Jump to content

Announcement - Staff Vacancies


DHutch

Featured Posts

My gut feeling has also been the number of mods needs to well into double figures. This is why I asked Dan earlier in the thread how many he was looking to recruit. It's very helpful of Geo to have done some analysis and arithmetic and come up with the number of 18, in my opinion. Thank you Geo.

 

18 mods doing much less work each also brings the benefit that modding decisions will be de-personalised. If mod A hides a post, bans a member or does something the member decides to dispute, that mod will shortly be going off duty and the dispute picked up and dealt with by another mod freshly on duty, so the member won't begin to see the modding as a personal vendetta, and the mod will also need to moderate their own decision making as they will know any disputes will be probably be dealt with by another team member.

 

Regarding TB, is it totally unmoderated? If it is, I'm wondering if it too will descend into internal warfare eventually, just as this board did. In which case the flow of members will probably reverse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well from your answer you certainly understood what it meant.

 

I understood it to be an attack on the messenger.

 

It seem to me that your self moderation includes being able to attack the messenger, albeit by implication

I wasn't attacking you I was making an observation.

 

You seem to ignore that I actually agreed with you in both my responses but, rather than predict the collapse of the forum if Daniel fails to recruit 18 mods, I preferred to add that if it didn't happen there are forums of this size that do run very well with less.

 

The forum I referred to is very similar, a broad single interest forum that covers a huge range of different subjects relating to it (along with a lightly moderated CA sub-forum).

 

It can be done but, like you, I hope it doesn't have to be.

 

 

Regarding TB, is it totally unmoderated? If it is, I'm wondering if it too will descend into internal warfare eventually, just as this board did. In which case the flow of members will probably reverse.

 

It is effectively unmoderated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is effectively unmoderated.

 

 

Maybe Dan should adopt that model then, as it works by all accounts. At least we would then know where we stand.

 

Presumably Nigel and Tony are posting the information there that mods here decided could not be posted, for reasons they could not tell us about. TB lets it stand and has not yielded to the secret pressure (either directly or indirectly applied) that Dan seems to have caved in to.

And of course, managing 18 mods is probably a major task in itself...

 

 

 

Edit to highlight the bit of Carlt's post I was responding to.

Edited by Mike the Boilerman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Maybe Dan should adopt that model then, as it works by all accounts. At least we would then know where we stand.

 

 

It depends how you define "works".

 

There are many people who would hate it (I struggle with bits of it) so copying TB is really not an option.

 

I think it works at its current level because it is a small group of people with similar attitudes (but wildly varying ideologies).

 

As it grows though I feel newer members will end up demanding more controls in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't attacking you I was making an observation.

 

You seem to ignore that I actually agreed with you in both my responses but, rather than predict the collapse of the forum if Daniel fails to recruit 18 mods, I preferred to add that if it didn't happen there are forums of this size that do run very well with less.

 

The forum I referred to is very similar, a broad single interest forum that covers a huge range of different subjects relating to it (along with a lightly moderated CA sub-forum).

 

It can be done but, like you, I hope it doesn't have to be.

 

It is effectively unmoderated.

 

I did not get any feeling from your posts that you agreed with my thoughts. Rather that you poo pooed them.

 

Regarding TB It is a tiny forum compared with this and the rate of posting here a few months ago. It is populated by a tight core of people feeling rebellious on the whole. That is the cohesion at the moment, but two years down the line when the rebellious feelings have worn away and the forum has grown with additional users who do not have the link to the rebellion I think you will find it will be a different story.

 

Time to go out

Edited by Geo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I did not get any feeling from your posts that you agreed with my thoughts. Rather that you poo pooed them.

 

 

I apologise if I phrased it in a way that enabled you to misinterpret my first post.

 

My second post, whilst reinforcing my agreement that more mods would be preferable, was more defensive

 

My intention wasn't to "poo poo" you but merely to offer a more positive slant.

 

That is the cohesion at the moment, but two years down the line when the rebellious feelings have worn away and the forum has grown with additional users who do not have the link to the rebellion I think you will find it will be a different story.

 

You will observe, I hope, that I agreed with this also (even before you posted it...How in tune is that?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends how you define "works".

 

There are many people who would hate it (I struggle with bits of it) so copying TB is really not an option.

 

I think it works at its current level because it is a small group of people with similar attitudes (but wildly varying ideologies).

 

As it grows though I feel newer members will end up demanding more controls in place.

 

Swerving off topic for a sec, I had a brief look the other day (in response to an avalanche of PMs from banned members urging me to come over, the water is lovely there apparently!) and was surprised to find it appears to be populated primarily by people recognisably from here.

 

It does not get returned by google searches so presumably Delta9 is making no attempt to recruit boaters other than from here. The total member count was something like 120 IIRC. Where will these newer members you speak of come from, I wonder? So maybe you're right, it only 'works' (according to the members there) because it is a special interest group. The special interest being they are all refugees from here so want to make it work, which they didn't when they were here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends how you define "works".

 

There are many people who would hate it (I struggle with bits of it) so copying TB is really not an option.

 

I think it works at its current level because it is a small group of people with similar attitudes (but wildly varying ideologies).

 

As it grows though I feel newer members will end up demanding more controls in place.

 

Puzzled confused TB is self moderation at work, Did I misunderstand I thought you wanted self-moderation. No moderation by the site it all done by the users self moderating what they post for good or bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Where will these newer members you speak of come from, I wonder?

 

At the moment a steady trickle from here plus a few (that I've noticed) that have stumbled on the forum.

 

The general prediction over there is that CWDF will fail (or shrink to a very small "fluffy bunny" club and the remainder will flood over there (assuming they don't seal the borders).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Puzzled confused TB is self moderation at work, Did I misunderstand I thought you wanted self-moderation. No moderation by the site it all done by the users self moderating what they post for good or bad.

 

No I think that a forum can be largely self-moderated (using the report system) but there needs to be a moderation team in place to deal with the inevitable failures.

 

I would not advocate an unmoderated site unless the ultimate aim is a huge bun fight....A bit like Tiswas used to be.

Edited by carlt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Swerving off topic for a sec, I had a brief look the other day (in response to an avalanche of PMs from banned members urging me to come over, the water is lovely there apparently!) and was surprised to find it appears to be populated primarily by people recognisably from here.

 

It does not get returned by google searches so presumably Delta9 is making no attempt to recruit boaters other than from here. The total member count was something like 120 IIRC. Where will these newer members you speak of come from, I wonder? So maybe you're right, it only 'works' (according to the members there) because it is a special interest group. The special interest being they are all refugees from here so want to make it work, which they didn't when they were here.

 

Over 200 last time I looked

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No I think that a forum can be largely self-moderated (using the report system) but there needs to be a moderation team in place to deal with the inevitable failures.

 

I would not advocate an unmoderated site unless the ultimate aim is a huge bun fight....A bit like Tiswas used to be.

 

 

Well for the reasons given earlier I do not believe CWDF is capable of being a self-moderated site in the way you have defined.

 

Now I must go

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I did not get any feeling from your posts that you agreed with my thoughts. Rather that you poo pooed them.

 

Regarding TB It is a tiny forum compared with this and the rate of posting here a few months ago. It is populated by a tight core of people feeling rebellious on the whole. That is the cohesion at the moment, but two years down the line when the rebellious feelings have worn away and the forum has grown with additional users who do not have the link to the rebellion I think you will find it will be a different story.

 

Time to go out

 

 

Sorry , I cant agree with that Geo.

 

I dont post on there because it makes me feel rebellious, i post on there as there is a reasonable amount of interesting (to me) things to chat about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think some of their CWDF sock puppets have taken on a life of their own and have been moved over there.

 

Interesting quite a few of what might be called fluffy bunnies much to my surprise

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Sorry , I cant agree with that Geo.

 

I dont post on there because it makes me feel rebellious, i post on there as there is a reasonable amount of interesting (to me) things to chat about.

 

So why did you go in the first place?

 

How would you classify the majority of posters their, why did they go, to cock-a-snoop at CWDF?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Well for the reasons given earlier I do not believe CWDF is capable of being a self-moderated site in the way you have defined.

 

Now I must go

I think you misunderstand what I mean by "self moderation".

 

For many years CWDF ran really well by being lightly moderated by a few mods even though it was far busier than now.

 

There were the odd idiots that came and went but it absorbed them (or spat them out) and they didn't last.

 

For a brief period the forum deteriorated largely because of some extreme opinions about a confluence of world and national events.

 

If you looked around the media at that time they were all at it but with one difference...Forums have a right of reply and provide a platform for folk to express their opinion, however extreme.

 

For one reason or another this period of madness was badly dealt with and the result was an overreaction and a swing from one extreme to the other.

 

Now things have settled down I think the forum can bear a return to its state before it all kicked off.

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So why did you go in the first place?

 

How would you classify the majority of posters their, why did they go, to cock-a-snoop at CWDF?

I initially joined to dissociate myself with the trouble a CWDF sock puppet was causing.

I said I wouldn't post much if at all on there.

 

I was wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firstly, I think we need to debunk the misleading phrase "self-moderation". If a site, or its contributors, are truly self-moderating, then its effectively no moderation since dodgy things said, either remain (and are left for all to see) and are later declared "dodgy" by a tirade of members attacking/arguing against it; or are declared by some as not dodgy ie acceptable. If you remove posts, even only a handful of posts, then the site is moderated since there is an implied expectation that future posts could also be removed. People are likely to behave in a better matter with this overhanging threat (so, it could be labelled "self-restraint") but I don't think you could say its self-moderation - just that a minimum threshold of behaviour is present.

 

If you can better define/explain "self-moderation" (distinct from a widespread awareness of a minimum acceptable behaviour) then please let us know.

 

HAVING SAID THAT, I do believe there is a middle ground for a forum where there are few rules, thus a light moderator workload, however its above the "no moderation" or "almost no moderation" that Thunderboat currently is (its worth pointing out that it is moderated, in an autocratic way - but only if you threaten to sue them). Whether that middle ground will arise from this forum loosening its tight grip on daft rules; or Thunderboat adopting at least a little (consistent) moderation and thus becoming more welcoming to a wider audience, I don't know. There is the possibility either will occur; and indeed for both to co-exist happily with a more moderate approach on each. Currently part of the appeal of TB is that its distinctly different in atmosphere to here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So why did you go in the first place?

 

How would you classify the majority of posters their, why did they go, to cock-a-snoop at CWDF?

 

Perhaps some did. However not everybody did, my initial reason for joining TB was quite simple and that was to prevent somebody registering an account in my CWDF user name. Something which has happened with other members from here.

 

However it quickly became apparent it was gaining momentum so I started posting more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firstly, I think we need to debunk the misleading phrase "self-moderation". If a site, or its contributors, are truly self-moderating, then its effectively no moderation since dodgy things said, either remain (and are left for all to see) and are later declared "dodgy" by a tirade of members attacking/arguing against it; or are declared by some as not dodgy ie acceptable. If you remove posts, even only a handful of posts, then the site is moderated since there is an implied expectation that future posts could also be removed. People are likely to behave in a better matter with this overhanging threat (so, it could be labelled "self-restraint") but I don't think you could say its self-moderation - just that a minimum threshold of behaviour is present.

 

If you can better define/explain "self-moderation" (distinct from a widespread awareness of a minimum acceptable behaviour) then please let us know.

 

HAVING SAID THAT, I do believe there is a middle ground for a forum where there are few rules, thus a light moderator workload, however its above the "no moderation" or "almost no moderation" that Thunderboat currently is (its worth pointing out that it is moderated, in an autocratic way - but only if you threaten to sue them). Whether that middle ground will arise from this forum loosening its tight grip on daft rules; or Thunderboat adopting at least a little (consistent) moderation and thus becoming more welcoming to a wider audience, I don't know. There is the possibility either will occur; and indeed for both to co-exist happily with a more moderate approach on each. Currently part of the appeal of TB is that its distinctly different in atmosphere to here.

 

That's true but it's the nature of the situation. The TB'ers get to feel a bit like the Rebel Alliance and a bit like they've outwitted the teacher etc. This will always lead to a sense of bonding and shared experience amongst members. This forum has to play the role of the old duffer, the uncool establishment figure. We'll have to wait a good couple of years until the honeymoon period is over to see how it all plays out. Given the strong characters who populate TB, I cannot see how it can work long term when the novelty of mutual satisfaction in sniping at CWDF wears off.

 

I'll consider the honeymoon period over when the 'CWDF' section of that forum is a minor footnote on the page rather than the section with the most posts on it. The CWDF section is currently at 6500 posts, compared to 4584 for General Boating. In fact, overall, there's more non-boating posts than there are boating posts. There's your clue about the main selling point of the forum. It looks to me to be a forum where boaters go to argue about things. I'd be more than happy to be persuaded otherwise though.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That's true but it's the nature of the situation. The TB'ers get to feel a bit like the Rebel Alliance and a bit like they've outwitted the teacher etc. This will always lead to a sense of bonding and shared experience amongst members. This forum has to play the role of the old duffer, the uncool establishment figure. We'll have to wait a good couple of years until the honeymoon period is over to see how it all plays out. Given the strong characters who populate TB, I cannot see how it can work long term when the novelty of mutual satisfaction in sniping at CWDF wears off.

 

I'll consider the honeymoon period over when the 'CWDF' section of that forum is a minor footnote on the page rather than the section with the most posts on it. The CWDF section is currently at 6500 posts, compared to 4584 for General Boating. In fact, overall, there's more non-boating posts than there are boating posts. There's your clue about the main selling point of the forum. It looks to me to be a forum where boaters go to argue about things. I'd be more than happy to be persuaded otherwise though.

 

Largely agree, however I'd also add: 1) I've noticed a distinct change in the past 2-3 weeks on TB, many more members and many more boating-related threads; 2) using cumulative historical numbers of posts is a metric which would tell you what's happened a while ago, not what's happened recently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.