The Forum Community (follow on to "Forum Moderation Idea")

On the "Forum Moderation Idea" thread that has proved so popular,

/108/9c/85350/5.html#post870164

I noted right at the beginning that the difficult point would be exactly how something like this would be configured.

Specifically what kind of "reward" for positive behavior on the forums could there be?

I found it interesting that while lots of people said it was a good idea, not many (if any), came up with any ideas as to how it might be implemented, with the exception of someone (forget who) who mentioned that my idea was closer to the kind of slashdot idea of a "user moderated forum" than the current res-mod idea is. Not knowing anything about slashdot, I couldn't say why however.

As Eboni pointed out, a "gold star" for behavior is essentially meaningless and won't do a thing, it has to be either something concrete like money or some kind of "social standing" within the forum "community."

At the time I posted I had no ideas either, but after reading the thread and with a bit of reflection, I am ready to make a (tentative) suggestion.

It seems to me that re-focussing on community might be a way forward. The "reward" for good behavior then, would be staying in good stead in the "forum community." To this end, things like having to "join" the forum and having one's membership in the community of forum posters might be a way to go.

This would not work for the more technical forums or course, nor the "question and answer" type forums but these are the very forums that by popular agreement generally don't have problems and are in no danger of going anywhere even if LL decides to shut down general and off-topic.

I have for a long time been an advocate of anything that fosters community in the forums. One of the things I noticed early on is that when you actually meet a forum poster in world (and others have said this too), they often appear completely different than they do on the forums. Almost always (well always in all the ones I have met), they are a far more reasonable and affable person than you might have thought them to be.

I know many people on the forums that I have had protracted arguments with or agreed with or talked with at great length on some subjects that I have never met. In fact after almost a year of playing Second Life I think I have met perhaps two or three people from the forums "in-game."

Even if some sort of "membership" in the community is not something that people want, perhaps an actual in-world gathering of some sort would also be a good idea. A kind of forum "office party" where we can all shake hands and spill drinks on each other and discover that we are perhaps not all the monsters that others think we are.

This is the kind of positive self-policing that I can get behind as it would not be policing at all. People who the majority of us thought were disruptive would not be encouraged to join or post and idiots could be shown the door.

Dianne, since Ulrika, whom I dearly wished I'd met inworld departed these virtual shores, I've begun to make a point of gradually contacting forum posters that I've grown to feel I have common ground with.
An inworld get together sounds like a splendid idea, as ive found everyone from the forums I've IMed or met have been excellent people inworld.

Dianne, while the idea has its merit, i still cringe at an implementation like this.

it could easily be rumored to consist of FIC faovoritism or possibly gamed to disclude members of the community that didn't get along with other members.

it's unfortunate, but as i stated in the other thread, forum history teaches us that this is how things would most likely end up.. resulting in it having to ultimately be scrapped.

however, i do completely encourage positive, intelligent and courteous posting to help foster a more positive and conducive environment. from my standpoint though, i would rather see people consider the intrinsic rewards instead of external ones.

why not make this one's modis operandi just because it makes sense? why should we need to be bribed to be "good"? i would rather see people take your suggestion of positive behaviour to heart just for the result of making the forums a groovier place for us all.. no other reason. just.. because.

I agree Cybin, although Ive probably ranted unnecisarily myself, and chucked out the odd back handed comment, in general I find civility and manners cost nothing.
Of course at times tempers will flare, and name calling will happen in the heat of the moment for all of us, we are after all only human.
However, if we can put a face to a poster, (albeit a virtual one) and have had some good common experiences, it can only go to foster a better sense of community, where we can disagree civilly, and hell, even call each other names on occasion without taking offense at each other.

Diane, I think it is great coming up with new ideas but...


I don't understand the mass hysteria over these forums. Other communities and games have forums and they don't require a ton of special attention or resident moderators, or anything else. You get an account, you have access to the forums. THe rules are enforced. It is simple. These forums are all puppies and rainbows and most people are extremely nice even if they steal land with alts, there really isn't a need for this policing that some people are begging for. If these forums become anymore bland, this might as well be a baby board. Wait, they argue over breastfeeding and pacifers, so even those are more heated.


The forums are fine. Can we focus our efforts on our common enemy...


The Permission System Sucks

"A kind of forum "office party" where we can all shake hands and spill drinks on each other and discover that we are perhaps not all the monsters that others think we are.

"This is the kind of positive self-policing that I can get behind as it would not be policing at all. People who the majority of us thought were disruptive would not be encouraged to join or post and idiots could be shown the door."

What?

coco

while by definition the forums are a community, it is not useful to think of it as a monolithic whole.

it serves a diverse number of people with a diverse number of needs and purposes.

in fact, treating the forums as a single uniform community might be counterproductive as it would minimize the needs of the individuals.

now the forums could have an overall forum culture, but that would take ll stepping in working harder on it than they have been. i suspect that ll has been hoping that the forums would reach an equilibrium on its own. and maybe the forums have, but it appears that ll doesn't like that equilibriums that have been reached so far. (which is to say, that i think ll should try to be clearer about what they are trying to achieve and suck it up and do that.)

Well I am probably just bored at work and in love with my own ideas as usual.

I think I am acting on a sort of "perception of imminent demise" maybe. In the abstract I don't see the need for moderation at all, but LL has made it clear that they are seriously into policing things like this.

So like others, I guess I am assuming it has to do with PR and that if we don't "clean it up" we will be shown the door or the forums will be closed or something like that. Possibly that's not in the cards, its so hard to tell what LL thinks about anything since they don't communicate things to the residents very well overall (I don't think they have any kind of communication strategy really).

So IMO it's either nothing at all, or something positive as well as negative, and I am for no resident moderation at all, but if we must have it, then something more inclusive and again positive instead of just turning random users into "Cops."

I probably shouldn't say this to a Republican, but I have no use for "Cops" or "Policing," generally speaking. Give someone a gun or a stick and you turn them instantly into a goon IMO.

I don't see LL as "the enemy" but more of a foolish king.

A bumbling, well-meaning but slightly addled monarch that is bemused at their own position and unsure of what to do about it.

make no sense?

Do you think "not being a monster" is incompatible with "showing idiots the door"?
I guess "idiot" is a bit of a strong way to put it but "not being a monster" refers to individuals and "showing idiots the door" is kind of a collective ostracism kind of deal.

i.e.- some people with (currently) a bad reputation would be seen to be not that bad at all, and as a more cohesive community if someone that absolutely no one could get along with came along they could be stopped from bothering everyone. I am hoping that category would be extremely small.

Probly never happen anyway, just a thought.

Thanks for the feedback, we just announced the first round of tweaks to the ResMod program and requested that further conversation on how to better incite positive conversations in the forum be posted here.

It's key to remember that this program, much like the other Second Life volunteer programs, allows Residents to take leadership positions within the community where they can help define and shape a strong, positive environment.

No, it didn't make any sense. At first I thought you were talking about a gathering in SL for people on the forums. But then you said some would not be encouraged to join. Which seemed contradictory to your idea that meeting in world would help people get to know each other.

Then I thought you meant the forums. Not sure which you mean now, or what you meant by some not being encouraged to join. I do know I don't like any idea of "collective ostracism" (though I certainly support the idea of ousting disrupters from a party).

coco

This is definitely a start in the right direction. Not everyone will be happy in the end but at least this shows that residents are being listened to

MJ

Well I think I have waffled on about this enough and am just going to shut up now. I am obviously not communicating my ideas as well as I hoped.

The in world party was a separate idea from the forum "community" or group that would be able to "oust" people and I'm not sure thinking of a forum community group only in terms of who can be ousted is really that productive anyway.

I had to be vague as it's against the rules to mention names as to who I think would be the kind of person not allowed to join in the fun or be chucked for bad behavior, but I wasn't speaking of you if that's what you mean.

As always, I am for the minimal number of rules possible and in favor of giving the most chances to everyone, turning as many cheeks as I can etc.

Your idea of a IW forum party is not out there. In fact, its been done before. Its funny actually... we were just reminiscing about it in this thread . It was alot of fun!

MJ

maybe it would be an idea to sticky this thread then

Seems like if it happened just over a year ago, that would be just before I was born.