On governance
Post Reply
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-12-2011, 12:39 PM
RE: On governance
Obviously trying to govern this site is a major undertaking. If you limit what can be said, then you risk looking like an authoritarian dick but if you allow anyone to say anything they want and start up a bunch of redundant threads that would be more at home on a facebook wall than a forum, then the site will become so cluttered with stupid shit that people who enjoy it for the seriousness will stop coming back. I have seriously been discouraged by recent activities in the last few weeks that seem to be less geared towards intelligent conversation and more towards "look at me! look at me! I can start a thread and talk about myself here!"

Perhaps you could make the recent thread feeds customizable? This way I could select to only see recent threads from topics I chose as opposed to seeing threads from the "this that and the other thing" thread every time I log on?

I was pleased to see in this forum that certain topics were left out (things like "I broke up with my boyfriend" etc) and that people held conversations rather than trying to incessantly flirt with one another as if this is facebook. That has been a bit of a problem as of late and has been a real turn-off from certain threads. These types of threads and commenting belong on facebook, not here.

I don't know if anything I said above is useful, but perhaps my opinion is?

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
06-12-2011, 12:50 PM
RE: On governance
In light of that then maybe some small changes could be helpful, not because I think the forum needs them but because it's not fair if Stark doesn't get to enjoy the discussion.

I'm totally against any idea of anarchy or democracy on the forum. On other threads I've talked about the idea of a 'benevolent dictatorship', pooling all the power to one person/a small group who are good leaders and honestly want what is best for everyone, I know it's practically impossible on a national scale but we can do it here because of the size of the forum. Anarchy will lead to a free for all with no-one to stop trolls/bots and stuff like that. Democracy will mean that we drain all power away from the people who actually care about the forum and share it out among the trolls and idiots.

That leaves autocracy. I would quite happily see all power pooled to Stark, I honestly think that he is doing a brilliant job, as I'm sure nearly all of you do. However, I feel that that attitude may be a little selfish as I have no idea how much work goes into running to forum and I would never expect Stark to run everything himself at the expense of actually enjoying debates, plus I think everyone would lose out if he didn't contribute. I think that if this is the case then we should look for a way for some of the longer standing members to share Stark's load.

How about we revamp the mods/veterans, first remove those who don't visit the forum any more. Then our existing mods can decide how many people they feel are needed to comfortably run the forum, if more are needed then they can be sounded out and appointed. These people can either be equal to Stark or slightly below as they are now. Then we could give the Veterans power to take care of some of the lesser tasks, again Veterans could be appointed as and when they are needed.

I'm sure that the longer standing members would have no objection to helping out, I certainly wouldn't. I spend half my time hanging out here and I would be happy to do my bit to help.

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Hughsie's post
06-12-2011, 01:07 PM
RE: On governance
Growing pains.
Me, i dislike change. I find something that works for me, i want it to stay exactly the same. But it never does. People come, people go, people argue and call one another names; trolls emerge from under bridges and people feed them or hit them with sticks; interest and emphasis shift; different subject matter is introduced. Manure happens and flowers don't always follow. One of the negative results, for me, is that when a lot of silly shit happens in a short time, people i like become fed up and go away: that's a permanent change for the worse. Every shit-storm in each teacup diminishes my own motivation to stay.

If one is involved enough, one makes the effort to preserve what's good, minimize the damage and prevent more harm. Two ways that can be done: more firefighters or better equipment. Three, i suppose - more firefighters with better equipment. *sigh* Okay, more stable-hands with bigger pitchforks.

My preference would be anarchy, but that's not quite so simple as many people imagine. It doesn't mean no rules. It means no government. It means a set of rules that everyone understands and is committed to uphold, so that it doesn't require enforcement. That's possible in very small numbers dedicated to a single well-defined ideal. It's not possible on a public service platform to which anyone can sign up, without an oath of allegiance or certification or literacy test... especially if that platform is bound by larger legal entity - like a country.

My second choice would be an oligarchy, perhaps with separate areas of responsibility for each regent, so they can act without consultation. The regents would still have to agree on a set of rules, and could, if they deemed it appropriate, divulge those rules to prospective participants.
My reason: since this is already a benevolent dictatorship, it would require the smallest necessary alteration.
(Should the dictatorship turn malignant, everybody's free to leave: no borders, no police.)

Democracy in its current state doesn't work.

If you pray to anything, you're prey to anything.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Peterkin's post
06-12-2011, 01:12 PM
RE: On governance
Quick addition here. as someone who is used to forums running into drama zones and getting through them. What is not already in place? A little while after Deep Thought joined us a forum management team was created. A council of respected forum members who can help in making decisions. And so while Stark still has the overwhelming authority we already have a sort of democratic lean. Albeit primarily for issues Stark is unsure on. Back 9 months ago stark reeled over having to ban a christian who was bogging us down now banning is being discussed as a common action.

Our community isn't as small as it used to be. People are starting to notice it and we're getting bigger. Before you seriously start discussing what huge changes we need to make in the face of a larger community ask yourselves if you really want a different community. The forum for a long time has been exceptionally what we desire. When it changes it's going to effect the atmosphere for everyone. Stark's already getting exhausted from all of this we need guidance stuff.

Ever since I started coming here there have been wacky and insane threads. There has been nonsense, and there has been sensationalism. Now there is more. That's most of what has changed. The threads people like to discuss aren't appearing first because comments are made on ones they don't like.

So far the main solution to this issue has already been suggested. Creating a filter system so that those not interested can avoid the categories they dislike appearing. Stark has already made the main move, making a place for nonsensical things to go so that it's not crowding the rest. What more do you want?

We have a council to address problems. Stark asks this council often. In fact he addressed to the forum management team how we would like to reword the rules page. Which I and Zatamon answered in part. Stark isn't trying to do everything on his own, he's trying to have fun. Just remember that there is a point where the people who have been here forever get tired of changes as well.

Also please someone explain to me how I've not been attention whoring this whole time? =p You guys know a lot about me. Much more than "a civilized discussion" warrants. And I don't hear many ban Lilith statements. I am the problem you are discussing though. I encourage that stuff. So think about that for a moment. It's not just the kids who act that way. They just do it more flamboyantly.

I'm not a non believer, I believe in the possibility of anything. I just don't let the actuality of something be determined by a 3rd party.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Lilith Pride's post
06-12-2011, 01:18 PM
RE: On governance
Another clarification: I have NOT made my own recommendation yet.

I merely listed the options (as I see them) and, Like Stark, I reserve my right to make my own preference known later.

I hope I hear a lot of other voices before it comes to that. Smile

From recent posts, I KNOW that quite a few people are VERY unhappy with the way things are now.

We should not ignore their concerns, just because we are happy with the way things are..
Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2011, 01:36 PM
RE: On governance
I am with Peterkin. Oligarchy is where it's at. I personally like how things are to an extant. Might leave if things change too much because it wouldn't be any of the things I listed in the Why are we here thread. But c'est la vie. Shit happens and then we get pie.

I'm not sure why people keep nit picking on the way the forum is, if they are nit picking. It seems like they are but I might be wrong. But I guess what I see and like is something another person might see and dislike. Such is the way of the world.

I understand why we nit pick people, I mean really who here isn't used to pissing people off? Isn't it in our nature? We all do it, the difference is most of us are grown ups and we should be airing our grievances and then moving on. I understand being irritated by all the juvenile threads but I don't understand why they can't just be ignored or openly mocked. I make jokes all the time that are relatively low brow, because it amuses me. It might irritate other people (I'm actually sure it does Wink )
But that is the nature of community isn't it? a collection of mixed personalities all pissing each other off in one ball of smelly hatred. What's not to like?
I think the trick is to avoid the personalities you don't mesh with as best you can. Not always easy as I keep finding out, but doable.

I also get that we are growing in size and subject manner, and it may not be easily managed by my boy Stark anymore, not without mental breakdowns. Which is sad, because I think if we could all just leave well enough alone he wouldn't have a problem. But everyone seems to have a problem lately including me (mine being that no one likes my wittle forum and it hurts my feewings) and I think it's killing Stark. Don't die Stark. That would be dumb.

Oh and another frequent problem totally unrelated is that expression is poorly translated across text. Most of you being new don't get my sarcasm because well... you're fuckin noobs. And in return I don't get your sarcasm or dry wit or blatant assholery most of the time either. So we develop imaginary issues with people who might as well be imaginary for all we really know about each other. Recently I've had more attack defend banter with people who weren't even here like a month ago, then I've ever had here. And most of it is my fault entirely. I am sure I've added fuel to a fire that may not have been had I kept my fingers off the stupid keyboard. So um... sorry. Now let's see what happens.

On a side note, if shit goes south I am cordially inviting most of you to my new forum that has yet to start titled TTA2 the remix. I will need a mod (Stark?) and someone who can program (Deep?) and members (you guys?) and there will be no voting for changes. Poop.

"I think of myself as an intelligent, sensitive human being with the soul of a clown which always forces me to blow it at the most important moments." -Jim Morrison
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2011, 02:05 PM
RE: On governance
Apart from fairly recently with the spam type posts, have we actually had any other problems that would mean changes to the forum?

Behold the power of the force!
[Image: fgYtjtY.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2011, 02:12 PM
RE: On governance
BeardedDude made his comments a few posts up, Mr Woof expressed some serious concerns in the other thread, as well as Filox (with which FSM_scot agreed), I know that Defacto has serious problems and is planning to leave and, I am sure, there are others we have yet to hear from.

I am not saying that we should bow to a minority (if it is indeed a minority), I only suggested that their concerns should be taken into account.

Once they are properly addressed and discussed (as opposed to sweeping them under the carpet), I am perfectly happy to accept the majority decision, if I decide that personally it works for me. Smile

If not, I either learn to live with it --- or not. Sad
Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Zatamon's post
06-12-2011, 02:21 PM
RE: On governance
The concerns are perfectly legitimate and i'm not at all sweeping them under any carpet. Of course the shit needs to be cleaned up. I thought that was understood. I thought the only question was who is supposed to do the cleaning and by what means.

If you pray to anything, you're prey to anything.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-12-2011, 02:58 PM
RE: On governance
We actually should listen to a minority. We aren't a government system we don't need everything to work precisely. so everyone should be able to have their input. It's best if we can maintain the fact that each opinion matters. Those who have issues need to know that we are listening. We aren't here to ignore the smaller groups. Hopefully we haven't given off an elitist clique feel yet =p. and I for one am not sure how I could.

I'm not a non believer, I believe in the possibility of anything. I just don't let the actuality of something be determined by a 3rd party.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: