[GEN] Has the JC merely turned into Summer Highland Falls?

It might be helpful if the JCC mods made a focus group for the JCC, and gave access to users whom they feel would have insightful ideas.

Im in the EUC's focus group, and it works.

 

Sorry Raven but that's demostratably not true.

Go look at the Comm FAQ.

Who made it? A member.
Who created the earlier one? Another member.

This place no longer elicits that level of commitment from the members.

 

It might be helpful if the JCC mods made a focus group for the JCC, and gave access to users whom they feel would have insightful ideas.

What would the point be? Again...just because YOU think something is wrong with the JCC does not mean others feel the same way. So the thread topics may be what you called "low brow", if you don't like them, don't read them. No one is forcing you. Just like no one forces anyone into your icons thread.

Im in the EUC's focus group, and it works.

The JCC is not the EUC...they are completely different forums with different styles. No comparison.

 

What would the point be? Again...just because YOU think something is wrong with the JCC does not mean others feel the same way. So the thread topics may be what you called "low brow", if you don't like them,

Yes, that's true.

However, there are other peopple who feel similarly about there being too much of certain subjects in the JCC. In my view, the issue isn't so much what's in the JCC, it's that there sometimes can be too much of a given subject or kind of thread.

Creating a few "lowbrow" threads here and there shouldn't raise much legitimate objection. However, if you make new threads like that every day, quite a few people become sick of them and don't want to see them anymore, along with the threads slowly starting to take up more space in the first couple of pages, pushing off other threads.

All things in moderation, I believe.

 

farraday: On the other hand, you have more people making banners and more people making icons. You have a lot of people running games in Community. Is it all the same thing? Maybe not, as they often get VIP status for doing their civic deeds, and some might stop helping out if they lost their spiffy red colors. But then again, not all of them would stop. Is the difference that people no longer care enough to write FAQ's, or is the difference that people no longer see writing FAQ's as being a way to help out?

 

Maybe the JC has grown enough that newer members think things like FAQ's are a moderator started thing ?


Maybe have mods make a FAQ thread, when they feel their fourm needs a FAQ, and have members give serious suggestions (and warn those that just spam)

Then on the finished FAQ, give credit to the person whom first suggested the idea in the FAQ thread.

 

Just a quick note about FAQs threads: eclipseSD and myself put together a vast majority of the Classic Trilogy forum's FAQ thread. DLM wrote the rules and such, eslcipseSD did the thread index and about half of the FAQ questions, and then I did the other half. Of course, this was well over a year ago, but I am slowly working on doing an updated version of the FAQ.

Even though this obviously isn't being done for Comms, it is still done occasionally.

 

As someone who's been here (off and on) for over four years, I thought I'd weigh in. Over 90% of my posting has been in Community, so most of my focus will be there.

a) the Administration

No real issues here for me - I think that the current group is doing a fairly good job overall. I think that Josh Griffin's installment as Head Admin is a good idea. As a part owner of the site, he is well equipped to handle issues and set policy, I feel, and I like the idea of one person having the final say on all the aforementioned major issues.

Several months ago, I felt that there was some bias by some JCC moderators towards certain off-board groups, but that doesn't seem to be much of a problem anymore.

b) what you like that we're doing (if anything)

One thing that stands out was over in the Senate. One of the Senate mods (Kimball, I think) posted in a particularly heated thread, encouraging users not to try to "win" the argument, but instead to try and understand the opposition. A great idea, and hopefully it will decrease the hostility that is often such a large part of the debates there.

Some users seem to feel that there is a bias by Senate mods towards people who don't share their views. I haven't seen any evidence of that, that I can recall. I suspect that some people simply don't like being told that they're wrong, and view any disagreement with their views as a personal attack.

Overall, the moderation recently (at least in the forums that I frequent) has been improving lately in fairness and balance.

The Senate mods are very good at interacting with their users and getting involved in their forum as posters. The JCC mods are getting better at this, and I hope it continues to grow.

c) what you'd like to see us do (if anything)

Recently, there was some discussion about limiting the number of gaming, party and social threads in the JCC. While this has been carried out to some degree, I'd like to see it continue, and even carried a bit further, as things seem to have gotten a bit lax (as evidenced by an increase in those threads over the past few days or so).

 

Y'know, dp, I don't understand the reference in the title to this thread (I opened it becasue you posted it, and I'm stalking you ): but it occurs to me I'm not likely alone in that.if you want to generate more responses, you might consider re-naming it.




*Derisa*

 

along with the threads slowly starting to take up more space in the first couple of pages, pushing off other threads.


Yeah, like the party threads, the social threads, and the game threads.

Seriously, is it really necessary to have more than one thread like that?

 

Summer Highland Falls was a relatively early Billy Joel track, possibly even off the Cold Spring Harbor (first solo album, methinks) album (it's been a long time, I may remember incorrectly).

The line quoted in the first post sums up why I posted the thread.

 

Seriously, is it really necessary to have more than one thread like that?

Is it necessary to have more than one kind of thread that you like?

 

Is it necessary to have more than one kind of thread that you like?

Of course, the game threads may have been stretching it a little as they at least have a purpose.

The social and party threads are REDUNDANT. If I last recall the Community is a forum designed to get to know your other star wars fans who post on the board. In essence the Community is like a giant social thread in itself. Having more than one social thread in the Community is just flat out clutter and redundancy no matter how you explain it away.

 

There are different social communities within the JCC. How would you go about disbanding them?

 

There are different social communities within the JCC. How would you go about disbanding them?

Same way you disband other threads: Lock.

Have a MOD start the new social thread so you don't have people whining post counts.

 

Same way you disband other threads: Lock.

So you would instantly break up social groups that have been around for years, some of them for two or three times the length of time you've been at the JC.

Each social group has their own dynamic, history and members. There's a limit on how much is enough for the JCC, but I'm rather amazed that you'd choose to break up the threads of groups and members who predate you by years.

 

The social and party threads are REDUNDANT.

So we close, the BYS, DL's, Lightsiders, Fecal Force, Geriatric Ward, EPC, etc. and make everyone post in one thread? Those are all clubs and social threads. The "party" threads, however, tend to be the ones that we don't need a glut of in the forum and we limit those to one or two at a time.

Everyone has different tastes. The threads you see as unneccessary and redundant serve different board populations. As I see so often posted in here, "If you don't like a certain thread, don't post in it." We don't really need to focus on how to scale down certain threads as much as trying to make the JCC an enjoyable place for a wide range of users.

 

So you would instantly break up social groups that have been around for years, some of them for two or three times the length of time you've been at the JC.

Each social group has their own dynamic, history and members. There's a limit on how much is enough for the JCC, but I'm rather amazed that you'd choose to break up the threads of groups and members who predate you by years.

Well, you and I both know it'll never happen, and even if it does there'll be such a flood to COMMS that you'd have to create a seperate forum just to foster the complaints.

The truth of the matter is, that it should've never happened in the first place. But, I will tell you this much. There are STILL new social threads being started. For instance, The Elite Posters Club, Sleepover, The Coffee House. There's three that have sprung up in the last couple of weeks.

Where does it end? I can't count the number of times that I've been in the Community and the entire first page was nothing but social threads, party threads, and game threads. It's pretty ridiculous if you ask me.

And, don't judge a user by his registration date. Just because the name is registered in '03 doesn't mean they haven't been here longer.

 

Everyone has different tastes. The threads you see as unneccessary and redundant serve different board populations. As I see so often posted in here, "If you don't like a certain thread, don't post in it." We don't really need to focus on how to scale down certain threads as much as trying to make the JCC an enjoyable place for a wide range of users.

I thought that's what Fanforce was for?

And I don't post in threads I don't like. I don't even bother opening them.

 

Where does it end? I can't count the number of times that I've been in the Community and the entire first page was nothing but social threads, party threads, and game threads. It's pretty ridiculous if you ask me.

But other users will come in and say that there are threads they don't like all over the first page and we should lock them. I'm all for making sure we don't get a ton of copycat threads (survivor game threads, anyone?), but each person has their own opinion on what should be allowed and what shouldn't be.

 

But other users will come in and say that there are threads they don't like all over the first page and we should lock them. I'm all for making sure we don't get a ton of copycat threads (survivor game threads, anyone?), but each person has their own opinion on what should be allowed and what shouldn't be.

Like I said, I don't say it as if it's something that should be changed. I'm merely venting.

And I actually brought it up in repsonse to KW's remark at the top of this page about pointless threads cluttering up the first page.

It's six of one, half a dozen of the other.

 

Just to correct a possible misinterpretation, FanForce's mandate is specifically to help fans meet in person. It should have nothing to do with posting activity, indeed, many chapters have members who aren't even on the boards, and who find out about events from emails, phone calls, or in-person meetings.

(There is more to life than the Internet!)


*Derisa*

 

Indeed. FF is actually an offline-centric group, we just use the boards to chat and coordinate real-life activities. There are over 200 FanForce boards in the system, having that many "social forums" would be pretty pointless.

 

Group threads are quite different from purely social threads or party threads. Groups actually serve a purpose within the Community. For example, the Dark Lords, Lightsiders, Jedi Outcasts, Blue Yoda Society, et al, all have "missions" and "training" for their members.

The threads from these groups are not simply social; and while the groups do many things off the boards, the JCC thread serves as a coordination center of sorts. It allows potential members to see what the group is about, learn information about the group, and perhaps ask to join.

Without these threads, the group would become quite unreachable, and would have to exist completely off site -- which isn't practical. I know that many people have problems accessing some other boards, and some just do not want to deal with posting at another site. If they have the choice to do both, it becomes more likely that they will utilize both places to post at different times rather than just choosing one place to post.

Generally, the trend is that a thread will get several posts for an hour or two, then die for most of the day, then pick back up again for a couple hours in the evening. During the rest of that time, the thread may fall off the first page and blend in with various other threads. I personally have never seen the first page get overly crowded, though I do admit that I do not venture into the JCC forum too often.

However, these threads really build a great community, which is, of course, the purpose of the community forum. I know that during my member in the Dark Lords, I have made countless friends (some of them extremely close) that I would not have made had I not joined the group. Being in the group has been great for me: I have no only made many new friends, but I have also became a better poster and person in general.

Doing away with such threads would be quite detrimental to the community; having a very negative effect on things. Yes, people generally tend to stay with their "group" of friends on the boards, but that is no different than how people are in their personal, offline lives as well. If groups of friends were no longer allowed to "hang out" with each other in the JCC forum, the forum would become even more chaotic than it already is, and I can imagine that many, many more flame wars would erupt, because several posters would be left with nothing else to do.

Leave the groups alone. End of story.