Dysfunctional SL forums... Solutions?

Thanks, Coco

That intro bothered me quite a lot but I was having trouble articulating it. Thanks for providing the words I lacked and letting me borrow them.

Thanks for your input Jim and StoneSelf.

Just to clarify, when I said "solid results" I was ONLY referring to the likelyhood that the percentages would change as more results came in. When the poll recieved it's first 6 votes, the results were 100% on the side of forum dysfunction. Obviously NOT a solid result. Now, however, I am confident that the percentages will not fluxuate too far from 72% to 74% on the side of forum dysfunction.

Also know that the sole use for that poll was to justify the creation of a "suggestions to fix the forums" thread. I think it's safe to say most people are not concerned if their threads are actually needed before posting. I, however, thought it would be more responsible to take the extra step to make sure I wasn't fixing something that wasn't broke.

I hope this clears things up and if you have any forum suggestions I would love to hear them, even if the suggestion is "leave them alone".

My own suggestion for the forums below.

Short Description: SlashDot

Long(er) Description: Members are able to place votes on the quality of postings, indicating either positive, neutral, or negative. The scores are used to determine an overall score for the poster. People can then select a minimum score that posters must have to see the posting.

The result: positive posters get good ratings and rise to the top, negative posters fall below the radar and get filtered out. There's no censorship involved, as the negative posts can still be retrieved, but individual readers will have the option to require a certain minimum quality to what they want to read.


- Newfie

This my be my favorite option so far.

LOL then no one would listen to me evar this way...LOL

just kidding Newfie..

Mine too, with one caveat... people start out with the benefit of the doubt. In other words, they get a reasonably average reputation score so they're not filtered out simply by virtue of not having a post history.

Agreed!

The only problem I can forsee with the post rating system is the possibility for "forum griefing"....getting a bunch of people to negatively rate a poster unfairly or without real reason. Just a thought

I'm for the Don't feed the Troll and Use the Ignore list for egregious annoyances. Silence is the most effective way to get them to lose interest.

Emma this is where one would have to rely on morality or human individuality.

Wait what am I talking about Id definately never be heard then...hmmpff...

LOL

Shadow

I doubt many will agree, but the Lindens have exercised appropriate forum control.

It must be tough to appear even-handed when some forum participants seemingly contantly belittle SL and LL. But the Lindens have.

This has the advantage of being the easiest to implement and it takes the burden off the Lindens. It also ensures freedom of speech is not abridged.

My only problem with this option is that a forum community is rarely if EVER uniformly comitted to ignore the troll. While 70% of the users are successfully ignoring the troll, 30% are feeding it. When this happens the theads themselves deteriorate. Eventually the 70% people are forced to ignore nearly everything.

Maybe this is simply the inevitable nature of forums! Though I think it may be worth a try to preserve and nurture the informative and productive posts that WOULD have happened after a thread brawl breaks out.

On a serious non-Troll note.

I kinda find myself in that position a lot lately on specific topics involving specific individuals.

But I still adore you hun..

Shadow

I like the idea of a blowhards section. If we had that then we would know never to read the posts there

The only problem with that is they wouldn't go there voluntarily

What I pesonally would like to see happen is for people just to chill out and for this whole issue of the past couple of days to at least make people stop and think about what they're posting. I you (the proverbial you) post about a specific idea, issue, theory, or whatever, and it brings about no positive discussion after several attempts, or worse, causes strife and verbal fistfights every time, drop it. Don't try and bludgeon people with it in every single post, day in and day out. Sometimes you might be flat out wrong about your ideas, or sometimes it might be something people simply don't care to hear. There's no shame in either of those, but there is shame in thinking what you have to say is more imprtant than the feelings of the people you share the forum with. Trying to keep a civil, open, and productive forum should always outweigh one individual's desire to get a point across. Some people want to be the lone ranger, and that's fine, but whether or not the proverbial you wants to be part of a community or not is beside the point... you're already part of one simply by virtue of being in a shared space. It deserves your respect both in the abstract, and to the individuals who comprise it. It doesn't need labels or stereotypes. It doesn't need prophets with megaphones. It needs give and take. If twenty people a day are telling you you're an ass, grab a mirror and look deep. Chances are you're an ass and should think about cleaning up your act or finding something else to do.

My general position is that I get tired of the constant food-fight at times, but I don't want to silence anyone or delete what anyone has said, and I certainly don't want to be part of a lynch mob, no matter how annoying I might find some posts at times.

With that in mind, I'd like to suggest a variation on this:



My suggestion: create a new "Contrarian Views" forum (yeah, ok, it's "rants" renamed, sorta, but a bit more respectful). Allow forum thread starters not to delete posts in their own threads, but to move them to Contrarian Views as their own thread starter, with a link left behind in the footprint to the new thread. This should be a simple operation, but should have a confirmation dialogue.

That way, the original thread stays more or less on target with how the thread starter intended, but the "contrarian" posts also remain, and can continue, and anyone who wants to follow both can do so. Those who are looking for the Contrarian position (for various reasons, including respect) can find it. And obviously, the new thread in Contrarian Views, having been effectively started by the author of the post that was moved, can be moderated in the same way by the Contrarian in question.

As an addition, I'd like each thread to be marked with an indicator of how often the thread starter has used this power previously. That way people who use this power frequently will be easily identifiable compared to those who are more casual in their "moderation."

Finally, unless a problem shows up elsewhere, I'd recommend this change only for the General forum, and the Contrarian Views forum should be a sub-forum of General.

And obviously, it would be possible to simply start a thread in Contrarian Views to begin with, if one felt like being Contrarian.

I'll grant you, a one-day poll is not statistically valid. But I think the poll was relatively pro-forma (sorry, there goes some of that Latin). The disagreement between those who want a "kinder, gentler" tone in the forums and those who think everyone else needs to be whacked upside the head with a clue-by-four has been pretty obvious for a while now.

neko

Nekokami, Outstanding idea! For the final vote I think I am going to adjust a few of my initial suggestions based on your refinement.

I really like the idea of filtering out posters based on how much or little idiocy I'm willing to put up with.

As for thread creators editing their own threads, perhaps there could be a twist on this idea: two ways to view the threads, one with the edited and hopefully coherent thread, and with a click of a button you can 'un-invisible' the editted out posts. This way posts aren't totally lost even if they're pushed into the back ground, a simple copy and paste will allow the poster to make a new thread with their idea.

I personally kinda enjoyed having a Rant forum when we did, I was sad to see it go.

I think the 'Higher standard' forum would be a troll magnet.

OK. Right now the options I have so far are these. Did I forget any? Did I completely misinterpret anybody?


-Create a Rants and Raves section. Move impolite or disruptive posts to this section (Linden discretion)

-Create a High Standards section. Impolite or disruptive posts will me moved to the general forum (Linden discretion)

-Allow thread creators to delete posts from their threads. These types of threads would be clearly marked.

-Allow thread creators to move posts from their threads to a "Contrarian Views" section

-Community based shunning (ignore the troll)

-Do not permit alt accounts in forums (only 1 forum account to Credit card/IP)

-Ban people for persistant, impolite, disruptive or repetative posts (Linden discretion)

-Implement "Slashdot" system where posters are scored and people can select minimum post scores for viewing

-Charge L$10 per 500 words for posting in all but certain critical forums

-Moderators become more active, agressive, and willing enforce stricter rules of conduct across the board

Aimee, do you really need to be bumping your thread so constantly?

I suggest implementing a change where people can't bump their own threads.

This way, if people don't care, they don't have to be constantly reminded of what they don't care about.

Aimee, I'd suggest allowing people to select more than one option, rather than forcing them to pick only one favorite.

neko

Wasn't there just a thread where you asked for examples showing the shitty way you spoke to people?

See above.

Absolutely. I am going to do that, especially since some of these options are not mutually exclusive.

Blaze thank you for your suggestion about preventing thread bumping. However if you look at the post times, you will notice nearly all of my posts are in REPLY to someone, sometimes only mere minutes after they posted. The thead is being bumped by a variety of interested persons, but not by me.

CCCP

Actually, I take it back.

Bump away. I think it'll represent the validity of your ideas well.