A Thought

This is just a thought. It probably should be posted under suggestions, but I wanted to get some feedback to see if it was even a good idea first. Polls are inherently biased so I am not making it a poll. I was just wondering if it would be a good suggestion to let the majority rule sort-of-speak with regards to forum posters. This suggestion is not made regarding any one person, I thought of it hearing the phrase, "We need to clean up the forums" so many times. The question is really, how do we do that?

My suggestion is:
Run a script every week that will identify the active forum participants in the last 30 days. If greater than 50% of those have a person on ignore then that person is banned from using the second life forums. I am not sure if it should be an entire forum ban, or just restricted to the use of forums (they would be allowed to use classifieds, new products, that sort of thing)

SL has grown to the size that a group of friends putting one person on ignore will not reach that 50 percent mark, so that it is doubtful it can be abused by one group of people.

This is a majority rules approach instead of a forum moderation approach. We would still have forum moderation of course, just with the above rule implimented. This would weed out people that the majority of the users of the second life forum do not want to see and would increase the functionality of the "Ignore User" feature.

Technically this can be done with a simple SQL script (depending on the structure of the database) and running it once a week at midnight would ensure that it was not to time intensive or costly in terms of computing power.

It would also ensure that our voices are heard and we have some say in the moderation of the SL Forums through the use of the ignore users button.

Is this a good idea? Is it feasible?

edited for clarity

Definitely an interesting idea. I'd just tweak it a bit to have it simply ban anyone who's posted within the past 7 days.

NEW BLOOD EVERY WEEK! hehehe

-Flip

Naw..too open to gaming. Folks could team up and ignore folks that disagreed with them.

I hate seeing the forums get too sterile. The only thing saving them so far is the fact that Jeska, Jesse and pathfinder are often too overworked to really keep'em clean. If they get too boring, I'd be forced to do work..at work! How unamerican is that??

I don't think the "tyranny of the masses" is a good way to run the forums. I can appreciate your goal, but - and it pains me at times to say this - I'd rather have a few trolls running around than squelch unpopular opinions.
However, it would be nice if the forum software was smart enough to hack out quoted material from those one has on ignore.

That is a very interesting idea with a lot of potential to curb certain disruptive influences on the forum, especially since no one can really tell who has whom on ignore and hence, there is a built in blind to make it truly unbiased.

I'd vote for such a feature.

I'd oppose this because groups of friends would game it and summon inactive posters to the barricades.

And majority-rules type of situations like this never help a free media and never help foster free speech, the oxygen of democracy.

You're making that suggestion in the belief that will lead to nothing, that it won't work. Or that only the worst of the worst people will have it happen to them. I doubt that will occur.

Random & Jillian,

I think the forum population has grown past the point that any one or even two groups will be able to ban a single user.

Lets say that 20,000 people play second life.
10% of those use the forums (2,000 people).
Of those 10% have posted within the last 30 days (200 people).

Of those, it would take 100 people having one person on ignore. Thats not just a group of friends.

All the folks who've been so vocal against player-run gridwide government need to get in here and tell you, as I am telling you, that this is an unacceptable suggestion.

Hmm..no offense, but that sounds awful facist. keep the dissidents quiet, and only allow the mainstream to post sorta thing. It's scary that it's happening in the United States right now..let's not contribute to it here.

I think it is a bad Idea. People should not be banned for being unpopular. Ignore is a powerful tool. Presumbaly if 50% of the people have someon on ignore, they don't have to listen to what bothers them.

I think this:

"Think before you post – sometimes in the heat of a passionate discussion you may be tempted to say something that on reflection you will regret. If your words do more harm to the community than they might give you pleasure in the short term, reconsider posting."

Is well stated, and is already part of the forum guidelines. It is not just one or two people cuasing the problem. Banning someone automatically is unfair and not right.

Why'd you address that to me specifically? I'm not the one saying it'll be gamed by groups of freinds. I am saying that unpopular opinions can get a person put on ignore - and it's more than possible that enough will put said poster on ignore to get them banned - no conspiracy nessesary.
Then there's the other half of the coin, a really "good" troll knows how to be too damn interesting to get ignored. So, I'm not sure such a system would have the effect you're looking for.

I had interpreted your post to mean the system could be gamed.

Okay then it's fairly safe to say that this might be a bad idea. Then we should go back to the drawing board and try and answer the question, how do we clean up the forums?

I think just personally committing to ignoring ignorance will eventually stifle it. It takes will power and enough people to do it for it to work. Sadly, that said, only the Lindens hold the tools to really clean up the forums.

I would hate the forums to be policed by residents. I disagree with it for the same reasons I'm against a resident government.

It is LL's job and I think they do a pretty good job.

Alexa

Not at all. It would be a completely unbiased system that determines who gets heard on nothing more than who wishes to hear them. Not unlike a filtering system, except this one would take a concerted effort to 'game' (as some people put it).

I have no illusion that listening to people who have proven themselves not worth listening to is going to net me some improvement. And because the criteria for 'not worth listening to' varies from person to person, deciding the matter based upon who actually takes action (as opposed to who says they do) seems a really good way to do it.

As I mentioned elsewhere, at present, I ignore at will. I don't really need to use the button. However, if there were a system in place that determined threads/posts disruptive or counter-productive to the community and the criteria was simply whether or not the poster is on X% of overall member's ignore list, I think that could really work.

I look at it this way, half the people who proclaim they have 'put someone on ignore' haven't, and you can tell this by the way they reply/post. Those who actually DO use the ignore button generally don't announce it, they just do it.

I'm human as human as the next person... people who are deliberately disruptive get no sympathy or understanding from me. I don't care what ideology you follow, there is never an excuse to malciously set out to trash a community setting.

I'm also human enough to admit that it bothers me that some people are more concerned with enabling poor behavior than not. This type of functionality would nip that kind of thing in the bud, too.

I know that doesn't sit well with some, and I'm ok with that. I think the overall quality of this environment, both for new players as well as being a venue for discussion is more important than insuring one or two maliciously disruptive people have a place to vent their spleen.

Not a good idea.

coco