Forums / General

195,506 total conversations in 5,381 threads

+ New Thread


The KYM Forum Enrichment Program

Last posted Mar 31, 2012 at 01:03AM EDT. Added Mar 25, 2012 at 06:53PM EDT
82 conversations with 26 participants

Hmm bad threads?
I should do something, my threads usually make it onto to the trending topics.
Actually I’ll go revive something, Cause it will entertain at leas the newer users.

Mar 25, 2012 at 10:41PM EDT
Quote

Just because a thread is trending doesn’t make it a good/quality thread. It just means people are posting there.

I think if you have an idea for a thread instead of just making random ones (especially without checking to see if there’s one like it,) then you shouldn’t make the thread. 404 just made one just to bail on it. It’s stuff like that which annoys me.

Mar 25, 2012 at 10:46PM EDT
Quote

CitationNeeded wrote:

This thread delivers.

Dearest Citation,
You certainly don’t deliver.
Farts incoming,
Wsxdas.

Last edited Mar 26, 2012 at 10:07AM EDT
Mar 26, 2012 at 10:07AM EDT

Interestingly enough this thread itself IS a quality thread

I laughed so hard while reading this even though it was supposed to be serious. Especially at Citations karma rape. Stay classy mate


But seriously, you guys ask for quality threads yet nobody here has actually defined what makes a quality thread in this discussion. That would have been the first place to start.

We can blame things on a lack of oldfags or the forum features themselves all day* but that’s not getting to the root of the issue.

That is: One must know quality before one posts quality.

We can start with the obvious: what is not a quality thread. Threads made just for the sake of thread-making is the biggest offender. The >Dearpocalypse consisted of entirely that. If people avoid the urge to just make new threads whenever they are bored and only post a thread when they have a legitimate idea, that would shave off plenty of junk threads.

So everyone. What is a quality thread?


*But some new features would be nice, like the ability to edit posts at any time. Seriously, what’s the purpose of that 30-min restriction? Why does it exist? It’s stupid.

Mar 26, 2012 at 10:27AM EDT
Quote

Blue Screen (of death) wrote:

So everyone. What is a quality thread?

A thread that doesn’t suck, in short.

Although to be serious, I think the more one thinks about making a decent thread, the more likely it’ll become to actually put it through.

So I believe that if one took the time to think things through a little longer, the quality will shine through.

Of course, we also have to think about User Reception. A good thread is a thread that is well-received by the community, and it should be a thread that everyone wants to participate in.

Take Sweatie’s Internet Can Now Find Stars thread. It started out as a serious thread. Then it grew to fantastic quality on its own. That’s one case where quality comes through Chaos.

Or, take Kalmo’s KYM family photo thread. That thread was a quality thread, hands down.

Sometimes, you don’t need to think too hard to make a quality thread, but it just makes the chances of it becoming quality that much better.

Last edited Mar 26, 2012 at 10:42AM EDT
Mar 26, 2012 at 10:36AM EDT
Quote

Blue Screen (of Death) wrote:

Interestingly enough this thread itself IS a quality thread

I laughed so hard while reading this even though it was supposed to be serious. Especially at Citations karma rape. Stay classy mate


But seriously, you guys ask for quality threads yet nobody here has actually defined what makes a quality thread in this discussion. That would have been the first place to start.

We can blame things on a lack of oldfags or the forum features themselves all day* but that’s not getting to the root of the issue.

That is: One must know quality before one posts quality.

We can start with the obvious: what is not a quality thread. Threads made just for the sake of thread-making is the biggest offender. The >Dearpocalypse consisted of entirely that. If people avoid the urge to just make new threads whenever they are bored and only post a thread when they have a legitimate idea, that would shave off plenty of junk threads.

So everyone. What is a quality thread?


*But some new features would be nice, like the ability to edit posts at any time. Seriously, what’s the purpose of that 30-min restriction? Why does it exist? It’s stupid.

The edit restriction can be important. I could post something neat and get +6 kramas, right? But if I edit it, I can make it say something disagreeable and you won’t be able to change your krama given.

EX. “I like hats” gets +6
then I could edit it to
“OP is a smelly bucket of buttholes”
And now I have six krama even though it’s completely different than what I originally posted.
See how this could be abused? I think it should be made that if a post is edited, krama from that post is reset to zero.
-
In hindsight, I think I would get at least eighty krama if I said OP was a smelly bucket of buttholes.

Mar 26, 2012 at 01:26PM EDT

Wsxdas, The Last Kramabender wrote:

The edit restriction can be important. I could post something neat and get +6 kramas, right? But if I edit it, I can make it say something disagreeable and you won’t be able to change your krama given.

EX. “I like hats” gets +6
then I could edit it to
“OP is a smelly bucket of buttholes”
And now I have six krama even though it’s completely different than what I originally posted.
See how this could be abused? I think it should be made that if a post is edited, krama from that post is reset to zero.
-
In hindsight, I think I would get at least eighty krama if I said OP was a smelly bucket of buttholes.

What if we just make it so that you can change your vote at any time? Thus, you can edit your post indefinitely, and the krama you got could be taken away if you’re acting like a jerk.

Mar 26, 2012 at 01:34PM EDT
Quote

Piano wrote:

What if we just make it so that you can change your vote at any time? Thus, you can edit your post indefinitely, and the krama you got could be taken away if you’re acting like a jerk.

That would allow people to correct accidentally giving bad karma to a good post, or giving good karma to a bad post, as well.

Last edited Mar 26, 2012 at 01:38PM EDT
Mar 26, 2012 at 01:38PM EDT
Quote

Piano wrote:

What if we just make it so that you can change your vote at any time? Thus, you can edit your post indefinitely, and the krama you got could be taken away if you’re acting like a jerk.

I actually think this should be implemented regardless of the editing time limit.

Mar 26, 2012 at 01:40PM EDT
Quote

I agree at least twelve times, this should happen.

Mar 26, 2012 at 01:46PM EDT

Blue Screen (of death) wrote:

The >Dearpocolypse

JESUS CHRIST I SAID I WAS SORRY WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT FROM ME?
Last edited Mar 26, 2012 at 03:20PM EDT
Mar 26, 2012 at 03:20PM EDT
Quote

Colmei wrote:

Blue Screen (of death) wrote:

The >Dearpocolypse

JESUS CHRIST I SAID I WAS SORRY WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT FROM ME?

We require your blood for the ceremonial Apologetic Sacrifice.

Mar 26, 2012 at 03:22PM EDT
Quote

I think some users would abuse the ability to edit your posts at any time. However, if we made a rule against abusing editing your posts in a disruptive manner, then I think it could work.

And I don’t get why you can’t change your karma. That has been proposed elsewhere, but I haven’t seen a case saying why you shouldn’t be able to change it yet. I think the only case would be going through the problem of coding. It may not take long, but I don’t think not being able to change your karma is a problem worthy of coding. It’s more of an annoyance than a problem.

And then it becomes a bit circular, because if you’re allowed to edit your posts at whatever time, then the inability to change karma would be a potential problem instead of just being an annoyance.
 
On the whole, I think those are minor issues.


BSoD wrote:

But seriously, you guys ask for quality threads yet nobody here has actually defined what makes a quality thread in this discussion. That would have been the first place to start.

We can blame things on a lack of oldfags or the forum features themselves all day* but that’s not getting to the root of the issue.

That is: One must know quality before one posts quality.

We can start with the obvious: what is not a quality thread. Threads made just for the sake of thread-making is the biggest offender. The >Dearpocalypse consisted of entirely that. If people avoid the urge to just make new threads whenever they are bored and only post a thread when they have a legitimate idea, that would shave off plenty of junk threads.
So everyone. What is a quality thread?

You speak sense, BSoD. However, “quality” is very hard to define. I’d hate to deconstruct the meaning of “quality,” but a quality thread can vary. Perhaps more examples of what most people consider quality threads will help us figure out the differences between them.

  1. I think there are three kinds of threads as I see them:
    1. Ones that have activity that lasts a significant period of time. Some people didn’t like the Ban the User Above You thread, but I think that it was a quality thread that lasted a while. It was simple, it was fun for users who wanted to participate, it stayed on point on the whole…
    2. There are some that are immediately locked. They are locked, because they’re an obvious flamewar waiting to happen or because they no longer serve a purpose. They can be locked for redundancy. Ads don’t really count, because they are specifically against the rules. But these threads are locked to prevent a whole lot of chaos. Of course, those aren’t quality threads.
    3. Then there are threads that have activity for a few hours and die out. These come from specific users for specific reasons, but sometimes, these threads come from well-respected users, but they end up dying very quickly. (Think of threads where an apt (but unnecessary) reply is “/thread.”) The only difference between who starts the thread is how much karma they get or lose on the OP.

This is where I think most of the problem comes from.

Some recent examples that I think fall into this category:

  • Orajel knows what’s up
    • It was started by RF, who is well-respected, so he gets karma for it (heaven forbid if some other users tried it though.)
    • However, it can’t go anywhere. If the thread is still active in a few days, then it will likely be off-topic. It’s just clutter that’s so specific and limited, that not much can be said on it or even joked about it.
  • What if Zelda
    • I have no idea what OP wanted to do with the thread. It has (even now) potential, but it’s more likely to be derailed and a breeding ground for karma whoring.
  • Thread Name
    • Well, for one, I know I’ve posted in a thread much like this before and somewhat recently. OP was in on it, I think, so he knows it was redundant.
    • Also, the other thread made like it died pretty quickly as well. Not much can come from such a thread.
Mar 26, 2012 at 03:55PM EDT
Quote

I don’t even know when I’ve hit the 5,000 character mark anymore.
 
 
I like a couple of the users who’ve made these threads, but I didn’t want to point out just users I don’t like, because that’s unfair. And granted, not every thread needs to last for 800 pages or go on for months. A thread may have a specific topic that can be addressed rather quickly. But if you make a thread for lulz (or out of boredom, which many claim to do,) and “/thread” would be an apt reply, then the thread probably should be made.


@Luis
We’re using it as an example. I made a bad thread before along with some bad posts. I’ve probably let some threads continue for too long before locking them. We all make mistakes. We’re just learning from them and using them as cases to not repeat.
 
 
Anybody else have some thoughts on what is “quality?” Or what is specifically not?

Mar 26, 2012 at 03:55PM EDT
Quote
Orajel knows what’s up
It was started by RF, who is well-respected, so he gets karma for it (heaven forbid if some other users tried it though.)
However, it can’t go anywhere. If the thread is still active in a few days, then it will likely be off-topic. It’s just clutter that’s so specific and limited, that not much can be said on it or even joked about it.

Sorry about that one, Verbose. I had that joke bottled up for days during my ban.

Last edited Mar 26, 2012 at 04:15PM EDT
Mar 26, 2012 at 04:15PM EDT
Quote

Whether a thread is quality or not also depends on the user. Some find the most simple threads quality, whereas other would want to see a topic to continue on. It might be better to divide the type of threads first, and continue from there to call them quality or not.


  • First you have the make-no-sense threads. The quality here depends on the topic and the OP post.
    • Example 1: Makes no sense at all, should be locked on sight. Not quality. The >dearpocalypse and other thread spamming also fall in this category. This is stuff you can get banned for if you continue.
    • Example 2: Makes no sense, but funny and rather enjoyable. Quality here depends on the user viewing it and how the thread continues. But nonetheless certain to die out fast if not continued correctly. Quality changes as the thread continues.
    • Example 3: Focuses on the OP post. Threads like these can be of great quality if made correctly. However, it has no lead to continue from. Besides reactions towards the OP, these threads are sure to die out in less than a week. If the OP post is quality -> thread’s quality. And visa versa.
  • Then there’s the discussion topics:
    • Example 1: General threads. These follow a certain topic, most commonly towards a certain fandom. It’s a quality thread if it approaches the correct subject. Unfortunately lately we tend to get too many general threads. The topics for them dry out, lowering the quality greatly in the process.
    • Example 2: News articles. With the correct article, a quality thread. But if it’s just some dumb stuff nobody cares about, no quality. These threads can go on if the topic interests people, but die out or get derailed when the topic is done being discussed. In the second case a lock might be the answer.
    • Example 3: The remaining discussion topics. The quality of these depend greatly on the subject chosen to discuss.
  • Forum Games (can’t have a quality discussion without them)
    • Example 1: Forum games that last longer. These are quality threads if done correctly, they create attention over a longer period of time.
    • Example 2: Simple Forum Games. Quality depends on the game. Requires minimal brain power to participate, therefore tend to get a lot of attention. If the game is dumb however, it shouldn’t be considered quality.
    • Example 3: Fooling around games. Besides a gem every now and then, these are mainly of low quality. These are also the threads users make when bored, those should be locked most of the time.
  • Other Threads
    • Example 1: Personal projects. Mainly quality, but sometimes just crap. The second kind should be locked when it gets derailed (which has a high possibility).
    • Example 2: Photoshop or Art threads. This can be centered around a person or image, but also general stuff. This is mainly quality, as it requires users to actually work for their posts. Making good results all the better.
    • Example 3: User related threads. Each user can post in these once, and sometimes a bit more as a response to others. Quality depends on the subject discussed, but the thread is most commonly of quality. Although can be of very low quality if the subject makes no sense.
    • Example 4: Share stuff threads. Can be experiences, created material, or other stuff. Quality varies a lot.
    • Example 5: Post Stuff threads. The General ones are commonly of quality. But as they start of focus on more detailed stuff, quality lowers.

This is just my opinion on threads, feel free to give your own twist to it.

Edit: Near the 4600 characters, not bad.

Last edited Mar 26, 2012 at 05:14PM EDT
Mar 26, 2012 at 04:57PM EDT
Quote

RandomMan wrote:

Whether a thread is quality or not also depends on the user. Some find the most simple threads quality, whereas other would want to see a topic to continue on. It might be better to divide the type of threads first, and continue from there to call them quality or not.


  • First you have the make-no-sense threads. The quality here depends on the topic and the OP post.
    • Example 1: Makes no sense at all, should be locked on sight. Not quality. The >dearpocalypse and other thread spamming also fall in this category. This is stuff you can get banned for if you continue.
    • Example 2: Makes no sense, but funny and rather enjoyable. Quality here depends on the user viewing it and how the thread continues. But nonetheless certain to die out fast if not continued correctly. Quality changes as the thread continues.
    • Example 3: Focuses on the OP post. Threads like these can be of great quality if made correctly. However, it has no lead to continue from. Besides reactions towards the OP, these threads are sure to die out in less than a week. If the OP post is quality -> thread’s quality. And visa versa.
  • Then there’s the discussion topics:
    • Example 1: General threads. These follow a certain topic, most commonly towards a certain fandom. It’s a quality thread if it approaches the correct subject. Unfortunately lately we tend to get too many general threads. The topics for them dry out, lowering the quality greatly in the process.
    • Example 2: News articles. With the correct article, a quality thread. But if it’s just some dumb stuff nobody cares about, no quality. These threads can go on if the topic interests people, but die out or get derailed when the topic is done being discussed. In the second case a lock might be the answer.
    • Example 3: The remaining discussion topics. The quality of these depend greatly on the subject chosen to discuss.
  • Forum Games (can’t have a quality discussion without them)
    • Example 1: Forum games that last longer. These are quality threads if done correctly, they create attention over a longer period of time.
    • Example 2: Simple Forum Games. Quality depends on the game. Requires minimal brain power to participate, therefore tend to get a lot of attention. If the game is dumb however, it shouldn’t be considered quality.
    • Example 3: Fooling around games. Besides a gem every now and then, these are mainly of low quality. These are also the threads users make when bored, those should be locked most of the time.
  • Other Threads
    • Example 1: Personal projects. Mainly quality, but sometimes just crap. The second kind should be locked when it gets derailed (which has a high possibility).
    • Example 2: Photoshop or Art threads. This can be centered around a person or image, but also general stuff. This is mainly quality, as it requires users to actually work for their posts. Making good results all the better.
    • Example 3: User related threads. Each user can post in these once, and sometimes a bit more as a response to others. Quality depends on the subject discussed, but the thread is most commonly of quality. Although can be of very low quality if the subject makes no sense.
    • Example 4: Share stuff threads. Can be experiences, created material, or other stuff. Quality varies a lot.
    • Example 5: Post Stuff threads. The General ones are commonly of quality. But as they start of focus on more detailed stuff, quality lowers.

This is just my opinion on threads, feel free to give your own twist to it.

Edit: Near the 4600 characters, not bad.

Why don’t you love me.

Mar 26, 2012 at 05:18PM EDT
Quote

Cale wrote:

Why don’t you love me.

What thread of you did I link?

Mar 26, 2012 at 05:41PM EDT
Quote

Most of the threads you guys are linking are in Just for Fun.
Which is, shockingly enough, just for run.

Mar 26, 2012 at 05:47PM EDT
Quote

CitationNeeded wrote:

Most of the threads you guys are linking are in Just for Fun.
Which is, shockingly enough, just for run.

I wouldn’t try snark in a thread like this, Citation. If you do, then you should be very confident in your argument. Otherwise, you may look silly.
 
Anyway, JFF doesn’t mean you can make a thread for any reason. If that was the case, then I wouldn’t have to lock anything as long as OP or other users were having fun.

Also, in this thread, we’re discussing RussianFedora’s OP:

I’ve noticed that everyone has been complaining recently about how the forums are in an entertainment rut and that useless threads are dreadfully abound. Thus, I decided that we should take action. In this thread, post what you would like to see more of in the forums, or what features you would like added to them (Different forum types, krama-button upgrades, etc.) Anyone willing should then get to making quality threads that members want, or that they believe to be quality. Every forum member has a responsibility to keep his forum awesome, and I want this thread to be a tool in aiding the forum-goers in that venue.

So your point is invalidated, because users (well, at least two) believe that many of the JFF threads are not quality.
 
And I think there are a lot more users who believe that they aren’t even fun.


But if there was a /b/ of sorts here, then have at it (going on RF’s suggestion to discuss new boards.) I don’t think, and I’ve said it before, that JFF shouldn’t be an excuse to make a thread about anything.

Last edited Mar 26, 2012 at 06:01PM EDT
Mar 26, 2012 at 06:01PM EDT
Quote

Sheesh, that took quite a while to read through all of that. I don’t think I have anything really impressive to add to this thread like RandomMan did above, but I have a few thoughts and opinions.

Oldfags are not necessarily betterfags: I’m pretty sure I qualify as an oldfag by now, and I’ve got to say that it can be over-rated. Firstly, because just about everywhere, both on the Internet and IRL, people are always talking about “how great it was in the good old days…” That’s usually complete bullshit, because I assure you, people were saying the same things back when I was a newfag. We simply dislike change, and tend to be nostalgic. When I was in college, I did a year of improv acting, and there were some scenes that were real gems! However when I get to thinking about how great they were, part of what made them great was the fact that they were improv, and therefore trying to go back and recreate them wouldn’t have the same magic.

On the other hand, oldfags paradoxically talk about how good it “used to be”, and complain when a newfag makes a thread that’s similar to one that was made six months ago. Some threads, if they were good the first time around, will still be great to have again with a new group of people. I know I keep freaking out if my favorite thread falls off the first page of JFF (as it is now), but what terrible fate would befall us if it got neglected and auto-locked? We’d just have to make a new one, and that would be just fine. We’ve probably had a dozen or more threads in our history that were essentially “Post your favorite YouTube videos!” and when they get started, people say, “Yawn… we’ve done this before.” but why? YouTube gets so much content uploaded every day that if you wanted to watch everything on YouTube, you couldn’t physically do so because after watching videos straight for 24 hours, you’d be farther behind than when you started! There’s room for new video threads, even though we’ve had them before.

(For someone with not much to say, that was a pretty big first point, wasn’t it?)

There are no bad threads: Well, not really. There are threads that are offensive and/or break the rules, and therefore should be locked, but… Too many people want to blame a bad thread on OP, in my opinion. “The Internet can now find stars” is one of the most-loved threads of all time, and what did any post in that thread have to do with OP? I love and miss Sweatie’s posts, but that thread became awesome because it was derailed on the very first response. While we do need good thread ideas, what makes a thread good is where the responses to OP take the thread. So if a thread is not a “quality thread”, then as the saying goes, when you’re pointing at someone, you should notice you’ve got three fingers pointed back at yourself. Make quality happen instead of complaining that it’s not present.

New forum features won’t create forum quality: While I think some of the ideas people have put forward (specifically being able to change your vote) might be nice, in the end it’s the users and the content that they create that make for good forums. I’ve commented a number of times that Facebook doesn’t seem to understand itself or its users because they keep trying to look cooler and have more little gadgets while the main reason most people want to use Facebook is to socialize. It should be obvious that it’s the same for a forum like this. Things should be changed if they’re going to enhance the experience of connecting with each other here, and left alone if they would distract from that. Being able to edit your posts forever is a bad idea, and Wsxdas explained why very well. If you’re not happy with a post you made more than 30 minutes ago, I’m pretty sure you can delete your own posts forever, so I think people can deal with it.

tl;dr “Everybody talks about the weather but nobody does anything about it.” -Mark Twain (not really, but who cares?)

Mar 27, 2012 at 12:43AM EDT
Quote

Thank you Verbose, Brucker and Random. Those are some good points.

Quality is indeed hard to define. We all have our own preferences of what makes a thread good.

But at the very least we can try guidelines like these:

-DO make threads when you have a good idea for something

-DONT make threads for the hell of it

-DO make threads when you have something important and relevant to discuss

-DONT make threads over insignificant or unimportant subjects

-DO make the point of your thread clear

-DONT repeat crap that has already been posted.

I’m sure you guys can think of more

Last edited Mar 27, 2012 at 12:45AM EDT
Mar 27, 2012 at 12:44AM EDT
Quote

I think nearly everything that’s needed was already discussed in this thread.

But it’s nice to see this thread is staying serious.

Brucker’s right on the ability to delete, but not edit, posts. A response to a deleted post would then make the user realize there is a hole for the conversation, so why not add a button similar to the negative karma one for something like this?

Mar 27, 2012 at 01:23AM EDT

While I’m thinking about it, I’ll reemphasize the suggestion for a “Random” board. Something where bored people can just post stuff that will die in a day and where people can basically post derail fodder at their leisure.

I don’t think “JFF” means you should be able to make a post about anything as long as someone is having fun with it. It just paves the way for other threads that a lot of users don’t like and is part of the reason why “quality” was even brought up. Forums are made to organize interaction. There is a chance to catch lightning in a bottle in a random thread, but I don’t think it justifies what generally happens.

That requires coding though, so it’s even less than a suggestion, but I think simply creating “quality” threads doesn’t remove what is not considered quality. Some users will continue to make threads of a certain persuasion regardless of ones that have an idea behind it.

Mar 29, 2012 at 11:22PM EDT
Quote

One thing I can think of is more active moderators. Mods from different regions with different sleep patterns on different “shifts”, for lack of a better term. This way, bad threads can be disposed of more swiftly.

Also, something that IGN had, and may still have, on its board system, is a means of directly contacting moderators. Like a “Forum 911”, in some respects. Again, this makes bad threads get dealt with quicker, but it also increases response times for more general concerns, such as users flaming each other, or locating and removing trolls.

However, at the same time, I don’t want the moderation staff to feel overbearing. There’s a fine line between “effective mods” and “overbearing police state of a forum”. Mods should have a set of rules specific to them, that relates to their moderator powers, so as to prevent one from abusing their power.

Not saying the users themselves don’t have a responsibility in all this, though. Threads should be well thought out before being posted, so I suggest a higher character requirement for thread starters. I also believe that there should be an autolock if no replies are made within a given period. Say, 24 hours? Long enough that if there were any interest in the thread, someone would have posted in it; yet short enough that if there’s no interest, the thread won’t clog up the forums.

The idea of a “Random” board meant specifically for shitposting? Don’t know, might be a hard place to moderate. You’ll have to keep an eye out for trolls, spammers and other undesirables if you want it to work. But it could be great. IGN’s infamous “Teh Vestibule”(look it up) has the most posts, if I’m not mistaken, of any board on IGN, and it has no established primary topic or real moderation beyond the occasional ban for trolling, flaming, spamming or bashing.

I also believe that the moderators should do their best to integrate into the community as much as possible. Just because you wield great power and are burdened by great responsibility doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy yourself at least some of the time. Be one of us. Don’t forget how you started out as just any other User.

Lastly, I think more attention should be paid to, and more use made of, the “Meme Research” section. Many entries on this site are definitely memes if you’ve been out and about on other forums, but they have no articles here. I think someone should make an effort to make it more prominent in our forums.

Sincerely,
Thomas Nair

Mar 30, 2012 at 03:21AM EDT

Actually I think our moderators are pretty active. Chris seems to be pretty vigilant if the most recent thread lockings are any indication.

Though when people want threads locked they really should just not post in the thread rather than nag Chris or Verbose to get their butts around to locking it.

Anyway I can agree with most of what you say Thomas but there’s one thing I need to address:

I also believe that there should be an autolock if no replies are made within a given period. Say, 24 hours? Long enough that if there were any interest in the thread, someone would have posted in it; yet short enough that if there’s no interest, the thread won’t clog up the forums.

Gotta say no to this one right here.

We already have an autolock that kicks in after one month and I think that is fair.

Sometimes something important comes along within the span of one month that should be added to an existing thread, it’s not that uncommon. Because of this, I think bumping is perfectly acceptable so long as people do it only to update threads with important or at least relevant information. People should be encouraged to recycle threads for the same topic.

If people just want to bump things for the sake of spamming then they will do it moments before the lock engages no matter how soon it comes. Auto-locks don’t really fix that problem anyway.

Making the auto-lock closer to one day is far too restricting. Some people might have something to say on a thread but it takes them more than 24 hours to finally getting around to saying something in it (Remember we have work, school, time-zones to take into account here). Those people will go ahead and make a new thread so a fast auto-lock could actually encourage more quantity over quality in terms of threads.

Last edited Mar 30, 2012 at 05:48AM EDT
Mar 30, 2012 at 05:45AM EDT
Quote

Blue Screen (of Death) wrote:

Actually I think our moderators are pretty active. Chris seems to be pretty vigilant if the most recent thread lockings are any indication.

Though when people want threads locked they really should just not post in the thread rather than nag Chris or Verbose to get their butts around to locking it.

Anyway I can agree with most of what you say Thomas but there’s one thing I need to address:

I also believe that there should be an autolock if no replies are made within a given period. Say, 24 hours? Long enough that if there were any interest in the thread, someone would have posted in it; yet short enough that if there’s no interest, the thread won’t clog up the forums.

Gotta say no to this one right here.

We already have an autolock that kicks in after one month and I think that is fair.

Sometimes something important comes along within the span of one month that should be added to an existing thread, it’s not that uncommon. Because of this, I think bumping is perfectly acceptable so long as people do it only to update threads with important or at least relevant information. People should be encouraged to recycle threads for the same topic.

If people just want to bump things for the sake of spamming then they will do it moments before the lock engages no matter how soon it comes. Auto-locks don’t really fix that problem anyway.

Making the auto-lock closer to one day is far too restricting. Some people might have something to say on a thread but it takes them more than 24 hours to finally getting around to saying something in it (Remember we have work, school, time-zones to take into account here). Those people will go ahead and make a new thread so a fast auto-lock could actually encourage more quantity over quality in terms of threads.

I wasn’t talking about threads that have seen activity, Blue Screen. I was just talking about threads where there has been an OP, but no replies to that OP.

Mar 30, 2012 at 04:25PM EDT

Right, I was going to say that, but I’ve been in and out today.

One thing I can think of is more active moderators. Mods from different regions with different sleep patterns on different “shifts”, for lack of a better term. This way, bad threads can be disposed of more swiftly.

I’m actually here fairly often, even if I’m working, because most of my schoolwork involves a computer. However, being completely honest, no one’s told me what to lock. I’ve gotten guidelines and some loose suggestions, but we all lock subjectively. Even with the guidelines, most moderators don’t follow them. For example, ANN brought it up once. A thread of ANN’s got locked but the locking moderator gave no reason. I’ve been told to give a reason and a warning for why I would lock a thread. I generally know why threads locked, so I gave ANN a reason, but I think a lot of users:

  1. Don’t know why a thread will be locked immediately.
  2. Would know…if there was consistency among what is locked.

It’s been brought up in another thread that specific moderators lock for different reasons. I’ve been told to not lock lightly, so as long as there isn’t a flamewar starting or the thread is redundant, I don’t bother it. Everything else I do involves moving threads to other boards (somewhat often) or editing posts (even less often than locking threads.)


So you have a point, Thomas. We don’t have clear guidelines as to how to moderate, but until I think there’s a huge problem, there’s no point in bringing it up. Besides, I already have with a few moderators. That’s the answer I’ve gotten from their collective answers.
 
There should be more specific rules and specific punishments for breaking each rule, but the problem with that will be that some users wouldn’t enjoy themselves, because they can’t follow the rules/they don’t like the hard rules saying specifically what they can or can’t do. I have my own preferences, but they are merely those: preferences.


Random board idea: Basically, I think JFF shouldn’t be derailed. But some users (and mods) think they should be (which allows for massive karma whoring, ruining the point of karma.) Others just don’t care one way or another. If there was another board, then I’d guess we’d moderate that board only for what you say: trolls, flamewars, and gore/pornography. JFF wouldn’t be serious, but people would stay on topic at least, as opposed to saying “This is now a X thread.” General would be more serious, but it doesn’t mean the topics can’t be fun and interesting or even funny.


As for incorporating ourselves into the community, I feel like we do that. We’re a bit more task oriented, I guess, but I post on the same threads I used to, and Chris and Brucker have probably become more active in posting over the past few weeks. I’ve seen Amanda on here more than I’ve seen her before as well, but maybe that’s just me.

Heck, I don’t think we’re intimidating at all. I would hope that “intimidating” would never describe us. Boring, long-winded, serious-ish and some such in my case, but hopefully not “intimidating.”


As for the Meme Research board, it could stand to be used more often, but on the whole, it should only be used if someone is serious about an entry. No one can make other people be interested in putting time and effort into researching and formatting an article properly. I’m inexperienced at articles, but it took me a few days to finish editing the first one I worked on. And I still haven’t gotten to a point where I’m confident in editing two other ones more, because I know I’ll need to spend a few hours consecutively to make headway on it.

I don’t have as much problem with that, especially if entries (well, decent entries) are still being created.

Last edited Mar 30, 2012 at 07:39PM EDT
Mar 30, 2012 at 07:34PM EDT
Quote

Alex wrote:

We need more hats.

That is all.

(sigh) Serious responses only, please…

Mar 31, 2012 at 01:03AM EDT
Skeletor-sm

This thread is closed to new posts.

Old threads normally auto-close after 30 days of inactivity.

Why don't you start a new thread instead?

Howdy! You must login or signup first!