problem alright but most likely destroy the site. I don't know what percentage of posts on the site are AH posts but I would guess at 30% +. AH definitely has the most reported posts (being about 90% of the rpm in the fora that I am charged with).

Sweetemotion · 10-06-2019 10:05pm

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

It would solve the AH problem alright but most likely destroy the site. I don't know what percentage of posts on the site are AH posts but I would guess at 30% +. AH definitely has the most reported posts (being about 90% of the rpm in the fora that I am charged with).

At a guess, how many would be reported for someone simply holding a different opinion from the reporter?

Pawwed Rig · 10-06-2019 10:17pm

Sweetemotion wrote: »

At a guess, how many would be reported for someone simply holding a different opinion from the reporter?

I wouldn't know tbh. One of the AH mods could probably say. I get notifications of reported posts from all of the fora I cmod. There wouldn't be enough hours in the day to look at them all.

end of the road · 10-06-2019 10:28pm

Sweetemotion wrote: »

At a guess, how many would be reported for someone simply holding a different opinion from the reporter?

a good question to be fair. all though i think realistically it's probably not possible to give a difinitive answer, given that only the person reporting the post is likely to be the only one who would know if they are reporting it because they simply disagree with someone. i would imagine they don't put in the box that they are reporting it because they disagree with someone, or maybe some actually have done that?
my personal opinion is that reporting for such reasons happens quite a bit.

Sweetemotion · 10-06-2019 10:51pm

end of the road wrote: »

a good question to be fair. all though i think realistically it's probably not possible to give a difinitive answer, given that only the person reporting the post is likely to be the only one who would know if they are reporting it because they simply disagree with someone. i would imagine they don't put in the box that they are reporting it because they disagree with someone, or maybe some actually have done that?
my personal opinion is that reporting for such reasons happens quite a bit.

I get carded for being a dick and uncivil to other posters. Some on this thread think they shouldn't and find it an insult. It has to work both ways.

You yourself take a lot crap from other posters but I bet you have never reported anyone.

klaaaz · 10-06-2019 11:19pm

Sweetemotion wrote: »

I don't think it's fair to use "these" re-regs as a sign of a rise of the far right on boards. It's more than likely just one sad individual getting his jollys from it and the mods on the most part are quick to deal with it. It's impossible for them to read every post and be here 24/7.

They often do. There are two types, the first do reg and spout their nonsense to get a reaction for a small number of months and then disappear after closing their accounts and then come back under a different username.(the cycle continues)
Then the 2nd type, they get extremely upset like a baby throwing their toys outta the pram after extensive engaging on a few threads, get carded and banned after a longer period while posting. Both types have always being the majority of that "alt-right" who often try to influence opinion and do not even live in this country.

Faugheen · 10-06-2019 11:59pm

Belfast rape trial thread.

I'm providing legal facts yet the experts are allowed to spread lies in the thread.

This has been ongoing throughout that thread. I'm accused of saying they're guilty (despite saying multiple times not guilty is the right verdict) but yet they're allowed to say 'the jury thought everything was consensual and she was lying' yet they go unpunished and they're allowed express that 'view' as a fact, when it's an absolute lie and an assumption, and legally very, very dangerous.

Again, there's having 'views' and there's people arguing with actual facts and making stuff up to suit a provocative narrative.

People just refuse to actually engage and read posts properly, and dramatise their posts to make people actually providing facts look like they're saying something they're not.

I've reported a few posts before realising I'm wasting my time. There's **** like that in so many threads that mods simply have too much to do and it will just get missed.

Boom_Bap · 11-06-2019 9:29am

In relation to the minimum post count for AH, I should remind people that this type of thing has turned other previously busy fora into Ghost Towns and it's still being grumbled about, even on this thread....yes, I'm talking about the PCV2.0 restrictions

If it was put in place for AH, folk will be jumping to other fora to build a post count, which is not fair to other forums.

There will always be rereg's on a public forum. The best thing to do is keep reporting them.

Boards.ie: Niamh · 11-06-2019 10:00am

I've been off for a week, I haven't had a chance to catch up on this thread yet but it seems we're now discussing cases before the courts? Absolutely not. I'm closing the thread until I have time to clean it up and see if it's worth re-opening.

Thanks for the genuine feedback given so far.

EDIT: it's been brought to my attention that the post I referred to was not about a case before the courts - I thought it was something else, apologies. Please see my first point about not having caught up yet on a week worth of posts yet.

Can we talk about AH?

Comments