board77

Hal, there have been many different sugestions for consolidation. I sat down and counted which ones were more popular, and tried to streamline all the different choices into a manageable bunch. All options were valid but this is a democracy so we have to go for the most popular option... it doesn't reflect on the validity of any given option.

Most people who have posted about this issue seem to believe that consolidating the large number of fora into a more user-friendly structure is a good idea. Therefore, we move one step and present a few choices for consolidation. That's all. We can discuss the issue endlessly and never do anything, or decide on a cutoff date and act.

If this issue had cropped up when you were still a ranger, the rangers would have discussed it among themselves and the majority would win. It's as simple as that. We can talk about stuff for as long as we want, but if we want to do anything? We have to DO IT.

And that's what we're doing, at last. It feels positive to do something, rather than letting this board fester and rot in inactivity. No, the board structure may not be the cause for the lack of activity, but changing the structure might help. And I'm pretty confident that it will help a hell of a lot more than not doing anything.

As before, feel free to disagree...

Yeah, I get that, but this place is built such that the rangers are not supposed to have the power to just "do something."

That's what's getting to me about this. You guys are currently rangers... and you have the power to "do something."

But should you is my question?

This is suppose to be a member driven board, not a ranger driven one. The rangers should not have any more weight than anyone else.

You say you took the most popular ideas. Well, based on what? Posts in this thread? People saying they LIKE or people saying they're OK with an idea?

Do the members want a change or are they listening to the rangers saying a change would be good and going along with that?

<edited out a whole lot of useless stuff>

sigh... I don't really care, do whatever. I don't think this place can be "fixed" or even improved. Traffic picks up when posters are here, it dies when posters don't post.

This board is not, and never has been a democracy. It's been a messageboard with a charter that limits power in some places and not in others, fairly arbitrarily based on our own bad experiences. It is important to some, and not important to others. It was more important before, and less important now.

Now, we're basically just like any other board, with a rotating group of people in "power" and even that seems likely to change as people willing to take that power are getting fewer and fewer.

halplm wrote:

because that's the only consolidation that I think will actually have the impact desired.

If everything is in Turf, and I see a Music thread that interests me (case in point Yov's thread that started this idea), I will probably post in it. I don't think I'm alone in this.

I don't know why I avoid the music forum... I love music... perhaps it is just my way of allocating time... I don't know...


if we consolidate radically, and people start talking enough about music or movies or Tolkien, then we can recreate those forums, and split as needed... the traffic should go into those forums as interest in the threads and topics expands...

IMHO, mini-consolidations will hurt traffin in those forums, not help. Activity/forum may go up, but overall activity will go down.

That doesn't make any sense to me.

(I'm not asking you to explain it more to me...I'm just saying what I think.)

well, sometimes what lots of people around here say makes no sense to me, so, I guess that's normal.

If you consolidate a couple of forums, all that does is mix the subjects, and confuse what all belongs there.

If you consolidate ALL the forums, the confusioin isn't there, everything has a place...

Here's another way to put it...

Right now, our forums are divided by both subject AND function. Mostly subject (music, movies, general, etc...), but also function (private forums, RP forums, Business forums, etc...).

The Functional divisions are necessary. The private forums have to be private, and the RP forums have different rules, etc...

The radical consolidation that Yov and I suggested, removes the subject divisions entirely with the possible exception of Turf vs. Symp as the "tone" of those two places is different.

This is the minimal set of forums that we need. This funnels all the subjects into small places so the maximum number of people will see them (in theory).

The peicemeal approach such as in Option A, removes some of the subject division, which to me confuses things, and does not focus attention in the forum any more than there already is.

In my experience, this is usually not a good thing for the resulting forum.

If that still doesn't make sense, I apologize. And I apologize for trying to explain further when you didn't ask for it...

I understand what you are saying hal merge music into the turf so that it spawns posting and then when there is enough interest split them back into their original separate forums. Did I get it?

Well basically, that's the concept... if it becomes problematic that they're all in one space.

You see folks it's not so hard to understand hal when you fill in that chip on your shoulder. He speaks plainly enough, try to understand him.

As for your idea, I'm not completely sold on it. I don't see why you feel rearanging the boards forums so that it is more concise is a bad thing. I really do like the idea of putting the snoozefest business type forums at the bottom of the page I think it'll do wonders for new members seeing where the good stuff is actually at.

*time for me to vote

TheMary wrote:

You see folks it's not so hard to understand hal when you fill in that chip on your shoulder. He speaks plainly enough, try to understand him.

Excuse me? That's awfully presumptuous of you. I have no chip on my shoulder in regards to hal. His ideas honestly make no sense to me. That's it.

.

I'm banning myself from this thread.

Good luck with the consolidation.

That was a general comment, yes it was blunt but it was directed at the ENTIRE board not just your Eru. Please don't take it personally.

I have no chip on my shoulder either TM. We're trying to get something done here and I don't feel that hals input has been constructive. I know he means well, but I've found it to be single minded almost to the point of tunnel vision. I've been as polite as I can, but at some stage we just have to take a vote and see what the majority agrees with.

Yes, I'm sorry that was blunt too.

Alatar wrote:

I have no chip on my shoulder either TM. We're trying to get something done here and I don't feel that hals input has been constructive. I know he means well, but I've found it to be single minded almost to the point of tunnel vision. I've been as polite as I can, but at some stage we just have to take a vote and see what the majority agrees with.

Yes, I'm sorry that was blunt too.

Thank you Alatar

halplm wrote:

Yeah, I get that, but this place is built such that the rangers are not supposed to have the power to just "do something."

That's what's getting to me about this. You guys are currently rangers... and you have the power to "do something."

But should you is my question?

You seem to forget that this was yov's suggestion, and that I was acting on that suggestion.

halplm wrote:

This is suppose to be a member driven board, not a ranger driven one. The rangers should not have any more weight than anyone else.

You say you took the most popular ideas. Well, based on what? Posts in this thread? People saying they LIKE or people saying they're OK with an idea?

Do the members want a change or are they listening to the rangers saying a change would be good and going along with that?

Don't be unfair, hal! I took the most popular ideas from yov's thread in the Turf. This IS a member-driven board and we're listening to what the MEMBERS say - if what the majority are saying goes against what you think, well... tough.

And yes I have a chip on my shoulder because you are going against what the MAJORITY are saying, and yet you demand to be listened to just because?

I don't demand anything

Ber wrote:

And yes I have a chip on my shoulder because you are going against what the MAJORITY are saying, and yet you demand to be listened to just because?

Sometimes I just wanna eat my foot

hal if really don't care about consolodation maybe you could just relent and let us finish up here? pleeeze?

whatever

I'm sorry I'm being obnoxious.
But I really believe this could help... Guess you can't please all the people, all the time.

You aren't being onbnoxious ixnay on the self-deprciation Ber

So how long are we having the vote for?

Hal, you asked where ber was taking the suggestions from? Here it is: Suggestion! Consolidation. It isn't just the rangers who are backing this decision, but plenty of other active posters, and even some inactive ones have agreed with it.

You keep asking what Option A will accomplish, and I think Alatar answered you nicely, and here is another reason: it's a compromise between "mush 'em all together" and "leave 'em all apart". It's an actual compromise. I don't agree with the entirety of A, but I agree with enough of it to not let the parts I disagree with bother me.

Katie, I am chiming in with the "I don't have a chip on my shoulder about hal" crowd as well. I don't need a chip on my shoulder to disagree with anyone.

I'll vote in a minute...nice to see that we're getting somewhere.


One question (just a question, not a suggestion, please nobody bite my head off!)...why are Archives and Threads of Historical Interest seperate? Is there a practical purpose for this division or are we just leaving them that way cause...that's how they were?

Eru sent me a PM about your question, Elian, and I told her I would post over here.

There's no reason to keep those forums separate at this point. The Archive threads can easily be moved into Historical interest and the Archive forum eliminated.

The Archive was created with the thought that we might want to save some of the precedents from the Jury Room, or store there information about legal issues that we might need later. But neither of those uses seem practical at this point.

Jn