A set of changes/proposals

[Guest]

Geez, I take a break for a couple of days and all hell breaks loose on the BBS. I'm still trying to figure it all out, but for what it's worth (not much I agree), here's my thoughts on the proposals and changes mentioned above:

• DEA's Departure - I already posted me thoughts on that. It's unfortunate in more ways then one.
• New Administrator - I'm glad to here there will be one. Having a name would be even better.
  
• TNZ Moderation - I think it's a great idea and one that probably should have been implemented a long time ago. Moderation by it's very nature does not have to be a negative thing. If we all had the ability to act as civilized adults and practice self-moderation the need for such measures would not be there. As it is, the actions of a few who are unable to act is the previously mentioned civilized manner will unfortunately cause the majority of members to loose a bit of freedom and personal liberties on the board. Not a bad thing at all as far as I'm concerned.
• Multiple Usernames - Don't know about this one. Seems to me that there isn't an easy solution. As a long-time proponent of IP banning, I'd like to say that's the answer, but it isn't. Having been an administrator on another board, I speak from experience when I say it isn't easy to prevent multiple usernames short of turning off registration all-together. The only possible solution is to implement policies and procedures that result in loss of priviledges and liberties on the part of new members. While not the best solution, it is perhaps the only logical one.
• Chat Room - Haven't spent much time there, but I do believe that a ban on the BBS should carry over to the chat room. While the two are not linked, certainly the established (written) policy can be suitably applicable to both.
• Banning Templates - Can't say much on those other than Hell will probably freeze over before I'm ever asked to use them.
  
• Various Technical Changes - All good in my opinion. As mentioned above, the only way to really prevent multiple usernames is to make registration difficult enough that only those who are truly interested in membership on the board are willing to go through the process. Unfortunately this is a shifting target between making it too difficult and/or not difficult enough. I wish you the best of luck.

And there you have it. Wraith's thoughts on all of this. Not that it mattered a whole lot anyway.

------------------
Random Insult of the Day:
"People say that you are the perfect idiot. I say that you are not perfect but you are doing all right."

Come join us on the Trek Talk BBS

 

[Guest]

I think we have to come up with a better way of dealing with the trolls. Also, we should get rid of the lounges. Posts in Internal Halls, Main Bridge, Engineering, and Astrometrics should count for post count towards the ranks. Science Fiction and Fantasy should be moved into Astrometrics as it may contain posts relevent to Star Trek or other science fiction things. Miscellaneous is for fun discussion and should not influence rank. Ditto for TNZ. The Briefing Room also should not influence rank since it is not a public part of the BBS and is probably used for administrative purposes only.

 

[dmcco01]

originally posted by dmcco01:
What if the ranks under usernames were replaced with the date of the user's registration. Get rid of rank completely. That would solve much of the spam problem and then you don't have to worry about which posts count toward rank. The lounges could be redesigned to allow access according to registration date instead of rank.

And Lisa replies:
Can I point out, that the above was ONE possible suggestion, made in the context of the private Briefing Room, in order to guage the reaction of the moderators. I think its fair to say the reaction has not been good.

Can you say more about what the opposition is to this? I'd be curious to hear the other side of things. Thanks!

 

[Christian]

Originally posted by The Lone Ensign:
This board has sunk to it's lowest, using a self-proclaimed troll to moderate TNZ.

Someone who proclaims himself to be a troll doesn't necessarily have to be one.

And, again, RobL is not moderator of TNZ. Do you see his name on the front page? I don't. This was just a little suggestion made in the privacy of the BR, and was nowhere near actually turning into reality - I have no idea if RobL would even want to be a moderator. I've never even talked to the man, which is also why it's a bit surreal 'defending' someone who I've had pretty much zero contact with.

Wraitheleven:

If we all had the ability to act as civilized adults and practice self-moderation the need for such measures would not be there.

Yes, exactly. I wish it wasn't necessary. We started TNZ in the first place to be a place where people could talk without having moderation in there, and perhaps I let it go on for too long without moderation in the hope that effective self-moderation would work.

Unfortunately this is a shifting target between making it too difficult and/or not difficult enough.

Yes, that is indeed the big problem we're running into. We absolutely don't want to make this board any less attractive to new users. But we have to stop the trolls.

I think we have to come up with a better way of dealing with the trolls. Also, we should get rid of the lounges. Posts in Internal Halls, Main Bridge, Engineering, and Astrometrics should count for post count towards the ranks. Science Fiction and Fantasy should be moved into Astrometrics as it may contain posts relevent to Star Trek or other science fiction things. Miscellaneous is for fun discussion and should not influence rank. Ditto for TNZ. The Briefing Room also should not influence rank since it is not a public part of the BBS and is probably used for administrative purposes only.

I agree mostly, though I'm not sure posts in QSF should count towards post count.

As for the BR - sure, not having posts count there shouldn't be a problem, especially as moderators and administrators don't have a rank anyway. The reason I didn't include it in my original list was because the volume of posts in the BR really is so low that it doesn't lead to giant increases in post count, but in the interest of fairness I see why this rule should apply to the BR as well.

 

[LtGarak]

Personally, I think they're all good ideas - if they'd been implemented sooner, we might not have had some people being hesitant to post. Though we still, I suspect, will have numerous flame wars - I hate those, they destroy threads that sometimes even had good starting ideas. And there's always going to be trolls of one form or another.

 

[Guest]

The majority of these points are only bandaid solutions. These have been bandied about for at least since I joined.
I think it requires more thought.
Go back to the drawing board matey.

 

[Guest]

Christian,

I have to say that this is the most active I've seen you on the board since I've been here (March 2001), and it's really nice to see. I have a principle in life that I live by that first occurred to me as a Junior in college many years ago. I was sitting in a physics class and the instructor began a discussion on the laws of Thermodynamics. One of the laws deals with the constant state of matter, and the fact that matter, by its very nature, is indestructible and as such it will always exist in one form or another. The second law deals with the tendency of all matter to revert to its most natural state, that of chaos, unless acted upon by an external force.

It occurred to me that the second law applies the most in life. Cars left idle for too long soon begin to deteriorate, returning to their natural state of chaos and disorder, unless acted upon by the external force of oil changes, maintenance, new tires, etc. Marriages and relationships, left alone for two long, soon fall into disrepair and revert to their natural state of disorder and chaos, unless acted upon by the external force of love and attention.

The same can be said of this board. Leaving it alone for too long a period of time has resulted in the chaos and disorder present today. It takes an external force to bring order to chaos. Action must be taken to organize what has devolved. It can be done, but it's going to require the constant effort of you, the other administrators, and the moderators.

Leaving the board in the hands of the administrators and moderators whilst preventing them from making the decisions and taking the actions necessary to control the chaos, is the very height of mismanagement. I have discovered through experience that responsibility without authority is perhaps the cruelest and most unfair thing that can be done to a person in a leadership position. I mean absolutely no disrespect. I think even you have to admit that you have not taken as active an interest in this board as you have the SlipstreamBBS. Many positive and effective suggestions relating to the board have been presented in QS&F only to receive little, if any, attention from either you or the other administrators or moderators. I believe that it is this constant inattention that has resulted in many members, including myself, becoming dissatisfied with the board. This has certainly resulted in a number of them leaving.

With this thread, my hope is rekindled. I find myself thinking positively about the future of the board once again. I hope that you will continue to take as active an interest in the future as you have demonstrated here in this thread.

Respectfully,
Wraith

 

[armalyte]

Originally posted by Christian:
4. In order to not stimulate an atmosphere where having alternate usernames is a normal thing, we have to stop continually attracting so much attention to that. Therefore, we would like to ask you to not accuse people of being another user posting under an alternate username anymore - this is one of the reasons for some of the paranoia which we have also witnessed. If you really feel someone is posting under an alternate username, please contact all admins personally - we will decide whether to act or not.

All right, Christian, so let us get this straight. Is it a punishable offense on this board to accuse someone of using alternate usernames without proof? Will this lead to warnings and eventually bans?

-a.

 

[Katie_543]

Many positive and effective suggestions relating to the board have been presented in QS&F only to receive little, if any, attention from either you or the other administrators or moderators. I believe that it is this constant inattention that has resulted in many members, including myself, becoming dissatisfied with the board. This has certainly resulted in a number of them leaving.
[/B]

That's the main reason I don't visit QSF very often. People make legitimate suggestions and NOTHING ever (well, almost) comes out of them. Plus, Christian, you are MIA in that forum. I doubt you even read it. Us commoners draw comfort from seeing you participate here, or even just letting us know that you heard us is reassuring. When you don't even grace us with your presence, what does that tell us? It tells us that you don't really give a care about us. We aren't as important as those special Slipstream people. We know you spend a lot of time there and not here.

Maybe that very reason is why trolls start to make trouble. You don't seem to care much about us, so why should we care about the feelings of others on the board.

Now, your participation in this thread if very incouraging. I highly doubt That you will continue this trend in QSF, though....

 

[Korczynski]

Having been here for only a relatively short time, I think that the proposed changes have a lot of merit. As for posts in some of the Federation Embassy areas not counting towards rank - I'd say this is a Trek board, and an aim of the admins and mods should be to promote discussion about Trek, and this sounds like a step towards that goal.

I don't believe that IP based banning is an invasion of privacy, and should be used - but that's my opinion, and can see why people have differing views. On the whole I'mg glad to be part of such a vibrant community and apart from the actions a few, it's a great place to discuss Trek.

 

[Christian]

Wraitheleven - I'm well aware of what you're saying, but unfortunately it's just not possible for me to post here as actively as I am doing now. This has taken most of my day, and besides the Trek BBS, I've also got TrekToday and SlipstreamWeb to run, while I've also got this funny thing called a life to live

. Those aren't excuses - they're simply the result of the unfortunate fact that a day only has 24 hours.

Having said that, I do keep and have always kept up with the BBS - I tend to read all ANNC, QSF and BR threads, and look into the other big forums daily. I just only respond to the threads that are really essential to respond to.

I think the board should be able to function very well without my continuous visible presence in every forum and on every little issue. There's a clear policy in place for that, and we have a good team of moderators and administrators in place for that. I do think I should be involved in the bigger board matters, such as policy changes, and that's why you're seeing me post here now

. That, I think, is what I should be working on: making sure the policy is in order and is working fine, and implementing new features that are suggested. I wish I could also post more in the forums, but that's simply an impossibility.

 

[VGRlover]

Originally posted by Katie_543:
And I uh...third that notion. Is that even how you say it???

Hmmmm. Maybe it's tertify........ or thirdify..........

 

[ed629]

Originally posted by Christian:
In light of the events of the past few days, we've decided to
implement the following changes:

1. As already announced by DEA in this thread, he will be leaving us as Trek BBS administrator, while he unfortunately will also be stepping down as General Trek Discussion moderator.

2. Another person will be coming in as fourth administrator. While LizardLaugh, Lisa and I already know who we're going to ask for this post, you'll understand that we will not be able to tell you who it is until we've actually talked with them

.

3. The Neutral Zone will be changed to a forum with a minimum amount of moderation. It will not turn into a completely moderated forum, and so it will still be possible to hold heated debates. However, as we've already been editing out porn and similar things for a long time now, that means we're legally bound to also moderate other illegal material - strong hate material and personal mail addresses could not be posted, for instance.

Before doing this, we'd like to have your input on what kinds of rules to have here. Please post your suggestions about this in this thread in Questions, Suggestions & Feedback.

4. In order to not stimulate an atmosphere where having alternate usernames is a normal thing, we have to stop continually attracting so much attention to that. Therefore, we would like to ask you to not accuse people of being another user posting under an alternate username anymore - this is one of the reasons for some of the paranoia which we have also witnessed. If you really feel someone is posting under an alternate username, please contact all admins personally - we will decide whether to act or not.

5. We are still reviewing the situation with the chat room. At the moment, it is a safe harbour for all those who have been banned, which is clearly not an ideal situation - a ban from the Trek BBS should also mean a ban from the chat room.

6. The moderators will be creating templates to be used when warning users in order to make the process less emotionally-charged.

7. Slarus and Che Guevara will receive a one-month ban, leading to their unbanishment on the 11th of November.

In addition, we will be implementing several technical measures:

1. People with less than X posts will not be allowed to post in the Neutral Zone. Suggestions on what X should be should also go in this thread in Questions, Suggestions & Feedback.

2. Users with less than 100 posts will be prevented from posting more than once every three minutes, and possibly also from posting new threads. Input on this would be appreciated.

3. Posts in the Officer's Lounges and TNZ will no longer count towards post count, under the rationale that this is a Star Trek discussion board.

Until these measures are implemented, registration will remain off.

I am convinced that with these measures we'll be able to maintain the BBS's friendly atmosphere. For a board of close to 10,000 members and with an age of more than 2.5 years, I'd say we're a remarkably clean board - I'm sure it'll be able to stay that for well into the future.

[This message has been edited by Christian (edited October 08, 2001).]

1) Good luck to the new one

2) Ditto

3) I think debates should be allowed, getting rid of pointless topics, or threats, or racial hatred posts, but it is the Neutral Zone.

4) Good Idea

5) I agree

6) Good idea, it seems like some moderators seem to do this when there isn't any warning deserved.

7) This seems a little overbaord, but then again I can see the reason behind it. But I think that it's a little much. Even though it would prevent many people from posting their "crap" in TNZ.



------------------
- "I prefer to describe my profession as that of a "Contemporary Anthropological Interactive Observer" because it has just the right amount of flair. Besides, "stalker" is such an ugly word.

 

[Guest]

Originally posted by Christian:
Having said that, I do keep and have always kept up with the BBS - I tend to read all ANNC, QSF and BR threads, and look into the other big forums daily. I just only respond to the threads that are really essential to respond to.

I've never doubted that you visit the larger forums and check on things, much as I do on the board I administer, but the thing is, sometimes it takes a visible presence to assure people that you care and are concerned with the welfare of the board. The predominant feeling around here has been you don't care and in fact you care more about the SlipstreamBBS than this one. For that perception to change, you most likely will need to post here more frequently and take a more active role.

I think the board should be able to function very well without my continuous visible presence in every forum and on every little issue. There's a clear policy in place for that, and we have a good team of moderators and administrators in place for that. I do think I should be involved in the bigger board matters, such as policy changes, and that's why you're seeing me post here now

. That, I think, is what I should be working on: making sure the policy is in order and is working fine, and implementing new features that are suggested.

I agree, but those individuals need to be given the authority to make larger decisions without having to run every little thing by you. I don't pretend to know everything that goes on behind the scenes (I don't have any "inside sources"), but from what I've observed, this seems to be the case here.

I wish I could also post more in the forums, but that's simply an impossibility.

Give the Administrators and Moderators more authority to make decisions on their own and you will have time to post more.

 

[Guest]

well i posted a lot in the other thread...i should have posted here first lol

suffice to say i am against most of these new things.

i wont go into why again you can check out the other thread but i will say a couple of things...


if we are going to moderate TNZ I really think it should be someone who frequents TNZ, someone who has been there awhile and maybe someone who doesnt have any real enemies lol (this last bit automatically disqualifies me)

i say this because TNZ is a unique place and quite frankly a newbie moderator probably wouldnt respected much as a grizzled veteran and someone who hasnt frequented TNZ wouldnt understand what it is all about.

At any rate, I hope whomever is picked for moderator is someone the people of TNZ can respect and trust, I hope TNZ doesnt change that only the trolls disappear and finally i hope TPTB implement these things one at a time to see if maybe less works then a blanket change.

ok end of rant.

 

[Guest]

While I understand why these changes are taking place, I can't help but feel that I'm being punished, or at least being hit by the bombs intended for others. I primarily post in the Lounges, Misc and TNZ, simply because that's where I find threads I want to post in.

Looking back at my own "history" on this board, I started in Future of Trek and soon moved to TNZ. I was posting there well before my 100th post, which will become impossible.

Admiral Dave

------------------
"Logic dictates you're a dumbass." - What happens when you combine Spock and Red.

 

[Teelie]

Posts outside of the main Trek forums not counting is an excellent idea. It would help discourage those who want rank from cluttering up the other forums, and if they try it in the Trek forums, they will be warned for spamming. TNZ and Misc and especially the Lounges aren't anything remotely on topic with the board; they're chat boards and should have no relation to the rest of the board.

 

[Mitty]

I'm only a "lowly" Lt Cmdr, but in my opinion, it would be great if you got rid of rank, number of posts, and date of joining (at least so other people could see them). A lot of the problems on this board seem to revolve around the fact that people think because they have been around forever they own the place (much like many other facets of life in general). If we took all of that away, I feel a weight would be lifted from the shoulders of TrekBBS. People can keep their user names... those of you who have been around for a while know who each other are, and eventually people who hang around and get involved will as well, and hopefully come to respect each other as people and posters on the Trek BBS, rather then simply as a person with a rank which may be intimidating to "newbies". I agree with not letting members with less than a certain amount of posts (I love the 147 idea by the way) post in TNZ or maybe even misc... and definitely don't let them post new threads until they reach a certain level either.
Thanks!

------------------
"The thought of fitting in... it repels me."
Guinan, "Hollow Pursuits", TNG.

 

[Hbomb]

I'm taking a vacation from this bloated cyber-bureaucracy.

You guys take this stuff WAY too seriously.

If you want my parting 2 cents:

You need a clear standard for judging whether someone has violated policy.... then you need the balls to enforce it. The reason why 80% of the QS&F posts consist of people accusing others of using alternate user names is because it is SO apparent to everyone else that it is going on while the Mods practically wait until the poster spells it out for them that they are doing it.

Take a tip from a court of law; don't wait for the person to break down and admit they are guilty, judge them on a burden of "preponderance of the evidence"... not "certain without a doubt". This is how you crack down, not by making a rule that "no one can talk about someone using alternate user names". That's ignoring the problem.

Finally, if the Mods are going to be judge, jury and executioner, maybe you should enforce some standards on THEM that would cause them to act in a manner that at least puts on the pretense of impartiality and raises the standard of their responsibility so as to act in a way that will set a GOOD example for members.... example) - Removed if they get drunk and hurl profanities at members, example) - No quibbling with other posters or each other.

I feel that if you want the responsibility of power, you give up the freedom to have petty arguments with others, otherwise it demeans their credibility. This is probably the reason they get so much flack. Instead of making clear concise decisions, they feel they must make snide comments back to those they are punishing who are, most of the time, being punished for making snide comments.

That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

------------------
I stayed up all night playing poker with Tarot cards. I got a full house and four people died!

 

[Guest]

Originally posted by The Lone Ensign:
You know if this had been done a year and a half ago, I wouldn't have resigned either, DEA.

Are you trying to re-write history again? You didn't resign, you were sacked.



------------------
www.renosreviews.com