Forum style

[Baca]

Not being prone to waffling myself,    i would just like to add my two pennies worth, before i joined IDNetters Forums, i had a good look around and i liked what i saw, so i joined up. Not everyone can answer technical problems, not everyone has a problem that they need help with, but everyone can join in and have a bit of fun and a good natter, so i think you have got it just right has it is. Anyway enough of the waffling, iv'e other things i must do.

Baca 

[jupiter]

I'm too happy with the way the various boards here work and greatly welcome the recently developed set of stickies on technical aspects.

It is natural that different people will favour different 'styles', but my perception of it is that, on the whole, each board has a flavour which reflects its title.  And, as RobMc posts, those who do not want to do so, need not visit boards that don't suit them.

The Natter board, for me, is exactly what it says and I wouldn't want anyone to start trying to make it, or its contents, conform to any 'ideal' of what such a board should be.  Within basic forum rules anyone should feel free to post what they want on a Natter board.

And by and large the technical boards do stick to answering queries.  And you can bet that if anyone started trying to force posts into some kind of straightjacket, then there would be cries of over-interference.  How could anyone say "no jokes, this is a technical forum" and not be written off as a control freak!  I've never known a forum anywhere that does not go off topic at times - it is how peole are.

[Lance]

I'm another person also happy with the way the forum operates. If i didn't like it, i wouldn't use it. Simple as that. As others have said, you can pick and choose which parts to read and i agree that on the whole, help questions do stay on topic. Just because maybe one or two might deviate from the original post, there is no need to create a fuss and demand more moderation, sulking when you are told its not felt necessary.

i'll just point out i'm tired and a bit grumpy tonight, and my post is not aimed at any particular person or group of people. Its purely my thoughts on this subject.

[MoHux]

Or sulking when you are told it IS felt necessary Lance. 

I don't remember anyone asking for more moderation, unless you mean self-moderation that is!!

And "one or two might deviate" from the original post, is a gross understatement.  The unrelated waffle sometimes fills a page or two before someone remembers the original poster. 

[jupiter]

The unrelated waffle sometimes fills a page or two before someone remembers the original poster. 

Replace page or two by hour or two and you remind me of loads of meetings I used to have to go to at work!  It is just people isn't it. 

[Mr Booh]

I reckon posters raising serious topics deserve 'Common Courtesy' from us all!

[Inactive]

I reckon posters raising serious topics deserve fast and effective help with their problem, which they all seem to get.

We are in danger of turning this forum in to a question and answers only place, without any humour,  where nobody, other than those posing questions visits.

I reckon the balance is just about right at the moment.

[jupiter]

I reckon posters raising serious topics deserve 'Common Courtesy' from us all!

That is absolutely right.  I've not spotted any posts here where there has been discourtesy - off-topic and digressions yes, but in good spirit I reckon.  Nor, I hope, would anyone condemn courteously expressed views.  Just to disagree with them is not a problem - it is the meat and drink of a forum.

When I visit some other forums I see rudeness and mean spirit and people who seem to be on some kind of ego trip.  So I stop going there.  Here I don't find that and so I like to visit.

[drummer]

Hi Rob

To take your points in order:

1)  I'm basing my statement on views expressed by members at various times in various threads. There has been no formal poll.

2)  I don't see you as part of a vocal minority, or any other minority, you are a member of the forum with the same rights as any other. I may agree or disagree with what you say, but you have a right to say it (within forum rules).

3)  The original thread was, indeed, off topic. As I indicated, I made the break at a point where I felt it had become a new topic, namely the discussion of forum style (or character, or whatever name you feel appropriate). The earlier OT posts weren't relevant to this discussion, so I left them where they were.

Aplogies to RobMc for taking up the cudgels on this.

1)  Your statement is based on the views expressed by those who agree with you.  As a Mod, you must realise that many will be reluctant to get on the wrong side of you and will just keep quiet, so most of the opinions actually expressed will be from those who support your view.

2)  It was Inactive who introduced the concept of the vocal minority within this forum and not yourself, but you must have realised by now, any criticism of this forum is met with a defensive closing of ranks, rather than a healthy debate about how the forum should and could evolve.

3)  Although I'm entirely to blame for taking the original post wildly OT, all I did was follow the same unwritten rules as everyone else, but then find this discussion shifted to a new thread.  Consistency might be an issue worth thinking about.

Recently, someone on here posted some stats which indicate that it's only a handful that actually contribute to this forum on a regular basis.  Not really the basis of how a majority is usually defined.

[jupiter]

1)  Your statement is based on the views expressed by those who agree with you.  As a Mod, you must realise that many will be reluctant to get on the wrong side of you and will just keep quiet, so most of the opinions actually expressed will be from those who support your view.

Gosh - why would I worry about being on the wrong side of a mod?  It isn't life and death.  Every day on here I read different opinions on all sorts of issues.  If I didn't I wouldn't be here.

2) ... any criticism of this forum is met with a defensive closing of ranks, rather than a healthy debate about how the forum should and could evolve.

I suppose what you may be seeing is a situation in which a lot of those who use this forum are using it because they like it.  People gravitate towards what they like.  I don't think that is a fault, it is just reality.  Nor do I think it is defensive - they just like it!

3)  Although I'm entirely to blame for taking the original post wildly OT, all I did was follow the same unwritten rules as everyone else, but then find this discussion shifted to a new thread.  Consistency might be an issue worth thinking about.

For my money consistency is a double edged sword - it sometimes goes along with over control.  But like all these things, it is worth talking about - which is what we are doing?

Recently, someone on here posted some stats which indicate that it's only a handful that actually contribute to this forum on a regular basis ...

Not sure that is true. I seem to be seeing more and more new names.  But in general I think that forums do attract a core support.  On TB you see the same group of names, certainly in the ISP boards.  I think that is in the nature of things.

Overall I tend to think that this thread illustrates the kind of debate you argue for.  In this instance most people seem to have disagreed with you on some points - but that does not invalidate your views or that you should express them.  But you knew that and it sounds a bit patronising for me to say so.

That is another problem with online forums. If we were sitting across a pub table with a couple of pints the conversation would not just consist of words - we would see each other's expressions and gestures.  It is too easy in forums for people to get prickly when no side was intended - that seems to happen a lot on TB IMO.

And people rambling on and on in posts - there's another thing ...

[Inactive]

2)  It was Inactive who introduced the concept of the vocal minority within this forum and not yourself, but you must have realised by now, any criticism of this forum is met with a defensive closing of ranks, rather than a healthy debate about how the forum should and could evolve.

Not a " defensive closing of ranks " just a different point of view from yours.

I thought all of this was a " healthy debate about how the forum should and could evolve ", or have I missed something?

As for getting on the " wrong side of a Mod ", that is utter tosh as far as I am concerned, If I upset a Mod, so be it.

Anyway perhaps you may consider running a poll on this issue to establish the majority view, once and for all.

[Rik]

Hi Drummer

1) My statement is based on the views expressed by the founders of this board and by the active membership. I stated my position long before I became a mod and I do not believe that people are worried about getting on the wrong side of me, since I haven't been noted for clumping around in heavy boots squashing any dissent. Last month, I had two debates with Rob on the question of the NOD32 update thread. I went out of my way to find a compromise that would please both him and those who held a different view. I would hope that Rob was not worried about getting on the wrong side of me, if he was, I'm surprised he raised the issue twice.

2) I guess we will have to agree to disagree. What you see as a defensive closing of ranks I see as the expression of views by the most regular posters. To my mind, they are just as entitled to say that they like the balance of the forum as it is as you are to say you don't.

3) I'm not placing blame for the thread going OT, I'm simply carrying out my job. Effectively, you created a new debate within a help thread on the issue of threads going off topic. I felt that the discussion warranted it's own thread (a) because it didn't belong in the thread in which it started and (b) because it was important that it got seen by more members, who might have missed it had I left it where it originated. I don't find that inconsistent, I've already indicated why I am happy with a degree of banter. However, where I see a new topic forming within a thread, or where I see two or more related, but separate, threads, I am likely to do some housekeeping.

As to majorities, the current Government was elected by a minority of the population, yet they still have a majority in the House of Commons. It may be a minority of the board's members who post regularly, but as the active members of the forum, they have indicated their views in this and other threads. I take note of what is said by everyone. As I have previously said, as we grow, it may be necessary to change the way we do things here, but I do not yet feel we have reached that point.

[drummer]

...As to majorities, the current Government was elected by a minority of the population, yet they still have a majority in the House of Commons. It may be a minority of the board's members who post regularly, but as the active members of the forum, they have indicated their views in this and other threads. I take note of what is said by everyone. As I have previously said, as we grow, it may be necessary to change the way we do things here, but I do not yet feel we have reached that point...

Hi rikbean

I'm aware of the shortcomings in our current electoral system and the resultant voter apathy.  Many intelligent voters make a conscious decision to abstain because of what's on offer.

Similarly, I'm personally aware of three other IDNet customers with a wealth of  computer and Internet experience who regularly contribute to technical forums, but simply don't bother with this forum because of the OT waffle.  Banter, humour, chat and waffle are essential ingredients for a successful forum, but only where it's appropriate and I think my only real criticism is that technical threads are allowed to meander endlessly.

Given the current consensus, I'm never going to win anyone over to my point of view, so I'll just sulk for a bit and keep checking in every now and again. 

So yes, we agree to disagree.

[Adam]

I apologise if the following reply is neither useful or relevant as I haven't read the whole topic.

Perhaps a method for people to filter out the OT posts by either minimising or completely removing them from their view would be a fair compromise? It would be possible to add automatic filtering and post "hiding" for users who want to banish certain posts from their view.

(NOTE: The above possible solutions mentioned does not delete or remove any post from the forum database, it simply removes or hides them from the persons view. Equally, any changes made by one user would not effect other users.)

[Rik]

I'm aware of the shortcomings in our current electoral system and the resultant voter apathy.  Many intelligent voters make a conscious decision to abstain because of what's on offer.

Point taken.

Similarly, I'm personally aware of three other IDNet customers with a wealth of  computer and Internet experience who regularly contribute to technical forums, but simply don't bother with this forum because of the OT waffle.  Banter, humour, chat and waffle are essential ingredients for a successful forum, but only where it's appropriate and I think my only real criticism is that technical threads are allowed to meander endlessly.

I could probably name all three. I can't accept your assertion that technical threads are allowed to meander endlessly though, unless you mean that we will persist until we find a solution or reach a point where we cannot.

Take a look at these three threads:

http://www.idnetters.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,2132.msg34054.html#msg34054
http://www.idnetters.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,2177.msg34569.html#msg34569
http://www.idnetters.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,2173.msg34492.html#msg34492

Forum members have worked with the OPs to try and resolve their problems, especially over the Bank Holiday weekend, when support is closed.

Given the current consensus, I'm never going to win anyone over to my point of view, so I'll just sulk for a bit and keep checking in every now and again. 

I'd really like you to take a good look at recent help threads. I think you might be pleasantly surprised.

[jupiter]

Perhaps a method for people to filter out the OT posts by either minimising or completely removing them from their view would be a fair compromise? It would be possible to add automatic filtering and post "hiding" for users who want to banish certain posts from their view.
(NOTE: The above possible solutions mentioned does not delete or remove any post from the forum database, it simply removes or hides them from the persons view. Equally, any changes made by one user would not effect other users.)

I am having trouble getting my head around that - probably me being thick!

But with different posters looking at different selections of posts, (because they have filtered some out) how would anyone understand the development of the points in the thread sufficiently to make a coherent reply? 

Some replies would be written in ignorance of earlier posts because the writer of the reply had screened out the earlier post.

I'm also unsure who would decide what was off topic?  And of course, parts of a post may be off topic and other parts not.

Maybe I have misunderstood the whole thing

[Baca]

The most important thing is not whether a technical query has gone of topic slightly, but whether the person who posted the original question for help or whatever, was given the help and advice he required, which i am sure he would get here, if at all possible.
People are different thats what makes the world go round and i can see why some people may prefer technical questions to be answered without the need for waffle or banter, or whatever name you wish to call it. Personly it dosn't bother me either way, but i would like to think that i wouldn't be here just for the help, as and when i needed it. Anyway if that was the case, not being a very technical person, i probably would never get a post in. 

Baca