You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
3

[–] yerwanontheinside [S] 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

FIVE


---

User: b_user_9

+1 on ridding of the user tags and the like. Far far too clique'y at best. And yeah, theres nothing more miserable in an otherwise
health topic discussion than a plethora of 'closed accounts' under users' names. Just emphasises emptiness.

---

User: b_user_24

How many big posters have abandoned their well-recognised accounts after being mentioned on the site-that-must-not-
be-named? I reckon that has to take some of the blame (as well as all of the issues raised in previous posts).
People complain about cliques, but being able to chat with posters and build a community vibe is important too. Little things like
having to remove photographs bites away from the potential for posters to get to know each other a bit.
I haven't had a face-to-face chat or a pint with another moderator in forever.

---

User: b_user_25

The other thing that seems to turn people off is zombie threads.
The search function is probably the only part of the site to function(ish). Is there a way of archiving threads so that old threads
don't feature high in the list? Being honest if I see a new thread and click in and the OP is from 6 years ago, I'm going to leave the
thread because none of it is relevant.
I also think that there can be too many forums and choices. Unless you know how to navigate the site, when you arrive it's a
nightmare to find anything. I understand that there needs to be more specific places for certain topics (like individual sports) but
there are so many specific forums that seem redundant.
The rules can also be off putting.
I'm not sure if any of these things would help.
And as for the site that can't be named, votamorte if you will, I don't mind if my pic shows up there. IMO if someone posts a photo
of themselves online then it's in the public domain, unless they request otherwise. If we had a new "know your boardsie" thread
with that warning in an OP? Face to a name...


---

User: b_user_10

Without being seen to be overly negative but does this really need yet another feedback thread? I can't imagine that much else
can be added to the thousands of words that have already been contributed to feedback and have yet to be actioned.
The time for talking is done. The office need to act and act decisively.

In fact the time to act was 3 or 4 months ago when it was evident that the new site was an absolute failure.

---

User: b_user_26

Trying to fix a major problem with sticky plasters isn't working and thats the impression I'm getting as to how this site is currently
being run. If Im wrong then lets hear from the owners, not the office staff nor the Admin team, but the actual business owners who
could and should advise as to how and when we can see an improvement and what plans there are for investment to keep old
smokin Joe afloat.

---

User: b_user_14

I think we're becoming too fixated on feedback from the general membership. I had an experience this week where I bowed down
to the baying crowd and in doing so actually left the OP down.
Closed a thread that was getting totally derailed but left option for the OP to reopen with update. Some posters took to the
feedback thread to moan about it and to cut a long story short the thread ended up in AH where the masses had great fun taking
the proverbial out of the OP's situation and was actually zero help to him. We shouldn't be made second guess our decisions to
keep an element happy. Actually got a pm from the OP thanking me for trying to help him by keeping it on topic. He posted looking
for help not to be AH fodder.
A bit like the soft touch modding, sometimes we have to be assertive to nip trouble in the bud and not listen to the troublemakers
when they take to feedback to vent at the rules /charters being applied.
All it takes is someone to make a comment like "it's killing the site" or the like and panic breaks out

---