Feel like I'm playing Devil's advocate at in this thread but discussion is good yeah
But that's natural isn't it and I think that the Internet forum can bring out the inner idiot that isn't present in everyday life, for all of us.
But then I am not advocating heavy rules, just perhaps a bit more guidance so that when people click the 'submit' button they are clearer on whether they have posted in line with what the site expects.
Or even perhaps just a link in the nav bar to the current T&Cs so we can review them easily.
Edugeek has changed massively since it started. Small communities can work on this laid back approach as people know each other, their posting style, when they are joking or genuinely being offensive. This is not possible with over 20,000 members and a lot of conflict can come from misunderstandings. It would be great to apply the small community approach to a large one but is this working at the moment? Looking across some of the threads you could argue either way to be honest. Personally I do think on the whole it currently does.
But the site is only going to get larger, more popular and will this model hold up?
The discussion about the future of the site has been started by DB, it appears clear that the ongoing goal is to drive the community further up the web rankings, therefore I think we really need to think about the image of the site. I do genuinely care about this site and it is a concern that recently a new comer could get the impression that we are introverted and squabbling over censorship issues.
That opinion may or may not be the same view as the next person but entitled just the same, we should reply to the topic in question not on someones views and to say what qualifies them to have such a view. It is their opinion and should be viewed as that.
i quite enjoy reading some of the threads on here and that it isn't that strict but i do feel some basic guidelines are needed to remind users to use a little bit of common sence.
some comments i have read on here directed at other users have been borderline bullying.
are we not adults and should know better ?
garethedmondson (16th December 2009)
TheRedGuy (16th December 2009)
Last edited by RingOfFlame; 16th December 2009 at 02:40 PM.
torledo (24th January 2010)
I am sure in all my posts that I have incensed someone with my comments but is this not what democracy and the forum allows as well as technical help.
If people are not allowed to properly voice their opinions however misguided then are we not creating a "closed shop" policy. You are always on any forum going to have the odd crank who just likes to intimidate others but they are soon spotted and sent packing by our ever enthusiastic Mods, who may I say do a marvellous job given the task which is before them.
It cannot be easy and I for one salute them wholeheartedly for doing the job and doing it so well.
webman (16th December 2009)
One of the reasons we make an effort to meet so many of you as we can is not for blatent self publicty and ego nursing purposes, but to make sure the community 'works' How many here have met in person one of the admins or mods? I'll bet it's quite a few of you. On eresone we pay for the conferences is to make sure you get not only free trainign and advice, but to see each other in the flesh. I find this helps greatly in making things work and ensuring you all are on the level with each other. Runnign a site this size is a full sized job, and running of basic netiquette rules provides us with a base for rules. However, if we were to set down rules hard and fast in stone then chnaces are we would have to break them within a few days to handles a situation that is upsetting people. Perhaps we could have a 'Mod for the week' scheme where members can be a temproary mod, just to see what work goes on in the background. Maybe then some members would realise that sometimes there is often more than one side to any story!
bossman (16th December 2009)
Your welcome I always try to be polite in any of my postings
I hope we can carry on with this discussion as I feel we may have something in common (What I don't know at the moment but something will come up I am sure)
Just a few thoughts that rely on my 6+ years of establishing, administrating and moderating roughly three different communities over the years..
1. GD is not wrong... It's an honour but the work, the crappy personality clashes and trolling make it a very real curse.
2. Detailed rules make for easy pickings when it comes to trolls who like nothing better than to pick loopholes in them. Experience has taught me that people like this do it simply to elevate a sense of self importance... Me? I call it bullying and pathetic... either way it makes life harder for moderators, not easier... and circumspectly worse for the community as a whole.
3. By far the best approach I've ever seen and since adopted successfully elsewhere has been the "spirit of the community" ground rule. If a members involvement and/or post benefits the community as a whole and is a positive input there's no foul. When a members involvement and/or posts are obviously detrimental, divisive and manipulative then it's time for the red card.
4. The final point is that this is not a democracy, it's a privately run site and if the owner says jump, you jump or you jump ship. Nobody is forcing anyone to stay but it works because it... well... works. Those who scream about moderator abuse are invariably the ones who like to pick holes, and divide rather than work together. Not always but experience has taught me the odds are stacked in that direction.
Anyway, as per the OP, more rules equals less life... Acknowledging a community spirit and working within that framework for ALL members, moderators, hangers on, etc... is far more effective than a 500 page legal document.
Just my ten quids worth with tax refund.
You need to a bit more careful about what you bandy about as fact, and back up your mod paranoia with something a little more concrete than 'Edutech is as young as me'.
(@Edutech: not that I want to drag you into this)
Last edited by powdarrmonkey; 16th December 2009 at 03:13 PM.
Completely forgot to add one last point...
There is a difference between:
- a member who has been active, involved and who has contributed to the community in various constructive ways, who then finds fault with the way things are being done from time to time
- a member who joins specifically to pick fights about rules, regulations and attitudes.
I just wanted to clarify that position in case anyone thought I was tarring all folks with the same brush. It's not like having a winge is verboten, but there's definitely a difference in terms of the value the different members bring.
IIRC I used to use the analogy of EduGeek being a bit of a frontier town on the net. I went out, found a suitable spot and planted my flag, and claimed the ground around me and made a house. Then others of a like mind joined me. Soon we had a village, then a town. As I'm a pretty easy going kind of guy I let some things go as I mostly know the people living around me. Soon though I needed to appoint sherrifs and judges to handle the inevirtbale crowd of miscreants who started to appear and did not like the rules that we all lived by. This is where we are now. If you do not like the way we live then please find another 'town'. I like mine. It has grass verges and trees on the streets, and even the smell of a BBQ going on somewhere. Now, where's the pub?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)