Improving THR

[jefnvk]

I can't help with any specifics.  One thing I have seen work somewhat well, is certain forums off limits to certain people.  Perhaps password protect L&P or something of the sort, and make people get approved before going in there.  The idea of closing off all non-gun related threads could work as well.  9mm v. 45 or AR v. AK usually turns out to be fun, pointless arguing causing no problems, while immigration or gay rights is going to rub people a lot more roughly.

[garrettwc]

I just started typing a long post and then when I got to the last paragraph I realized that the solution at least in L&P is a simple one.

Stay on topic.

THR is supposed to be about firearms and the second amendment. Limit L&P to exactly that. No cop bashing, Bush bashing, or any other sort of left vs. right diatribe. It should be used to discuss pending legislation, grassroots lobbying your politicians, etc. Basically, anything that wouldn't appear in the American Rifleman or GOA newsletters doesn't fit there.

[Perd Hapley]

I try not to post there too often because invariably some jerk makes me want to swear. I'm kind of a hothead and my values aren't necessarily the same as the average THR poster, which is a bad combination.

Yeah, but you get a lot of good advice from the men on the forum, right?  We're so helpful to the little ladies.  

[Perd Hapley]

I second the idea of limiting L&P to gun-related topics.  I would also suggest some kind of header or at least a sticky that explains to newcomers that not all gun owners are conservative, libertarian, Christian, Pagan, Atheist, pro-abortion, anti-abortion, straight or homosexual, and it doesn't matter; we're talking about gun rights.  

I think part of the problem is that, for example, someone makes a comment about drug legalization and the libertarians get heated and think they have to prove that point, lest someone be hypocritical about which freedoms they favor.  And people who are conservative or Christian wonder into the forum thinking that all gun owners are like themselves, and they need to straighten out the libertarians or the pagans, so we can all agree on everything.  Then others are shocked to find that someone on the board isn't for homosexual marriage, or legal abortion, and that turns into a free-for-all.  

I've argued about all of that stuff, but I think the problem lies in injecting those issues into gun-related topics, in a way that implies that if you're not for my point-of-view, then you're not living up to the stereotype I want us all to be like, and you don't really belong on a gun board.  I'm sure I've done that in the past myself, and I apologize for such moments.

[Sindawe]

THR is supposed to be about firearms and the second amendment. Limit L&P to exactly that.

I second the idea of limiting L&P to gun-related topics.

I must respectfully risk to differ with garretwc & fistful.  Limiting L&P to only issues about firearms and the 2nd Amendment would diminish THR.  As Felonious Fig stated about the late Rountable, the current configuration of L&P assists in reminding one that it is not just your cultural/political persuasion that cares about and is interested in firearms.  As it stands now, L&P makes (to me at least) THR feel more like a community than "just another gun forum"

I do have to say this, I am a bit baffled by some of the complaints expressed in this thread and its sibling here on APS.  Maybe its just me, but the level of acrimony and hostility on L&P has been higher in the past than I see it now...  :/

[brimic]

My suggestion maybe some sort of 'wiki' style guide to popular models of guns or accessories- advice on buying, modifications, features etc, where a person could tap the vast knowledge base of THR without having to ask the same question on a forum thats been asked a hundred times before. A person could use a search function, but a search on 1911s, Glocks, ARs, or AKs could litterally take weeks to wade through.

I know that THR deals with several aspects of gun ownership, but 99% of my time spent there is in the rifle forum, I know that a lot of other active members there seem to gravitate toward 1 or 2 forums also.

[280plus]

I'm kind of a hothead

YOU Barbara? No way...



How about "suspensions" Suspend an offendinders postijng priveleges for say one week and then three suspensions and you're out?

Givethe ones that might come around to playing nicely a chance to mend their ways with a little slap on the wrist. Then if they don't get it "Bye Bye"...

I interjected a little "What has this got to do with guns and RKBA" into one of the "illegal immigrant"  threads at L&P to little positive response and a bit of negative response.

What I love are the "wolfs in sheep's clothing" types where they've been all friendly to you all along for a while and then one day their true colors come out and they turn on you. I could name names but I won't.

[Warren]

I know with some software posts can be rated and the poster himself then, over time, gains an aggregate rating of his own.

And when reading threads you can filter by either/or the rating of the post itself lor what the poster's rating is. This would let individual readers select just what they wanted to read. They would never be bothered by idiots because those sorts of people would never earn a good rep and their posts would also be low rated and thus would be filtered out.

One downside of this is the one place where I posted a  lot that had it,  it took forever to get through a thread if you were rating the posts because when you clicked on the rating star the site would take 10-15 seconds to refresh after each click. That sucked so I stopped doing it, as did many others. If that could be solved a rating system would be workable.

Another downside is that new posters may not have their posts  read because they will have a zero rating initially.  And if they are not being read then they are not being rated and can never gain a rep. Maybe everyone starts at zero, but the lowest rating is -3 and the highest is +6.

If these things could be worked out you could use rep in other ways, such as making some sub-forums "high rep" (3-6 rep?) only so posters have to earn their way in, and then there is something to strive for. This, if the sub-forums are valuable enough, would keep people posting relevant, quality info with minimum of jawbonerin'.

Mods could punish people by taking rep away making it harder to step up into the better forums which would keep (most) people from going off the rails in discussions. It would be subjective I admit but mods also have to worry about their own ranking and if one was unjust his rep would suffer thus providing him an incientive to provide only quality rulings.

This could be taken farther, say a post is useless and stupid and receives a low rating (-2), after a certain minimum number of readers rank it, the post is then auto deleted. Poof! So instead of responding to trolls and idiots just rank the post low and the thing will disappear. This might take some of the fun out of trolling. The same thing could happen to posters whose ranking is at some low point (-2), after a minimum number of rankings, only instead of an auto-ban the poster's rep would auto-pop up as a topic  in the mod only section of THR and to be discussed and have whatever action needs to be taken, taken.


So by doing this every person on THR would be a mini-mod, bad posters would eventually fall out and bad posts would disappear routinely without the main-mods having to do any chasing down. And by setting it so that there is only a short way to fall and a long way to climb  would tend to keep people on their best behavior.

[stevelyn]

Gonna start out by beating a dead horse...

With the demise of the Roundtable, I think we failed on missions 1 and 3.  The Roundtable was bringing people to THR who wouldn't visit a gunboard otherwise.  Some of those folks started participating in the gun/rkba discussions.  IMO, that was the best way to bring non-gun people into the community.  With APS being a separate forum, it doesn't have the same evangelical effect.  I know Roundtable was a moderation nightmare, but I feel it was bringing folks in who might not have been there otherwise.  That's how you spread the message.  You get their attention first, then you share the good news.

This is probably a dumb question, but when the Roundtable was up, folks visited it because it was convenient and part of the forum.

Knowing the Roundtable isn't going reincarnated on THR, why can't there be a direct link on the THR index page sending them over here? That way you still have a separate site, but easier access. It might help with 1 and 3 as Chris pointed out.

I know some of the Mods have invited people to APS to continue their whizzing contests or off-topic discussions, but I never see threads relating to the contested subjects here....but that might be a good thing.

[Antibubba]

I have to disagree with you, here2learn.  THR would have to create a bureaucracy to run the system, and I think nearly all of have the same general opinions on bureaucracies, right?  

The point of any changes is to make THR more manageable, while best upholding goals 1 and 2.

Oleg, #1 is RKBA evangelism.  I've never met an evangelist who let the audience interrupt whenever they wanted.  I see nothing wrong with the L&P forums being "read only" for the first 100 posts.   Because RKBA evangelism isn't THR's only contribution to the Web.  It also demonstrates:  That  discussions about RKBA, firearms, and Constitutional issues can be discussed in a polite and civil manner; that, in fact, the depth and quality of the arguments will be much better for it   And: That gun owners and advocates are a diverse lot, and that despite differences in age, race, religion, sexual practices, and 9mm vs .45, we CAN co-exist, that we all AREN'T Bubbas (which is the point of my screen name).  Oleg, THR is The Armed Polite Society we all aspire to.  THR is a libertarian society.

Please note that rules are enforced within it.  We're libertarian, not anarchist.  And a lot of new folks don't understand that.  They've come from boards where the LOUDEST MOST PERSISTENT POSTER WINS!!!!!!!!    Or they have heard about the site and are fence-sitters or antis.  If they want to be a part of THR, let them post to the more technical forums, to learn more about the mechanics and safe handling of firearms; in the meantime they can bite their tongues and listen.  I can hardly believe the things I've learned just by shutting my yap!

Of course, exceptions can be made, per Oleg and the Mods.  

But, as others have said, Freedom isn't Free.

[Werewolf]

As it stands now, L&P makes (to me at least) THR feel more like a community than "just another gun forum"

That my friends is a very, very salient point. The rules for an internet forum striving to be a virtual community are quite different from those of an internet forum set up with a very narrow mission and meant as a place to encourage a narrow range of interests.

A forum set up with a narrow mission and narrow subject is really easy to control. ZERO TOLERANCE actually works at such a place. ZERO TOLERANCE makes moderating said forum a piece of cake.

A forum that strives to be a virtual community on the other hand is another matter entirely:

In every community there are good guys with white hats, bad guys wearing black hats and all shades of grey hat wearing guys in between. A community celebrates its good guys, generally ignores its lighter shades of grey guys, necessarily tolerates the darker shades of grey guys and isolates or eliminates the black hats.

The problem with a forum that strives to be a virtual community is not identifying who falls into which group but rather consistently applying necessary actions to control behaviors that are in violation of published rules (much like in real life).

In real life there are laws that address the aforementioned issues. On an internet forum there are rules.

In real life there are judges - who act and are constrained by the law. On an internet forum there are moderators. Unfortunately those moderators aren't really constrained by anything other than their own sense of what is right and wrong and their own interpretation of the rules. What happens is that what one moderator lets slide another jumps on with a vengeance. I would challenge each and everyone here who frequents THR to audit the general and L&P forums. What you'll find are a variety of threads that violate the rules or the spirit of the rules. One thread recently posted (which to be honest I had no problem with) essentially was about the best and most sporting way to off skate boarders (and at least one moderator participated - at least I think one of the posters was a mod - if he's not a mod he's one of the most highly respected members anyway). The thread was eventually locked but it took three days (maybe two) to do it. Point is - inconsistency of applying the rules.

Anytime there is inconsistency in the application of corrective action resulting from a violation of the rules, people - being people - are going to test the limits of the rules and the rules enforcers. It is human nature to do so.

And that I believe is the source of what folks who have been long term member on THR are seeing today. The new guys are testing the limits of the rules and the nature of the moderators and there are so many new guys that the limits testing they are engaging in is more visible.

Is there a solution to this - yeah there is but it isn't one anyone here woulk like or accept. ZERO TOLERANCE. The problem with zero tolerance is that it would kill THR as a community - no free community can exist under a zero tolerance system. So absent placing into effect zero tolerance or deciding that THR is a narrowly focused subject based forum as long as THR continues to grow new members will test the limits of the rules and the noise level that exists will just have to be tolerated.

I'll wrap this up by saying that not until Oleg decides whether or not he wants THR to be a virtual community or a subject focused forum will he be able to decide what actions need to be taken to shape it into what ever vision he has for it.

[cordex]

I disagree with the folks who suggest that THR should be about guns and only about guns.  The inability to discuss other civil rights issues would remove an awful lot of good information and discussion.  Sure, it would get rid of some obnoxiousness, but so would banning anyone who starts yet another Glock vs 1911 or Revolver vs Semiauto or AR vs AK or Best SHTF Gun or Why YOUR Gun Sucks or What If Fifteen Goblins Kicked Down Your Door Right Now or 9mm vs .45 or 9mm vs .40 or .40 vs .45 or 10mm vs .45 thread.
Those threads do little to evangelize, inform, support or entertain, and most have been covered a dozen times before.

There are only so many times you can ask what your favorite carry gun is, and why you use X to lube your rifles.  After a few years of discussing existing firearms technology, a gun-only forum will have a few hundred truly new and worthwhile threads per year as new guns or gun-related products come on the market, new laws are passed or (rarely) someone finds an original question to ask about a gun.  So much has already been discussed on THR that nearly all questions can be simply answered by "Use the search function" and closing the thread.  That doesn't make for a very effective forum.

In other words, not all issues that are gun related are really worthy of more discussion, and I believe there are an awful lot of issues that are either not gun related or only tangentially so that are very beneficial to discuss.

But that's my opinon.  I'm just a member, not a moderator.

[griz]

I like the suspension idea.  Maybe a week the first time, two to four weeks the second time, then banned.  This would give somebody who can learn from his mistakes the opportunity to learn to play nice without banning him for one bad mistake.

But I don't have any ideas as to how to teach[/] people to discuss instead of rant.

[Chris]

I'm afraid that the problems you mention as existing on THR are simply a reflection of society.  Every day in court, I see people who seem to exhibit far less tolerance and yet, at the same time, demand that they be respected.  The way I was raised, you judged people by what they do, not necessarily what their beliefs are.  Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Pagan, I don't care.  What I value, and respect, in people are probably the same things other APS members do.  Honesty, integrity, respect given to others (in all ways).  Real honor.  the problem is that this seems to be a rare commodity these days.  People don't earn respect, they think they are entitled to it.  At the same time, they are "dissed", meaning they are offended by the least little thing, and think that they have a right to not be offended in that manner.  Anything that is said which is different or contrary to their own views or opinions is immediately offensive and disrespectful, and since they are entitled to certain respect, any person speaking to the contrary is offensive.  What can be done about it?  Well, we can't make people grow thicker skin.  And we cannot stop people from expressing their views, so long as they do so in proper ways.  All that can really be done is to have someone play referee to stop things from getting out of control when the flames start burning, the verbal bullets are flying, and the innocent among us are ducking for cover.  As for me, I enjoy a good debate (why else would I be a lawyer).  At the same time, I'm trying my best to educate young people about real respect, real honor, and trying to lead by example.  Not much else I can do.

[BryanP]

I admit it, I've spent less and less time on THR of late.  That can be traced to the continued deterioration of civility in L&P.  There are many interesting and informative topics in L&P.  The problem is they're drowned out by all of the blathering about immigration and "those evil liberals."

If I could somehow configure it to let use the "New Posts" button but exclude L&P I'd probably do it.

[mtnbkr]

If I could somehow configure it to let use the "New Posts" button but exclude L&P I'd probably do

Some flavors of forums software allow that.  I'm on one forum that does.  It's a nice feature, one that I use.

Chris

[cordex]

Been here, suggested that. It takes all of five seconds to set up a weblink in vB that looks like one of the forum sections aside from the icon looking like http://www.elaborare.info/forum/vbulletin/images/statusicon/forum_link.gif instead of http://www.thehighroad.org/images/statusicon/forum_new.gif. I might use one of my spare licenses to show you guys a quick example if my time permits today.

As I recall the issue was not so much technical as the idea that if there was going to be a seamless link between the two, there really isn't much of a point in separating them in the first place.

[...has left the building.]

Whatever you decide, I think it would be prudent to include a Mission Statement along the lines of what the Antibubba said:

That  discussions about RKBA, firearms, and Constitutional issues can be discussed in a polite and civil manner; that, in fact, the depth and quality of the arguments will be much better for it   And: That gun owners and advocates are a diverse lot, and that despite differences in age, race, religion, sexual practices, and 9mm vs .45, we CAN co-exist, that we all AREN'T Bubbas (which is the point of my screen name).  Oleg, THR is The Armed Polite Society we all aspire to.

I would sticky the Mission Statement as a must-read for all new members before posting.

Also, when valued members post something out-of-line, I would offer them the option of issuing a public apology or leaving. I think you'll find that more people will "man up" and you'll see that all the forums will be more polite and respectful.

[BryanP]

I have set up a small forum elsewhere which is by invitation only. It has worked very well. The key is self-moderation and mutual respect and/or tolerance. I did have to remove one member who went outright psycho, but about 120 members are doing very well. I really do not like prior restraints...hope to avoid them on THR.

Ah.  Well, this would explain where quite a few of my favorite posters have gone to.

[cordex]

Ah.  Well, this would explain where quite a few of my favorite posters have gone to.

Hey, I'm still here ... oh ... er ... I see.

It wouldn't be a "seamless link" by any stretch of the imagination, any more than a moderator directing an offtopic poster toward here would be.

How about "integrated link"?  People direct members to other specific forums all the time (1911Forum, Glocktalk, bladeforums, candlepower forums, etc), but THR doesn't have subform-style links to them.  I honestly got the feeling Oleg didn't feel the Roundtable should be so closely tied to THR.

[Ron]

THR is fine. Sometimes you just have to take a break from GD or especially L&P when the emotions get high.

What I find with the larger membership is more frequent name calling.

Jorge, Shrub, Bushbots, Hitlary, Demoncrats, Republipukes etc...

Is it possible to just eliminate the name calling? A dose of civility is what is needed.

I don't mind the Libertarian Clown Posse dumping on us Republicans but they almost always use derogatory names.

The right wing loves the pet names for Bill and Hillary.

The left has an amazing assortment that the libertarians use also.

It diminishes them /us all.

We are all supposed to be there as supporters of the RTKBA.

I did the name calling here to make a point, but I have never done it at THR because I felt it was supposed to be The High Road.

Admittedly it FEELS good to type a derogatory name for those you disagree with, but it doesn't further the debate and inflames EMOTIONS.

How about a zero tolerance for name calling? It is juvenile and doesn't reflect well on THR as an online community.

[bermbuster]

This place is like a Mensa SIG for gun enthusiasts.

I don't go to THR any more.  Too much BS to sort through to get any valuable information.  If I have a technical question I ask one of my friends.  My political opinions are my own.  I don't read message boards to discuss politics and generally refrain from becoming involved in any political discussion.

I subscribe to a board for one of my other hobbies.  It is closely moderated to keep out name-calling and harsh language.  It is a very nice communitiy of enthusiasts at all levels of interest and experience.

[Perd Hapley]

Perhaps Oleg's exclusive country club forum and APS have drained away too many good forum members.

Also, when valued members post something out-of-line, I would offer them the option of issuing a public apology or leaving. I think you'll find that more people will "man up" and you'll see that all the forums will be more polite and respectful.

How many people will actually admit they were wrong, and how many times will you have to hound a person until he gives a real apology?  

I don't mind the Libertarian Clown Posse dumping on us Republicans but they almost always use derogatory names.

I find that the tone of many Libertarians to be condescending and smug.  That's why I dump back.

[Warren]

I have to disagree with you, here2learn.  THR would have to create a bureaucracy to run the system, and I think nearly all of have the same general opinions on bureaucracies, right?  .

Antibubba- i don't see where the bureaucracy would come into it. The software would handle all the details.

[Antibubba]

How about a zero tolerance for name calling? It is juvenile and doesn't reflect well on THR as an online community

Awwww-can we at least keep "sheeple"?  

Oleg, I think you'll regret mentioning the super-secret forum.  I too was wondering how my invitation was overlooked; then I remembered what Groucho said.