Talk:Boards.ie

message: MCD PRODUCTIONS currently have taken legal action against Boards.ie. Maybe a sentance on that. --Dark archeus 07:26, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article you link to is behind a paywall. Would be interested to know more about this case and the outcome. 90.200.83.180 (talk) 18:10, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Legal Action

message: Oil company seeks and obtains order to name individuals who posted damaging remarks on boards.ie against it: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/1129/1224327258662.html  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.125.4.168 (talk) 01:02, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The article you link to is behind a paywall. Would be interested to know more about this case and the outcome. 90.200.83.180 (talk) 18:10, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Legal Action Nov. 2012 

message: This article survived a Vote for Deletion. The discussion can be found here. -Splash 02:47, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Vote for Deletion

message: Boards basically used trickery to wrongfully gain a '.ie' domain name under false pretences in the first place, and thus became a Limited company ... which should in no way hinder it on Wikipedia. Boards became big simply because of this bit of trickery, as everyone else played by the rules, and the two combined mean it should be noted on Wikipedia. Strange reasoning indeed ...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.125.4.168 (talk) 01:15, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Interesting' arguement 

message: *Could someone please provide some reliable independent sources regarding this forum?  Wickethewok 20:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added the only one I could find. Curtains99 23:00, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources

message: I would like to point out that not only are their servers slow, their moderation is quite terrible and they frequently ignore slews of complains their feedback/helpdesk forum. They seem to have a policy of making random peoples mods who are not qualified in the least. -- 78.19.173.131 15:09, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This has nothing to do with the article. See Wikipedia:TPG Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views on a subject. Take it elsewhere folks. RubberTyres (talk) 18:59, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Moderation

message: Boards claim  to have 630,000 members (although as the article points out many of these may be banned, duplicate, inactive or closed accounts) and 2,400,000 unique users. What exactly is the difference between a member and a user ? Is it really the case that nearly 74% of users are merely lurkers who never bother registering an account letalone contribute. And seeing as how they cannot even give a figure for how many of those 630,000 are unique individuals (not duplicate account holders) still contributing on a regular basis how can they be so sure as to the uniqueness of those 2,400,000 "users" (most of whom seem to be unusually shy, lazy or uninterested enough to register -assuming of course they're not banned) ? 90.200.83.180 (talk) 13:25, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: According to thisthere are about 90,000 "active" accounts (user logs in at least once a month). No relaible way to determine how many are duplicate (Using IP addresses and/or cookies to determine this can give both false positives and negatives) 176.24.162.131 (talk) 19:58, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: In recent months the site has been experiencing a marked drop in the number of active users as interest shifts to reddit and social media platforms. They have updated the "look" of the site and reorganised the layout in an attempt to stem the decline 86.156.162.45 (talk) 13:56, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  How many actual users ?