Dysfunctional SL forums... Solutions?

(hands panda rope)

Dude, you can't just "take it back"! This is the INTERNET. DUH!

I'll tie it around the stick, if you pull it out of your ass!

i love you pandastrong fairplay, you rock my world!

I thought you weren't going to do that any more.

People often start threads because they want to discuss something, not becuase they want to sit back and watch other people discuss it. It is right and proper for a thread starter to participate in a thread, and even guide the discussion, as Aimee is doing and doing well.

Hey, like I said.

I take it back!

I think she should this guide this thread. I think she's doing a fantastic job of revealing it's true value.

That's my first reaction. And my second is to say, isn't it interesting that a bunch of people who find griefing with buildings to be a form of architectural freedom of expression most of the time could come up with such a fierce set of filters to control the freedom of expression of their fellow man. It's uncanny. It's a good example of why licentiousness and utopianism lead to unfreedom, not the freedom under the rule of law that maximizes freedom for everyone and preserves the system creating freedom itself.

Really, professors ought to clip this entire thread and show it to their students of how NOT to make a free society LOL.

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



More work for the Lindens, and no one will bother to read, so you will force the mods to ban more people, because they will refuse to be ghettoized into this section, and will invade others. You'll get the opposite of what you wish.




More work for the Lindens, which they cannot justify. Who is to decide what is "impolite" and "disruptive"? This is in the eye of the beholder.




And avoid all accountability? Avoid all responsibility? When people call them on their inconsistencies and even lies? Huh?



But that means anything that anyone doesn't like, even criticism that does call a person on their poor arguments, weak constructions, unconvincing arguments. etc.



This is a great solution. Because it will only be followed by those hardy few Net Nannies with the iron constitution needed to pounce on everybody else. Thus when those 6 -- and you know who you are! -- put, say, me on ignore, and don't follow my forum progress, that's great. That means I can post my thoughts in their usual long, but coherent essay, with a beginning, middle, and end (as Jamie Bergman helpfully commented), a premise, a solution, etc. Then instead of having 6 fucktards invade my thread, or my answer to someone's intelligent thread, with their idiotic fruit pictures, their asses, their asshats, their rude remarks, their witch-hunting, their foaming at the mouth, there will be silence -- golden! And then I'm free, and that other person, say, Hiro Pendragon, to go on talking like adults about our various agreements and disagreements, unenumbered by the kids.

it's like those little tables that your mom used to set up for you and your brother and your cousins at Thanksgiving. The adults sit at the big table. The kids sit at the little table, out of sight, out of mind. I love it! Great solution, Aimee! Thanks!





So husbands and wives using the same credit card will have the husband speak for the family. Sure, Aimee, great plan!


Poor and vague concepts, not in the TOS, and not TOS-able, because poor, overbroad, vague. In fact, all of these proposals would be struck down by any lawyer or judge in the land as "overbroad". I suggest you google this term together with "First Amendment".



Oh, I'm for this. I just want to make sure it has a neggable negrate, not just a possable posrate : ) Honestly, you people are like Bowdler.



Now there's a truly novel idea! Honestly, by adding this one in, you'll ensure that some blog out there in the real game world journalism world, as distinct from the fake forums world, will pick up this post and have a lot of fun with it!



Well, I think we have that already. Pathfinder and Jeska have already worked very hard, and worked overtime, to clean up the boards. They're doing a good job. I'm for supporting them in their continued efforts exactly as they are, using the existing TOS, without inventing an entire array of ridiculous, cumbersome, expensive, and exclusive tools merely to ensure one thing: that the FIC remains the FIC ROFL.

But you DO see what I mean when I say you can verify I am NOT bumping the thread by simply looking at the time of my posts compared to the time of the poster before me. My posts follow by only a few minutes, meaning...I am posting when my thread has ALREADY BEEN BUMPED.


I am indulging in this because I think the mission of this thread has been accomplished Part 3 to follow. Have fun folks.

You forgot this one:

PANDA!!! Thats the Museum of SEX in Manhattan! I don't live too far from that!

I'm just on the other side of the Hudson (the smelly side)

Ya know, Buster, you would have been reviled in SL a few months back.

The whole concept of buying and selling land was looked down upon like it was a dirty activity only suited for the worst possible sort of person.

Next time you feel like jumping in and joining the lynch mob, maybe you want to consider that carefully.

Blaze, are you saying Buster is for, or against you...

/120/7b/44410/1.html#post470846

Sometimes I think the multiple personalites have multiple personalities.

This is precisely your problem (and everyone elses).

There is nobody to be 'for' or 'against'. You should be 'for' or 'against' ideas, not people.

It's that type of debate mentality that just makes me shake with disgust.

I am a human being, sometimes I'm wrong, sometimes I'm right. Same as you or anyone else. To be for or against you or me would be wholey irrational.


Unfortunately, with all this voting at a time when obviously we have made ourselves unpopular, is a case of full on witch hunt and you are obviously subscribing to the politics "you're either with the cool kids or against the uncool kids".

Which is really sad, because the truth is, you have some good ideas and I agree with a lot of them. Unfortunately, you've turned it into a war of personalities which is awful in the extreme.

I mean really, why not just go post in the thread jeska opened? Why do you feel the need to sample the opinions of a very small minority (Last time I check 20,000 people in SL and 100 or so voted in your little poll - you call that realistic evidence? of *anything*?)

This place is supposed to be a free exchange of ideas. You and those who disagree with some of the ideas I'm proposing are just into this peer pressure garbage with the shunning and the polls and the constant insults.

I haven't insulted anyone. I have attempted to disuade people from certain logical approaches to things, but nothing more and not much less.

I am guilty of maybe 3 or 4 (top) posts out of a couple of thousand I've posted which were really just my attempt at 'gaming' the forums, and that was wrong, I agree.

I admit to that, just like I admit that I get into the personal attacks somtimes, which I always feel guilty about and re-edit my posts accordingly. It's just really fucking sad I'm one of a very select few that bothers to do that around here, and yet it's *me* that's getting hassled here.

I guarantee that there have been a 1000 times worst posts than what I have posted by a 1000 others and I'm just getting hassled because I happen to have a few opinions which run contrary to what everyone thinks.

Which, btw, usually ends up being what everyone accepts in the end.

For example, Land Baroning:

I supported it when it was unpopular, and now it's generally acceptable behaviour. Land developing I supported (I have whole threads on it) which I got majorly hassled, but now we have feature support and Philip came out enthusisastically about.

These were all contrarian opinions that were unpopular... but guess what, people buy into some of them (though, yes, not all of them. Oh boy, I'm human! shoot me!)

I guarantee I am totally right about what I'm talking about now, however. This whole techi-wiki do-it-yourself core mentality to SL will have to go when it is time for SL to grow. Which, I agree, due to the unstability of the current system, that time may not be now.

I would like to address each idea. Aimee, great job consolidating the ideas. Before addressing the ideas (because I think most of them are *bad idea*), in order to not appear to just be against everything, I would say that I am in favor of moderated forums. We don't have to invent any newfangled contraption, moderated forums have been around as long as the internet. These forums are very lightly moderated, just as the SL world is very lightly governed. Linden prefers that the players work out the in-world government issues amongst themselves, and they prefer that we forum posters also act as responsible adults.

I think adding one or more heavily moderated forums is a good idea, so that the people here who want to have censored discussions can do so. Even a slight increase in the aggressiveness of the moderation would be OK with me. (Moderating forums is VERY VERY HARD to do well. It is a thankless task. You can never be objective enough to please everybody.)

Having voiced my opinion that increased forum moderation would be OK, or better yet add separate aggressively moderated topics, let me address the specific ideas put forth so far:


I think *threads* that are off topic should be moved to the correct topic, or even to Off-Topic when they aren't even about SL. I do not think *messages* should be moved, or that threads should be moved when they are derailed. Only when the opening subject and/or post is out of bounds. (I don't want forum terrorists to be able to derail a thread by spiraling it off topic.)

I don't think a "Rants and Raves" section should be used as a holding tank for posts that somebody doesn't like. The act of moving a message or thread to the "rants and raves" section would be pronouncing the message to be without merit. This is a horrible idea. Even an honest broker could never fairly judge the line between something they don't agree with and something that has no merit. In an open discussion, each person must make this determination for themselves.


Noble goal but bad idea. Judging "high standards" vs. "low standards" is a pronouncement about the merit of the message. Nobody should have the power to control a discussion to that extent.


I am afraid that thread starters would abuse this privelege, using the power to stifle any voice that doesn't agree with them. I think the outcome would not be the utopia that people are looking for. In fact, the cure would be worse than the disease, in that the discussions would be less heated but would also contain less substance, because the forums would become a speaking platform with a cheering section instead of an exchange of competing ideas from varied points of view.
Yech.


Don't give the opinionated the power to supress the opposing point of view, even by moving it out of the way. *EVERBODY* gets to use these mechansims, don't forget. I don't want to give ANYONE a platform and a megaphone without any way of countering them other than setting up another platform and megaphone. Have you really thought this through?


Ignore the troll is an option that everyone has. As far as I am concerned, actively campaigning for everyone to ignore someone is just as bad a tactic as derailing a discussion by annoying people, or spewing withering tripe. So while I would encuorage everyone to use their ignore buttons, I would also discourage everyone from campaigning to shut someone up. Whether somebody deserves it or not. If it works, who would be next? Ignore them, or refute them.

This one I completely agree with.


They will already do this for disruptive or impolite posts, but they have to be VERY VERY VERY disruptive or impolite. So maybe they could lower the threshhold a little. Persistant or repetative is a more difficult call. Unless these fall under the disruptive area, I don't think they can be fairly judged.


Great idea!

Or better yet, just limit to 500 words period, and limit posts-per-day. I hate the idea that rich people can talk all they want but poor people can't.


I would prefer this above all the others (except the 500 word limit). I don't know about "across the board" -- maybe add some aggressivly moderated forums. (Moderating forums is VERY time consuming and thankless. Smart Lindens have better things to do. So moderate one or two forums.)

Buster

Buster! Thanks for your input and I didn't find any of it the least bit negative! It was all very constructive, and assuming the technical hurdles are not too significant, I will confess that I too am pulling for the Slashdot solution

I think I am going to adjust the "lindens for words" option based on your critique as well.

Thank you so much!

Thank you blaze for accusing me of joining a lynch mob. (I'm trying to reign in the lynch mob, if you haven't noticed.)

Thank you also for once again characterizing me as a "person who buys and sells land".

When you have nothing of substance to say, attack. Use a backhanded attack if you can. Everyone will think highly of you.

Aimee,

I have thought long and hard about what suggestions I would make. Honestly, I do think the current forum malaise is a cyclical thing, and that ultimately these forums have the right balance. It goes out of whack sometimes, and yes, there are certain posters who can cause chaos, but only if they are given free reign to. It is amazing how much a simple thing like ignore can allow you to focus on the substance of a thread. I have found value in just skipping posts I don't care about, even if I don't have the person on ignore as well.

I am loathe to see any additional changes made. These forums have some of the most literate people I have ever seen in online forums, and at the same time, we are all adults. Sometimes we are mean to each other, sometimes we have drama, but for the most part, there is a tremendous amount of important discussions happening in these forums. Any steps taken to fix a perceived imbalance endanger an already delicate mix that continues to thrive and change. So after that long paragraph, I vote for no changes at all.

Even when you have stupid stuff like alts on parade and obvious trolling, it does more damage to the credibility of the person doing it than it does anyone else. Respect is something earned and lost, and ultimately the people who warrant loss of respect ultimately move on to other venues to haunt - it has happened time and again. Seen Christopher Nomad, Regnar Bell, Jon Morgan, or Korg lately? It's all a cycle, and this too shall pass.

Thanks Cristiano that is so true and well said.

Very well said.

Let's rely on the evolution of time, rather than the evolution of a very tiny majority who thinks they should control the agenda by right of these so called irrelevant polls that get less than 0.5% of the population even looking at them.

Thanks for your input guys, as always. But I DO think we should keep things in perspective here...

I'm just a chick with a poll.

I think the legends of Aimee are starting to take on an almost mystical quality, as if *I* will personlly make the results of the poll the undisputed corporate direction of Linden Labs. The truth is, when I package all this up for the Lindens, the whole thing may end up like this:


So lets keep this lighthearted and fun. Vote your heart and lets see what kinds of ideas people are keen on.

No, but it sure would be nice to pit that lot against Prok *snicker*

Hell, I'd PAY to see Chris Nomad and Regnar Bell 'debating' with Prok.

I guess that posting in this thread after it allready disintigrated into the usual bull is abit too late, but I promised i'll post here, so here:

I dont have any good answers i'm afraid. But I think that I can point out a main factor that, if delt with, can help the section: The way General is defined says "anything you'd like that is somehow related to SL and is not covered by other sections".

I noticed that if you post the wrong topic in another section, the thread will be moved to the proper one right away. However, if you post something that goes to a dedicated section in the general forum, in most cases that thread will stay there. Thats a bad idea - it generaly contribute to the chaos the word "General" allready imply.

The way I see it, General should mean "not allready covered but SL relevent" in a strict manner... in other words: Start moving threads around.

This isnt going to help reduce the amount of people bitching in threads or trowing threads off topic with banters and etc' - thats the people's fault in this case - but this sort of organisation may help the forums to recover somewhat.