Subject: I agree.
Author:
Posted on: 2012-06-02 10:05:00 UTC
The bump system is a mess. It's harder to keep track of anything, and newbye and badfic threads still swarm the Board.
ANd yeah, a brief introduction to newbyes made here on the Board is needed. There are too many newbyes that rush in barely understanding what the PPC is about and especially how it works.
...is not that great, folks. The bump system keep threads that should have died alive well past their time, convo-posting is stretching out the site like a rubber band wrapped around a hot air balloon, and many PPCers - regardless of experience or time spent on the Board - are getting frustrated.
The Board is a mess. Something needs to change. That's why I made this thread: to discuss our possible options and maybe even start implementing something. Something everyone - old guard and newbie alike - can appreciate.
My personal opinion is one that might not be that popular with some, based on what I've gathered from observational evidence. This whole 'modless anarchy giving birth to creativity' system we have right now? It doesn't work. We have several out-of-control threads that can attest to that fact. Attempts to do something about these threads have only resulted in back-and-forth arguing that only makes the thread longer. Proper moderators could have stepped in and brought everything under control before it got to this point. Having everything on one page doesn't help; new missions and the like end up getting knocked down by badfic threads (or thread, I suppose) and questions that could easily be solved by reading the wiki.
We need organization. We need structure. We need proper authority.
That's why my suggestion is to form a new PPC Board - one in the phpBB internet forum style (or something similar.) We can have moderators. We can have separate sections for mission releases, newbie introductions, badfic discoveries, role-play, or even just chatting about random stuff. Both out current Board and the old Board can be kept as sort of backups or whatever you like.
Of course, I should state right now that I'm a bit biased in this regard. I was a moderator on a phpBB internet forum well before I came to the PPC. It was what I was used to. I like organization and regulation. Not such a big fan of anarchy.
This post is not meant to suggest that the newbies - or anyone else, for that matter - can only be controlled by the firm hand of an authoritarian moderator. Likewise, I am not saying that those who support the current Board are necessarily in the wrong. I'm not saying that we should abandon the Board immediately. I am also not trying to take over the PPC.
I don't want to make this a lecture. I want this to be an open debate. What do you, the PPCers at home, think? Do you want the Board to stay as it is? Do you want things to change? Do you have your own ideas?
Speak up, folks! I yield the floor to you.
I just refreshed the main page and see there, lots of topics I had already clicked were back to their highlighted gray selves. This is, at least to me, a tad annoying, since the highlights kinda disturb the flow, and also confusing, as the board highlights things that I've read before.
Also: If people want to know which posts they have seen, why don't they look at the color of the link? If it's been clicked on, they've seen the post.
The Board doesn't highlight what you haven't read yet. After a post is on the Board for a day, its replies become highlighted until they are 24 hours old.
Also, my settings make it so that every time I close my browser all the links change back to the default unclicked color. I also read posts from at least three different computers (one at home, two at work). The highlighting has helped me keep better track of what is new and what isn't without having to remember each post on the Board and sift through long threads for new posts.
-Phobos
I like this system we have right now, but since I use an EMail alert to find things to post on rather than going onto the Board itself, I haven't seen the problems you mentioned.
Still, I really don't think I have the power to change anything- I must be something of a loner here, after two failed Permission attempts.
Permission doesn't matter in terms of "community membership." What makes you a member of the community is hanging around, talking to people and generally participating.
In general, I'm glad that we’ve switched back to... whatever the proper name for ‘not bump’ mode is on the Board. The highlighting new posts to old threads thing sounds like a good idea for easily picking out which older threads are still active. Having long threads be bumped up to the top of the front page actually discouraged me from posting a couple of times.
As for the stuff about Mods, before I go any further I just want to say that I haven’t participated in an online community like this before, so there may be simple, obvious, solutions to some of what I'm about to say, that I just don’t know about. Having said that, there are a couple of things concerning the practicality of implementing a Mod system, that I think need to be considered by people that know about this kind of stuff, so I wanted to make sure it had been highlighted.
Personally, I'm not sure if we do need Mods or not, but a large part of that comes from not being in a moderated community before so having nothing to compare our current state to. However, it does seem as if most of the people that know more about this think that something needs to be done (and I have a possible alternative that I’ll get to later in this post), so I’d be prepared to trust their judgement on this matter.
Can the Mods have anonymity? (Note that this is a separate topic to should they have anonymity, which is something that has already had the pros and cons of discussed a fair bit).
If we do decide to go for anonymous Mods, how would we actually give them that anonymity? Even if they’re posting under a group name, won’t their IP address show up on the post, allowing them to be identified by anyone that takes the time to compare it with other posts? Also, if PGs are to give up their status as a PG in order to become a Mod (as has been suggested before by... someone, I forget who), won’t that be kind of a giveaway?
This point leads neatly on to...
Who do we use for Mods?
If we are going to have Mods introduced, the idea of having a rotating group does sounds like a good one to me, as it should avoid people burning out. Realistically, there are only 2 methods I can think of for the fair selection of Mods, either everyone’s name gets put into a hat and an appropriate number (whatever that may be) are selected at random, or we have some kind of vote system.
With 1, no-one could be accused of trying to grab power for themselves, which may help alleviate any fears of the new authority being A Bad Thing. But we could easily end up with people that just aren’t suitable/capable of, or even interested in, whatever we end up deciding the Mods are needed for (in terms of their specific powers, abilities and limitations).
With 2, as has already been mentioned by a couple of other people, chances are that the same sort of people are going to be voted in each time. If we’re looking for people that are around the Board often, and are well respected in the community etc. (not to mention that people are always going to think of the more high profile Boarders first, simply because they are more high profile), then to me it looks like we’d be picking Mods from the same pool of people as the PGs get selected from. That’s fine if there are enough of those people out there to fill the quota for both PGs and Mods, but what happens if there isn’t? (I don’t know how many PGs there normally are at any one time, how many Mods people think would be appropriate, or how that compares to the number of oldbies).
Personally, I would think that the PGs and Mods should be different people, just because I imagine that the PGs have enough on their plates already simply by being PGs. I think July, VM and Neshomeh have all said words to that effect regarding this already.
As a possible alternative to Mods
It seems to me that most (most, not all) of the things people are saying the Mods are needed for concern the behaviour of newbies (people telling badfic authors that their story/Sue has been ‘reported’ to the PPC as if we're some kind of fanon-police, conversation spamming, joining up for the chance to bash authors etc.). That being the case, I would like to offer an alternative to an official Mod system: resurrect the ‘Little Sibling / Big Sibling’ idea.
Now, I haven’t seen this in action, and have only read about it on the Wiki, so I might be wrong about what it was there for, but it seems to me like it might work. As I understand it, the idea is that an older Boarder offers to act as a sort of mentor for a newbie, and guide them through at first to make sure they’ve understood everything.
If the Sibling thing gets promoted a bit more (maybe move it further up the Guides/FAQs, put a reminder in the top banner etc.), then we might find that more newbies ask for one, in which case they’ll be able to get direct help when it comes to things like Board, and general PPC, etiquette. Most of that could potentially be handled through private e-mail or something, so it wouldn’t even clutter up the Board. If someone doesn’t ask for a Sibling, but then goes off with a bit of unacceptable behaviour, they could be given one to set them straight. This would work a bit like a warning from a Mod, but would possibly be a bit more constructive in that at the same time as being given the warning, they’re also being given direct access to someone that can help them avoid making similar mistakes in the future.
As a side note, while I didn’t ask for a Big Sibling myself when I joined up, if someone had made the offer, I’d have probably taken them up on it.
Big Siblings wouldn’t have any actual authority (in terms of special powers/abilities), and they’d only be acting on their individual Little Siblings, so we wouldn’t have to worry about how adding authority would influence other peoples’ interactions with them.
Virtually everyone on the Board, that isn't a newbie, should be capable of acting as a Big Sibling, which should take the pressure of the relatively few people that are currently trying to take care of it. Big Siblings could also have Even Older Siblings, chosen from the PGs, long term Big Siblings, and other general long term Boarders, that would be there to give them support and advice (and a quick line to the PGs / Nameless Admin if a newbie persistently and wilfully ignores their advice).
Also, if I'm right about how this’ll work with a few levels of siblingness, it might help with another topic that Neshomeh has brought up recently, which is that of newbie integration and newbie/oldbie interaction within the community. I’ll be honest, I am slightly nervous about posting to oldbies, but whether they’re Permission Givers or not doesn’t make any difference to me. It’s not the level of authority that they have which makes me nervous about talking to them, it’s just the fact that they’ve been around for some much longer than me. The more I talk to them, the less it bothers me. Assuming that this holds true for other people too, then encouraging communication between the generations of Boarders may help crossing those divides.
So, what do people think? Was any of that useful or did I just completely miss the point?
I still think that people who can act as mods would probably be a good idea, but I also agree that the Big Sib/Little Sib thing is a good idea either way. I agree with July too, making sure every newbie gets a Big Sib will help out a lot.
I, for one, would be more than willing to volunteer myself for Big Sib duty, as well.
It's something that I think we should continue, and I've been musing on how to start it up again for awhile.
However, I'd like to suggest that we take it a step further with regards to the newbies, regardless on what we decide to do on the topic of moderators or no.
For one, I think that Irish Samurai's suggestion of restarting the Big Sib/Little Sib thing is a good idea, but I'd like to suggest we go a step further. Instead of having it be suggested/encouraged, we should go a step further and give every newbie a big sib automatically. The ones who don't actually need it will benefit regardless, and the ones who do need it are unlikely to ask because they'll either be the ones not listening or will continue on right up to the point where they ask for permission and one of their agents is an all powerful elder god and they homophoned all over the place.
Being a Big Sib would, of course, not be mandatory, but if we could get- maybe choose?- a decent sized pool of people who have experience with the PPC as a whole, it'd certainly help so we don't end up with three or five people juggling five newbies apiece at any given time.
Having an explicit support group there from the first means everyone will get to know at least one PPCer from the beginning, rather than newbies only knowing other newbies, and even then, only maybe.
For two, we should do something more than just handing out newbie gifts. They're traditional and all, but we can give them something more valuable than a random thing you spend ten seconds throwing at them. Instead, I'd like to suggest that we ask them questions. Actual questions. Things that can be gone into in depth. Not just "What are your fandoms?" but things like "What do you like to do?" "What are your favorite kinds of fic?" "Do you write any fic?" "Do you write anything original?" "Do you RP?" "How'd you find us?" "What do you want to do if you write a spinoff?"
If anything, it should be sort of like an interview.
This is the sort of thing we should be doing. That is greeting and interacting with the newbies.
Fairly obviously, I would volunteer to be part of a group of Big Siblings if/when it gets started up, although seeing as I haven’t done it before, if anyone had any advice from their time as a Big Sib, I’d be interested in hearing it. But I guess that’s the sort of thing that could be set up for the whole group once it’s been established.
As for automatically giving every newbie a Big Sib, I'm not so sure about that, for a couple of reasons. Firstly (and most importantly), if we wait to see if newbies request a Sib, then we can instantly sort them into two categories: those that think they need one, and those that don’t (some of these may even be correct!).
By allowing them to sort themselves into those two groups for us, we might be able to tailor the choice of Big Sib to newbie, rather than just assigning people randomly and trusting to pot luck that we get a decent match. In fact, taking that last thought a bit further, it might be worth setting up a Big Sibling Directory on the Wiki, similar to the Beta Reader Directory, (giving details of their fandoms, writing habits etc. – basically the same kind of stuff you’re saying we should be asking the newbies for) so that they would be able to pick out a Sibling that they had more to talk about with than just ‘how do I do this thing on the Board?’.
[And while I'm on the subject of how to do things on the Board, can anyone tell me how to a web link in a post and have it appear as part of the text? I’ve worked out how to do bold, underlined, italic font etc. by copying the formatting from the Wiki editing guide, but whenever I copy a web address over it just gives the full link, and it looks kind of messy.]
So, anyway, got a little off-topic there. My second reason for not wanting to automatically give Siblings out is that it could be seen as pushy, and frankly, a little insulting to anyone who has actually bothered to read through all the Guides etc. Asking people if they want a Sib is one thing, telling them that they need one, is something else entirely. I would rather hold off on simply giving a Big Sib to someone unless and until they demonstrated that they do require one.
With regards to asking newbies questions, are you thinking that should be something that’s done in their introductory post, or something that their Big Sib should go through them with? Having a bunch of questions requiring in depth, detailed answers be fired off at them the first time they say ‘Hi’ could be a tad intimidating.
‘If anything, it should be sort of like an interview.’
Speaking as someone who has just started looking around for a new job, interviews can be terrifying. Having one sprung on you unexpectedly? That doesn’t sound like a pleasant experience to me.
And now that you've made me think about that, if I get nightmares about it in the near future, I’m blaming you!
As noted, the Big Sib thing is more a guide thing than 'YOU MUST FOLLOW THIS PERSON UNTIL YOU ARE OUT OF NEWBIEHOOD. YOU ARE THE PADAWAN TO THEIR JEDI KNIGHT.' The idea is by having it be a mandatory thing is there's more mixing by far, and it gives the newbie an automatic contact person.
It ties in with the questions thing, too. We're supposed to be actually getting to know new people, and the best way to do that is through their intro thread, before they wander into the wilds. I didn't intend to use the word 'interview' in such a way that it made 'ding ding ding oh god job interview ding ding ding' go off in your head. If anything, it's supposed to be an informal thing, which would also be to help us match up with newbies; Sorting them, if you're so inclined. It's referenced in the HP books, that before the Sorting Hat the founders questioned and picked through the students for their own houses, and I see no reason why that wouldn't work here, with the Big Sibs organizing themselves according to interest or outlook or however.
That said, there are potential issues with letting newbies choose their big Sibs. It can cause supply and demand problems- such as one person accidentally becoming overpopular with the newbies and accidentally (or not) amassing an army of newbies (I'm looking at you, Phobos), or the problem of, as Data put it, he'd "rather not accidentally end up with one I want to turn into a goblet" or one person becoming over-popular over the others. We don't want people who signed up and agreed to be Big Sibs regretting it, after all.
I no longer have them :)
The HP houses style of thing sounds much better than what I was thinking of.
I would be willing to serve as a Big Sibling as well.
On the subject of assigning newbies to BSs . . . wow, bad acronym . . . Rather than letting the BigSib choose, maybe there should be a brief discussion between a handful of BigSibs to decide who would best suit the newbie? If possible.
Also, not sure if official houses are strictly necessary, rather than just sorting LilSib with BigSib based on individual interests. But people seem to be having fun with the idea, so that's fine too.
I would personally prefer to guide newbies that I had selected myself for two reasons. First off, I can personally control how much of a newbie burden I have at any one time. Too many Little Sibs could take my energy and focus away from my own writing.
Secondly, it would allow me a chance to select newbies that have fandoms or writing styles close to my own. While I have no problem working with anyone regardless of what they enjoy, it would make it slightly easier on me if we shared something.
I like the idea of having groups based around interests, or philosophies, or fandoms, or whatever. It would help to keep any one person from getting swamped.
As I see it working, interested newbie is pointed to the list of groups (descriptions of the group philosophy included, but no names of Boarders). They pick the group that they feel would suit them best, and then members of that group would choose from amongst themselves and assign a big sib for the newbie.
That way, the load is spread out among the group, and new members can be added without having to constantly update the page. It also gives both the newbie and the volunteers some choice in the matter.
-Phobos
..But I still feel very newbie-ish. A BigSib would be very helpful, if I still qualify as newbie?
You are, of course, always welcome to ask for a Big Sib. You are just in a more informed place than the average newbie. Since you know people in the community already, you could ask someone you already trust to step in, or there is always the possibility someone could volunteer. Or you could wait for the Houses to be up and running and do it that way.
-Phobos
I volunteer as tribute!
...Er, Big Sibling.
I volunteer as Big Sibling.
Especially since it conjures up wonderful Bioshock images.
In all seriousness, I like the idea of us having houses. Nesh and I talked about this a bit today, and while I'm not the most active normally, I think this could be a chance for me to actually do something for the Board for once.
And I'd be willing to be a BigSib when I feel like I'll be around for a while.
I think the structure that's appearing here - July's point that everyone should have one, Phobos' groups - is a good one. In fact, can I make a suggestion towards ensuring ridiculousity as is the PPC way?
Let's give the groups completely unrelated fandomy names. So if (for instance) you're a fanfic-writing, Anime-centric, well-read, chat-using American, you might be in Sparklypoo House. If you're something different, you might be in the Guard of Riverdale - or the Department of Awesome - or any other joke that'll make people chuckle. I can't think of any more (I would say Crew of the Good Ship Harmony, but that's out of date - what's the current fandom with big shipping wars?)
But yeah, I think this idea is by far the best that's come out of this thread.
hS
I second the motion for silly names.
I also really like the idea of having houses based on philosophy/fandom/whatever in general. It tickles the HP fan-nerd in me. Assuming this happens, and I really, really hope it does, once we have some names to work with, I may even make a Sorting Song for us. ^_^
Er, I also volunteer to be a Big Sib. Just for the record.
~Neshomeh, who actually bothered to invent a new song for the Sorting Hat in her old HP fic. Which she kind of wants to work on again now. Even though she was recently saying how that would probably never happen. >.>;
I'm going to get this ball rolling by starting a house and putting it on the wiki. So, I give you:
House Kind Words And A Two-by-four (Name pending group approval) - This House is made up of Boarders who are not really interested in fanfiction. However, they are interested in improving their writing skills, in general, and helping other people improve as well. This House is big on giving Concrit.
Let me know if you are interested in joining up and I will add your name to the wiki page, when it goes up (hopefully later today).
I have also been working on potential edits to the existing Big/Little Sibs page on the wiki. My work can be found in the sandbox. It is not finished, yet, so any feedback would be appreciated.
-Phobos
Mr. Concrit, that's me.
Application for House Darjeeling: steeped in the history, lore, and traditions of the PPC. Also delicious with scones.
Current Big Sibs in this house are myself and July, whom I hope approves of the by-line.
~Neshomeh
But you may have guessed that.
(Curse you. I was going to get round to this one eventually...)
hS
Calling Phobos. Oops, wait a minute, this was supposed to be anonymous wasn't it? I'll try that again.
Calling House Kind Words And A Two-by-four (I wonder who will respond to this). I'd like to apply to join the House as a Little Sib. I think I've pretty much worked out my way around the Board, but I don't feel particularly confident when it comes to reviewing and giving concrit (which seem to be key aspects of the PPC), and would appreciate any advice you can offer on the subject.
Hopefully if this works, it can used as a template for rolling out the ‘every newbie is given a Big Sib’ plan.
Kind Words And A Two-by-four got together in a secret location to discuss who would best fit as your Big Sib. There was a secret ritual and also a light breakfast. In the end, it was decided that I would be your Big Sib.
My email is Baridthetroll(at)gmail(dot)com. Feel free to send me your contact info and ask any questions that you may have.
-Phobos
House Kind Words And A Two-by-four (Name pending group approval) - This House is made up of Boarders who are interested in improving their writing skills, in general, and helping other people improve as well. This House is big on giving Constructive Criticism.
It is now focused on a single idea. We give concrit. While everyone in the PPC values good writing, this house is about actively helping each other get better.
Let's suppose I create House Santa's Little Kinslayers, which is a highly traditional house for people who love Lord of the Rings to death. A newbie (let's call her Lacksidacksical) shows up who says 'I'm a really big fan of Tolkien - my favourite character is Finrod - so I guess I'm in Santa's Little Kinslayers'. Heck, in accordance with your multiple-Houses idea, she can also join (as secondary) House Catastrophe Theory, who love the minutae of PPC History.
So here's me, and I say, 'A Finrod-loving PPC History buff? MINE! I am your Big Sib, bring me your questions!'
Right away Lacksidacksical emails me. 'Hey, Hunesoron' (yeah, people never get the name right) 'Hey Hunesoron, I'm really interested in this IRC thing. Seems like great fun. Can you give me some pointers on how to use it, what sort of people I'm likely to encounter, what the rules are and so on?'
And I say, '... um, no. Sorry. Here's JulyFlame's email, she can answer your questions'. And we are right back where we started.
I see the key decision-making point in Neshomeh's post as House Goal #2 (asking questions); I get the impression you're looking more at 1 and 3 (making friends [is there a song that goes here?]). It's very good to have a system for recognising the people you're most likely to get one with - but if you can't answer their questions, you have no business being their Bug Sub.
hS
I 'm sorry, but saying "if you can't answer their questions, you have no business being their Bug Sub." kind of excludes most of the potential Big Sibs from the pool. I don't imagine that was your intent, but it is a pretty big statement.
Close to no one is going to be able to answer every question that a newbie might have. The point is that each newbie will have easy access to someone they can ask first. If the Big Sib doesn't know the answer, they probably know someone who does and can either point the newbie in that direction, or ask the other person and report back to the newbie. Not knowing the answer is not a terrible thing.
On the other hand, if anyone is afraid that they are going to be inadequate when it comes to answering basic questions (How do I get permission? Can my Agent be super-powerful and unkillable? How I mine for fish?), then perhaps they should rethink volunteering to be a Big Sib. It isn't for everyone.
I like your House philosophy, and am definitely considering joining (assuming of course that you think I'm suitable), although I do have a few more questions/thoughts about the Sibling Houses set-up before I do so.
1) Do people think it's a good idea for Big Sibs to be limited to just being in one House (or some other number), or take part in any that take their fancy?
I feel that there are pros and cons to both options, but can't seem to articulate any of them at the moment, so I'm kind of hoping someone else can do it for me. I'll be back on this topic later (if needed), once I've given it some more thought.
2) What do people think is a good number of Sibs for a House?
I would think a House probably needs at least 3 people in it, so that there's a decent level of support within the group. It would also mean that one person wouldn't get swamped with Big Sib requests if their House got really popular.
3) How many Houses do people think we need?
Do we want to set a limit at all, or just let the whole thing grow and develop organically? I personally would be in favour of organic growth, so long as the number of Houses doesn't get ridiculous. We don't want the newbies to be overwhelmed by choice.
I also think that we should probably have a 'Hufflepuff' style House that simply aims to take in anyone that doesn't feel they fit into any of the others, although I will admit that this may not be necessary depending on what the other Houses end up covering. Given the nature of this House, if it were to exist, it should probably be one of the larger ones in terms of number of Big Sibs, and possibly have the more experienced ones too (as I imagine it may well attract the more clueless newbies).
Your work on the Wiki looks good, I'm particularly interested in Step 5, although I personally feel that Step 4 is a little light on details at the moment :P
The only thing I can suggest with regards to that at the moment is making sure that it's linked appropriately from other Wiki pages, the Newbie and Board FAQs are the most obvious to me, but I'm sure there are other useful places for it too.
If you think you fit the philosophy, then we are glad to have you.
1) I was thinking about this, actually. I think that a person being in multiple houses is a good idea. For instance, I started one House, but I might also want to be part of a House that focused on people who play video games, or something. If you are in multiple houses, then it is up to you to make sure you don't get swamped.
2) A minimum might be a good idea. Don't know what number I would go with, though.
3) I think we need as many as we can make distinct. For instance, we wouldn't want a House for people who like skull goblets alongside a House for people who like skull punch bowls. We would just combine those into a single house that likes skull drinkware.
A catch-all house might be a good thing, or it might end up being the lazy-person's choice. The idea of Houses is that they tell us a bit about what the newbie thinks is important. Do they value concrit most? Or is roleplay their big thing? Or social interaction? Or whatever else we can come up with.
Also, linking will be important once we have updated the page. As of right now, it's just a draft.
Thanks for the input, though.
-Phobos
As I understand it, the purpose of Houses is to enable people to find the right type of Big Sib. Surely the way to create Hises would be to work out what different categories of questions need answering, and set up Huusen that will answer each set. For instance, and off the top of my head:
-Do you anticipate spending large amounts of time on the PPC IRC chatroom? (If yes, you need a Big Sib who can help with how the chat works)
-Do you plan to write PPC stories? (Will need a Big Sib who can help with the Permission process)
-Do you leave many reviews for stories and fanfiction? (Will need a Big Sib who can help with concrit and, y'know, Not Flaming)
So we would need a house for non-chatting writers who leave reviews, and also for non-chatting writers who don't review much - etc etc etc. To my thinking, this would be a more useful way to go about it than for everyone to make a house for People Just Like Me.
hS
(PS: Yes, obviously there would be more questions, and yes, some might overlap. The easiest way to find your House might well be a flow chart...)
And even then, not quite.
Houses are supposed to be generalizations, and also paired with the attitude people- the Big Sibs- will take towards things. We don't want to end up with it turning into factions of PPCers. We already have enough of that, thank you very much.
If they're Already Like You, that somewhat defeats the point; congratulations! You have a minion now who is like you in every way! How does that make you feel?
If we get ridiculously specific, or cross-polinate the houses, or what have you, we'll end up with people just getting labelled thusly, be they newbie or Big Sib. There should be something shared, yes. But it shouldn't turn into things like "I, HUINESORON, SHALL TAKE ONLY THE PUREST OF THE PURE, WHO READ LORD OF THE RINGS, WHO STUDY CHEMISTRY, AND BELIEVE THEY ARE ELVES AND HAVE LOVELY LONG HAIR, OR SOME COMBINATION OF THE ABOVE"* or "I, PHOBOS, SHALL TAKE ONLY THE MOST BETRAYING OF THE BETRAYERS, WHO TAKE PART IN THEATRE, WHO LIKE WARCRAFT AND ITS LORE, AND HAVE AT LEAST SEVENTY PERCENT OF THEIR BODY COVERED BY HAIR, OR SOME COMBINATION OF THE ABOVE".**
It should be general enough that any newbie could go to any group without feeling completely out of place, but still there being enough there to really help with matches being made.
*Read this with BRIAN BLESSED'S voice.
**You can read this with Phobos' voice.
I see how that works, but I have a question. Does each possible combination of answers lead to a different house? If so, that would create 8 houses right now, and more with the addition of new questions. That seems a little overwhelming.
Perhaps we can incorporate some of this into the idea I am working on. Since each house is for "People Just Like Me" on a single issue and each person can be in multiple houses, perhaps we can ask the newbie to pick a first and second choice.
For instance, they might pick the IRC centric house and the PPC history centric house (yes, I just made those up). In that case, someone like July might be in both of those, and would be a good choice. If they pick PPC writing and PPC History, someone like you (hS) might be in both of those. If they pick concrit and PPC writing, someone like me might be a good choice.
I think that strikes a balance between the amount of newbie choice in the original idea, and the diversity in yours. What do you think?
-Phobos
And certainly not like that.
With how you suggested, it implies that all aspects of the PPC are completely and utterly modular.
Everyone should be community oriented, PPC background oriented, and writing oriented to some degree. It suggests that it can all be entirely divorced.
The community is important, yes, but if you don't give a rat's tail for the PPC itself, at least in the first place, why are you even here? The PPC as a whole is a combination of both neatly mixed together.
Before we all start arguing about how houses should work, let's examine what our goals for them are so we have a blueprint to build with and aren't just guessing. Measure twice, cut once and all that.
This is just my impressions based on this thread and conversations I've had with Phobos and July. Let me know if I'm off-base at all.
First, we should agree what our goals are as a group. I believe the goals of the PPC are:
... I don't see anything wrong with that. :P I think something about being fandom-oriented in PPC Goals wouldn't go amiss, but beyond that...
Oh, here's one. If this goes into action, your comment in Houses #3 ('if your little sibs are driving us up the wall, we're going to Have Words with You, not just them') I think goes too far. If a Beg Seb is responsible for their Lib Sib, we should be Having Words primarily with the Bug Sub. The point of all this is to stop people being told off on-Board so much - and since I imagine SibSib interactions taking place in email, it's hard to know what's already going on unless you ask. So since the Bug Sub should have made their email available at least once (to their LibSib), email them, rather than addressing the LibSib on-Board-Chat-Wookie.
No? Yes? hS needs more sleep? (hS always needs more sleep)
hS
The Board moves on apace, and we'd better try to catch up!
Anyway, hS, I agree with your points. Revised charter (if that's what it is?):
1. PPC Goals
These are the primary goals of any PPCer or group of PPCers.
Going back to Lacksidacksical and her unaccountable interest in the IRC, it seems like the Houses would also be useful for dealing with that situation. Rather than me always pestering July for IRC-related questions, I could instead look at the list of Big Sibs in House Insertnamehere (IRC fanatics & friends), and email one of them. That way the House structure not only helps get people introduced, but helps us as oldbies answer questions more effectively.
hS
'Cause yeah, early talk indicated that this is also meant to be a support structure for us oldbies. Would that be an addition to House Goals, then?
Speaking of the IRC, though, I dunno if that isn't too specific a thing, like a certain fandom would be too specific a thing. I could see maybe a house specializing in community interaction—maybe their oldbies are people who like/want to put on games and RPs and stuff?—but I don't think it makes any more sense to have an IRC house than it would to have a wiki house or a Board house. Plus, I'd like to think that cross-hangout sib pairings might help bridge the gaps that exist there.
~Neshomeh
Community would work - I'm just thinking that for questions, 'How does the Wiki work?' and 'How does the IRC work?' are pretty common (not always asked, but the number of times you've said 'Please stop setting fire to the Wiki it is not meant to be a torch etc' of late indicate they probably should be). Bridging gaps is good - but so is answering questions.
Probably it's a Goal, yes.
hS
The wiki at least has an instruction manual anyone can point anyone else at (which reminds me I've been meaning to move the more general Etiquette and Style information to the TOP of the thing). IRC, I dunno—I guess since we've got a Board FAQ and a Wiki Editing Guide it would make sense to have an IRC FAQ/Guide, too. Might that cover it?
Granted, part of the current trouble is that people aren't taking the initiative to find/read these things, but perhaps with Big Sibs being there to make sure they get firmly pointed at when required...?
~Neshomeh
First off let me just say that I had no idea this was going to get so long when I started writing it, but it sort of took on a life of its own. Obviously, all of this is just my opinion, so feel free to disagree with me. Oh, and I have referred to what my opinion of other peoples’ thoughts have seemed to be, on occasion. If I’ve misrepresented your position at all, please let me know (I don’t like it when that happens to me).
From looking over the recent posts about it, my understanding is that the main points for discussion with setting up the House system are as follows:
• How do we create/define the Houses?
• How do we avoid factionalisation? Or failing that, how can we make it work for us?
• What is the intent behind setting up the Houses, and what needs to be avoided at all costs?
• What should the duties/responsibilities of Big Sibs be?
I’ve tried to deal with these points separately, but I think they’re all fairly deeply entwined with each other, so this does get a little rambly at times. Hopefully you can still follow my thought process, but I’ll be happy to provide clarification if needed.
Creation/definition of the Houses
I can sort of see the point behind hS’ suggestion of a sort of grid system for covering all aspects of the PPC with Houses, but it just feels a little cold and clinical to me. I much prefer the idea of Houses more in line with Phobos’ suggestion, where a few like-minded people can share their thoughts on what they believe to be the important issues. As long as we can stop it from getting too far into ‘these are the only/most important issues’, then I think we should be fine.
It also seems to me that things along the line of ‘Do you anticipate spending large amounts of time on the PPC IRC chatroom? Do you plan to write PPC stories? Do you leave many reviews for stories and fanfiction?’ could easily be added to the questions that newbies get asked, rather than being things which actually define their choice of House.
Going back to some earlier issues of mine, I would think that we probably want somewhere between 6 and 10 Houses (although I’ll admit I am pretty much just pulling those numbers out of thin air), to give a good range of choice for any potential newbie, without making it seem overwhelming/intimidating.
As for how many people are needed in each House, that’s probably variable depending on the nature of the House. Any House which decides to focus on ‘people actively involved in the fandoms of the Big Three (LotR, PotC and HP)’, is probably going to need more Big Sibs than something more obscure in order to avoid being swamped if we suddenly get 20+ newbies turning up in a single week.
The exact number can probably be sorted out on a per House basis, with people calling out for extra members when they set up, if they feel they’re understaffed. I’d like to think that we can set up whatever House we feel like, as long as we think there’s a real need for it. As I discuss (at great length) later on, I don’t think we should necessarily be limiting ourselves to just thinking about what a House can offer a newbie either. I think the House idea has a lot to offer the community as a whole.
Factions, factions, everywhere
Personally, I haven’t seen much factioning in the PPC. It may be that it’s here and I just haven't noticed it, or it may be that it’s a reference for things that have happened in the past that I wasn’t around for, I dunno.
The thing is, in my opinion, if we’re going to run with the idea of Houses for Big Sibs (as opposed to just one general pool of all the people willing to be a Big Sib), then that by very definition is going to lead to a certain level of factions. We’re grouping people together, ergo we are creating factions (or just simply groups, or proto-factions, or whatever, I understand that the term ‘faction’ can have negative connotations, which I don’t particularly want to invoke here). I don’t think there’s a problem with factions per se, although I will admit that I can see where it could lead to problems along the lines of splitting up into groups that only interact with other members of the same group.
However, as has already been pointed out somewhere in this thread’s history, if you are aware of a potential problem then you can do your best to avoid it. Rather than splitting us into isolated factions, I think the Houses could actually be used to encourage more communication between Boarders of every generation. When Phobos first made his suggestion for House Kind Words And A Two-by-four it’s philosophy was:
‘This House is made up of Boarders who are not really interested in reading or writing fanfiction. However, they are interested in improving their writing skills, and helping other people improve as well. This House is big on giving Concrit.’ (taken from the Wiki Sandbox page)
I said that I’d consider joining, the reason that I didn’t say ‘sign me up straight away’ is that I wasn’t sure how well I would fit in with that: I didn’t really know about the existence of fanfic much before joining the PPC, and so far I’ve mostly read it with a view to finding something sporkable (although I do check out goodfic recommendations for fandoms I like, my thanks to July for bringing ‘The Onset of Autumn’ to my attention). As far as writing goes, I’ve written some fanfic in the past, but these days much prefer the idea of writing original fiction. I’m extremely interested in improving my writing skills, that is what brought me to the PPC after all, and I’d like to help other people out because I know how much I needed help when I started. Being big on giving concrit was the potential stumbling block for me: because I’ve never really been involved in fanfic in a big way before, I’ve never been involved in giving concrit.
Now that the House has slimmed down to the single focus of giving concrit, I’m not sure that I’d be the right choice for a Big Sib in it. But you know what? I could probably do with being a Little Sib in it for a bit. While I don’t think I need the full ‘Hi, I’m a newbie, what is this place / what does this shiny button do?’ treatment, I think that it would benefit me as a community member to get some pointers on giving concrit. Maybe at some point later I will then feel confident enough to volunteer as a Big Sib in 2x4.
Chances are there will be other Houses set up that I might want to get pointers from, in which case having those few vaguely defined groups will actually have strengthened the community, and resulted in me (and while I don’t consider myself to be a newbie, I am still a relative newcomer seeing as I’ve only been here a couple of months), having in depth conversations with a whole bunch of the oldbies. To me, this seems like the kind of behavior we want to encourage.
I guess my point really is, if we’re going to have factions (which I would say is inevitable if we do go down the Sibling Houses route), then we should at least make sure that those factions work for us, rather than against us.
What is a House?
The main reason for setting up the Houses, in my mind, was so that newbies would have somewhere to go to for a Big Sib (or for us to have a pool of potential Big Sibs to give them if they didn’t ask for one), so that they would get someone to help them out, without being able to ask for a specific individual.
As can be gathered from my essay so far, I think the Houses offer the potential for more than just that, and believe that we would be denying ourselves a vast resource if we focus them solely on Oldbie/Fresh-Faced-Newbie interactions.
The Wiki is a fantastic resource for anyone wanting to write missions, and I think people should always look there first when they want to find something out. But the thoughts, opinions and recollections of Boarders are also a resource, one that could be just as valuable to newbie, midbie and oldbie alike. Having an easy access to a group of people that know about a certain subject in detail sounds like a good thing to me.
Prior to this, I was thinking that it would be a good thing to work on improving my ability to offer concrit, and I may have posted a request for help with that on the Board at some point in the future. Now I know that there is somewhere I can go specifically for that help, rather than just having to ask randomly.
In one of hS’ previous posts he said ‘As I understand it, the purpose of Houses is to enable people to find the right type of Big Sib’, now I would disagree with the specific wording used there, although not (I think) with the intent behind it. I would say that Houses should be used by us to help provide the right Big Sib. No-one says we’re going to get it right first time (hell, no-one’s saying that the newbie in question is even going to pick the House that is most suitable for them).
To take the example of the hypothetical Lacksidacksical, in her intro post she expresses an interest in both Santa’s Little Kinslayers and Catastrophe Theory (and is promptly snapped up by Hunesoron – hey, I guess you’re right, looks like people really do never get the name right!), but then immediately starts asking questions about the IRC. So July may be better at answering those kind of questions: what does that matter? Assuming that Lacksidacksical has made sensible choices with her Houses, she’s probably still going to have questions about LotR fandom/missions and the history of the PPC. In which case, we’ve just succeeded in getting her talking to two oldbies, and from an integration point of view that’s got to be better than just talking to one, right?
Even if it were to turn out that hS couldn’t answer any of Lacksidacksical’s questions, and ended up turning over siblingship entirely to July, the system has still worked. We provided Lacksidacksical with an appropriate Big Sib in July, even if we did take a detour along the way. So what? I don’t think there’s any major problems with that.
Now I admit, it may be a little disappointing to pick out a newbie for adoption and then find that you’re not the right Big Sib for them, so maybe we shouldn’t be picking them out? As July said, the Houses aren’t to be used as our personal recruiting grounds for minions (which I guess means that I need to start looking elsewhere for my future Legions of Terror. Incidentally, if anyone knows of any decent Bond-villain-style volcanic islands available on the market, let me know), so maybe the choice of ‘officially designated’ Big Sib should be done randomly. Each member of the House gets listed alphabetically, and is assigned a Little Sib who applies to that House in order. If they can’t take on the responsibility at that time, for any reason, they pass it on to the next person in the list. If the newbie asks a question that their ‘official’ Big Sib can’t answer, they can outsource that particular question to someone who can.
As for what a House isn’t, I’m firmly with Neshomeh on this one: they aren’t to become an isolated clique, and they aren’t to place themselves above any of the other Houses. Some may end up becoming more popular than others, just because of what the deal with, but that’s not to suggest that those more popular ones are somehow better or more valuable than the others.
What is a Big Sib?
For a newbie, a Big Sib should be someone that they can start talking to, to help get them settled within the madness that is the PPC.
For everyone else, they can still be there as a knowledgeable person on a given subject (but I think I’ve already gone on enough about that elsewhere so I’m going to stop now).
What I think we want/need for a Big Sib is someone who can be easily contacted, who won’t get too annoyed if they’re asked the same silly questions again and again, who has a good knowledge of the PPC (and maybe a specialist subject within that), and who knows enough about the other PPCers to be able to direct any unanswerable questions to someone who can handle them.
I also think that we should limit the number of Houses that a Big Sib participates in. I’m not suggesting anything official, but just that we should all be aware of what we’re doing, and not bite off more than we can chew by signing up to every House under the sun.
So yeah, I realise that some of what I'm suggesting sounds like fairly major changes (both from how the Board is currently, and from what we've already discussed), but I think that for the most part it follows the way we've been developing already. What does everyone else think?
I've spent the last few days reading and rereading what you've said here, and to be honest?
I'm more than a bit lost. You used way too many words to say... something. I'm not exactly sure what.
It's a bit late- in terms of planning and such- to be coming out with an essay on your views and reflections on them. Right now is the point where we should be figuring out what we are doing and how we will implement it.
I was writing that up in my lunchbreak and just posted it when I got to the end of it rather than looking back properly at what I'd written.
Re-reading it now, it looks like I was mostly just writing stuff down to organise my thoughts, and there are better places for me to do that than the Board. Sorry about that.
I'll try to be more concise in the future.
This just wasn't the right time for it in this thread. Would've been better earlier on when we were all being longwinded to an extent.
And I still haven't had enough sleep, so I'm just going to reply on one point:
To take the example of the hypothetical Lacksidacksical, in her intro post she expresses an interest in both Santa’s Little Kinslayers and Catastrophe Theory (and is promptly snapped up by Hunesoron – hey, I guess you’re right, looks like people really do never get the name right!), but then immediately starts asking questions about the IRC. So July may be better at answering those kind of questions: what does that matter?
The problem is, at the moment a few people are doing all the work. Imagine that half the non-Chatters think immediately of July when a question about the Chat comes up. However we randomise the selection process for Big Sibs, this still ends up with a massive workload for July - precisely the situation we're trying to sort out. In fact it makes it worse, because at the moment she at least technically has a choice about it, whereas this scenario has Lacksidacksical contacting her out of the blue on my recommendation.
Obviously this goes for other people than July - I imagine I'd be on at least a few people's minds if their Little Sib started asking detailed questions about the in-universe origins of the PPC - but unless I create a hypothetical oldbie to go along with my fictional newbie, I have to use someone for examples.
hS, trying to do thinking
I hope you've managed at least some sleep, I'd be utterly out of it myself by now otherwise.
I'll carry on using the names that have already come up for examples, cos it's easier that way. In this case, maybe the communication needs to go the other way. Rather than you saying to Lacksidacksical 'Ah, I don't know, but here, have July's e-mail, she'll be able to help', maybe you should contact July and say 'My Lil' Sib has a question about the Chat, can you talk to her about it? (Here's her e-mail)'. Then, if July has the time and inclination to answer, she contacts Lacksidacksical, if not, she passes the request on to someone else to deal with, maybe someone else from a Chat-centric House, or just anyone else that she knows frequents the Chatroom.
If new contact is done Big Sib to Big Sib first, then it can all be taken care of under the radar, and the Little Sib gets an answer to their question, while Big Sibs that have too much to handle don't get tonnes of extra questions from people that aren't supposed to be their responsibility.
Obviously to prevent outsourced Big Sibs from becoming swamped after they've introduced themselves to a whole bunch of newbies, we'd just have to stress the importance of using your Official Big Sib as the main point of contact.
I would think that we should be able to arrange it so that no one individual gets swamped, because with the Houses set up, we're all going to know that there are other people on the Board that are willing and able to deal with stuff like this.
Personally, The Reorganisation and Crashing Down are among my favourite PPC stories, and while I doubt that I'd be able to answer any questions about them in quite as much detail as you, I'd certainly be willing to give it a go if it came up and you were up to your eyeballs in other stuff.
Yes, the atmosphere of an Interview is definitely not what we want to subject newbies to. It just isn't friendly, and would be a Problem. That said, considering that we aren't looking to hire one newbie out of a half-million applicants, it's probably not going to happen.
So, let's actually have a conversation with newbies, rather than a half-million echoes of "Ahoy there! Welcome aboard!". I think that part, at least, is a good idea.
And finding out a little more about each newbie when they turn up will surely be worthwhile.
"Hi, nice to meet you! I see you've read all the Guides, that's cool. Just in case you have any questions, or need help with anything, we've assigned [Insert Boarder Name Here] to be your 'Big Sibling'. If you need anything, they're there to act as your personal guide to the PPC. Hope you have a great time!"
Alternativly, have the big siblings choose their own newbies. Either way, wouldn't change the content of the above very much. And if they managed to take offense at that? They're not gonna get very far anyway.
If we do implement this, I do think that it would be worth having some information on the Wiki that would allow newbies to pick their Big Sib, just to be able to pick out the ones that have bothered to do that level of research.
...to volunteer as one of these Big Sibs. Provided this ends up being an idea we choose to pursue, of course.
Set out as responses to specific things people have raised, but generally applicable anyway.
Tomash's Link: I don't feel this applies to the PPC, for one specific reason: we already have a mechanism in place whereby egregious offenders can be banned. The Nameless Admin, when the Board makes its feelings clear, can ban an IP. This has happened before, but usually to trolls - because when people act up, the Board as a whole does unite against them, if it feels the need. If just one person, or half a dozen people, have a problem with a newcomer... well, that's their problem, not the Board's.
nakkel's Italics: I disagree that 'self-moderation simply will not happen in an internet community', for the simple reason that it, uh, does. Right here. We have never met a problem that could not be resolved by the community acting together, or by the Nameless Admin IP-banning - and those are trolls, by and large. There is not such a problem now. The PPC Board can and does self-moderate. Also, uh:
The fact we needed to have more complicated, precise rules of conduct attests to this. Apparently, the old rules weren't specific enough, which is code for "nobody could tell what they should or shouldn't do based on simple observation and common sense".
As the person who suggested rewriting the Constitution, no, that is not why we did it. We did it for two reasons: first, that the old Constitution was Board-focussed and LotR-heavy, both of which are no longer appropriate. Secondly, because (bluntly) I was fed up with all the 'How dare you post a new badfic outside the thread!' posts, and by way of compromise wanted to put it into the Constitution so that people would hopefully not need telling. The third type of alteration is the addition of definitions for various terms - 'troll', 'plagiarism' - which came about because of a very specific incident where someone claimed rewriting a video as their own work wasn't plagiarising because, er, something. I do not believe the community as a whole needed the definitions in, and they were originally simply Wiki links - but for completeness they are in there.
Neshomeh's second post: Well, the Wiki is irrelevant to the discussion of Board moderators, since July responded there in her capacity as an Admin, but I understand her point. However, as I think Vixenmage pointed out, the reason July never gets a break is that July never takes a break. At the top of the second page of the Board, I find her responding to three ThArcanist posts in less than half an hour each - in one case, 2 minutes. And more generally - most of the things that she's responding to are either not generally seen as issues (posting a badfic outside the long badfic thread which she wanted to shut down anyway), or are going to get responded to.
Telling people to read Legendary Badfics will get you told off - that's two separate posts recently - whether or not the insanely vigilant JulyFlame says something. A permission request five minutes after joining will get turned down or ignored. Etcetera etcetera. One post that might have gone unnoticed is the one where someone reviewed a story to say that they were reporting it to the PPC, and yes, July (or whoever it was) was right to say something - but even if she hadn't, even if no-one had noticed that particular review (since it wasn't mentioned specifically on-Board), it would either be a one-off, or the poster would do it again, and pretty soon they would have been told not to. As mentioned in my comment on nakkel's post, we do that self-moderating thing. And the PPC has managed ten years without descending into a flame-generator.
A note on badfic posting: And specifically on the fact that people seem to feel a burning need to post every badfic they find, and often to claim it for PPCing as soon as they start... um, did anyone ever read the Board header? Because until very recently it started with this:
Welcome, Assassins and all other supporters of the Continuum Protection Initiative! Here is the place to report new offenders in need of smiting, or celebrate the acquisition of yet another target. (Or just to natter on...we're not picky!)
Yes, according to the header, the sole purpose of the Board is to post and claim badfics. And the link to the Constitution was kind of thrown in offhand, what with the long ramble about wikis and IRCs. Hopefully the new version is a bit more to the point.
Techno-Dann's Questions: Are very good ones. These questions:
What situations are mods going to address, and what powers (both technical and soft) are they going to need to have to do so? You say "We need proper authority", but what does proper authority look like?
I would like to see these answered by more than one person. I think that the various proposals have focussed very much on how to select mods, without actually coming down on what they're for. Ultimately, if people feel (as I do) that mods are unnecessary, it doesn't matter if they're randomised, rotating, secret or chosen personally by the Sunflower Official - they're still a bad idea.
But, since that's not very helpful, I'll make a proposal of my own. As a reply.
hS
Mainly, what is an acceptable period of time to wait to respond if you see somebody doing something you think is wrong? For instance, I see you've insulted July by calling her "insanely vigilant," as though questioning her mental stability is an appropriate response to disagreeing with her habit of correcting wayward behavior as soon as she sees it. I've waited about nine hours, and I'm still the first person to point it out. Should I have waited longer? A day, maybe? Two?
How long should July have waited before responding to those posts by ThArcanist? When would someone else have gotten around to it, do you think? How long should any of us wait and see whether someone else will get to it first before it's okay for us to respond?
I would also like to know what exactly July is allowed to respond to. You note that she's generally either responding to things that aren't issues, or she's responding to things that someone else would get to eventually anyway (in theory). Is it ever okay for July to respond?
Furthermore, do you find it's always true that there is never a real problem if only one person or half a dozen people are complaining? I'm pretty sure there are examples in history that strongly indicate otherwise, so I'm wondering what gives you the opposite impression.
I really would have liked to not be the one to bring this stuff up, because I'm sick of being on the opposite side of disagreements with you, and it really sucks, but I didn't honestly have much hope that it would be otherwise. First of all, it's you, and second of all, it's July. Who else is going to stick their neck out? Apparently no one, not in less than nine hours, at least.
I think you owe July an apology.
~Neshomeh
And I apologise for my poor choice of wording. I meant 'insanely' in the sense of 'extremely' - as in, she is highly vigilant and always here.
And I was not intending to say that you shouldn't respond. It is of course always okay for anyone to say that they see an issue. However, you stated that 'I think the biggest reason that I want mods is so that those of us who are doing all the work trying to keep order right now can take a f***ing break. I'm thinking of July in particular, but also me and Phobos and anyone else who wants to step back for a while and have someone else step up'. In response to that, I attempted to point out that taking a break is as simple as taking a break. Those nine hours, incidentally, saw about half a dozen posts to the Board - including yours here.
...do you find it's always true that there is never a real problem if only one person or half a dozen people are complaining? I'm pretty sure there are examples in history that strongly indicate otherwise, so I'm wondering what gives you the opposite impression.
You are of course correct on this point, that complaining aloud does not equal being the only personeople to be upset. However, this is a community, not an international body. I don't believe that behind every complaint lurk a hundred unspoken objections - because I remember the PPC Board as being somewhere people weren't afraid to speak out. If I have had a hand in changing that, as you seem to be suggesting, then I am truly sorry.
And I am truly sorry for appearing to single July out. Despite what you appear to be implying, I am not targetting her. I am simply referrencing recent events on the Board - and as you yourself stated, it is July that is doing most of the work.
hS
PS: If your questions ('How long should July have waited before responding to those posts by ThArcanist? When would someone else have gotten around to it, do you think?') were intended to be answered, rather than being a rhetorical device, I would say this: I can only speak for myself, but I work ten to twelve hours a day and try to sleep eight. The chances that I will respond to something in any given two minutes - or two hours - are not good. However, the chances that I will read most posts within a couple of days are currently quite high. ~hS
Also helped by your reply to July up in the Board-update thread. I know I'm being ratty over this myself, so I'm glad you were even willing to respond to me here.
I actually do agree with you on several points (having to take a break to get a break, for one), and I think I haven't been clear what my issues actually are, so I want to try to clear that up. I agree that we are pretty good about dealing with big stuff, like trolls and other obviously malicious types; it's the little things that build up that are worrying me. It's the sheer amount of correcting that seems to need doing these days more than whatever particular thing is being corrected at a given time. It's stuff like the two unrelated instances last year of July being criticized for using "fancy words" and an "extensive vocabulary" to intimidate people—I mean, really, this is not a place where people should be intimidated by big words, right?
The thing is, my own tendency is to take each individual thing on its own, so I understand the instinct to forgive and forget, but clueless stuff like this has been going on for a long time, as Araeph reminded me in the oldbies thread. Tomash's post made me realize that's what is getting to me: the steady influx of cluelessness and not getting it that July has been on the forefront of combating, largely at the cost of her own image and reputation because it's so easy to ignore.
The PPC I joined was one where the members had long conversations about obscure canon details and were clearly way more knowledgeable than I was about such things—that's why I joined. The PPC we've got now is one where we're constantly reminding people that we don't bash authors, and please contain your badfic reports so they don't flood the Board, and please don't use fanspeak, and please at least try to do some research on your own before you ask questions, we've got a really awesome resource for it now; etc., etc. I agree that each individual incidence is not a big deal, but what I want to get across is that I think all of it together is, and what we're doing right now is not good enough.
I'm going to stop here, though, because I think Irish Samurai has some really excellent thoughts about an alternative solution to mods. I don't think I said this clearly, but my first choice is for more action on the part of the community to self-regulate about this little stuff, but that can't happen if we don't recognize the little stuff as a big problem, collectively. That's why it's so scary to hear you and VM going "We're just fine, we don't have any problems we can't deal with doing exactly what we've done forever, only a few people are making noise so there can't really be a problem," etc. I don't think we can be the community of intelligent and thoughtful people we're so fond of insisting we are if we continue to love and tolerate all the cluelessness.
Hopefully that is more sense-making than I have been thusfar, and I am also sorry for the general frustration and rattiness.
~Neshomeh
I think that what we need in a moderator is power without authority. We do sometimes need to ban people - spambots, or just people who really don't listen - and sometimes locking threads could be extremely useful. But that shouldn't be any one person's decision to make. So. This:
The Powers
I suggest that moderators be given the ability to:
-Ban users and/or IP addresses, depending on the Board setup (see, I'm not ranting about how we should never move - that's for later ;)). This would be useful for trolls and spambots - more so the latter, since we point and laugh at trolls. :P
-Lock posts, so that no further replies can be given to them or to anything descending from them. This would extend to locking entire threads simply by locking the top post. This would be useful for uber-conversations stretching the Board (when it's only two people, this is), and for flamewars, should they ever crop up. It does need to be specific, though - there's no need to lock a whole thread because of something happening in a sub-thread, and I adore the multi-threading nature of the Board.
-Collapse a conversation into its starter post. This, actually, could be automated - if a conversation reaches more than (say) ten indents, it automatically collapses so you have to go into the tenth to see all the others. Livejournal does this, I believe.
-Poof posts, as Dann suggested, so that they are hidden but can be clicked to read. This would be ideal for the situations where someone posts something without a warning - which is a legitimate problem, and one we can only currently deal with by replying with 'THIS CONTAINS whatever'.
-Delete posts and threads. This would be, again, necessary for spambots, but not often used otherwise.
I do not think moderators should be able to edit other Boarders' posts, nor should there be any 'formal warning' system - particularly not leading to a ban. I would much prefer fire-and-forget moderators, who operate based on specific actions, not ongoing trends or feelings about the individual. That's what the community response is for - as mentioned (far) above, if someone is (eg) reviewing stories with flames, they will be asked to stop by the Board - and if they keep going, that's trollish behaviour.
The Authority
I suggest that moderators have specifically defined authority. They would be allowed to deal unilaterally with:
-Spambots
-Obvious trolls (I mean really obvious)
-Extended conversations (lock or, preferably, collapse, as above - with a specific limit on the term 'extended')
-(Possibly) poofing and stating what the warning should be - but only for things that should have been warned but weren't.
Beyond that, I suggest that Boarders should be given a very simple method of asking a mod to intervene - given the small size of the PPC, this would be best given as a button at the top of the Board, not on every post. We would send a note to the mods - it would go to every active mod - where we actually say why we object to something, rather than just saying 'This is bad'. Then, the moderator would do nothing.
Because moderators would not be allowed to act without a community response saying they should. The message system is because people may be uncomfortable saying anything on-Board, particularly if it's an older member acting up (oh yes it /does/ happen). So make sure it's anonymous (in case it's a mod acting up), and make specific guidelines. For instance, six people need to request intervention, or at least as many people as have responded positively to the post in question, whichever is greater. Then, and only then, the moderator would be permitted to intervene.
You may have noticed that what I've said is pretty much 'We should have more functionality for the Nameless Admin'. That's because we don't need moderators. Admins with power but no authority beyond cosmetic changes or community request, yes. Moderators who get to pick who is allowed to post what, no.
hS
If I'm honest, the main reason I don't like to come here much is that virtually every time I decide to lurk, somebody is getting/has recently been told not to do something, or there's a dispute, and I just don't find it a pleasant atmosphere to be in.
An anonymous tip off system would probably eliminate a lot of that, so I'm all for it.
The thread in question.
I feel it is important enough and connected to this that we should be able to get to it quickly, now that the first few pages of the board kinda look terrible and dire and like why we switched to bump mode in the first place.
I was thinking of starting a new thread with a link, but this is probably better. I'm definitely not done with that thread yet.
~Neshomeh
I agree that we have some pretty big problems at the moment. I don't think anyone will be surprised that I feel that way, I'm pretty open about that.
I am in favor of seeing what we could do with a new Board design, before we make a choice about moving or not. We should at least consider alternatives to what we have now.
Bumping threads is, as so many have already noted, not working for us. That's fine. Maybe we can try hS's discovery of an option that highlights new posts. I think that one sounds like it could be a winner, and it looks to have some support right now.
As for mods, I am in favor of the idea of having them. I believe that this community is cautious enough about the idea that we will create rules, checks and balances to avoid any of the issues that have been brought up so far. In fact, let me go ahead and throw out a potential idea. To prevent any one person from gaining too much power/authority, I think you should not be able to be both a PG and a Mod on the Board. If you are a PG and you want to be a mod instead, then you can opt to lose your PG status if you were voted to be a mod. I know some people would prefer one over the other. Nesh, for instance, would prefer to stay a PG in a case like this. PGs could be like the DAs in the chat, with a new ability to overturn any punishment a mod deals out.
Just an idea. Maybe you like it, maybe you prefer Neshomeh's rotating nameless mods idea, maybe you have something that you would like to suggest. The point is, as I recently said to a friend, the fear that if you do X then Y might happen, means that you are watching for Y to happen, and you are not likely to let it.
We are a group of intelligent, mature people. We can make this happen. I have faith in the group. With people like July working to fix the problems as they arise, and people like VM watching the watchmen, I think we can make it work. I also think the group as a whole would be better off for it.
-Phobos
I'd rather see rotating mods, personally - a system that expects and requires people to give up power strikes me as a better balance than one where imaginary lines are drawn to try to prevent accumulation. Of course, there's no reason they couldn't coexist - PGs commissioned to mod-hood could go on a Permissive hiatus until they've passed the commission on to the next victim.
I didn't have any particular attachment to that idea, it was just a potential way of addressing some of the fears that people have expressed.
I was under the impression that Neshomeh's plan (I think that's what you are referring to) was not for people to give up power, but rather for there to be a group of elected mods with a rotating schedule. The group never changes, but no mod is on duty all the time.
For instance, we have nameless mods A, B, and C (chosen by closed ballot so only the vote counter and the mods know who is a mod). This week/month/whatever mods A and B are on duty. Mods A and B are expected to keep an eye on the Board and deal with any problems that arise so mod C can take a break (to prevent burnout). Next week, mods B and C will be on duty, and mods C and A get the week after that. The mod(s) that are not on duty can still step in if they see a problem, but they wouldn't be obligated if it is not their week.
As I understand your post, you favor a system where A, B, and C are mods for a certain period of time and then give it up so that D, E, and F can take up the mantle, and G, H, and I after them. Is that an accurate assessment?
The major problem I see with a system like that is what happens if the same people get elected to the position every time? It is not outside the realm of possibility, since the community won't know who the mods are, and some members of the community stand out more than others. It is the same reason that many of the PGs got voted to be DAs in the IRC. It is something to consider.
-Phobos, bouncing ideas
I don't know if this is what Dann was thinking of, but in this post, I did kind of put up a possible solution to that?
What if we, as a community, in some private ballot, nominate, say, five trustworthy, active members to do this for one month. At the end of that month, each of the five members picks somebody to take their place, and so on and so forth? We could even put some kind of guideline up, like you can't pick someone who was on last month, if we're worried about a power dynasty or something.
I quite agree. The problem is, we need to be careful with admins.
I know hatred of authority is juvenile and all that, but I've had some roleplay groups I really loved die, just because of one moronic, control-freak, jerk of an admin.
I think that a slight upgrade to the board would be a good thing. At the moment things can get a little confusing to follow with each thread stretching the page. Not sure on the topic of moderation, I've never really had a problem with the current method. Then again, I'm not here very often currently, so I can't say.
Which is one of the reasons I returned last month, or the month before, and haven't really been seen since. Bumping I'm indifferent to, though I can see how it stretches out arguments and threads which really should die.
As to the separate board idea... I have less support for that, but I can see where it's a good idea.
And the Mods getting banhammer powers? Yes, I can definitely agree with that, especially after the link Tomash posted, which expressed my thoughts and feelings on the subject much more clearly than I can. I've come back, and regretted doing so...
Authority doesn't always mean a bad thing. The Agents have the Sunflower Official to answer to, and our community should have someone to answer to when it gets really bad. Being a Mod with the banhammer doesn't mean we're going to enter a Big Brother period, but it can help weed out the Derps from the people who are genuinely here to have intelligent discussion.
I agreee that we need some sort of moderation to deal with out-of-control threads abe newbies who don't listen. Nesh's "rotating mods" idea sounds good to me, and I support it. I've also come accross this link, which is relevant to this discussion.
On the subject of a new Board, I support Dann's "seperation of post and view" idea. I like the threaded, all posts on one page model, but I realize that not everyone does, which is why that should be a per-user option. I'm willing to help with the coding (I'd need to learn Rails, though). Here's my new Board wish/idea list:
I continue to think that there is a middle ground. I'm not so crazy as to think that being able to level some consequences against people who are obviously acting up is a bad idea. I'm just worried about the consequences, community-wide, of putting a shiny gold star on somebody's name, a hammer in their hand, and telling them to Keep Order. I think most of us are quite capable of keeping order amongst ourselves, and, well, honestly, giving somebody the power to shut down threads and suspend people from the community, then trusting them with no checks or balances besides communal outrage to Do The Right Thing... that worries me. Also, as I think has been said, putting someone on a higher level of authority changes the conversation - it makes people address them differently, makes people worried to disagree with them.
I know I've made bad calls as a PG. And as a DA. And just in general. I've told people off who didn't deserve it because of personal grudges, and started fights with people that, once started, were hard to stop. I've denied... well, one request, anyway, out of hand for an incredibly stupid, personal reason. Fortunately, hS was paying enough attention to start a conversation and fix that mistake.
But clearly, at this point we need some kind of solution. If we are to have mods, as it appears we are going to have to, I think Neshomeh's Nameless Rotating Mod idea is best. I have a sort of proposal for that.
What if we, as a community, in some private ballot (Nameless Admin to check?), nominate, say, five trustworthy, active members to do this (Whatever 'this' is, exactly, because we also have to decide that - we want to keep things from getting out of hand, not impose strict martial law) for one month. At the end of that month, each of the five members picks somebody to take their place, and so on and so forth? We could even put some kind of guideline up, like you can't pick someone who was on last month, if we're worried about a power dynasty or something.
And maybe a Board-Wide discussion on what worked, what didn't, what we want to change/fix/keep after six months? I don't know.
As for what actual powers such mods would have... that's sort of more tricky, and bears more discussion. But what do you folks think about this all?
In one style, the mods pretty much keep themselves aloof from the community. They mostly post with mod hat in place, and absolutely keep their opinions out of any controversial threads -- politics, religion, best pizza toppings, etc. They aren't personally involved with the people of the community; they're just background staff.
These communities tend to run very smoothly. Of course there are plenty of people who do resent the mod team, but that never really causes problems because the mod team don't particularly care. They keep the room tidy and that's that.
In the other style, more common on small forums like this, the mods are fully immersed in the interpersonal aspect of the community. We know all about their politics and religion and personal pet peeves; they indulge in all the fun of internet cliques, and we all know which "ordinary" members can get away with murder and who gets warning points for breathing too suddenly.
These communities tend to regularly erupt in massive fireballs of drama -- great for s'mores. The mods get a lot more personal emotional satisfaction out of their work, but the communities themselves suck.*
This is what I expect from any community that is small enough for people to recognise each other's names, because the mods just can't keep themselves emotionally removed. And yes, this is what I expect would happen in the PPC. It's just how small internet communities tend to work. (And anyway, I've seen enough PPC chatroom dramas come through over the years to know that we're not remotely immune to moderation angst)
I don't like the nameless rotating mods. The line between acceptable and rule-breaking would shift every time the mod team changed, and I can scarcely think of anything more dramatic than handing people anonymity and power at the same time. People would still bring their personal issues to the moderation room: they'd just have less accountability for how they handled them. There's a reason Anonymous use anonymity as their symbol, you know?
And if Dann has come up with a brilliant board design which would help keep things tidier, then I genuinely don't see how mods would contribute much to the community. (Admittedly, an untidy board doesn't cause me much primal anguish to begin with)
Of course we get spambots and trolls sometimes. But democratic community response *does* kick in for those times. The Admin in its various incarnations seems perfectly sufficient to handle that sort of thing. I don't think mods would be a particular improvement. They would only bring the potential for entirely new kinds of drama. A tidy board would be great and all, but I don't think it is worth the trade-off.
-- Kaitlyn, posting once on this issue
*In fairness, I have seen a few individual mods who manage to walk the tightrope in between -- they carefully balance their law enforcement with massive heaping doses of self-deprecation. Everyone loves them, or can at least tolerate them, but they tend to burn out in a matter of months when they realise that to maintain that acceptance in the community they have to give up personal dignity and boundaries. The fireballs are smaller, but the marshmallows are still tasty.
Frankly, I was thinking mostly about protecting the potential mods from unfair treatment by everyone who thinks they can never be looked upon as a normal person once they have "status." That upsets me, and I think the onus is really on you-collective to treat people in a way that you think is reasonable rather than to blame them for the way you decide to regard them once there's a metaphorical star by their name.
BUT, since that's the case, and additionally considering issues with accountability, anonymity for mods is probably not an appropriate solution.
~Neshomeh, who does have bad ideas occasionally.
I am part of a decent sized community that is based around the game Diplomacy. The Mods on their forums are picked, by the existing mods, from among the community and they continue to post as part of the community. They are people who are well known and respected. They keep order without self-deprecation, losing their dignity, or massive fireballs of drama. There are very clear rules, and the mods enforce them without any of the problems you have mentioned. So, it is possible.
That system works because of the clear rules in the community, and the level of respect for the individuals who are chosen to be mods.
All that aside, you make a very good point about anonymity and power. While it may be convenient for people who don't want to know they are talking to a mod, there is the problem of accountability. That is something that needs to be considered.
-Phobos
That is way more than just relevant. It's positively frightening how much that sounds like us. O.o;
~Neshomeh
It seems the standard depiction of authority here on the board is off tyrannical despots going completely off the rails the second they're given power and reducing the community to a grey, lifeless wasteland. It's tiring and frankly, I think it's rather juvenile.
Self-moderation simply will not happen in an internet community; Anonymity puts paid to the concept. The fact we needed to have more complicated, precise rules of conduct attests to this. Apparently, the old rules weren't specific enough, which is code for "nobody could tell what they should or shouldn't do based on simple observation and common sense". The anonymity inherent in internet use basically means that people are quicker to act on their impulses and less likely to consider what they're doing. Removing moderation from this is akin to a body acting without a head.
Most communities get by perfectly fine with less-than-stellar moderators, and clearly we're putting a lot of thought into who is moderating. It doesn't matter which way the mods want to do it, I believe this community will have no problem with the mods it chooses. The moderation will almost certainly be lax regardless; it just helps to have the safeguards in place instead of assuming you won't need them.
As for the board design, I prefer non-bump and I don't mind the current design, but I do prefer phpBB. Either way, it doesn't bother me since I'm mostly on the IRC.
Finally, I believe the community could do with a little less of the "be nice to everyone all the time" attitude, but then again I'm a curmudgeonly Scot and it's in my blood.
I've been, in my own small way, been tooting the horn of needing "proper authority" around here for a while now. I think there should be a small but trusted set of moderators (that can have rotating duties if they prefer it that way). I think we're looking at the authority angle at the wrong way. It almost seems like people feel like the so-called venerated oldbies (PGs, etc.) can't be trusted at all to run things without twenty different regulations and by-laws breathing down their necks. This comes off as bizarre to me. Most forums putter along with moderators who were almost virtually grabbed off the street or are just buddies with the admin.
Our community is incredibly strong in many ways, and we should have a bit more faith in that. And like I replied to Makari, we are not making people Kings or Queens of the PPC here; if the moderators got out of hand, there'd be Consequences. But they should be able to close threads when they get out of hand, they should be able to ban people from posting - temporarily or permanently - etc.
I think moving to phpBB would be great. I don't think we have enough volume to warrant separate subfora though.
In particular, thank you for bringing up the trust thing. I think that's part of what was giving me so much grief when I was trying to post this morning. Just... hear, hear.
~Neshomeh
Okay, yeah. Mods with power. Great, and, it throws the structure on its head.
My interpretation of the reason we don't have mods has always been to keep people on an equal footing. I can understand why they might look like a necessity -- maybe they are, maybe they aren't, but they sure look like it right now -- however, half the point of a moderator is that they are respected more than the other users because of the powers they wield, yeah? Not because of who they are. Because of what they can do to you if you step out of line.
Isn't that exactly what we were trying to avoid? My take had always been that we were trying to encourage a feeling of equality, regardless of chronological presence. (though the oldbies do have a certain, hm. Veneration, I suppose? All of us are human and fallible.) I realize PGs are also kind of a thing in that respect, but hey, we have stealth PGs, sort of.
I dunno. When I go into a conversation with someone I perceive as a peer rather than someone I perceive as above me on the status chain, the results are going to be completely different. In fact, in the latter situation it's unlikely to get me to engage at all. Maybe I'm just a special kind of shy, since I haven't noticed many other people doing so. In fact, I think many of the people here would be fine with it, charge brightly ahead with a smile, though correct me if I'm wrong.
I find official moderators a bit intimidating and not conducive to an open environment, but maybe I just know too many places where the moderation got out of hand, and maybe we could use people with 'official' authority to tell us to listen to each other instead of the people we know as friends. Because that always works, right?
On the subject of the Board, I think I'm probably alone in that I like this method. I can actually tell what's new. O_O This is novel. Yes, some threads are getting lost in the kerfuffle, but threads were always getting lost in the kerfuffle, and at least this way we have the capability to un-lose them.
My two bits. Please let me know if there's a point you want clarified or I phrased something too ambiguously.
Poking around the settings for YourWebApps reveals that there is an option for 'Highlight New Messages'. It does exactly what it says - any messages posted in the last 24 hours will be highlighted.
As a continuation of the 'trying new stuff' theory, what do people think of turning off bumping and flicking that switch instead?
hS
Personally, I'd think it's worth a try at least. Wonder what everyone else thinks?
Anyone wildly against it?
If it's going to be bright-yellow background fill highlighting, for instance, I think that would be pretty obnoxious. What's the visual going to be?
~Neshomeh
It's a mild-yellow highlight on the post titles. Could be a lot worse...
Actually, could it? Any chance you could mess with the color, maybe make it blue?
I'll grit my teeth and give it a shot in any case if nobody else cares, but my aesthetic sensibilities are definitely twinging. ^_^;
~Neshomeh
Understandable if too late.
(And I might have given half the people on the IRC heart attacks in the process. Note to board admins: There is no 'preview' function for styles!)
CHARGE for no aesthetic sensibilities!
I understand the concern over having moderators, but I am honestly thinking we need to pick our poison here. The past few weeks and months have shown that we're picking up more and more traffic that is simply in dire need of some hand-holding and guiding, backed up by the use of force, to keep the whole thing from collapsing into a mess.
You have to remember that the moderators will not be anointed Kings of the PPC; they still have to have the legitimate backing of the population at large. We're already having DAs and PGs and whatnot, which is basically skirting around the issue of needing proper authority-holders.
And it's not like you couldn't be able to tell what's new on a phpBB board either!
phpBB boards I am actually comfortable with! It was this one I was talking about re: telling what's new. :P
And yeah, I know no one sets out to go 'here have a King' when mods are appointed. Just. Status things. When I was a newbie I was almost terrified of the PGs, and that's a fairly loose authority. Granted, I haven't been that age in a while, and I'm just one person.
I'm all for turning off bump mode, but it's not going to solve all our problems. Rather than really long out-of-control threads, we'll be back to asking people not to spam new threads. I think I prefer that problem to this one, but let's not kid ourselves that everything was perfect before bump mode—somebody said something to that effect, and it's just not true.
I would like to see Dann's board up and running, too, but failing that, I would be okay with moving at this point. Something like the St. Dymphna's Academy board does have a feature that lets you view the 100 most recent posts, so if you want to view everything not separated into subfora, that's entirely possible.
I'm also in favor of mods, but I've been trying to discuss my feelings about this controversy for hours without being able to keep from descending into frustrated ranting, so that's all I can safely say right now.
~Neshomeh
Having thought about it a little since my previous post, I think the biggest reason that I want mods is so that those of us who are doing all the work trying to keep order right now can take a f***ing break. I'm thinking of July in particular, but also me and Phobos and anyone else who wants to step back for a while and have someone else step up when somebody decides it's a good idea to tell authors they're reporting their fics to us, or to post a blog on our wiki about why they hate fundamentalists, or come here all excited about getting to bash authors.
Don't know what I'm talking about? You haven't been paying attention the last few days—or possibly you were, but you missed it under all the badfic. These things all happened. Clearly some folks needed to be told to stand in line, because they either didn't read or didn't understand the rules on their own.
It thrills me to note that VM in particular has stepped up multiple times to help deal with these specific things, and stuff related to them, but this is new. Mostly it's July who's first on the ball, and July leans on me and Phobos, and I don't know that we lean on anybody, so it's mainly the three of us stuck doing most of the work when things go awry like this. Either more people need to step up voluntarily (and the Constitution strongly suggests that you all ought to take a hand in this, including the anarchists), or I would like to elect somebody new who's willing to deal with problems instead of pretending we don't have any and isn't already walking a very fine line between barely coping and being burned out.
Heck, what about rotating mods? We could have a mod pool, and they could take it in turns to post under a group name (The Nameless Mod?) so nobody is picked out as being "above" anybody else at any given time, and nobody bears all the weight all the time.
What about anything that is some sort of compromise between "OMG ebil authority!" and "OMG total chaos!"?
~Neshomeh
(For the record, quite often the only reason I haven't said anything to people is because by the time I've made up my mind "Yes, this is something that deserves a response, yes, I should respond and say something," and written up a post that strikes a balance between OMG Ebil Authority! and Wishy-washy ineffective whining, and examined it, cross-examined it, made sure I'm not posting out of frustration or irritation, and got someone I trust to look over it and tell me whether I'm out of line or overreacting...
July, or sometimes you or Phobos, has beaten me to the punch. This also happens with permission requests. I'm not being lazy, or disinterested, I just really, really, really don't like to rush into those things - frequently, if I check the 'Board before work, I'm mulling over some response to a permission request (or out of line thread, or whatever) in the back of my mind for most of my shift, writing a draft on my break, and posting more or less within half an hour of getting home. The last internet community I hung out in splintered and disintegrated and died because the mods had feuds, and there were too many Very Serious Rules and too many people over-eager to enforce them, and eventually, far too little interest in the community. I have been guilty of rushing into Talking To/At People [about problems] before. I really don't want to make that mistake ever again.
That, compared with the fact that I know how easy it can be to come off as dogpiling, or attacking, and despite being a PG and a DA, I don't want the impression of authority. I'd much rather have people listen because the reply makes sense logically and makes sense in the community than because The Almighty Permission-y Folks Said So. I figure you guys probably don't want that either, but I worry sometimes about the impression it gives with just PGs acting as modly-types.)
That was sort of a tangent. What I meant to say was:
Rotating-Nameless-Mods sounds like an excellent idea. Why haven't we thought of this before? You're a genius, Neshomeh.
That way no one can complain that the mods are controlling or that they restrict freedom because the mods are never the same.That being said, there should be some requirements to volunteering as a mod, maybe having to have been here for a while or maybe getting approved by the rest of the community.
Memories surface of rotating mods having been employed on my old forums. I don't remember well how exactly it worked out, but this is actually a good idea. And I think this community is a tad more mature than the one on my old forums, so yeah. And the group name is actually a good idea.
Why do you keep making all these valid points and have these awesome ideas all the time?
The rotating mod plan, I mean. Using a group name's a good idea too; it circumvents the issues that Makari brought up regarding interacting with people who happen to be mods.
It wasn't until you put it this way that I realized that is part of the reason that I haven't written much for quite some time.
I rather like the 'rotating mods' idea as well.
While I do agree with most people that the bump system needs to go, I don't think that it's necessary to move to a whole diferent site. As far as mods, I think that the Nameless Admins would be good enough,so long as one person isn't running the entire thing. I'll admit, we need a bit more order than we have now, but the PPC has never been a very structured organization. Also, I like the fact that everything is in the same place, that way I can see everything that's going on without having to to a seperate page for things like new missions or badfic threads.
I agree with the consensus below that the bump mode has to die but I'm a little wary of the other suggestions. I've never used a phpBB style forum so I don't exactly know what it's like but the idea of mods seems unnecessary to me. We don't need anyone to rule over anyone else if everyone would just stick to the Constitution. Along with that is the point that hS brought up, while compartmentalizing the posts would make them easier to find, people would end up sticking to one type of post and never branch out. So yes we need some revisions but we don't have to completely reconstruct the Board.
I think a change might be needed. It would be easier to get around, and we would be able to see previous posts and be able to edit posts, in case we put out one with a mispelling.
I myself am in favour of moving to a new forum, because I'm more used to forums like that (Wesnoth's, TvTropes', etc). I also think that it's easier to find what you're looking for when everything has its place.
Last but not least, moving to a forum would make RPing much, much easier; I know that from experience. To me, at least, RPing in a linear thread makes more sense and is easier to follow than RPing in a Board (which I find confusing. Who's responding to who, exactly?).
The bumping new threads to the top was annoying/confusing me, do I'd support turning it off.
I like the idea of going to a new Board. A system like proboards or whatever seems like it would work. (eg I was part of July's Mary Sue Academy RP, which from memory was built on and as I recall it handled heaps of posts and nattering without getting too confusing.)
Elcalion
Seriously. I only suggested it as a brief experiment to see if, as people kept claiming, it would Solve All Our Problems (which at that point were limited to... hmm, lots of newbie threads, and too many badfic threads). At this point, posting your badfic to a previous thread/to the Unclaimed Badfic List is in the Constitution - I enshrined it in the sharding Constitution, guys - so we have an actual justification for asking people not to do it. And, you know what? People tend to listen.
We do not need mods. The Nameless Admin does just fine as it is - power without authority, acting on Board consensus. I have seen nothing to make me believe people need to be constantly hounded to get them to stand in line and play nice - because the PPC isn't a place for standing in line. It's a place for wild free-thinking madness.
hS
PS: Article 11 of the Constitution says it's okay to ask questions (but that we may point you at the Wiki). Article 6 says be nice when telling people things you already know. So can we, rather than just throwing out Wiki links, give useful answers as well? The Wiki isn't a complete store of knowledge, you know. If no one on the Board knows things that aren't on the Wiki, it's a sad, sad day. ~hS
They don't. If they did, I would never have posted this thread in the first place. I wouldn't have needed to, because everything would be fine and dandy. But people don't listen, for whatever reason. Nesh's posts bear witness to that.
We have a link to the Wiki at the top of the page that people don't seem to use. The warnings and finger-waggings of more experienced PPCers go unheeded. People. Don't. Listen.
Context is important. When I link the wiki for a question, it is because the answer is something that can be simply found and simply answered. If the question is a good one- good here being used in the sense of "complex and requires a detailed answer"- I will write up a thorough answer.
The bump system is a mess. It's harder to keep track of anything, and newbye and badfic threads still swarm the Board.
ANd yeah, a brief introduction to newbyes made here on the Board is needed. There are too many newbyes that rush in barely understanding what the PPC is about and especially how it works.
A forum-like system would probably work better, as we could keep it better organized and would be less easily swarmed.
The Board worked well when there were less people. It just can't handle a big community like we are now.
Not to mention that we are probably the only ones still using a posting board outside of image boards (that are a different thing completely), so most people has to learn how it works. (I had to.)
About the links problem, I think we can edit all those we can, and leave a big link on the Board to the Forum.
The main thing that needs to happen is getting rid of the bump system. The main reason why convo-posting is a problem is because the bump system forces us to watch a conversation that may or may not have anything to do with this. The same thing with out-of-control threads. They're less of a problem if they get shoved off the front page by time.
I don't think we need a new board, or moderators, or whatever. Before the bump thing came along, I think we were just fine self-regulating.
Thanks, but my position has slightly moved? I had, somewhat, unforgivably, forgotten about the new 'Board idea. I think a more efficient design would be a Good Thing.
(Still all against Mods with Powers, though. Aside from the mentioned Nameless Admin style below-thread.)
...to a point. I really like the way the GitP board is set up, as they have active moderators (chosen from board veterans), and have posts organized by page. They limit threads to 50 pages, and just add new ones. Unfortunately, the way the posts work prevents one from just scrolling past a less relevant topic.
TL; DR, I like this board, but think it could be better.
I whole-heartedly agree with changing back from bump to . . . whatever the old way was called. Chronological? It's too hard to keep track of where particular posts wind up when I try to find them again. And yes, discussions that should have petered out long ago keep going.
(I want to say this. The badfic thread? Very little actual discussion. It's mostly "Oh it's so bad my eyes are hurting." Can't we find something more interesting to talk about concerning a badfic than that? Discuss why it goes against canon? Creative ways to handle a mission in it?)
I'm a bit more neutral about switching to the newer type of discussion board. I don't think we should go there quite yet. Let's try going back to the non-bump mode and see how things go.
On the topic of moderators: I know at least some PPCers are uncomfortable with the idea. Would it strictly be necessary to have such on the newer type of board? Or could we get by with the Nameless Admin situation we have now, with someone only intervening to delete troll and spam posts?
Since it seems we're discussing multiple things, let's try to break them out and look at them individually.
Firstly, bump mode seems to not be working. One advantage to the old way is that threads are killed perforce by the progress of time. I am of the opinion that we should go back to it.
Secondly, layout issues. While I can understand the appeal of having everything neatly divided into sections, there is also appeal to having everything together - there are no subfora for people to disappear into and never poke their heads into the larger community. I, for one, am a fan of the current thread structure, too, where replies can be made to any post far more easily than the perforce-linear nature of PHPbb and similar.
I've been designing a Board replacement where the layout of the board is independent of the posts - I can see a layout that looks like the current one, while Pieguy can see PHPBB-esque subfora and linear threads. Or subfora and branching threads, or a single blog-like page where every thread's first post is listed in its entirety, with a little "77 replies!" link at the bottom to get into the conversation. It's quite possible - I'd like to think that I've gotten the design close to right, and flexible enough to make creating new views easy.
Thirdly, moderation. I have two questions concerning mods. What situations are mods going to address, and what powers (both technical and soft) are they going to need to have to do so? You say "We need proper authority", but what does proper authority look like?
If I might address some of these out of order...
I've heard you mention this Board replacement before. I wasn't sure if you were still working on it, but it's good to hear that it's still viable. I'd support something like that even if it didn't have moderators (which I'm guessing it wouldn't.)
Regarding people disappearing into subfora; I could see that being a problem on a much larger board, with more people and more subjects being discussed. I can't see that happening with PPCers. Really, it depends on the person. However, it's a potential flaw of the phpBB system and I acknowledge that. That's why I asked for more than my proposal. Let's get an exchange of ideas going!
Finally, the question of mods. I have no doubt that quite a few people on this Board are going to see the words 'proper authority' and immediately recoil. This was a poor choice of wording on my part. I did not mean to imply anything with those specific terms.
What I pictured was a small group of individuals - recognized respectable figures or something like that - with the goal of keeping the Board manageable. A small committee of Nameless Admins, I suppose. Balancing and coordinating with each other to prevent power-induced madness. But that's just my view.
Building moderation powers into a Board isn't too hard - especially if their powers are limited to simple things like closing threads or poofing comments into limbo. (I don't really want to allow deletions from the Board, but a Youtube-esque "This post has been poofed for X. If you'd really like to see it, though..."
I guess maybe this is my perspective, but my impression is that The Nameless Admin doesn't exist to run herd on threads and newbies. They're the janitor, of sorts, and are here to delete spam, kill threads that have gotten totally and wildly out of hand, etc. They're hard power - the ability to delete threads, etc - without using any soft power (the respect they have from the community) that they may have.
The closing of threads and poofing of comments, I mean. I was think before (but forgot to write it down) of things like editing posts that set people off or are offensive or something. Like you said, the Youtube-style "The content of this post has been etcetera, etcetera."
I could see leaving the Nameless Admin as the final arbitrator/janitor/whatever. That makes sense to me.
A new Board will definitely help clean up the sprawl we have now.
We'll need to hold Mod elections if we do go through with this though.
The Board as it is has a lot of weight and tradition behind it, but the system is just too outdated. If we switched to an IPB/phpBB/SMF-based Board, with different subfora and what have you, it would make things a lot cleaner and easier and more manageable.
I've been in favour of this for a while; I think it needs to happen.
I... almost completely disagree. (Anyone surprised? Anyone?)
I think if we get rid of the bump system (please please please, we tried it, all it does is keep things alive forever, please can we let it die), that will solve a lot of this problem. Like... most of it.
And then we can talk about the rest.
--VM, who remains in favor of modless anarchy, at least on the internet... at least, on this corner of it
I was laptopless for a few months, and so only checked the Board about three times during that period. It was most confusing the first time, before I found the post that said bumping was on. The other two times I had to go back several pages to make sure I'd seen everything.
But I concur with VM. Ditch the bump system, wait a week (or two, or whatever), and then re-analyze.