Log in

View Full Version : Suggestions for forum reorganization


Cain
May 21st, 2009, 11:40 AM
Cross-posting:


I want to reiterate my sub name suggestions, because I personally think that "Debate" is not the best title, as there are likely to be a number of subjects that no one wants to debate, but many people want to discuss... scientific breakthroughs, for example. My suggestions are:

Maybe instead of "General" and "Serious", the subs should be:
*General
*Politics
*Sociology
*Science and technology

I think that this kind of division is more likely to spur intelligent, intellectual conversation. In fact, I'm going to add one:

*Art, Music & Literature

Add Theology as well, for religious discussion.

Oh, and group them all under Advanced Search, with a subtitle of for Debate.

I would have divided it up this way:

Google Chat (for talk about Google and the CoG, obviously)
General Chat (fluff threads and things which don't seem to go anywhere else, go in here)
Books, Music & Media (discussion about various entertainments go here)
Creative Pursuits (Creative efforts by the members go here)
Current Events (if its happening, we want to know)
Politics & History (many small bloodsucking creatures and past events go here)
Philosophy
* Political and social
* Ethics
* Metaphysics
* Atheist vs Theist/Religious debate ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK
Science
Technology, Computing and Gadgets

Something like that.

So, does this seem like a good idea? Because it seems it would solve a lot of problems that have arisen, thus far.

Cain
May 21st, 2009, 12:00 PM
Tsar suggested perhaps merging a couple of forums as well, and I said it could work if Current Events was a subforum of Politics & History, and if Creative Pursuits was a subforum of Books, Music & Media.

But it depends whether people think I have too many suggestions. I tend to not like subforums, for completely irrational reasons, and don't think this is too many, but I'm not worried if people think my suggestion in this post is better than the previous one.

Avatar of the Qlippothic
May 21st, 2009, 04:16 PM
I prefer the second idea, Cain.

EDIT: I'd also make the tech forum a subforum of Science.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 04:32 PM
I liky

Dolores
May 21st, 2009, 05:20 PM
God yes! Please do it.

Dolores
May 21st, 2009, 05:21 PM
Maybe also add medicine as a subforum of Science. So technology won't be so alone.

Cain
May 21st, 2009, 05:23 PM
I was actually thinking about that, too.

Avatar of the Qlippothic
May 21st, 2009, 06:02 PM
Medicine and Biology (as one combined subforum) instead of just Medicine, IMO.

Cain
May 21st, 2009, 06:13 PM
But then we'd need subforums for chemistry and physics as well (and no doubt the geo-tards would moan at being left out, as would Astronomy etc etc). Since that would be getting unduly messy, it might be a good idea to have a Science and Medecine forum, with the Tech and Gadgets and computing beneath that as a subforum.

Clark Nova
May 21st, 2009, 06:34 PM
I would suggest the following moderator hierarchy restructuring.

Reinstate Rimmer as a moderator. Remove all inactive mods. And Get at least one extra admin because the absentee landlord thing is really annoying.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 06:38 PM
Inactive admins too minus matt, so Geof.

Clark Nova
May 21st, 2009, 06:39 PM
Inactive admins too minus matt, so Geof.
You should be an admin at this stage.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 06:41 PM
I am the newest mod, people might not be happy with that. *blushes*

Clark Nova
May 21st, 2009, 06:42 PM
I am the newest mod, people might not be happy with that. *blushes*
yes but you are also competent which I think should be the deciding factor.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 06:46 PM
I think others may dispute that fact. I would make this forum to much of a democractic socialist thing.

fomenter
May 21st, 2009, 06:56 PM
you are the only one from coG who has volunteered to spend time and put in effort... deciding factor..

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 07:00 PM
Fair enough but it is not up to me.

fomenter
May 21st, 2009, 07:07 PM
not up to me either unfortunately...
if it was things would have happened and be over by now and coG would be on to the next challenge..

Cain
May 21st, 2009, 07:10 PM
At the very least, the extra forums allow for those on the shortlist for such a position to be given a forum where they could show their approach to the role in a contained environment ie; being made a mod for a particular individual forum.

So, we're all more or less decided the layout should be the following:

Googlism Chat
General Chat
Books, Music and Media
* Creative Pursuits (subforum)
Politics and History
* Current events (subforum)
Science and Medicine
* Technology, gadgets and computing (subforum)
Philosophy
* Political and Sociological (subforum)
* Ethics and Morality (subforum)
* Metaphysics (subforum)
* Religion/ Theist and Atheist debate (subforum)

Yes?

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 07:12 PM
What do you believe the next challenge would be after we restructure the forums?

Cain
May 21st, 2009, 07:16 PM
Definitely looking at modding. People who aren't ever here shouldn't be on the list. People who abuse their powers should equally be struck off (I only have one particular person in mind for that, however). And then a Code of Conduct, with responsibility both for mods and users should be discussed.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 07:17 PM
At the very least, the extra forums allow for those on the shortlist for such a position to be given a forum where they could show their approach to the role in a contained environment ie; being made a mod for a particular individual forum.

So, we're all more or less decided the layout should be the following:

Googlism Chat
* Forum Discussion(subforum)
General Chat
* Introductions(subforum)
Books, Music and Media
* Creative Pursuits (subforum)
Politics and History
* Current events (subforum)
Science and Medicine
* Technology, gadgets and computing (subforum)
Philosophy
* Political and Sociological (subforum)
* Ethics and Morality (subforum)
* Metaphysics (subforum)
* Religion/ Theist and Atheist debate (subforum)(I assume Hatemail can go here as well)
Offtopic(old IFU)(hidden)

Yes?

Added some notes but I like it.

Loki
May 21st, 2009, 07:18 PM
Sounds fine to me. I'll email the owner to make sure but if no-one objects I'll start to re-arrange the threads over the next few days.

I'll go through the member permissions today and suspend mod/admin abilities for those posters that aren't/ haven't been doing the job for yonks.

Cain
May 21st, 2009, 07:23 PM
Added some notes but I like it.

Well, I was looking at only rearranging the top forums, as I think these below fulfill their purpose quite well.

We could do it that way, but honestly I think everything from introductions down works just fine as it is.

Cain
May 21st, 2009, 07:23 PM
Sounds fine to me. I'll email the owner to make sure but if no-one objects I'll start to re-arrange the threads over the next few days.

I'll go through the member permissions today and suspend mod/admin abilities for those posters that aren't/ haven't been doing the job for yonks.

Awesome! Thanks Loki, this is much appreciated!

fomenter
May 21st, 2009, 07:26 PM
What do you believe the next challenge would be after we restructure the forums?
tweaking it so it has a broader scope than just a atheist vs theist joke (funny but limited),
if you open it up a bit coG it wont devolve back into a troll site with 14 year old Fundy atheists trolling and being trolled by 14 yr old's pretending to be christian fundies ..

there are a lot of potential jokes and comparisons between computer/search engine and religion, theology, philosophy that could be explored or created if it wasn't limited as "only atheist".. and being less limited is necessary to survive and thrive..
__________________

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 07:27 PM
Well, I was looking at only rearranging the top forums, as I think these below fulfill their purpose quite well.

We could do it that way, but honestly I think everything from introductions down works just fine as it is.

Oh ok, I was figuring that but was not sure. Now we should talk about ministers, Now I think anyone should be a minister but that is up to Matt. I believe if the minister thing is to stay the forum should be hidden, there is no use cock teasing and showing off.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 07:29 PM
tweaking it so it has a broader scope than just a atheist vs theist joke (funny but limited),
if you open it up a bit coG it wont devolve back into a troll site with 14 year old Fundy atheists trolling and being trolled by 14 yr old's pretending to be christian fundies ..

there are a lot of potential jokes and comparisons between computer/search engine and religion, theology, philosophy that could be explored or created if it wasn't limited as "only atheist".. and being less limited is necessary to survive and thrive..
__________________

That would take Matt giving up the FTP pass which he is willing just hasn't.

The Laughing Man
May 21st, 2009, 07:32 PM
Sounds fine to me. I'll email the owner to make sure but if no-one objects I'll start to re-arrange the threads over the next few days.

I'll go through the member permissions today and suspend mod/admin abilities for those posters that aren't/ haven't been doing the job for yonks.

Awesome.

Cain
May 21st, 2009, 07:33 PM
What if everyone over a certain postcount (100-500) was made a Minister and given access to the board in question? As a reward, for those members who contribute more to the site? That way its both egalitarian, and retains something of its special status, neatly solving most problems arising from it.

If that is to be the case though, then I would suggest being a Minister confers no powers except access to the Minister's Lounge.

fomenter
May 21st, 2009, 07:35 PM
That would take Matt giving up the FTP pass which he is willing just hasn't.

one thing at a time, get the forum right, do away with the mod problems and the minister problems then tackle the fun part of creating something in a fresh clean forum

Dolores
May 21st, 2009, 07:35 PM
Sounds fine to me. I'll email the owner to make sure but if no-one objects I'll start to re-arrange the threads over the next few days.

I'll go through the member permissions today and suspend mod/admin abilities for those posters that aren't/ haven't been doing the job for yonks.


That is GREAT. Thank you! I was losing hope.

I really think some restructuring will be good for this board, and maybe if we work hard we can attract new members who will stay.

Dolores
May 21st, 2009, 07:36 PM
What if everyone over a certain postcount (100-500) was made a Minister and given access to the board in question? As a reward, for those members who contribute more to the site? That way its both egalitarian, and retains something of its special status, neatly solving most problems arising from it.

If that is to be the case though, then I would suggest being a Minister confers no powers except access to the Minister's Lounge.

That's not a bad idea... I would say 1000 posts or more, though.

and Ministers should ABSOLUTELY not be able to see user IP addresses. That's a lawsuit waiting to happen.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 07:36 PM
I agree with that but I would go with at said post count there is a vote of the members, only because you have some who come in and just build up a postcount for no reason. Look at Lamb, ISA, Bubbles, and others who have come along just posting nothing.

The Laughing Man
May 21st, 2009, 07:38 PM
I agree with that but I would go with at said post count there is a vote of the members, only because you have some who come in and just build up a postcount for no reason. Look at Lamb, ISA, Bubbles, and others who have come along just posting nothing.

Even that will lead to two distinct groups of posters though. I'd like to see the minister thing done away with altogether to be honest, but if it must stay, the same rule should apply to everyone. In my opinion anyway.

Cain
May 21st, 2009, 07:39 PM
A thousand, then. I was leaning towards the higher end of the postcount, but I was worried I was making it too high, which is why I moderated my suggestion somewhat. But a thousand seems a nice, solid, round number to go with.

fomenter
May 21st, 2009, 07:41 PM
What if everyone over a certain postcount (100-500) was made a Minister and given access to the board in question? As a reward, for those members who contribute more to the site? That way its both egalitarian, and retains something of its special status, neatly solving most problems arising from it.

If that is to be the case though, then I would suggest being a Minister confers no powers except access to the Minister's Lounge.
the seeing of IP addresses must go,
i don't think it would be any loss to tha coG to do away with ministers altogether, and make the lounge disappear and use it for sorting out moderation (if its even necessary for that) by mods only

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 07:44 PM
at a 1000 we can run them off if they are too annoying so i am ok with that. I think most people would rather see it done away with but we are talking alternitves.

We do kinda need a mod place but that is just for spammers Ip, and discussing other things.

Cain
May 21st, 2009, 07:44 PM
the seeing of IP addresses must go,
i don't think it would be any loss to tha coG to do away with ministers altogether, and make the lounge disappear and use it for sorting out moderation (if its even necessary for that) by mods only

That could work, as well.

Also, I think TLM raises a good objection. Backtracking on what I said above, I think 500 posts is far more reasonable and attainable, should we keep the Minister system but decide to overhaul the entry qualifications.

The Laughing Man
May 21st, 2009, 07:47 PM
1000 sounds good to me. A number like that might actually encourage people to post more in order to get access to the minister forum.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 07:47 PM
Either way as long as it is not too little. Now where is Tsar, and others for imput?

The Laughing Man
May 21st, 2009, 07:48 PM
I think 500 posts is far more reasonable and attainable, should we keep the Minister system but decide to overhaul the entry qualifications.

Agreed.

fomenter
May 21st, 2009, 07:52 PM
i haven't seen any good arguments made for keeping it yet, the go between argument is dead if the moderation is good you don't need go between's, the "its a joke" argument falls down because it backfired and became a joke on the forum, hierarchy for hierarchies sake will only be supported by its benificiarys or those with the title.. anybody have a good argument for keeping the ministers title??

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 07:53 PM
If the guy who pays the bills wants to keep it!

Cain
May 21st, 2009, 07:54 PM
I think giving people the incentive to post more never hurts, and this is one cheap and easy way to do it. Plus, privacy for FSM/O:MF style activities might be handy.

fomenter
May 21st, 2009, 07:55 PM
If the guy who pays the bills wants to keep it!
does he?

The Laughing Man
May 21st, 2009, 07:57 PM
i haven't seen any good arguments made for keeping it yet, the go between argument is dead if the moderation is good you don't need go between's, the "its a joke" argument falls down because it backfired and became a joke on the forum, hierarchy for hierarchies sake will only be supported by its benificiarys or those with the title.. anybody have a good argument for keeping the ministers title??

After the revolution, a classless society can only come about through a transition period with the CoG ministers as the ideological vanguard of the noobs.

fomenter
May 21st, 2009, 08:00 PM
I think giving people the incentive to post more never hurts, and this is one cheap and easy way to do it. Plus, privacy for FSM/O:MF style activities might be handy.
the second point is a good one,
incentive is tougher some people you don't want to encourage and others you do, if this encourages both types then it is a wash, and becomes a problem if the "don't want" types want the title more than the group you would like to see posting

Cain
May 21st, 2009, 08:04 PM
After the revolution, a classless society can only come about through a transition period with the CoG ministers as the ideological vanguard of the noobs.

:icon_lol::icon_lol::icon_lol:

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 08:05 PM
I think giving people the incentive to post more never hurts, and this is one cheap and easy way to do it. Plus, privacy for FSM/O:MF style activities might be handy.

I like these points

does he?

IDK, he might. *shrugs*

Cain
May 21st, 2009, 08:09 PM
the second point is a good one,
incentive is tougher some people you don't want to encourage and others you do, if this encourages both types then it is a wash, and becomes a problem if the "don't want" types want the title more than the group you would like to see posting

Thats why I suggested it at the higher end of the spectrum. I mean, 500 posts is a fair bit, even if you do stick to the mostly spam topics and threads. I would hope a similar ethos to that of PD, where people who are not entirely suitable are given suggestions as forums they might find more to their liking, would evolve.

The Laughing Man
May 21st, 2009, 08:10 PM
100% original idea:
http://i42.tinypic.com/2h6f2nq.jpg

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 08:12 PM
I made a fancy one in the ML

fomenter
May 21st, 2009, 08:15 PM
the second point is a good one,

incentive is tougher some people you don't want to encourage and others you do, if this encourages both types then it is a wash, and becomes a problem if the "don't want" types want the title more than the group you would like to see posting

also the kind of people i would like to see posting more, aren't impressed with titles or secret forums or privileged elite powers, or maybe that's just me :icon_lol:

http://i42.tinypic.com/2h6f2nq.jpg

as for the ethos of redirecting the "not entirely suitable" i would hope so to

Loki
May 21st, 2009, 08:17 PM
the seeing of IP addresses must go,
i don't think it would be any loss to tha coG to do away with ministers altogether, and make the lounge disappear and use it for sorting out moderation (if its even necessary for that) by mods only

That's a very good point fomenter and it never occurred to me (as usual).
There's no reason for anyone other than mods et al to see posters' IP addys.

Tsar Phalanxia
May 21st, 2009, 08:22 PM
What if everyone over a certain postcount (100-500) was made a Minister and given access to the board in question? As a reward, for those members who contribute more to the site? That way its both egalitarian, and retains something of its special status, neatly solving most problems arising from it.

If that is to be the case though, then I would suggest being a Minister confers no powers except access to the Minister's Lounge.
Sounds great, although 1,000 is probably a better number.

and Ministers should ABSOLUTELY not be able to see user IP addresses. That's a lawsuit waiting to happen.
:D

i haven't seen any good arguments made for keeping it yet, the go between argument is dead if the moderation is good you don't need go between's, the "its a joke" argument falls down because it backfired and became a joke on the forum, hierarchy for hierarchies sake will only be supported by its benificiarys or those with the title.. anybody have a good argument for keeping the ministers title??
If it ceases to have any authrity, what's the big deal?
After the revolution, a classless society can only come about through a transition period with the CoG ministers as the ideological vanguard of the noobs.
Yes, we need to establish a Dictatorship of the Postertariat

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 08:25 PM
Took you long enough... Larry Tsar!

fomenter
May 21st, 2009, 08:31 PM
S


If it ceases to have any authrity, what's the big deal?


in most places it wouldn't be a "deal" of any kind,

but the fact that it has been a ongoing contributing factor in the attitudes and culture that have been crippling this place, and since the coG is struggling with a rebirth what does it harm to do away with it?
and any unfortunate connotations it carries.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 08:35 PM
rebirth

http://bookhound.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/geoff-johns-flash-rebirth-1.jpg
:icon_eek:

The Laughing Man
May 21st, 2009, 08:40 PM
I think we can leave the minister debate until later.

For now, reshuffling and renaming the forums and purging the old inactive mods is definitely a step in the right direction.

fomenter
May 21st, 2009, 08:42 PM
I think we can leave the minister debate until later.

For now, reshuffling and renaming the forums and purging the old inactive mods is definitely a step in the right direction.
i agree seeing some change will be a great start..

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 08:44 PM
And maybe killing the retired minister group since it has been jumbled up so bad. If they were once a minister they can contact someone about it if they come back.

Loki
May 21st, 2009, 08:57 PM
And maybe killing the retired minister group since it has been jumbled up so bad. If they were once a minister they can contact someone about it if they come back.

Yeah, it's a right mess. I was going through the ACP and saw several hundred ex-ministers.
Which moron did that then? Huh?

(Oh lord, please don't let it be one of my cock-ups :D)

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 21st, 2009, 08:59 PM
hahah! I think at one point all inactive people got shoved in there somehow.

Loki
May 21st, 2009, 09:03 PM
I'm thinking of all the people who could have done that and one name keeps coming to mind :(

I'll fix it later. Not a priority at the mo.

Dolores
May 22nd, 2009, 03:21 AM
I agree with that but I would go with at said post count there is a vote of the members, only because you have some who come in and just build up a postcount for no reason. Look at Lamb, ISA, Bubbles, and others who have come along just posting nothing.

I really don't like the idea of making it a popularity contest.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 22nd, 2009, 03:46 AM
True we just have to make them run away before then.

Dolores
May 22nd, 2009, 03:59 AM
I don't think that anyone who wasn't into the board on some level would make it to 1000 posts. Honestly.

Even if you don't like them, if they make it to 1000 they're clearly committed, and that's what diversity is all about.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 22nd, 2009, 04:04 AM
Faire enough, maybe 1000 is to much cause I know alot of people who are under that who are cool... 600?

fomenter
May 22nd, 2009, 04:41 AM
the fact that it has been a ongoing contributing factor in the attitudes and culture that have been crippling this place, and since the coG is struggling with a rebirth what does it harm to do away with it?
and any unfortunate connotations it carries.

still not feeling the love for the minister thing my self but.... start by getting rid of the privileges and it becomes a tiny bit more acceptable at least.

Dolores
May 22nd, 2009, 04:51 AM
Faire enough, maybe 1000 is to much cause I know alot of people who are under that who are cool... 600?

There's that popularity contest thing again.

Do you think they're going to get less cool over the course of the next 400 posts?

I think people should at least have to put a bit of time into contributing, if it's going to be a privilege.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 22nd, 2009, 05:04 AM
No but I jut think it is too much, you normally can see a posted is deticated around 400 so i think 600 is better.

Daruko
May 22nd, 2009, 06:04 AM
Sounds like everyone is in agreement here. Consider my vote with the masses on this shite.

Dolores
May 22nd, 2009, 08:11 AM
No but I jut think it is too much, you normally can see a posted is deticated around 400 so i think 600 is better.

I think if it's going to have any meaning, as a "position", it would be better to make it a higher number of posts than a lower one. If someone's going to stick around, they'll make it to 1000 eventually.

I mean, if it was only 600, I would be a Minister already, and I don't think I've been on here long enough or posted enough to have earned it.

But, if that's what everyone else agrees on, I'm fine with it.

Tsar Phalanxia
May 22nd, 2009, 11:48 AM
1,000 is better. If they're cool, they'll keep on posting until they reach 1,000 anyway.

fomenter
May 22nd, 2009, 02:13 PM
the more you talk about how "cool" you have to be to be a minister the less i like it, even the powerless title is starting to smell

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 22nd, 2009, 02:18 PM
Good point Dolores

Yiuel
May 22nd, 2009, 04:09 PM
My little drop of water into this wide Ocean.

On the forum reorganisation, I do really like it. Dividing forums by subject instead of seriousness will definitely help improve this forum's life. I don't have much to comment on that.

(I do not know if this forum can create automatic pruning. If it can, one could have a dedicated forum for forum games and general silliness with pruning. It has had a lot of good effects on the forum on which I write a lot.)

On the subject of Ministers, when I first joined, I actually asked myself what was the point of a Minister forum, who was a Minister and how do you become a Minister. Though having such communities is not to me a problem, the lack of highly visible purpose did made me wonder all that it is about. What is the point of being a Minister? Who is, and how do you become one?

(Compare that with the process of being a member of a clsoed society or simply a community.)

If it is simply by post count, I doubt it gives the title any value. Again, on one of my favorite forums, we have a series of ranks, and these are determined by postcount (because the forum's software is a very simple one). While by these postcounts you know who has been very active on the forum, it never achieved the idea of "special status". This has been only done through general forum reputation.

And giving that "special" (merely more active, or more ancient) group a forum to discuss together seems a lot like what we call "orphan clauses" where I live : rules applying to people based on non-reputation details. You can't come in because you're new... (Having a special forum for mods and admins is a good thing however, to discuss moderation and administration of the forums.)

However, I wouldn't oppose giving the title of Minister to people over a certain postcount. Many forums do that, so why not? Just don't give them a private forum or otherwise. (If you want to give a private forum to a private group, give a more proactive reason to have that group. For instance, on another forum where I went, there were groups for the ongoing projects of the forum (they were game creators), where only dedicated people could post.)

You could also think of Honourable Ministers (or other more honourable titles), people that, while not contributing as highly en masse, are deemed by the moderating community of some distinct honour. This can be done easily. The community itself could even give some people titles : on another forum, again, we all had fun making General Elections to vote for 5 Honourable Leaders of the forum, in a very democratic way. It was fun every time.

(I say all that, but I only joined March 2nd, so I am a newcomer myself. And I haven't reached 250 posts yet, and won't get near 500 before the end of summer I suppose, and probably won't get over 1000 before the end of this year... Though I dare say people don't hate me here and generally approve of my behavior, or so do I hope.)

Yiuel
May 22nd, 2009, 05:03 PM
Because it's just like valuing quantity over quality. It'd make more sense to have a system where long-time members get access (as long as they log in frequently).

I know, and that is why I wouldn't give anything special to a status like having special accesses merely based on postcount.

But that's also true about seniority. Sure, being somewhere for a long time may give you a certain value, but pretty much the same way as postcount : you're valued upon the fact you just were there first and stayed for a longer time.

I once worked in a supermarket's bakery department. There was a very senior worker, not much more educated in bread making that I. He was payed twice (if not more) what I was, just because he was working there for years. Sure, it wouldn't be much a problem if he hadn't been lazy as an asshole and any newer employee was twice if not thrice as fast as his lasy ass (and the work was done just as well, if not better by the faster people). Seniority is no proof of value either, you can be there for a long time and still be a frigging asshole, as much as experience tells me.

fomenter
May 22nd, 2009, 05:16 PM
thanks rimmer and yiuel you are making good points for why the minister position is unnecessary.
it is better that people are judged by there contribution, respect must be earned not handed out by elitist to those that conform or awarded based on seniority.

Loki
May 22nd, 2009, 05:44 PM
UPDATE:

I'll post a proper thread in a bit but, for now, you'll do.

OK - I've spoken to Matt and we're going ahead with the reorganisation suggested by Cain.
If we need to fiddle with it later then we can do but that's fine IMO. We don't want too many forums yet.

The Ministers' Lounge - I think we're going to kill that entirely. We'll probably set up a hidden forum for Moderators and Admins - I think that's fair.


OK - this is my bit alone...

There should be NO difference between posters. Admins and mods don't know any more than members. Just because you hold a position of responsibility doesn't mean you're right.

If I see ANY moderator pulling a power trip from now on I'll ask them to stop. Once.
Do it again and I'll pull the moderation privileges until that person learns how to use them.
I hope that's not too extreme but that's how I see it.

fomenter
May 22nd, 2009, 06:09 PM
UPDATE:

I'll post a proper thread in a bit but, for now, you'll do.

OK - I've spoken to Matt and we're going ahead with the reorganisation suggested by Cain.
If we need to fiddle with it later then we can do but that's fine IMO. We don't want too many forums yet.

The Ministers' Lounge - I think we're going to kill that entirely. We'll probably set up a hidden forum for Moderators and Admins - I think that's fair.


OK - this is my bit alone...

There should be NO difference between posters. Admins and mods don't know any more than members. Just because you hold a position of responsibility doesn't mean you're right.

If I see ANY moderator pulling a power trip from now on I'll ask them to stop. Once.
Do it again and I'll pull the moderation privileges until that person learns how to use them.
I hope that's not too extreme but that's how I see it.

http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/Smileys/default/mittens.giffair and reasonable..thanks loki

Cain
May 22nd, 2009, 07:27 PM
Excellent. :icon_cool:

rzm61
May 22nd, 2009, 07:39 PM
UPDATE:

I'll post a proper thread in a bit but, for now, you'll do.

OK - I've spoken to Matt and we're going ahead with the reorganisation suggested by Cain.
If we need to fiddle with it later then we can do but that's fine IMO. We don't want too many forums yet.

The Ministers' Lounge - I think we're going to kill that entirely. We'll probably set up a hidden forum for Moderators and Admins - I think that's fair.


OK - this is my bit alone...

There should be NO difference between posters. Admins and mods don't know any more than members. Just because you hold a position of responsibility doesn't mean you're right.

If I see ANY moderator pulling a power trip from now on I'll ask them to stop. Once.
Do it again and I'll pull the moderation privileges until that person learns how to use them.
I hope that's not too extreme but that's how I see it.



Right on.

Daruko
May 22nd, 2009, 07:42 PM
UPDATE:

I'll post a proper thread in a bit but, for now, you'll do.

OK - I've spoken to Matt and we're going ahead with the reorganisation suggested by Cain.
If we need to fiddle with it later then we can do but that's fine IMO. We don't want too many forums yet.

The Ministers' Lounge - I think we're going to kill that entirely. We'll probably set up a hidden forum for Moderators and Admins - I think that's fair.


OK - this is my bit alone...

There should be NO difference between posters. Admins and mods don't know any more than members. Just because you hold a position of responsibility doesn't mean you're right.

If I see ANY moderator pulling a power trip from now on I'll ask them to stop. Once.
Do it again and I'll pull the moderation privileges until that person learns how to use them.
I hope that's not too extreme but that's how I see it.
Sounds great.

Dolores
May 22nd, 2009, 08:16 PM
UPDATE:

I'll post a proper thread in a bit but, for now, you'll do.

OK - I've spoken to Matt and we're going ahead with the reorganisation suggested by Cain.
If we need to fiddle with it later then we can do but that's fine IMO. We don't want too many forums yet.

The Ministers' Lounge - I think we're going to kill that entirely. We'll probably set up a hidden forum for Moderators and Admins - I think that's fair.


OK - this is my bit alone...

There should be NO difference between posters. Admins and mods don't know any more than members. Just because you hold a position of responsibility doesn't mean you're right.

If I see ANY moderator pulling a power trip from now on I'll ask them to stop. Once.
Do it again and I'll pull the moderation privileges until that person learns how to use them.
I hope that's not too extreme but that's how I see it.


This is GREAT. Seriously great!

Yiuel
May 22nd, 2009, 09:24 PM
UPDATE:

I'll post a proper thread in a bit but, for now, you'll do.

OK - I've spoken to Matt and we're going ahead with the reorganisation suggested by Cain.
If we need to fiddle with it later then we can do but that's fine IMO. We don't want too many forums yet.

The Ministers' Lounge - I think we're going to kill that entirely. We'll probably set up a hidden forum for Moderators and Admins - I think that's fair.


OK - this is my bit alone...

There should be NO difference between posters. Admins and mods don't know any more than members. Just because you hold a position of responsibility doesn't mean you're right.

If I see ANY moderator pulling a power trip from now on I'll ask them to stop. Once.
Do it again and I'll pull the moderation privileges until that person learns how to use them.
I hope that's not too extreme but that's how I see it.

I concur.

sudikics
May 22nd, 2009, 09:40 PM
UPDATE:

I'll post a proper thread in a bit but, for now, you'll do.

OK - I've spoken to Matt and we're going ahead with the reorganisation suggested by Cain.
If we need to fiddle with it later then we can do but that's fine IMO. We don't want too many forums yet.

The Ministers' Lounge - I think we're going to kill that entirely. We'll probably set up a hidden forum for Moderators and Admins - I think that's fair.


OK - this is my bit alone...

There should be NO difference between posters. Admins and mods don't know any more than members. Just because you hold a position of responsibility doesn't mean you're right.

If I see ANY moderator pulling a power trip from now on I'll ask them to stop. Once.
Do it again and I'll pull the moderation privileges until that person learns how to use them.
I hope that's not too extreme but that's how I see it.
And if the above posts weren't enough, I support this as well.

sailor
May 25th, 2009, 11:22 AM
tl;dr thread, but i think that what you need to do is have a certain set of guidelines that all the ministers agree upon for everything you make decisions on, and then try to stick to the guidlines. things get emotional, so in that case a 3rd person should step in to mderate the dispute...like we talked earlier last year of a dispute resolution space where people could go to hash things out. then you wouldn't have all this spew of political back stabbing and positioning/fighting, and game playing all over the front of the church. its silly and is why they often try to tear down institutions in the first place, usually, storm the temple or the school library. burn their books...it's cause the participants get fed up with being oppressed by dictator rule. kill the aristocrats....anarchy!!!

(etc)

Paris Hilton
May 26th, 2009, 05:10 AM
UPDATE:

I'll post a proper thread in a bit but, for now, you'll do.

OK - I've spoken to Matt and we're going ahead with the reorganisation suggested by Cain.
If we need to fiddle with it later then we can do but that's fine IMO. We don't want too many forums yet.

The Ministers' Lounge - I think we're going to kill that entirely. We'll probably set up a hidden forum for Moderators and Admins - I think that's fair.


OK - this is my bit alone...

There should be NO difference between posters. Admins and mods don't know any more than members. Just because you hold a position of responsibility doesn't mean you're right.

If I see ANY moderator pulling a power trip from now on I'll ask them to stop. Once.
Do it again and I'll pull the moderation privileges until that person learns how to use them.
I hope that's not too extreme but that's how I see it.

Hi D.
This is a wonderful solution (making 85 different forums) now even a third grader will know which forum to post in. :icon_rolleyes:
However until you do away with the ministers forum and all the baggage that goes with it, this forum will remain stagnant.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 26th, 2009, 05:37 AM
UPDATE:

I'll post a proper thread in a bit but, for now, you'll do.

OK - I've spoken to Matt and we're going ahead with the reorganisation suggested by Cain.
If we need to fiddle with it later then we can do but that's fine IMO. We don't want too many forums yet.

The Ministers' Lounge - I think we're going to kill that entirely. We'll probably set up a hidden forum for Moderators and Admins - I think that's fair.


OK - this is my bit alone...

There should be NO difference between posters. Admins and mods don't know any more than members. Just because you hold a position of responsibility doesn't mean you're right.

If I see ANY moderator pulling a power trip from now on I'll ask them to stop. Once.
Do it again and I'll pull the moderation privileges until that person learns how to use them.
I hope that's not too extreme but that's how I see it.

http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/Smileys/default/5a.gif

Hi D.
This is a wonderful solution (making 85 different forums) now even a third grader will know which forum to post in. :icon_rolleyes:
However until you do away with the ministers forum and all the baggage that goes with it, this forum will remain stagnant.

I think that is going to happen D.

Sister Faith
May 26th, 2009, 05:31 PM
Hi D.
This is a wonderful solution (making 85 different forums) now even a third grader will know which forum to post in. :icon_rolleyes:
However until you do away with the ministers forum and all the baggage that goes with it, this forum will remain stagnant.

Agreed! There will be way too many sub forums. Keep it simple.

One place for debating, where the rules of debate apply and is moderated accordingly (or not depending on what the OP wants), and no topic is taboo.

One place for informal discussion on any topic (lite or no moderation depending on what the OP wants). If anyone wants to discuss technology or the difference between black cocks and white they could start a thread there.

This will put the decision of what is serious and what is not back into the poster's hands.

I've never agreed with having a ministry. It has become as Dolores said, a popularity contest and now totally meaningless and dangerous (ministers can see IP addresses?! wtf?).

If it's going to be kept in place then the bar to qualify must be set higher to avoid ass-tards like ISA posting 50 million times a day to reach the post count that will make them a minister. And, I think all the members (not just the ministers) should be polled when a candidacy for ministership is brought forward.

Arrrgh! I broke my ban!
*I hope Loki remembers I prefer a hair brush* :D

Loki
May 27th, 2009, 12:00 AM
I don't agree that it'll make things more complicated. For one it'll remove a lot of the subjectivity that exists with so called serious discussions.

Most of the shit flinging has been about posts being moved because they're not serious in someone's view.
This way a lot of the problems can be solved - the mods can moderate where applicable and the posters can post.
And forum mods can be appointed if and when.

And I'm not talking about hundreds of forums/ subs etc - just a few.

I posted in this thread that the Ministers' Lounge was defunct and will be changed. (I think)

Any more objections?

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 27th, 2009, 12:30 AM
I object to people who pop collars. Other then that I am good.

When will this change be taking effect and I guess mods will have to move threads. I sugest we just arcive all inactive threads.

fomenter
May 27th, 2009, 12:38 AM
at some point during the discussion somebody mentioned upgrading the software to decrease the number of bots, not a bad idea if it can be done and good timing to do it with the other changes if you can..

Loki
May 27th, 2009, 12:38 AM
I object to people who pop collars. Other then that I am good.

When will this change be taking effect and I guess mods will have to move threads. I sugest we just arcive all inactive threads.

It was supposed to be happening this long week-end but I got, well, rat-arsed to be honest.

and I guess mods will have to move threads.

That would be wonderful. I thought I'd have to do it all myself.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 27th, 2009, 12:46 AM
We will have to move or archive threads before we kill the ministers lounge. or just make that the mod lounge and we can move threads out of it to googlism chat.

You have enough mods we should be able to move for you. I just think It would be easier to archive a whole bunch of unneeded threads to make it easier. That way we don't get rid of them. I will also have to lock some threads to promote this change but i am willing to help where i can once I get my report for school done which is due tomorrow but IDK if it will get done by then.

And I agree with Formenter the software needs to be upgraded.

Loki
May 27th, 2009, 12:50 AM
at some point during the discussion somebody mentioned upgrading the software to decrease the number of bots, not a bad idea if it can be done and good timing to do it with the other changes if you can..

Ya - Akismet wouldn't go amiss, it seems to have some good reports.

I can't upgrade the software though. That's not such a bad thing fomenter - I've got an experimental attitude to things - push the button and see what happens :D

fomenter
May 27th, 2009, 01:14 AM
Ya - Akismet wouldn't go amiss, it seems to have some good reports.

I can't upgrade the software though. That's not such a bad thing fomenter - I've got an experimental attitude to things - push the button and see what happens :D

same here, learn by doing and see what happens,:icon_lol:
unless the reason you cant is permission or cost the pd crew has good tec guys for advise on "how to" for that kind of stuff, it might make things easier for the mods...

Loki
May 27th, 2009, 01:35 AM
same here, learn by doing and see what happens,:icon_lol:
unless the reason you cant is permission or cost the pd crew has good tec guys for advise on "how to" for that kind of stuff, it might make things easier for the mods...

It's a permission thing.
Trust me (heh - the classic phrase of a bullshit artist and confidence trickster :icon_cool:) I'll take advice and assistance.

I might be silly but I'm not stupid. Thanks.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 27th, 2009, 01:43 AM
Our tech guys are loki, rzm, tag, and me.

fomenter
May 27th, 2009, 01:49 AM
i am sure you guys would be up to the challenge,
bummer about the lack of permission the number of bots and some of the weird mod stuff makes me suspect a upgrade is in order.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 27th, 2009, 01:59 AM
If I have more time I can read up on it and figure it all out and get the needed things from Matt.

The Good Reverend Roger
May 27th, 2009, 04:32 AM
The Ministers' Lounge - I think we're going to kill that entirely. We'll probably set up a hidden forum for Moderators and Admins - I think that's fair.


Oh, dear. :icon_lol:

The stories I could tell you.

The Good Reverend Roger
May 27th, 2009, 04:33 AM
I don't agree that it'll make things more complicated. For one it'll remove a lot of the subjectivity that exists with so called serious discussions.

Most of the shit flinging has been about posts being moved because they're not serious in someone's view.
This way a lot of the problems can be solved - the mods can moderate where applicable and the posters can post.
And forum mods can be appointed if and when.

And I'm not talking about hundreds of forums/ subs etc - just a few.

I posted in this thread that the Ministers' Lounge was defunct and will be changed. (I think)

Any more objections?

Yes. Moving threads is dildoes.

Loki
May 27th, 2009, 09:14 PM
Our tech guys are loki, rzm, tag, and me.

Me? Honestly Goofy, thanks for the vote of confidence but I'm winging it mate.
I have learned a lot over the past year or so but I'm no tech. I just look things up a lot :D

EDIT:
Cain suggested this for the forums;


Google Chat (for talk about Google and the CoG, obviously)
General Chat (fluff threads and things which don't seem to go anywhere else, go in here)
Books, Music & Media (discussion about various entertainments go here)
Creative Pursuits (Creative efforts by the members go here)
Current Events (if its happening, we want to know)
Politics & History (many small bloodsucking creatures and past events go here)
Philosophy
* Political and social
* Ethics
* Metaphysics
* Atheist vs Theist/Religious debate ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK
Science
Technology, Computing and Gadgets


I'm about to enter the dragon's den of ACP and create a few new forums. Not all of them yet.

The Chat ones I'll leave for the moment because it's Serious Discussion we're having problems with.


Whilst I'm doing this the new forums won't be accessible or visible - just in case I make a balls-up (which is quite possible :D) but I hope to get my arse into 5th gear now.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 27th, 2009, 11:33 PM
The chat ones we already have we just thought they should be moved higher.

Loki
May 27th, 2009, 11:43 PM
Ignore forums that appear and disappear for the time being :D

fomenter
May 27th, 2009, 11:46 PM
The chat ones we already have we just thought they should be moved higher.

i think we talked about putting google on top and loosing the word chat..

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 27th, 2009, 11:48 PM
naming it Googlism then?

Loki
May 27th, 2009, 11:55 PM
Guys and galls - and goofy :D

Can you check the new forum please. It looks ok and active - and in the right bloody area after 3 tries (I HATE Vbull!)


I'd appreciate a first post from someone that isn't me :D

Cheers

EDIT:
Check as in make sure I'm doing it right

fomenter
May 27th, 2009, 11:57 PM
naming it Googlism then?
i like it..

Sister Faith
May 28th, 2009, 02:51 AM
Any more objections?

No. It all looks good. And they were suggestions, btw. Not objections.

I object to people who pop collars.

I object to people thinking that they can pop a collar on me. I may be a bitch but I'm not a dog. :icon_evil:

Do you need help putting a Mod Code of Conduct together so that we may all know what is expected of us? I believe Rzm wrote up a good one a while back, IIRC.

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 28th, 2009, 03:07 AM
Cool, so did you figure out how to get the rest in there? and I like how I am something other then a lady or gent!

Dr Goofy Mofo
May 28th, 2009, 03:49 AM
I have moved the "News that makes" Threads to Current events and have locked them to prevent just article dumping. This was discussed earlier and there was no objections then.

fomenter
August 21st, 2009, 12:23 AM
the forum reorganization is done..
i will adjust them based on need, if we get a lot of threads on a topic i will consider giving it a section, Googlism is now on top and there there is a gamers corner in "random stuff" and a new improved ministers lounge open to all members...:icon_cool: