|
|
Post by aline on Feb 7, 2018 16:09:16 GMT
...also, we can't sticky threads, since Tom and GK are sorta distant IIRC. I just checked the staff list and indeed, they're the only ones and have both not logged in since 2013. I didn't even notice we didn't have mods. This place is the best behaved online community I've ever seen, and that includes a Facebook group of go players. Still, it's always convenient to have a mod or two who can move threads around and so on. Maybe we should try and ask Tom to give permissions to a couple of people. I feel we have a number of members who have been active for many years and could do that job well (Daedalus?) What do you think, should we? If the community can agree on a few volunteers, we can try contacting Tom, maybe through his tweeter account, or his patreon acccount if there are any patrons here. |
|
|
|
Post by csj on Feb 7, 2018 16:59:42 GMT
It's well-behaved, because it's restricted in size and in areas of discussion. Despite the popularity of the webcomic, the board is rather small and I honestly see this as a good thing. As people veer of the subject of the comic itself, that's when forums tend to go downhill.
We don't need mods as such because the issues are infrequent enough that it's unnecessary. I can see how and where it would be Nice, but it's not something I've seen as an immediate issue.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2018 18:24:10 GMT
Another service I can provide for the RotD: there's an option to hide your log-in status from public view, which most people who use it enabled at a certain date in 2013 (I presume that's when it was first offered by ProBoards). Sierra's last post actually dates to November 2017, and Tom himself evidently checks the forum on request (and wished us a Happy New Year 2018 on his own accord). As for the topic itself: with a whole two subforums in total, and most threads being either page discussion which immediately gets discarded once the page is no longer current, or polls to the same effect (lately), the broader threads never falling off the first page, and members being allowed to delete their own posts/threads, I don't see what threads would need to be moved or stickied at all. I'd suggest, for such a small and dedicated forum, to establish one sticky index thread, which lists valuable threads that don't fall into the aforementioned pattern (e.g. Opportunity, Wild Speculation, ...), and have a committed member (e.g. Daedalus) create the OP and maintain it, as well as redact it on request, with no need to invoke moderator privileges more than once. Don't leave root shells open. If we absolutely need to give one other (certainly no more) long-standing and distinguished member elevated rights to take care of technical issues, it should be one we can trust not to intervene on anything else; if someone cares for whom I'd nominate, EDIT: I'll name them if there actually comes to pass some kind of vote (hah). Many others would probably serve the office well; these are merely those still-standing members that I myself have a more or less vague idea of, and whom I'd wholly trust to remain far from the less-purely technical buttons that come with the green stars. I think it's not wise to give a new public office to the petitioners for its installment. I'd emphatically prefer no moderators to be added at all. The author alone ought to make the rules and enforce them here; that should not come even under the slightest risk. |
|
|
|
Post by aline on Feb 7, 2018 21:43:24 GMT
If we absolutely need to give one other (certainly no more) long-standing and distinguished member elevated rights to take care of technical issues, it should be one we can trust not to intervene on anything else; if someone cares for whom I'd nominate, EDIT: I'll name them if there actually comes to pass some kind of vote (hah). Many others would probably serve the office well; these are merely those still-standing members that I myself have a more or less vague idea of, and whom I'd wholly trust to remain far from the less-purely technical buttons that come with the green stars. I think it's not wise to give a new public office to the petitioners for its installment. I'd emphatically prefer no moderators to be added at all. The author alone ought to make the rules and enforce them here; that should not come even under the slightest risk. *shrug* There is obviously no absolute need. I just thought it could be practical, like to publish the rules-of-naming-threads in a more visible way. Tom owns the forum and he can remove moderator privileges as quickly as he can give them, it's not like anybody can "overthrow" him. I can see you're worried about people getting too cocky about their privileges, but that's easily resolved by picking a level-headed person and defining the limits of the job. As for "giving a new public office to the petitioners for its installment", let's be clear: 1) There are no "petitioners", just me. 2) I am not a candidate for the "public office" in question This forum is doing very well and will continue to do very well. I'm just discussing the idea of having people on hand for minor shuffling around, because it seemed relevant at the time. Not planning a revolution here, pals. |
|
|
|
Post by keef on Feb 7, 2018 22:00:04 GMT
As Groucho Marx would have said if he was alive today:"I wouldn't want to belong to a forum that would have me as a moderator."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2018 6:51:11 GMT
Tom owns the forum and he can remove moderator privileges as quickly as he can give them, it's not like anybody can "overthrow" him. True, but even having to verify that the staff behaves is an unnecessary responsibility for him, no matter how sporadic. I very much doubt he'd be interested in having to arbitrate disputes over any actions of the moderation staff, whether he would defend or reverse them; so if he reserves the right to appeal decisions, he'll possibly have to deal with thankless Internet drama, and if not, then his staff can essentially do anything, no matter where their legitimation ostensibly stems from. Your request makes clear that you don't think we need moderators as such, but rather a "gardener" (in the presence of whose skills we shall all tremble) who can move around threads and sticky them. I suggested a compromise between our positions. If the forum framework itself allows for delineating the limits of the job, I'd prefer that to the more malleable limits of personal code and virtue. At least as I recall, Daedalus has expressed, more or less obliquely, that he thinks this forum needs additional staff on several occasions over the years (which is how Sierra got installed iirc); therefore, I would not want him to be given that position, even though I have nothing against him personally (and to show this, I nominated him for the office in my own suggestion); and you explicitly suggested him. You've put "petitioners" and "public office" in more-or-less distancing quotes (but not "candidate"?); I do consider this political, as in, a decision that concerns everyone who enjoys this agora. I mean forum. If you think that's ridiculous, you gravely insult the services I have performed to the Serene Republic of San Marino; je suis véritablement du sang royal. Intent is not effect, unfortunately. I myself trust that your intent is genuine, but as I've said, I'm against the legitimation of the moderator office as an institution independent of the holder, particularly such as it occurs on other forums, which has never existed here (in part due to Sierra having always stayed true to that principle), and which, it seems, nobody does in fact want. As Groucho Marx would have said if he was alive today:"I wouldn't want to belong to a forum that would have me as a moderator." From the moment I scrolled down to your post to the moment I scrolled past, I was convulsed with laughter. Someday I intend to read it. |
|
|
|
Post by philman on Feb 8, 2018 9:57:07 GMT
...also, we can't sticky threads, since Tom and GK are sorta distant IIRC. I just checked the staff list and indeed, they're the only ones and have both not logged in since 2013. Tom is definitely still around as he posts now and again when threads get too heated. He hides his last logged in date so no one knows when he is looking at anything, which is why he shows as last appearing in 2013 when it is obviously not the case. I don't know if GK Sierra does the same, but I would assume so as his last post was November 2017. |
|
|
|
Post by csj on Feb 8, 2018 18:53:46 GMT
I just checked the staff list and indeed, they're the only ones and have both not logged in since 2013. Tom is definitely still around as he posts now and again when threads get too heated. He hides his last logged in date so no one knows when he is looking at anything, which is why he shows as last appearing in 2013 when it is obviously not the case. I don't know if GK Sierra does the same, but I would assume so as his last post was November 2017. And then Tom realised he was also Coyote! |
|
|
|
Post by faiiry on Feb 8, 2018 20:16:14 GMT
We don't reaaaaally need mods. The homophobic trolls only come around when there's a Paz/Kat chapter, which is once a millennium anyway.
Other than that, it's a great community.
|
|
clover
Junior Member
Posts: 79 
|
Post by clover on Feb 8, 2018 21:24:47 GMT
We don't reaaaaally need mods. The homophobic trolls only come around when there's a Paz/Kat chapter, which is once a millennium anyway. Other than that, it's a great community. Every community needs mods. If you have a community that doesn't need regular moderation, that's fantastic. But you still need mods. I have watched and participated in many communities that presumed otherwise for ... well, at least as long as they could. |
|
|
|
Post by faiiry on Feb 9, 2018 0:20:37 GMT
We don't reaaaaally need mods. The homophobic trolls only come around when there's a Paz/Kat chapter, which is once a millennium anyway. Other than that, it's a great community. Every community needs mods. If you have a community that doesn't need regular moderation, that's fantastic. But you still need mods. I have watched and participated in many communities that presumed otherwise for ... well, at least as long as they could. Hasn't this community been presuming otherwise since, like, 2013? It's not like there is NO moderation, anyway. Tom sometimes steps in when needed, which is rarely. I'm not of the opinion that anyone is needed other than him. |
|
|
|
Post by Zox Tomana on Feb 9, 2018 2:38:37 GMT
We don't reaaaaally need mods. The homophobic trolls only come around when there's a Paz/Kat chapter, which is once a millennium anyway. Other than that, it's a great community. Things have gotten heated on other occasions, though the most heated I've ever seen the forum was in the last chapter where Red was involved. Given that, I think the current level of moderation is doing fairly well. |
|
|
|
Post by Daedalus on Feb 9, 2018 16:55:53 GMT
Oh! I didn't see this thread until now. A few of my thoughts:
1) @korba is correct that I have expressed a desire to have at least one active moderator around, who checks in more than once every few months. This forum is so ridiculously well-behaved (a haven in the wilds of the internet) that I don't think we really need someone to moderate the content, but being able to sticky important threads would be nice.
2) I'm extremely flattered that my name got thrown into the ring twice, but I'd prefer not to moderate here. I like just being a member, and furthermore my presence here has been spotty for the last couple years. I've become a bit of a cryptid during recent "all the pathos for Annie" arcs, though I'm trying to fix that, and I wouldn't want to be made a moderator then just disappear (even if Tom was amenable to doing such a thing).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2018 17:25:34 GMT
In order to constructively contribute, which I sometimes forget about: ProBoards does indeed appear to allow the creation of user groups whose privileges can be fine-tuned by the administrator creating them.. In particular, it's possible to define a user group that only has two privileges over all regular users: to sticky threads and to move them, while e.g. modifying or deleting others' posts would remain impossible for them. I think that's a solution everybody could agree to; all that remains is to (a) ask Tom about this, (b) have a candidate that everybody (ideally) can agree on, including the candidate. (It's also a sign of a well-behaved forum that absolutely nobody wants to moderate it.) Edit: Changed link to non-deprecated version. Same difference, though. |
|
clover
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by clover on Feb 9, 2018 21:33:15 GMT
Hasn't this community been presuming otherwise since, like, 2013? Not in particular, no, because for what level of moderation has been needed, |
|
|
|
Post by Eversist on Feb 9, 2018 23:05:46 GMT
Pretty sure every time this is brought up, there is little to no interest expressed from Tom. And therein lies the likely resolution: This will continue to not change.
As someone else already said (and I agree), it'd be Nice™, but is probably not necessary.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mitth'raw'nuruodo on Feb 10, 2018 17:16:11 GMT
We don't reaaaaally need mods. The homophobic trolls only come around when there's a Paz/Kat chapter, which is once a millennium anyway. Other than that, it's a great community. I haven't seen any homophobic threads in a long, long time, though that word is a bugaboo ipso facto. As far as moderation goes, benevolent neglect is my optimal state. |
|
|
|
Post by faiiry on Feb 11, 2018 1:53:47 GMT
We don't reaaaaally need mods. The homophobic trolls only come around when there's a Paz/Kat chapter, which is once a millennium anyway. Other than that, it's a great community. I haven't seen any homophobic threads in a long, long time, though that word is a bugaboo ipso facto. As far as moderation goes, benevolent neglect is my optimal state. It's interesting that you'd say that, given that you were responsible for the last one, not even a year ago. To the point where Tom even needed to step in. |
|
|
|
Post by CoyoteReborn on Feb 11, 2018 2:01:12 GMT
I haven't seen any homophobic threads in a long, long time, though that word is a bugaboo ipso facto. As far as moderation goes, benevolent neglect is my optimal state. It's interesting that you'd say that, given that you were responsible for the last one, not even a year ago. To the point where Tom even needed to step in. ...You know, if you ever get bored of the Court, we could always use more faiiry-s of your wit in the Forest! |
|
|
|
New mods?
Feb 11, 2018 6:45:23 GMT
via mobile
Post by jda on Feb 11, 2018 6:45:23 GMT
I haven't seen any homophobic threads in a long, long time, though that word is a bugaboo ipso facto. As far as moderation goes, benevolent neglect is my optimal state. It's interesting that you'd say that, given that you were responsible for the last one, not even a year ago. To the point where Tom even needed to step in. wow, that took me to necro-read a couple flamewar threads (20+ pages!) I wasnt even here then! |
|
brokshi
Full Member
About as furious as my icon appears ecstatic.
Posts: 108
|
Post by brokshi on Feb 11, 2018 9:03:21 GMT
Part of the problem is that most everyone here is sporadic these days. It feels like I see a new set of faces every other time I check the forums, and I don't just mean new avatars. No one with the time spent here to know their temperament is consistent enough anymore, or they'd turn it down for other reasons.
Even if adding a new mod was on the table, there's not the pool of people for it. And it's almost definitely not on the table since as everyone else has pointed out, it's largely, but not entirely unnecessary here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mitth'raw'nuruodo on Feb 11, 2018 18:27:31 GMT
Funnily enough, it wasn't homophobic, even a year ago. Could you point the part where I cast any derision, or is the act of questioning something now derisive? |
|
|
|
Post by aline on Feb 11, 2018 19:52:17 GMT
Funnily enough, it wasn't homophobic, even a year ago. Could you point the part where I cast any derision, or is the act of questioning something now derisive? I did not start this discussion to resurrect old locked threads. I don't see any positive direction this discussion could take, so please, both of you, or anyone else who feels like answering that, take a step back and think before continuing it. And if you feel the urgent need to do this, then please, please do it in pm, or at least in another thread. This is me begging you. |
|
|
|
Post by aline on Feb 11, 2018 20:00:19 GMT
In order to constructively contribute, which I sometimes forget about: ProBoards does indeed appear to allow the creation of user groups whose privileges can be fine-tuned by the administrator creating them.. In particular, it's possible to define a user group that only has two privileges over all regular users: to sticky threads and to move them, while e.g. modifying or deleting others' posts would remain impossible for them. I think that's a solution everybody could agree to; all that remains is to (a) ask Tom about this, (b) have a candidate that everybody (ideally) can agree on, including the candidate. (It's also a sign of a well-behaved forum that absolutely nobody wants to moderate it.) I believe those limited user group permissions are a great practical solution. Those aren't powers anybody is likely to abuse. Are there any candidates? It should be someone showing up most weeks, I think. A "sticky thread" job isn't something where one would need to react super quickly or be there all the time. But it should be someone who isn't hard to reach. |
|
|
|
Post by Mitth'raw'nuruodo on Feb 11, 2018 20:02:09 GMT
Are there any candidates? It should be someone showing up most weeks, I think. A "sticky thread" job isn't something where one would need to react super quickly or be there all the time. But it should be someone who isn't hard to reach. The point is that mods aren't needed though. That's the point some are making. On the side note, I did not start anything, nor do I wish to continue anything, nor be attacked. |
|
|
|
New mods?
Feb 11, 2018 22:02:50 GMT
via mobile
Post by wombat on Feb 11, 2018 22:02:50 GMT
My thinking is that having just one mod could lead to unchecked rulings on things (unless of course Tom steps in, but we don't want to make more work for Tom). On the other hand, multiple mods seem like an unnecessary amount of mods.
While I don't actually view this forum as positively as some others do (which is why I mostly lurk these days), I'm not sure a mod would greatly help. For practical technical things, I could see it being useful, but maybe if that was the extent of said person's power. I suppose part of my resistance to the idea is just certain implications I see in the term "mod." Perhaps a different title.
|
|
|
|
Post by faiiry on Feb 11, 2018 22:37:46 GMT
Funnily enough, it wasn't homophobic, even a year ago. Could you point the part where I cast any derision, or is the act of questioning something now derisive? Funnily enough, you don't need to outright say "Hey, I hate gays!" to be homophobic. Sometimes, it's enough to just say that the inclusion of gay couples causes you to lose suspension of disbelief and lose interest, in a comic where characters use magic, fly, teleport, demon gods run around all over the place, an immortal woman has existed since the dawn of time, and several chapters are devoted to heterosexual couples. If you can suspend your disbelief for all the improbable things that happen in the comic, but not for a few queer couples, then you don't need to spell out the words "I am a homophobe." You've already said it. |
|
|
|
Post by Druplesnubb on Feb 11, 2018 23:18:31 GMT
This got me thinking. Does anyone know why this forum is so small depsite the comic being so popular. Like, whenever I visit another forum with a webcomic board the Gunnerkrigg thread is usually one of the largest on said board.
|
|
|
|
Post by faiiry on Feb 11, 2018 23:21:10 GMT
This got me thinking. Does anyone know why this forum is so small depsite the comic being so popular. Like, whenever I visit another forum with a webcomic board the Gunnerkrigg thread is usually one of the largest on said board. Frankly, I think the comic saw the height of its popularity a while ago. Even so, I think that some people might not be aware that there even is a forum. Usually, 150+ people comment on the comic page itself, but how many of those people are on the forums too? I don't know. |
|
|
|
Post by aline on Feb 11, 2018 23:33:49 GMT
My thinking is that having just one mod could lead to unchecked rulings on things (unless of course Tom steps in, but we don't want to make more work for Tom). On the other hand, multiple mods seem like an unnecessary amount of mods. The point is that mods aren't needed though. That's the point some are making. And I, together with a few others, am making the following points: 1) sticky threads are useful 2) actually we can need one right now 3) we can have a sticky thread person without having actual mods, as korba found out 4) do you know of any sane reasons to be opposed to sticky threads, because I can't think of one |
|
