Post by: Oleg Volk on May 17, 2006, 05:17:28 AM
1.RKBA evangelism and newbie support
2.Tech discussions and knowledge sharing
3. Emotional support for members
4. Entertainment
The main problem, at this time, is the inability of some people to discuss rathr than argue. We have tested a situation where all the "hot" topics (religion, homosexuality, abortion, Glock vs. 1911) were debated and the conversations proved informative and civil. That outcome apparently depended on the quality of the participants, rather than on any moderating efforts. No moderating effort that I am willing to do -- I am not willing to imitate a drill instructor who breaks down the forum members and rebuilds them in the THR mould -- makes much difference with those who are unwilling or unable to be civil and reasonable.
What options are left to us? Re-focusing THR mission, removing certain members, rearranging deck chairs on the Lusitania...which would you advise? Some folks here have been banned from THR: your input would be helpful in figuring out what to do, as I am not keen on banning more members.
Post by: mtnbkr on May 17, 2006, 05:42:57 AM
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.
As for the folks who can't discuss rather than argue, well, I don't know what to do. Some just need banning, others might respond to temporary suspensions of some sort. Others might benefit from not seeing threads/forums that upset them. Over at Apug.org, they have a function that lets you hide forums you don't care to read or even see. Once you "hide" those forums, they don't even appear in search results. That might be a helpful tool for people who simply don't want to see L&P threads, etc.
Bladeforums.com has at least 1, maybe 2 forums that only "special" members can get to (paid members I think). Possibly we could establish such controls for the more polarizing forums at THR, but start out with global access and then limit access by users who can't handle the responsibility.
Chris
Post by: Stickjockey on May 17, 2006, 05:47:14 AM
Quote
I don't think about it much, but all of us are Moderators at THR. ...THR is like my yard, and I need to make more of an effort to keep it clean. So. I resolve to be more vigilant about Low-Roaders when I'm there. If I can advise, I will. But if they don't get the idea, I'll let a Mod know.
As for the rest, the only thing I can think of is maybe a "probationary member" designation, where after six months/100 posts or some such one's post history is reviewed and appropriate action taken? I suppose it's an idea, half-baked as it is.
Post by: K Frame on May 17, 2006, 05:50:32 AM
My former coworker Josh, for example. I turned him on to THR when I was still there. He lurked for awhile, and then finally started posting when an off-topic section was opened.
When it was closed, he quit visiting/posting to THR, and said to hell with it when I told him about this place. He was happy with some of the advice he got on the off-topic board at THR, and was actually learning something about guns. I was hoping to use that leverage to make him a regular part of our reigndeer games, but whatever interest he had in it apparently went away when he couldn't participate in non-gun-topic discussions on the board, as well.
Overall, a multifaceted failure.
Other than that, I don't have a dog in this fight.
Post by: Ben on May 17, 2006, 06:20:48 AM
Stickjockey's idea of probation (e.g. no posting in L&P until >100 posts) is a favorite that I've mentioned before, but Oleg said it's not possible in this software. Trying to do that manually would require half as many Moderators as members.
I don't really have a solution, just an observation: THR is a great forum, thus word of it spread, thus the population increased, thus statistically we have increased the raw numbers of jackasses and trolls.
This is a common theme in lots of areas. Anybody remember back when AOL first "merged" with the Internet? Usenet was absolutely flooded with imbeciles who didn't know they weren't on AOL anymore, and the signal to noise ratio became nearly 1:1 for a while.
Why do so many people like small towns versus big cities? In small towns, everybody knows everybody, which creates "self-moderation" on behaviors. If you know you're gonna run into people on a daily basis, you're better behaved.
I like to SCUBA dive, and in my favorite destination, where I've been going every year for the past 12 years, there is this great dive shop. When I first started going there, the town was sleepy, and the dive shop was small, but known by some through word of mouth only. It was a friendly, laid back operation where it was not uncommon to run into celebrities on your dive boat because of how low key both the dive shop and it's customers were. We were all there to dive, we all wanted a friendly, low key experience, and we all happily had one. Over the years, this dive shop has become well known throughout the world. If you go to this dive destination, it's this or one other of the many operations there now that is ranked as "#1" in dive magazines and on the net. The operation has tried its best to keep its "small, laid back" atmosphere, but again, with increased numbers come increased jackasses to be dealt with. The shop tries to deal with this by creating "special" dive trips, putting it's long time customers on boats with each other, much like Oleg has created APS for those of us THR "oldtimers" that want to keep a friendly place to hang out and talk about "just stuff".
The analogy is that both the dive shop and THR grew, but both want to keep the "laid back" atmosphere. They both try their best, but without, as Oleg said "becoming Drill Instructors" it's nearly impossible to control the rabble without killing the experience for the rest. Maybe a lot of this is up to us. I haven't posted much on THR myself in the last half year or so, but maybe that's part of the problem. Maybe those of us who don't like some of what growth is doing to THR need to post MORE there rather than staying away -- to "set an example of behavior" as it were. Also, and I know I have been guilty of this myself -- instead of retorting posts by jerks, there needs to be more just plain ignoring the posts. Most of the threads that degrade into the noise that bothers me are almost always either started by, or invaded by, someone looking to get a rise out of others. Simply ignoring the jackass posts (and I KNOW it's hard to do) will eventually cause many of the troublemakers to look for new ground, and could go a long way into making things better.
So as a conclusion to my ramble, if we don't want THR to turn into an overly moderated, lords of discipline kind of place, much of the onus seems to be on us as the users to set examples of behavior and do better at simply ignoring the gadflys that have been drawn to it via its growth and popularity.
Post by: garyk/nm on May 17, 2006, 06:32:29 AM
But then again, I'm old and have a tendency to mis-remember stuff.
Post by: cordex on May 17, 2006, 06:38:33 AM
Mtnbkr has some good points on the adverse effects of closing the Roundtable.
In short, I would suggest that THR add a greater variety of punishments with clear guidelines as to their application, preserve the ban for the worst offenders, look into subforum-specific bans, bring back the Roundtable, and finally bring in a few more moderators to help with the increased workload.
Edit:
Quote
Stickjockey's idea of probation (e.g. no posting in L&P until >100 posts) is a favorite that I've mentioned before, but Oleg said it's not possible in this software. Trying to do that manually would require half as many Moderators as members.
That's not entirely true. I don't know if it is possible on PunBB, but on vBulletin, the software THR uses, it should be relatively simple to automate.Using a combination of vBulletin's Usergroups (a special group who has the required permissions to see L&P, for instance) and Promotions (when a user's post count reaches x, do this) this can be done.
Oleg, if you'd like help configuring this, let me know.
Post by: Oleg Volk on May 17, 2006, 06:45:17 AM
Post by: mtnbkr on May 17, 2006, 06:56:23 AM
Quote from: Oleg Volk
I just got access masks to work. Woohoo!
What's that?I'm totally ignorant of the inner workings of the various flavors of forum software other than what I see as a
[L]user...
Chris
Post by: SpookyPistolero on May 17, 2006, 07:10:43 AM
I think this kind of self-policing (including reporting users who are incorrigible) and some kind of two or three strike type program before being banned, will help keep things a little cleaner in general.
Even if the manpower existed to make 'our backyard' into a police state, I don't know if I'd still want to spend as much time there that way.
Post by: Oleg Volk on May 17, 2006, 07:18:33 AM
Post by: Tallpine on May 17, 2006, 07:42:37 AM
Somehow we need to encourage them to either "calm down" or "take it outside" - just like you would at any other gathering.
Post by: Stickjockey on May 17, 2006, 08:04:57 AM
Post by: garrettwc on May 17, 2006, 08:41:33 AM
Quote
I really like the idea of banning people from certain subforums rather than completely from the site. If you don't like the way someone plays in Legal and Political, ban them from that forum.
The problem with that is that if you have someone who is dedicated to being an idiot they will just post in a forum they have access to, creating more work for the mods.Self moderation is part of the solution, but not the entire solution. Look at what happened at TFL when Rich tried to clean things up. The thread went something like 20+ pages of people alternating between attaboys, calling Rich names, and posting outrageous comments to see if they could violate the policy.
The problem may just be unsolvable due to human nature and the tendency to become cliquish. There are folks that have been members at TFL and THR, that just rubbed people the wrong way and ultimately left or got banned. On other forums those same people are highly respected members and/or moderators.
Post by: USP45usp on May 17, 2006, 09:38:02 AM
Since the last time that I was there, around December, the mods were really going overboard on banning/closing threads, some needed it, some felt as if it was done out of spite.
I don't know how it is now but I did notice back then that only a small click of "old timers" stayed around and most of the others had left.
Wayne
Post by: Polishrifleman on May 17, 2006, 10:13:18 AM
My suggestion would be to do something with the SEARCH. Make it mandatory prior to starting a thread or have the topic key words tied to the library. I don't know if the software can do this but repetition leads to borish attitudes and behaviors.We collectively have covered a lot of ground in a myriad of topics. Having to rehash and discuss the same topic over and over again tends to make one lean toward cynicism if you choose to reply on a whim.
Good luck, and I will keep coming back!!!
Post by: Felonious Monk/Fignozzle on May 17, 2006, 11:52:03 AM
Post by: Monkeyleg on May 17, 2006, 12:10:20 PM
The idea of members policing themselves seems the most workable. Nobody likes to be a snitch but, on the other hand, the moderators can't be everywhere at once.
Perhaps a warning prior to banishing the member forever would then be taken seriously.
Post by: cosine on May 17, 2006, 04:36:53 PM
I just want to thank you for what you provide for us in THR and APS.
Post by: Guest on May 17, 2006, 04:47:55 PM
Post by: Guest on May 17, 2006, 04:53:53 PM
And no more threads bitching about anti-gun girlfriends. Arggh.
Post by: grampster on May 17, 2006, 05:00:56 PM
Post by: Oleg Volk on May 17, 2006, 05:03:06 PM
Post by: cosine on May 17, 2006, 05:05:45 PM
Quote from: grampster
But don't invite any of the bloviaters to come over to APS with their BS or we'll start having the same problems here at APS.
Exactly. I hang out here at APS more than I do at THR, probably because of the calm, laid-back, problem-free atmosphere.
Post by: grampster on May 17, 2006, 05:23:49 PM
PS: Oleg, I really appreciate what you have done with THT and APS. I spend some good quality time here and there. Much more lively and better than the wasteland of TV. Have your dad and mom ever wanted to go back to Key West again? Just curious as I owe them a bottle of wine if they go to Cafe Sole' for some great seafood provender.
Post by: jefnvk on May 17, 2006, 07:02:38 PM
Post by: garrettwc on May 17, 2006, 07:43:40 PM
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.
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 17, 2006, 08:59:04 PM
Quote from: Barbara
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. 
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 17, 2006, 09:18:41 PM
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.
Post by: Sindawe on May 17, 2006, 09:57:57 PM
Quote from: garrettwc
THR is supposed to be about firearms and the second amendment. Limit L&P to exactly that.
Quote from: fistful
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... :/
Post by: brimic on May 17, 2006, 11:44:46 PM
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.
Post by: 280plus on May 18, 2006, 12:48:15 AM
Quote
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.
Post by: Warren on May 18, 2006, 01:51:03 AM
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.
Post by: stevelyn on May 18, 2006, 03:33:40 AM
Quote from: mtnbkr
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. 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.
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.
Post by: Antibubba on May 18, 2006, 04:04:37 AM
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.
Post by: Werewolf on May 18, 2006, 04:31:08 AM
Quote
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.
Post by: cordex on May 18, 2006, 04:47:42 AM
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.
Post by: griz on May 18, 2006, 04:53:32 AM
But I don't have any ideas as to how to teach[/] people to discuss instead of rant.
Post by: Chris on May 18, 2006, 05:34:10 AM
Post by: BryanP on May 18, 2006, 08:01:22 AM
If I could somehow configure it to let use the "New Posts" button but exclude L&P I'd probably do it.
Post by: mtnbkr on May 18, 2006, 08:11:11 AM
Quote
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
Post by: cordex on May 18, 2006, 08:20:34 AM
Quote from: Blackburn
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.
Post by: ...has left the building. on May 18, 2006, 08:31:15 AM
Quote
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.
Post by: BryanP on May 18, 2006, 08:38:34 AM
Quote from: Oleg Volk
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.
Post by: cordex on May 18, 2006, 09:24:27 AM
Quote
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.Quote
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.
Post by: Ron on May 18, 2006, 02:26:48 PM
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.
Post by: bermbuster on May 18, 2006, 02:48:40 PM
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.
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 18, 2006, 03:19:56 PM
Quote
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? Quote
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.
Post by: Warren on May 18, 2006, 03:28:57 PM
Quote from: 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? .
Antibubba- i don't see where the bureaucracy would come into it. The software would handle all the details.
.Post by: Antibubba on May 18, 2006, 05:46:19 PM
Quote
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.
Post by: Oleg Volk on May 19, 2006, 09:27:44 PM
Some of the conclusions:
The quality of the forums is decided largely by the quality of the participants, not by the rules set up by me. Corollary: the most improvement will happen by inviting interesting people from elsewhere (the way Tamara and rnchick ware invited from Glocktalk) and by removing the most base and offensive varmints. In the past, I tried to salvage the varmints, I will no longer try to do so. Membership THR will mirror my real-life relationships: at the initial triage, newcomers will have a chance to become friends, acquaintances or be removed as nuisances.
Duplicate or over-done topics: I plan on making a "smiley" to look like a rubber stamp reading "please search the archives first."
Crass, offensive or retarded behavior will be punished by removal of the account.
I am an elitist -- I strive to better myself and I prefer to keep good company. I will apply my judgement directly or through like-minded proxies and not try to be all-inclusive. If certain behavior would be unwelcome in my home, it will be unwelcome on THR. I am tired of trying to second-guess my own decisions, so I'll stop. Ideally, I will not have to do any policing at all. Name calling will be discouraged: it reduces the precision of the debate.
For a well-run venue, look at http://volokh.com -- the participants stay factual and civil, often despite having strong feelings about the events or the personalities involved.
Post by: Guest on May 19, 2006, 09:56:37 PM
The only way to really stear a forum into a direction is by controlling membership, but that route also leads to a stagnation of content and you end up with a stale and dull repetition of the same basic posts over and over again. Im sure people have been members of small tightly knit forums and all the sub-lingo and cute little exchange that comes with it, it gets to a point where every post starts to look the same and all the people act exactly how they are expected to. Its friendly and non-threatening, it is also mind-numbingly boring. We occasionaly veer in that direction over here. You get the same people replying to each other with essentially the same posts, lots of noise, little content.
Post by: ...has left the building. on May 20, 2006, 05:37:23 AM
Post by: Old Fud on May 20, 2006, 06:07:48 AM
Bravo!!!
Enough of the agonizing and "how can I please you?" soul-searching.
I have a confession --- it's hard for me to tell the difference between TFL and THR.
That's because the "core body" is the same people.
Which means I can't remember who said what on which forum, or if he/she simply expressed themselves twice. It comes out the same.
At the time I joined up, TFL was back on line and I set up accounts on both.
Now my favorites list has 3 in a row, with APS on the list (which means I visit APS just as easily as I used to visit Round Table, and I never have understood all the fuss and bother over the switch.)
Within a week of joining, I was introduced to the "Art's Grandmaw" rule --- and I don't remember which forum it came from either -- nor does it matter because Art and his Grandmaw are on both.
Now Oleg says "This is my home. People I don't like will leave." I'll buy that too.
What has impressed me MOST has been the way mods and sr. members catch and correct bad manners AS TEACHERS WOULD. They point out the exact nature of the "fault" and require immediate improvement --- no quick judgments, second chances offered, mature tolerance being the norm. The chop comes only when the offer is rejected and then without rancor.
Personally, I think you are doing just fine.
Thanks.
Fud
Post by: garrettwc on May 20, 2006, 06:09:31 AM
As I mentioned in my other post, Vbulletin can be set up to automatically warn the offender and lock their account after a certain number of infractions. That will do some of the work for you. Then you and the mods can focus on topic content.
Post by: roo_ster on May 20, 2006, 06:13:19 AM
That sounds like it would work.
Also, I would second (third?) the notion of someone having to make 100+ posts in the gun fora before being allowed to post in L&P, where most of the rancor develops.
Post by: Iain on May 20, 2006, 08:03:27 AM
Quote from: jfruser
Also, I would second (third?) the notion of someone having to make 100+ posts in the gun fora before being allowed to post in L&P, where most of the rancor develops.
I can't agree with this. Had this rule been in place I would never have been a member of THR. Of course that might be a good thing in the eyes of some...Obviously a large part of my involvement in THR has been perhaps more APS suitable material, but I pre-date Roundtable and APS. I'd never have been able to participate at all if this suggestion had been in place, and neither would the vast majority of people who come from firearm unfriendly countries. L&P provided a means for myself, and others to interact with the THR community and it was a chance for the THR community to get its message across.
I can't say with 100% certainty that I've never been a troublesome member of L&P's 'regulars', but I can certainly think of a few instances where a poster whose username I was unfamiliar with but who had way more that 100 posts caused some serious headaches in L&P. There was a poster just recently whjo had around 100 posts who was the cause of much unpleasantness.
Post by: Oleg Volk on May 20, 2006, 11:04:53 AM
Post by: 280plus on May 20, 2006, 11:18:05 AM
For your eyes only: Yahoo! Mail Beta
You VIP you! As one of our best users, you've earned an invitation-only test drive of a faster and easier way to use Yahoo! Mail. It's free. Be among the first to try it .
So there...
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 20, 2006, 11:33:10 AM
Quote from: Oleg Volk
Ironically, APS has been less troublesome in terms of incivility. Only half-dozen people caused problems.
What happened to Masterpiece Arms? He was hilarious.
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 20, 2006, 11:42:24 AM
I thought it was priceless that he spread invective and insults far and wide, yet in his mind, he was the only one interested in serious discussion.
I think he must have been conciously trolling, anyway.
Post by: 280plus on May 20, 2006, 12:04:16 PM
Post by: Iain on May 20, 2006, 01:34:19 PM
Post by: White Horseradish on May 21, 2006, 06:47:44 PM
Post by: gunsmith on May 21, 2006, 07:04:18 PM
imo the roundtable was one of the best things I ever encountered on the internet, & I would like to access
those threads again and see it revived.
I do not think you should agonize over banning people, some people do not value thr and could care less about what it means taking the high road. Myself, I am really opinionated and quite the curmudgeon & thr has really help me moderate myself.
Post by: Werewolf on May 22, 2006, 04:12:08 AM
Quote from: Blackburn
#1 thing is still this secret squirrel BS when it comes to someone getting out of line. When someone does something bad, put it on display as punishment and make it absolutely clear (with plenty of mocking) why they were in the wrong. People will learn a HECK of a lot faster by example that way.
Kind'a like the pillory and stocks of pre revolutionary war New England? So what it appears that you are suggesting sounds like you want to ban the evil do'ers to their own forum where they must stay until they learn to behave all the while having virtual rotten vegetables tossed at 'em. Kinda like prison only in THR prison you don't get out until you toe the line, bow to the masters and just like a dog lick their smelly feet with a loving smile on your face.
Hmmm...
Sounds like a plan.
Post by: roo_ster on May 22, 2006, 08:32:41 AM
Quote from: Blackburn
#1 thing is still this secret squirrel BS when it comes to someone getting out of line. When someone does something bad, put it on display as punishment and make it absolutely clear (with plenty of mocking) why they were in the wrong. People will learn a HECK of a lot faster by example that way.
Yep, I agree. A parting post by a mod saying, "tr0ll_bate got this thread locked and himself banned because he did A, B, & C."
Some folks need examples of what is OUT of line. Perhaps a "Hall of Shame," where the naughty threads can be exiled.
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 22, 2006, 08:52:19 AM
Quote
SuperCool1911guy: All you Glock guys are sissy fags with wimpy Eurapein tuperwear guns!
SC1911g is now banned, as this is the latest in a long string of abuses, and his screen-name is hijacked.
[hijacked]SuperCool1911guy: Hey, ya know what? My boyfriend just got a Glock and it is super-tacticool-awesome! After Lyle and I go trade in our 1911's we are going to take our new Glocks to the Pink Pistols Shoot, where hopefully I will hit some paper, maybe around the edges, if Lyle holds my hand and shows me how.
This is fun, I'll do another.SC1911g is now banned, as this is the latest in a long string of abuses, and his screen-name is hijacked.
[hijacked]SuperCool1911guy: Hey, ya know what? My boyfriend just got a Glock and it is super-tacticool-awesome! After Lyle and I go trade in our 1911's we are going to take our new Glocks to the Pink Pistols Shoot, where hopefully I will hit some paper, maybe around the edges, if Lyle holds my hand and shows me how.
Quote
FundyConservative: Nietzsche06, it is secularist trash like you that is ruining my country! I hope you Darwin yourself and the sooner the better!
another banning and hijacking
[hijacked]FundyConservative: Man, I just saw the Davinci Code and I just...I don't know. What with that and Farrinhiet 9/11, I just can't believe in anything anymore. It's all a sham! I figure if I quit my job and collect some govt. aid, I can probably afford to get an apartment by myself and have lots of hookers over. Maybe I could get them to bring some heroin. If my wife doesn't find me, I can probably get away without paying child support.
I don't know, is that a tad harsh?
another banning and hijacking
[hijacked]FundyConservative: Man, I just saw the Davinci Code and I just...I don't know. What with that and Farrinhiet 9/11, I just can't believe in anything anymore. It's all a sham! I figure if I quit my job and collect some govt. aid, I can probably afford to get an apartment by myself and have lots of hookers over. Maybe I could get them to bring some heroin. If my wife doesn't find me, I can probably get away without paying child support.
Post by: Guest on May 22, 2006, 08:54:28 AM
I recall for some reason the old joke about the fellow finding out after being married to the same women for 50 years - she used "How to train your dog" as a marriage guide not only for husband - also herself.
Somewhere in all them works is the answer I am pretty sure.
Does vB allow ladies to call the forum "Michelle" and the gents to call it "Mike" ? That might be a start...dunno...
What do I know, I keep flip-flopping b/t Galt's Gultch, Heinlein's Crater, and Big Brother...and craving dog biscuits.
Post by: Telperion on May 22, 2006, 12:37:01 PM
I have heard that vBulletin 3 has a neat feature called "send to coventry" or the like, whereby the affected user doesn't think he is banned, and can still post, but his posts are completely invisible to everyone but himself. Nothing sends a troll packing like being ignored.
Post by: Gewehr98 on May 22, 2006, 12:45:10 PM
Quote
#1 thing is still this secret squirrel BS when it comes to someone getting out of line. When someone does something bad, put it on display as punishment and make it absolutely clear (with plenty of mocking) why they were in the wrong. People will learn a HECK of a lot faster by example that way.
And that fits in with the forum name of The High Road just how? Particularly the "plenty of mocking" part, I'm curious how that portrays what a forum wants to convey with respect to class and dignity? AR-15.com, ok. Democratic Underground, you bet. The High Road, no.
Post by: Gewehr98 on May 22, 2006, 04:53:41 PM
Now, if you want to hang dirty laundry from the highest flagpole yourself, have at it. If you take delight in mocking others on a forum for nothing other than your sheer enjoyment, knock yourself out. I appreciate the insight into your character, and it reinforces my understanding of why you want a half-dozen sock puppets to infiltrate THR. But do it somewhere else, ok? I like what Oleg and crew have started with THR and APS. I don't want to see it devolve into a free-for-all flame and slamfest.
Post by: grampster on May 22, 2006, 05:18:26 PM
The purpose of THR is twofold in my opinion. It's a place where folks of like mind about firearms and firearm related subjects can gather and edify one another. It is also a place where those who perhaps are undecided or perhaps even opposed about our culture can also gather and judge for themselves which way they should fall in the matter of firearms and firearm related subjects. How we are judged is based on our behavior.
Having said that, everybody has an opinion just like they have a certain orifice. Frankly, if one reads the rules of THR, the place should not even need moderators. Sigh....human nature being as it is, sometimes those opinions are held in check about as succesfully as is the product of the other orifice.
If someone gets out of line, a member should gently remind that person about the rules he agreed to. Not heeded? A moderator also gives a gentle nudge by PM. If the person doesn't catch on then, boot em. Nobody has to be told anything. The violator is gone because he failed to keep his word. Why that person is no longer around should be painfully obvious by his previous behavior. We are all here by invite of Oleg and we should respect his rules. Don't wanna do that? Well the internet is a big place.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on May 22, 2006, 08:13:14 PM
Use the stocks, hold off on the rotten vegetables.
I can see the reasoning behind the "no reasons given" locks, they do, to a point, try to prevent the disagreeing with the cause idiot or his buds to whinge in a new thread. But we get that anyway.
A clear description of what in that post was not tolerable and why would serve to educate the newer folks who may not see the "self-evidentiaryness" of it and establish a guide of where the lines fall.
I've found (usually after writing an apologetic PM to the locking mod, especially if I theoretically knew better) they will tell me what in particular provoked the response. Doing it instead of the "That's It" kind of final lock post makes sense.
Like the sign posted above the poor fellow in the stocks explaining what his crime against society was.