board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

The Last Discussion Evah About Opening board77?

Post Reply   Page 1 of 9  [ 174 posts ]
Jump to page 1 2 3 4 59 »
Author Message
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject: The Last Discussion Evah About Opening board77?
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 3:29 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5170
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Fat chance, probably. ;)

But some may recall that in the past, when these discussions have come up before my attitude was that the admins at the time should start a binding poll and decide the issue once and for all. The response was always "we don't have the power to start a binding poll."

Well, folks, guess who's an admin now. ;) And of course, my attitude now is "we don't have the power to start a binding poll." ;) ;)

Nonetheless, I firmly believe that the time has come to decide this issue once and for all. The convention, slow moving though it is, has made real progress. If I can be so bold as to say so, I think we have a particularly strong, solid group of admins. On the other side of the coin, there continues to be virtually daily reminders of this person who's friend can't get in to the board, or that person from TORC who has registered and must be turned away. It is my firm believe that the very survival of board77 requires that it open its doors as soon as possible.

So this is my suggestion. I would like to discuss the possibility of starting a poll that would hopefully give sufficient guidance as to the membership's feelings on this matter to establish a firm goal for when to open. I would propose (as starting point, at least) the following options:

Edit 4/5/05 4:50 a.m. GMT: Here is the revised poll language that I have suggested:
Quote:
"Assuming that any issues regarding what to do about the Thinking of England forum when the board opens, and whether non-members will be able to read the board when it opens, are resolved separately, I would like to see board77 open:

1. As soon as the charter provisions regarding the admins are ratified,
2. As soon as the charter provisions regarding dispute resolution are ratified,
3. As soon as the charter provisions regarding members rights and responsibilities are ratified,
4. As soon as the charter provisions regarding the mission statement, purpose and goals,
5. As soon as the charter provisions regarding the office of the Mayor are ratified,
6. As soon as the charter is completely finished and ratified, including the provisions regarding the ownership of the board.
7 I do not want board77 to open in the foreseeable future."

The purpose of this poll would be to determine at what point a sufficient percentage of the membership to constitute a consensus wants to open. Each successive choice in the poll (or at least the first six) is scheduled to occur after the previious choice and the votes for each choice would carry over to the next choice. I have suggested that 80% would constitute a consensus. So if 50 total people voted, and 10 voted for the first option, and 15 each voted for the second and third options, a consensus would have been reached for that third option, since 40 votes out of 50 is 80%.
I'm sure that I have terribly confused some (if not all) people (my mind does tend to work in strange ways). But I'll leave it at that, and then try to answer people's specific questions as best I can. It may well be that we can't even reach a consensus on having a vote, or how, but I think it is worth trying.

What say you?

Last edited by Voronwë_the_Faithful on Sat 07 May , 2005 12:14 am, edited 4 times in total.

Top
Profile Quote
truehobbit
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 3:42 pm
WYSIWYG
Offline
 
Posts: 3228
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:37 pm
Location: wherever
 
As said in the previous discussion on the same subject ( :P ;) ) - we'd need to decide about who gets to vote in the ratification process, if we let new people in before the whole charter is ratified.
(You know all this: the whole current membership has the right to vote and this and that percentage of the current membership to reach a quorum...)

If we can decide on that, I'd not mind having a vote.


The options for the vote are ok, though, I think. :)

_________________

From our key principles:

We listen to one another, make good-faith efforts to understand one another, and we treat one another respectfully at all times.


Top
Profile Quote
Nin
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 3:49 pm
Per aspera ad astra
Offline
 
Posts: 3388
Joined: Thu 28 Oct , 2004 6:53 am
Location: Zu Hause
 
The options are more than okay, and it would help if there was an end to the convention business in sight (sorry, pessimistic day). As for the voting rights of new members: have we not decided on that :scratch ... or was that just about who has the right to be admin :scratch ? Eventually, it can be decided in the member rights - how much time does someone have to be here to be a voting member...

I need a coffee first, and something to cheer up.

_________________

Nichts Schöneres unter der Sonne als unter der Sonne zu sein.
(Ingeborg Bachmann)


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 3:57 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5170
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Good point, Hobby. :doh1: Maybe we could have separate vote that decides that question. My feeling is that all members should be able to vote and that the quorum number should simply be adjusted based on the number of eligible voters. But I can understand not wanting to change in midstream. I think this could be resolved with a fairly simply either/or poll, which could even run concurrently with the other poll.

Then there is the secondary id issue that we discussed in the admin forum. But as I said there, I think that issue should be covered as part of the discussion about members rights and responsibilities.

Edit: Nin, I sympathize with your point of view. The fact of the matter is that the convention is going to take much longer then anyone thought. That's the driver for this thread. I really think we need to consider an opening date sooner then the final completion of the charter.


Top
Profile Quote
Eruname
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 4:08 pm
Islanded in a Stream of Stars
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 8748
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:24 pm
Location: UK
Contact: Website
 
I would definately have concerns about the point hobby raised. That's why I tend to lean towards having the charter finished, but I know that's going to take a while. I just have this paranoia about people who really hate the idea of this place coming in and screwing things up....and yes I know that's improbable.

I'd also like to have discussions about us possibly not allowing certain types of threads here...you know the kind Tom's house used to have? For example, it only took one name to post in a game. Someone would post Rivendell and then the next person had to post a name that started with 'L' and then so on and so on. This board is somewhat of a free for all and I'd really hate to see those spam type of threads crop up and they very well could when certain people come over.

Also, we may want to decide that there comes a time to lock down a certain thread because it has strayed so far from it's purpose. Take the Easter with Hookers and Gambling thread. Right now we don't have a problem with this so much because our members are fairly responsible, but if the board opens, I can definately see it becoming a problem.

I just think there is a lot we need to talk about before opening up.

edit:
Voronwe wrote:
Then there is the secondary id issue that we discussed in the admin forum. But as I said there, I think that issue should be covered as part of the discussion about members rights and responsibilities.
How are we going to know who has a second ID? We can try to tell people that they should sign up with their TORC name, but how are we going to control that? In an open and free board, people should be able to sign up with whatever ID they like, and unless you start checking up on everyone's IP address (and even that doesn't always work since there are static IPs) we will have no way of knowing if someone has alternate IDs. So far we've had honest members here. We can't honestly expect that once the board opens. In fact, that's always going to be a big problem for us if we ever have votes in the future after the charter is done.

_________________

Abandon this fleeting world
abandon yourself.
Then the moon and flowers
will guide you along the way.

-Ryokan

http://wanderingthroughmiddleearth.blogspot.com/


Top
Profile Quote
Nin
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 4:28 pm
Per aspera ad astra
Offline
 
Posts: 3388
Joined: Thu 28 Oct , 2004 6:53 am
Location: Zu Hause
 
Eruname, Idon't think it will be a big problem - it takes quite a malicious intent to register a second fake ID, to post, pretending all the time to be another person, moreover if the poster knows that he/she risks a sanction for both IDs - how about being deprived of all voting rights for three months if cheating has been admitted?

As for the type of threads... I would not like us to go that road - if a thread has no public, it will die of itself.

And I am with Voronwë about the question that we have to consider an opening date before the entire convention is done. But I am afraid it won't be possible. :( Very afraid.

_________________

Nichts Schöneres unter der Sonne als unter der Sonne zu sein.
(Ingeborg Bachmann)


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 4:30 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
You raise a lot of good, discussion-worthy points, Eru. As for secondary IDs, there is probably not a lot we can do, though if we have a rule against them ouside the RP forum, we can at least ban the ones that give themselves away (the secondary IDs, not the members who have them). I notice that secondary IDs often do give themselves away.

Voronwe, that's an impressive list of options, but you forgot an important one:

8. I do not want board77 to open.

Also, I think we're going to have to address a lot of issues around opening, and potential legal problems related to Thinking of England will unquestionably be one of them, no matter when or how we open. I don't think it should be included in the poll; it's a separate topic. I also think it's too soon to discuss that issue in this thread.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 4:30 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5170
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Nin, :hug:


Top
Profile Quote
Mummpizz
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 4:32 pm
Gloriosus
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 1805
Joined: Wed 08 Dec , 2004 11:10 am
Location: history (repeats itself)
Contact: Website
 
On Eruname's list, only 7 does for me.

Becasue it would not be fair to exclude new people from the convention, and even less fair to withhold them the right to vote.

Time, even lots of time, is on our side. The longer the convention takes, the less tension between TORC and here will be; whoever wants to meet his or her friends so urgently can meet in Ethel's "demilitarized zone". So the "people are hurting to meet each other" argument doesn't count.


I fear a large number of Trolls coming in from TORC on the day the board opens, people who want to "get even" with the elitist club here, people who simply want to yell abuse because they can. There are not only friends out there who want to meet us.
We can face them, but with founded laws and good rules and instruments of enforcement behind them. With trained and quick-responding admins. With answers to all questions. Maybe not all Jny can think of, because that would be a bottomless vat, but many. Okay?

_________________

– – –


Top
Profile Quote
Eruname
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 4:34 pm
Islanded in a Stream of Stars
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 8748
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:24 pm
Location: UK
Contact: Website
 
Nin wrote:
As for the type of threads... I would not like us to go that road - if a thread has no public, it will die of itself.
I think we'll still have plenty of people if we do not allow those sort of uber-spam threads. They multiply very fast and can become out of control too quickly. I don't want to see any part of this board taken over by that.

Most message boards I've been to do not allow those sorts of threads because they are a waste of bandwidth....and bandwidth is something we'll definately need to think about if and when we move this board to our new home.

_________________

Abandon this fleeting world
abandon yourself.
Then the moon and flowers
will guide you along the way.

-Ryokan

http://wanderingthroughmiddleearth.blogspot.com/


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 4:40 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5170
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Well said, Mummpizz. I admit to a certain sympathy to that point of view, as well. But I think there can be a happy medium, and that (for instance), once the rules for the admins and for dispute resolution and members rights and responsibilities are resolved, that would be sufficient to address those concerns, without waiting for the rest of the process to be completed. That's probably where I am leaning towards right now (though I go back and forth like a pendulum).

But what I am more interested in hearing about right now is how people feel about having a vote, so that we can get some sense of certainty about what our plans are. Mummpy, what do say about that question?

P.S. Prim, thanks for pointing out my error. I will edit it into the first post, as you are correct of course.


Top
Profile Quote
Pippin4242
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 5:38 pm
Hasta la victoria, siempre
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3978
Joined: Sun 13 Mar , 2005 7:49 pm
Location: Outer Heaven
 
I'd like to see some daft threads allowed. When everything 'spammy' was shoved together in Tom's House nobody saw how much effort had gone into some of the threads, like The Mad-Lib Thread. (We wrote our own. I spent hours adapting The Lay of Beren and Luthien). Obviously I don't want to sanction one-liner threads, I just thought it was worth a mention. ;)

*~Pips~*

_________________

Avatar is a male me, drawn by a very close friend. Just don't ask why.


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 5:45 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5170
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
I don't see any reason to "forbid" those types of threads. Just stay out of them if you don't want to see them. We could just as easily "forbid" threads about "Lush" products. That would make about as much sense to me.


Top
Profile Quote
Eruname
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 6:11 pm
Islanded in a Stream of Stars
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 8748
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:24 pm
Location: UK
Contact: Website
 
No, that's not the same Voronwe. There's actually discussion occuring in the Lush thread. I don't have a problem with the types of thread Pips mentioned...the ones where there's actual effort put in. Those are cool. I do have a problem with one word per post threads and where they look like this:

post #1:

Gandalf

post #2

Frodo

Post # 3

Orthanc

post #4

Celeborn

post #5

Niniel

post #6

Lothlorien

and etc, etc, etc. Very little thought is put into these threads and a poster can do some serious spamming. I don't see what would be wrong to restrict bandwidth wasting threads like these as practically every other message board does.

_________________

Abandon this fleeting world
abandon yourself.
Then the moon and flowers
will guide you along the way.

-Ryokan

http://wanderingthroughmiddleearth.blogspot.com/


Top
Profile Quote
yovargas
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 6:13 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 14774
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 12:11 pm
 
Why would anyone forbid any thread about anything? If people are participating in it, it means there is some demand for that thread, spammy or otherwise. If people aren't participating, then it'll go away of its own accord. I would very strongly oppose any sort of admin regulation about what how a thread develops.

As to when I want to open, right now would be good for me. I've long thought that the problems people are worried about happening when we open have been very much overblown.


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 6:19 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
I hope you turn out to be right, yov, but I have to say I would be very nervous about being an admin on a newly opened board if I had no authority and no guidance. Certainly I could, and would, do what I could to preserve peace, but then I'd have to defend myself for doing it. We might end up having serious disputes involving conflicts between new members and established ones, maybe based on resentments going clear back to TORC. What do I do? Ban everyone in sight? I could get equally in trouble for failing to ban everyone in sight, because what's right to do and wrong to do would be a matter of opinion.

This doesn't mean I think we need the whole charter in place. Just the essentials: nail down the admin role and a model for dispute resolution, and spell out member rights and responsibilities so we know what is and isn't a problem needing intervention.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Eruname
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 6:23 pm
Islanded in a Stream of Stars
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 8748
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 6:24 pm
Location: UK
Contact: Website
 
yovargas wrote:
Why would anyone forbid any thread about anything?
Because they waste bandwidth which equals wasting money. I'm not talking about quashing threads that contain discussion. I'm talking about those that contain very little thought and are places for mindless spamming and uping of post count.
Quote:
If people are participating in it, it means there is some demand for that thread, spammy or otherwise. If people aren't participating, then it'll go away of its own accord.
Since the threads are a very good way of uping postcount without seriously trying to contribute, they will always around. You obviously never saw Tom's House before they had to clean it out. I participated in it and it was really awful. People complained a lot so the mods locked down on it. It's a good thing they did because the type of threads Pips mentioned weren't shoved out of the way.

I just want this to be a quality place and I feel it's important to discuss this now instead of waiting until it happens. It's much more painful when you have to clean up later. But, if people have no problem with those sort of threads popping up and most likely multiplying, well, the more power to them. I sincerely hope I won't say "I told you so" in the future.

You won't hear any more about this from me until it happens.

_________________

Abandon this fleeting world
abandon yourself.
Then the moon and flowers
will guide you along the way.

-Ryokan

http://wanderingthroughmiddleearth.blogspot.com/


Top
Profile Quote
Frelga
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 7:30 pm
A green apple painted red
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 4622
Joined: Thu 17 Mar , 2005 9:11 pm
Location: Out on the banks
 
In the spirit of honest communication, I think there's one discussion that needs to happen before opening the board.

I sense that there are posters who are very uneasy about opening the board at all, ever. I am not talking specifically about those who have posted in this thread - this is just the impression I got in reading through various threads on this and other subjects. Perhaps their concern is losing the sense of security or the freedom to discuss certain subjects and people, or fear of conflicts that may arise if trolls attack.

It also seems to me that this point of view is in the minority, and that may discourage people from saying outright "I don't want this to be an open board" even if they have a strong negative reaction to the idea.

There are many thoughtful points being raised that would argue for delaying the opening of the board or for going right ahead, now. It's been my experience, however, that trying to deal with an emotional reaction in rational terms is rarely effective.

I don't know what to do about this. Perhaps we should brace ourselves, and have an all-out, weep if you have to, bare-it-all thread about how people feel as opposed to what they think. There's not a shred of sarcasm in my suggestion. I am dead serious, although I may also be dead wrong. :oops:

_________________

GNU Terry Pratchett


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 7:43 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5170
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Frelga, all I can say is that I hope that people who feel that way will speak up.

The first question that needs to be answered is whether there is significant opposition to actually having a vote such as this. I think there is great value in getting some kind of clarity as to what the board's plans are, regardless of where you are in the issue. If there are a significant percentage of people who really don't want to open, we need to know that, and know it now. If there is a significant enough majority that wants to open sooner then at the end of the process, we should know that as well.

As for what those percentages would be, that would need to be the next thing that needs to be worked out.


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 02 May , 2005 7:47 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Frelga, the vote would be a poll, I have no doubt, meaning that those opposed to opening could vote for that option with complete privacy.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 1 of 9  [ 174 posts ]
Return to “Threads of Historical Interest” | Jump to page 1 2 3 4 59 »
Jump to: