Your Thoughts on Forum Culture

Maxx, what do you think of the Slashdot approach? Posts could be rated by readers or admin, but the latter is too burdensome. Then you could set a filter.

Yeah, slashdot is pretty cool, but I wonder if that requires a certain critical mass before it is effective.

ditto

The slashdot method has the advantage of putting the tools into the users hands, instead of having moderators edit posts for oh-so-sensitive-eyes. Not really sure how you'd start to implement 'karma' here though.

Of course, I'd like the same tools in SL, before the forums became an overriding concern.

I think part of the difficulty is that "open free exchange" and "maintaining respect" may be incompatible goals; which no doubt makes Jeska's job like treading a razors edge.

Put another way, "I'm a hateful troll" is perhaps something that people ought to be able to freely, albeit implicitly, exchange. Of course such violates the "maintaining respect" principle, but like I said, the two are incompatible. On a related note, paternalism (in this case, moderating at all) rarely serves to increase adult's restraint; indeed, my experience shows the opposite.

Slashdot has perhaps the most rapid system of "peer" review and meta-moderation acts as a check on that. Even so, many of the posters think it "unfair" in some fashion. Moderate dissent and you usually just drive it underground, or in this case, into in-game shenanigans.

That said, perhaps it is time for LL to lose the apron strings and give the third party sites a fighting chance. As much as I'd like to go to third party sites for useful information, they just will not get the traffic as long as an "official" forums exist.

I suspect the forums will go away when they are now longer perceived by LL to be valuable. I think they are nearing that conclusion.

I think I'll take a swing at this one, because I somewhat disagree. Without going and posting the definition of "totalitarianism" like a prick (my guess is you have a good grasp of it, anyway), a large part of this is how you define it - and, frankly, the distinction between protection of free exchange of ideas and controlled throughput is fairly subjective.

Stark forum censorship, that is, only post thoughts on *this this this or this* (example: forums that allow for only Lindens to post new threads) is closer to what I would define as totalitarianism, and even then, it's not *always* a bad thing, if used exclusively in some areas.

On the other hand, I agree with your four points:

... pausing only to add that certain mechanisms, like moving threads to select forums (ie. my "Rant" forum comment), could be used to promote a more positive atmosphere in the greater part of the forums without censoring anyone. This could be considered its own form of censorship if it became too lopsided, though.

One other point I'll bring up is the internets are in many ways completely different from the real world, as far as exchanges of ideas are concerned. While there are some similarities, rendering your totalitarianism comment contextually correct, one of the biggest problems admins face is it's extremely hard to track down who someone is, moreso if they (the end-user) know what they're doing at the other end of the computer and/or have a string of alts.

This, in itself, is the double-edged sword that makes forums, or more specifically, these forums, display a wider range of tolerance and bigotry than you would ever see in reality. The upshot of that is you take the good with the bad.

That said, the only solution I see is first through stark rules and enforcement on the points Selador brought up, as well as others as needed, followed by a place for both the good and the bad (from a forum perspective) may share their ideas. The latter is not too different than what exists now, save I would add a couple more "Catch-all" or "Open Discussion" forums, to better file discussions as forums are meant to do. I would not, however, split up General at this time - many people use it for attention-seeking, and frankly, that's not always a bad thing (though it can be). As for hiding General to all but existing account holders, I can agree there.

</soapbox>

I like how http://www.fatwallet.com/forums/ does it.

1) They have a "alert moderator" button on every post in every thread. This way we the members can help make sure the mods know about posts they need to know about.

2) In all the forums except "off topic" members can rate every post in every thread. They can rate them Positive or Negative or not rate them at all. Each member has the ability to choose how they see the forums based on ratings. I can choose to see posts by Best, Better,Good, Average, Poor or All Messages. Members rate posts depending on if they are relative to the topic for the most part.

Most of the members (including myself) didn't like when Fatwallet said they were going to implement the system. We pointed out all kinds of this that were wrong with it. But it works. And now(two years later?), I am glad they did it.

They had a reputation system at one time as well but abandoned it as it just pisses people off and is used to piss people off.

The point of the system above is... It lets people post what they want for the most part. And if it is within the rules it can stay. But if it isn't contributing to the topic at hand then the members don't have to see it if they don't want to. This way members can still post little cute conversations that seem to grow off topic from the OPs intent, but when someone is looking for something specific they can change their settings to get straight to the point of the topic at hand.

It also gives the lurkers a bit of power in controlling the forums. As most forums are probably something like 30% posters and 70% lurkers, the lurkers don't have to wade through the forum community drama to get to the meat. They can weed all the drama out if they wish.

My friends who have been moderators also say it has made their jobs easier. Now they can quickly go to the source of a problem and take action. They don't have to wait for it to erupt before it shows up on their radar.

JM2C. Just and idea to consider. Flame away.

Jeffrey,

It's a pleasure to have you disagree with me! Thanks for an interesting posting.

I think actually most of the time we are pretty much in agreement; where we differ seems to be in our interpretation of the word 'totalitarian'. The reason I use it is that censorship is the very first tool applied by a new totalitarian regime. Once you have control over communications, your power becomes enormous.

And secondly I have experienced a virtual world in which censorship of postings was the commonplace of daily life. If you posted anything in the slightest way critical of the powers that be, you could guarantee it wouldn't stay there more than half an hour.

And that place had all the trappings of a totalitarian state, including a powerful security force and a government which, although it gave the appearance of fairness, in fact wielded power in an arbitrary and unjust way.

Don't get me wrong. I think the Lindens are brilliant. Having been in that other place I can really appreciate the freedom and good humour that comes to us from them. But I think it's important to be aware of those areas which might be abused at some future time - because one thing we can be sure of is that change is inevitable, online as well as in real life - but that online it occurs very much faster.

Edited to spell your first name correctly!

Huh? All of the forums have not been available to the public for months now. You have to have an account to read any of them.

Essence,

<<Huh? All of the forums have not been available to the public for months now. You have to have an account to read any of them.>>

Really? I didn't realise that.

What is all the fuss about, then?

Techzen, I think you're on to something here. Perhaps what we need is not censorship or popularity rating, but "drama" rating. Imagine if everyone on a forum could mark posts for "drama content," and we could set our readers for how much "drama" we wanted to see... knowing that we might miss some substantive posts, but at least having the choice of how thick-skinned we wanted to be that day.... people might even be willing to drama-label their own posts. (Why not?)

neko

My thoughts? If the mods went through these forums and weeded out the 'lurkers' 'trolls' & 'egomaniacs' then we might actually get somewhere - but they wont so we'll have to put up with it as it is.

Gesh the amount of trolls running around this boards is unreal. All they do is look for problems. I have given up with the low lives. SAD

These are my exact feelings Jeska - very well said!

...Obviously I removed intolerant and rude; I fear reprisal, lol =P

I would humbly submit that there is no such thing as transparent enforcement. It's clear from the ideas listed so far, many of them culled from other forums, that people are aware of exactly how their forum participation is being moderated (or not being moderated) whether here or elsewhere.

In the forums I frequent, particularly the Hockey's Future boards, the most productive form of moderation comes from "exalted participants"; forum posters who have proven their value over time, are even-tempered enthusiasts, and are actively engaged in the discussions. These participant/moderators are particularly effective because they can sense the tenor of the discussions, know when it's okay for the forum to let off a little steam, and know when it's time to clamp down. They are familiar with the different threads and know when to merge similar ones. Some might call them "feted," but at a certain point you gotta get over picking favorites, because the simple fact is some forum posters are good at setting the tone of a discussion.

In short, my advice is to play favorites, pick some quality forum participants to help with the moderation, and don't worry about being quiet about it.

Thank you for starting this discussion, Jeska.

I prefer a minimalist approach to moderation. Off-topic and wrongly-placed posts should be moved to an appropriate forum. Revelations of private information should be edited out. Outright falsehoods about Second Life, or Linden's goals and plans should be countered.

But beyond that, there's less need for forum moderation. Those who are mean-spirited will face social sanction and shunning in the forums, in-game, and quite possibly in RL.

Some yelling and screaming in the forums is to be expected. It's the price forums pay for open discourse. Elsewhere in Second Life, people make their own choices. Here in the forums, we have a mute function. So it's all good.

i see "forum culture" in the same sense as "bacteria culture". it's a bunch of lower life forms and some of it makes you sick but some of it makes things like yogurt that are still kinda gross but at least they have a little nutrition in them.

sticky more topics and clip out the redundant ones.

the rights to free speech don't apply here... make sure it's known that you can be kicked from the forums for being a complete ass.

post moderation a-la /.

make a 'no whining' policy or a seperate forums for the self-absorbed ignoramuses where they can whine ad nauseum about how poorly they are treated or their latest conspiratory theories.

I fully agree with Maxx - we are all adults (at times you wouldn't know it), but we are. If people are offended by off color language, then give them a PG thread. Personally, when I find something offensive, I simply skip over it and move on to the next.

The only exceptions would be when something is in direct violation of the law or TOS. For example, revealing someone RL identity or threats.

For the most part, I like the forums, I have an easier time getting to know people from the forums than I have in world. I think that it's because what people say in the forums is a little more in depth than conversations that I've had in world. Sometimes people just have a day when they want to Rant, sometimes they have a question and sometimes they just enjoy a bit of playful banter.

I think that free exchange, coupled with effective tools for filtering out more valuable content, is something to aim for.

What about allowing individual replies to be rated, as on Slashdot? That seems to work pretty well, in that free exchange is allowed, but it is easy to filter to see the most valuable posts. (And by default, posts with a negative total score aren't displayed.)

Slashdot's post ratings are determined by a small number of moderators, although something similar could be done where any user could vote. I'm not sure if this forum software supports anything like that, but it might be something to consider.

How to deal with the forum culture itself is a more complex question. People tend to have strong opinions about a lot of things on SL, and that can lead to inflammatory tones in quite legitimate discussions. Also, many SL-related issues just naturally end up digressing to tangentially-related topics.

Maybe the upcoming dispute-resolution for contracts could be extended to allow forum conflicts to be mediated in world.

Now THAT would be a good reason to set up some alts!

May I use that line for my human relations class?(substituting forum for office?) hehe.

Okay maybe I'm being too simplistic about this but...if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen! If you don't like the tone of the thread, stop reading it and better yet...stop responding to it! I for one do not side on moderating any form of free speech because it is exactly that...free speech. Any form of censorship is still censorship. I find it amusing to read some of these posts and to try to imagine what events have taken place in the life of the writer to make them so bitter and opinionated that they would feel the need to spout about it online...however, it's even more amusing to see that these people are often the very ones who bitch the loudest when someone else does it! Regardless, "they" have every right in the world to do so whether most approve or not.

Sometimes heated discussions can reveal the most interesting things about human nature. To deny our opportunity to learn, to learn what we like and don't like, to learn what we aspire to or want to run screaming from, to learn that some people are really cool and some just suck the very life out of everything they come into contact with would just be wrong to me somehow.

But, that's just me! Take it or leave it!

While this is certianly true, I don't want every thread to be a study in human psychology. Sometimes I just want an answer to a question, or to see what's happening that might interest me, without the usual trolling, flirting, name-calling, character assasinations and/or mutual-masturbation that threads decline into far too often.

The problem with allowing everyone to police themselves is that we're going on the assumption that at least the majority are mature enough and reasonable enough to do that. That's been proven time and again not to be the case. Even the New Products forum, which should be pretty black and white in purpose, has turned into gang-ups and spewed insults on occassion. (Why that forum isn't Post Only is beyond me, but that's another matter.)

If the goal of the forum is sheer Springer style entertainment, then by all means, allow a Free For All style with no censorship or moderation at all. Those without the stomach for the mud-flinging will eventually take their ideas elsewhere and leave the forums to the drama queens. However, if the goal is a communication of ideas, then some censorship is needed, because the ideas get lost in the garbage more often than not.

JONQUILLE!
You said "masturbation"!
On a Linden forum!
On a thread about forum censorship!?
*flogs Jonquille*