What are the Pub's Positive Patterns?

[Ink Slinger]

Thank you, Thank you!

[Blaze]

Thank you, Fred!

[Curly]

About the idea of increasing the number of mods:

I think that there's a possibility of creating mod-envy, in the same way we see BETA-envy on the boards, with requests to become Beta-readers and such.

This could become a problem.

But it could also be harnessed to encourage better behaviour.*Strokes newly formed beard*

In another forum that I won't name, a similar effect was created, to the point that a FAQ was needed on the conditions of being named moderator, because the mods got sick of repeating themselves. It seems as though the fact that people respect the mods, and the presence of a slight possibility of becoming one, can give people some carrot to moderate their own comportment.

It is the only Forum I know that has fewer incidences of flame-war and other bad behaviour than here, this despite the fact that it's purpose is specifically to gather people of many native tongues, cultures and viewpoints.

I've nicked some of the guidelines from the FAQ, not to tell you what to do, just as humble suggestions in the event that I'm wrong and you are actually human.

Who are the moderators?
They are ordinary members (or “foreros”, in forum slang) who have been invited by the administrative team to take on a temporary assignment. They are unpaid volunteers who help maintain order in the forums, in addition to participating in the forums as regular members.


How are moderators chosen?
When there are openings on the administrative team, current moderators suggest and discuss candidates. The administrator makes the final decision, considering these requirements:
- Very active in the forums, available and willing;
- Highly capable in the languages of the forums they are to moderate;
- Easy to work with and very helpful, especially with beginners;
- Collaborative with both moderator staff and fellow members;
- Serious, trustworthy and obviously dedicated to the _____ Mission.

Where can moderators moderate?
Each moderator is responsible for one or two forums or subforums. All moderators have the ability to moderate in any forum, but they generally moderate only in their assigned forums.

Why do moderators have different titles than other members?
Each moderator is free to choose his or her own title.

What do moderators do?
Moderators keep the forum clean, organized and running smoothly. Their duties include:
- Reading threads to ensure that posts are cordial, collegial, on-topic and not chatty, and that they follow rules of punctuation and capitalization;
- Merging or deleting duplicate posts and threads;
- Responding to report-a-post messages from members;
- Moving misplaced threads to the appropriate forum;
- Closing or removing threads that are outside the scope of a forum;
- Changing thread titles for clarity;
- Deleting advertising and “spam” posts;
- Editing posts as necessary, to fulfill the mission of the forums;
- Banning members, when necessary;
- Asking posters for context and complete sentences;
- Sending private messages to members;
- Answering threads like any other member.

How can the  community help the moderator team?
All members are encouraged to direct moderators to any post or thread that needs attention. Just click on the red triangle in the upper right-hand corner of the post you wish to report.

Do moderators work as a team?
The moderators collaborate as much as possible. Because moderators are in different time zones and have responsibility for different forums, they tend to work independently. Each forum has its own customs and practices, so moderator actions may vary from one forum to the next.

Can moderators be disciplined just like other members? By whom?
Moderators must abide by the rules, just like other members. Their posts can be reported by members and are subject to moderation by other moderators. If disciplinary action is warranted, it is carried out by the administrator.

What do I do if I disagree with a moderator action?
Discussions about moderator or administrator actions are welcome via email or private message, but should not be discussed in the public forums. This is out of respect for the members and moderators involved.
If you don’t understand or agree with a moderator’s actions, send a private message to that moderator or another moderator that you trust. Your complaints and suggestions are welcome and will help us improve the  forums.

[Sorryman105]

Thank you for all the work done on this, it's an impressive new set-up.

With this many new divisions, I'm finding it hard to envision precisely what-all might be left in the general "Friendly Pub" space.  

Also, would it be considered reasonable to post in two sub-boards if you have something that seems to fit in both places - for example, if you find a totally awesome Dr. Who fanvid on youtube, would putting a link both in It Came from The Internets and in the Dr. Who thread in Media Favourites be considered OK ?

Or an awesome Soap Bob being sold and couldn't figure out where it would fit in the new system? It fits as an internet thing (since its an internet company selling it) but also as something author related, book related and media related. I ended up putting in the book section without thinking which in hindsight was not the best place for it.

[Murphy's Stunt Double]

Two things:

First, Thank you, Fred. This took (is still taking) a LOT of work, and I'm sure I'm not alone in appreciating all of the effort you're putting into it.

To Panesgrey: Thank you for fighting for the Community Support type threads. Sure, there are some who make their friends through discourse on what happened, what will happen and what might happen in JB's books, but I'm not one of them.

If this site lost it's ability to let me just hang out at the bar with my pals, whether life is good or not at the time, it would lose my interest, too. There's only so much hashing and rehashing I can handle over a 6 hour read once a year. I love the people here, and I've come to love them through the little windows of personal life they post here in words and pictures. It's brought a lot to my life, and I would miss it if it was gone from JBO.

As for my suggestions... I want Weird back. I've tried the chat, and it's not that I don't like it, it just doesn't serve me well. It can be glitchy, eating your reply and sending it into a black hole somewhere. It blanked out on me three times in a minute once. And trying to visually sift through multiple conversations to find your own is VERY fatiguing on the eyes. I've already mentioned to you, Fred, that I like the ability to catch up on posts made while I was sleeping with some of the friends I've made here from other time zones, and your rebuttal to that is well taken, BUT if we behave properly as you're asking us to, then what's the risk?

JMO

[iago]

BUT if we behave properly as you're asking us to, then what's the risk?

The request to behave properly has not fundamentally changed. At what point do I stop going back and giving another chance despite people saying, "No really, baby, I've changed"?

[Murphy's Stunt Double]

The request to behave properly has not fundamentally changed. At what point do I stop going back and giving another chance despite people saying, "No really, baby, I've changed"?

Good point.

Guess it's a matter of: Do you stop dating the one who hurts you? Or swear off humans all together?

[iago]

Good point.

Guess it's a matter of: Do you stop dating the one who hurts you? Or swear off humans all together?

Stop dating the one who hurts me (undirected chats in a general chat area), or swear off humans (the whole forum) all together?  The former.

[Shecky]

^ This is the problem with metaphor.

[nthnclls]

Stop dating the one who hurts me (undirected chats in a general chat area), or swear off humans (the whole forum) all together?  The former.

I guess the question is, was the undirected chats the problem, or was the Angst corner the problem?

[Paynesgrey]

Stop dating the one who hurts me (undirected chats in a general chat area), or swear off humans (the whole forum) all together?  The former.

Alexander looked out over his domain and wept for there were no more worlds to conquer.

I look at this straight line, and weep because among all the really saucy lines clawing and screeching to get out of my head, I can't find a single PG-13 one. 

[Heretic]

Regarding Weird and the like....would it be possible to set up such threads with a very short post life-span?  Something like, "All posts over 48 hours old are automatically deleted every night."?  This would (I think) be long enough to maintain the sense of community and conversation across time zones, but hopefully short enough to keep things fresh, and to keep the threads from getting too large.

Sorry if this has already been suggested and just won't work.

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

Regarding Weird and the like....would it be possible to set up such threads with a very short post life-span?  Something like, "All posts over 48 hours old are automatically deleted every night."?  This would (I think) be long enough to maintain the sense of community and conversation across time zones, but hopefully short enough to keep things fresh, and to keep the threads from getting too large.

It would however kill the ability to keep conversations going over weekends for people who do not have reliable weekend net access.

[iago]

I thought I recalled "Weird..." being a not-Angst thing in terms of its location. But it's definitely where some of the blow-up happened.

The idea of a short lifespan pub (though I agree, 48 hours is way too short) is, at least, intriguing to me. The problem with that, though, is that thread expiration right now (as an automated thing) depends on the concept of topics which are inactive for a period of time. Deleting *some* of the posts out of a topic just isn't in the cards right now.

I *suppose* a different tweak could be done, where a topic within a short-span board gets *locked* once it's 7 days old, or whatever, and then suffers a quick (+7 days more) death thereafter.

While I'm not sold on that as a solution, it *does* sound like I need to suss out a compromise position. I've got a few ideas bubbling. Stay tuned.

[meh]

The idea of a short lifespan pub (though I agree, 48 hours is way too short) is, at least, intriguing to me. The problem with that, though, is that thread expiration right now (as an automated thing) depends on the concept of topics which are inactive for a period of time. Deleting *some* of the posts out of a topic just isn't in the cards right now.

How if you have each post in a thread /shorten/ the requisite period of inactivity.