Senate I Want to Believe-The Senate's Social Thread and Secret Society Roundtable

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by Mr44, May 17, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Mr44 VIP

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2002
    star 6
    Double post, but these are interesting claims.

    Yes, I get it... you assume that people who frequent the jcc are incapable of engaging in in-depth discussion, and should, therefore, be kept separate from everybody else. You make a lot of assumptions and judgments about people you are very unfamiliar with.

    Nope. No one, including me has said anything like this. You can engage in all the in-depth discussion you want, that's why the Senate exists. Come over and take part in all the the in-depth discussion you want. However, if someone (not specifically you) says "I'll only come over to a forum if the standard is reduced," it gives the impression, that yes, they are uncomfortable with engaging in such discussion. It's like if someone said "I'm capable of running in a marathon, but will only choose to do so if I can ride a motorcycle.." Yeah, that kind of defeats the whole point of the marathon.

    Academic sports discussion... okay.

    I take it you're unfamiliar with the depths that sports discussion reaches. To use baseball again, it has some of the most in-depth, mathematic-based statistics of any sport. But regardless, I think you're mis-characterizing what "academic" means in this case. It's simply a discussion with other people on a more thoughtful level.

    The truth is, this was thoroughly discussed by the community and moderators, and a decision was made. I'm sorry that you chose to not take part... I guess it's equivalent to somebody choosing not to vote and complaining about who gets elected, after the fact. For the most part, the collective community have adjusted and are running quite smoothly. It's unfortunate that you were late to the party and are unhappy about how it was organized, but really, you can choose to take part, or you can continue to make the same identical complaint, day after day. You are trying take part in a discussion that happened several months ago.

    And this is what works against you. Again, to redirect your point, why are you so fearful of change? Just because a decision was made months ago during the temp board period, it's forever locked in stone? It can't ever be revisited or undone? Pish pish... I know you don't mean that.
    Last edited by Mr44, Nov 9, 2012
    Violent Violet Menace likes this.
  2. Violent Violet Menace Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 11, 2004
    star 4
    Forgive me, it's a little difficult to keep up. What are we discussing now? Is it
    a) the level of mod strictness and standard expected of Senate posts,
    b) whether the Senate should be taken out of Community, or even survive at all, or
    c) how to attract new Senate debaters?

    It seems to me like a mish mash now. Let's take one thing at a time, eh?
    Last edited by Violent Violet Menace, Nov 9, 2012
  3. JoinTheSchwarz Comms Admin & Community Manager

    Administrator
    Member Since:
    Nov 21, 2002
    star 8
    Moderating in the Senate should be stricter, of course. And that should be the end of it; if you check the special Senate rules, you might realize I copied them from the old Senate rules verbatim. Anything else is merely "we don't like new people". In my opinion, of course.

    Technically there shouldn't be many duplicate threads between JCC and Senate. I always assumed the Senate to be more in-depth. I guess I didn't expect "the electinnns!1!!" to b a Senate topic. But that's okay, it's an exception and, as Jello said in Comms, we've survived.

    About whether you should be taken out of Community, I insist it's too early.
  4. Fire_Ice_Death Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2001
    star 7
    True. If you don't like a member you can always place them on ignore. I've done that with only two people thus far. Not too bad.
  5. harpua Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 12, 2005
    star 8
    I think deserves repeating.

    I'm not fearful of change. I've embraced the change. My problem lies with the assumption that the senate will be diluted if it remains in the community forum. Whether you mean for it to, or not, that sort of language really comes across as elitist and condescending. Truthfully, I honestly don't care whether the senate stays in the community or not. If you really feel that it can't survive where it is, if you really need the perception that you are in your own safe little bubble where you are free to prove your intelligence to a handful of people, day in and day out, then I say you few people should go off and intellectually stroke each other.
    DarthTunick likes this.
  6. Lady_Sami_J_Kenobi Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 31, 2002
    star 6
    I think we may experience an influx of new posters when the details of Ep. VII firm up. Maybe some of them will be senate-level posters. We should take a 'wait and see' posture at this point.
  7. Mr44 VIP

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2002
    star 6
    For what it's worth, the remove "Senate from Community" claim wasn't an immediate request, it was just used as alternative to illustrate the concept of change.Some people were saying that the Senate has to change and change now. As if change was the goal on its own... If that's case, then doing something like removing Senate from Community would be just as change-based as reducing Senate standards, if change, and change alone, is the goal. Re-naming the Senate as "Mr Happy's free ice cream social" would also represent change, but I would question the wisdom of that as well.
    SuperWatto likes this.
  8. Ramza JC Head Admin and RPF Manager

    Administrator
    Member Since:
    Jul 13, 2008
    star 7
    Well, truth be told, "Mr. Happy's Free Ice Cream Social" is about as intuitive as the old name with regards to the content, whereas, say, "In-Depth" would make it obvious that there's a standards jump. Holding onto the old names was perfectly fine in a pre-Episode VII state of the boards, where it looked like slow decline, but our activity has basically doubled with literally no news outside of "Oh, hey, new film." Might be worth thinking about.
    Last edited by Ramza, Nov 9, 2012
  9. SuperWatto Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Sep 19, 2000
    star 5
    Not that I care one way or the other which board goes where, you gotta admit that that makes absolutely no sense.
  10. harpua Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 12, 2005
    star 8
    See, this is the language that I have an issue with. Define "senate level poster."
    DarthTunick likes this.
  11. Mr44 VIP

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2002
    star 6
    Well, you would get your choice of Rocky Road....
  12. JoinTheSchwarz Comms Admin & Community Manager

    Administrator
    Member Since:
    Nov 21, 2002
    star 8
    If you really think standards are being reduced and we're not simply talking about the perturbations caused by new people adapting to the Senate, then perhaps the issue is with the moderating and we should be more attentive and more careful. Is that your issue? Has it been Senate-wide or merely in a few threads? Examples, people, examples. Feel free to PM them to me or any of my colleagues.

    Because if the issue is just a diminished quality of posting, maybe you should actually live to your true potential and strive to that 11 you were joking about earlier and leave the more general threads (ie, "elections 2012") to JCC.
    Last edited by JoinTheSchwarz, Nov 9, 2012
    Ender_Sai likes this.
  13. Fire_Ice_Death Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2001
    star 7
    Hey, Mr. Happy's Free Ice Cream Social is an excellent name for a thread. Why, I remember when the Atheism thread had its own clever and sometimes not so clever names.
    Mr44 likes this.
  14. Mr44 VIP

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2002
    star 6
    I think you might have come late to the discussion. The issue isn't that standards are currently being reduced by those who are participating in the forum. The mods are doing an outstanding job enforcing the standards, and the level of discussion is top notch...

    The issue is that some people made the suggestion that standards should be reduced in order to possibly attract additional participants because those potential participants don't identify with the current lofty level. The argument is should the Senate remain a forum with higher standards, or should it be reduced to be closer to the JCC so more JCCer's might come over and post in it? My point is that if the Senate is made to be more like the JCC, then what's the point of having a choice? Everything here is hypothetical.
    Last edited by Mr44, Nov 9, 2012
    Violent Violet Menace likes this.
  15. harpua Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 12, 2005
    star 8
    Yeah, the "Jedi Council Community" tab within the "Community" forum is a bit redundant. You could say that about any of the names on the tabs--that they will make little sense to new users, and "sports, media, games, poll, politics, general, etc" would make more sense to somebody new to the place.
    SuperWatto likes this.
  16. LostOnHoth Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2000
    star 5
    Darth Guy said:
    "Also, the idea that the traditional Senate is necessarily "more intelligent" or "serious" because the posts are longer and the sticks are farther up the rectums is funny (as are faux-academic citations).

    The Senate is and always has been a more "serious" forum not because of the length of the posts or the stick up the rectums (although there is a bit of that) but because of the thread topics themselves. Like I said earlier look at the threads on the first page of the Senate tab and compare those to the thread topics on the first page of the JCC tab and you will see that they are very different. No one is talking about intelligence ( I seem to recall that the JCC beat the Senate in the last forum challenge some years ago ) but rather the scope of the subject matter of the threads which generally comprise the content of the two forums. They are different, that is all. Not better or worse just different.
  17. Mr44 VIP

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2002
    star 6
    Exactly.

    This is why defensiveness about "capability" misses the point. If you feel like participating in an in-depth, richer discussion, make a post in the Senate. If you feel like a more rapid-fire, whimsical post, then do so in the JCC. There are no barriers that exist in either, and any person can inter-change between the two. It' s not better. It's not worse, it's just different.

    What I don't get is when someone says "I'm able to post in the Senate, I'll only choose to if it's more like the JCC.." Because if that's the case, then just go post in the JCC that day. The Senate will still be here.
    Last edited by Mr44, Nov 9, 2012
  18. JoinTheSchwarz Comms Admin & Community Manager

    Administrator
    Member Since:
    Nov 21, 2002
    star 8
    Maybe I misread, or maybe I was thinking of the hysterics of the Comms discussion. If that's all you're arguing about, I agree with your position. The higher moderating standard are what make the Senate.
    For the record, when we set up the forum the tags were "Social", "Debate", "Sports", "Media", "Polls" and "Games". We had second thoughts about it, though, so we moved back to using the names of the old forums. I like the descriptive tags better, myself.
    Last edited by JoinTheSchwarz, Nov 9, 2012
  19. Fire_Ice_Death Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2001
    star 7
    The generic stuff would've been bad. Good thing you bunch decided against it.
  20. KnightWriter Administrator Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Nov 6, 2001
    star 8
    Fearful of change? The changes already happened, 44.

    I don't think there's going to be a major influx of new posters. Message boards are well past their prime as a form of discussion and communication online. There will be some new people, of course, but not all that many, and not nearly as many as some believe. Any new people will be faced with entering a community that has been around longer than potentially a few of them have been alive.
  21. harpua Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 12, 2005
    star 8
    Why would it have been "bad?"
    Last edited by harpuah, Nov 9, 2012
  22. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 9
    :rolleyes:

    This ranks up there with my memories of your epic tantrums in the old unban request system on most levels. Less tears, but the same kind of infantile, impotent rage at a world you don't quite understand.

    Moving back to the grown-up discussion:

    This discussion has found itself in a familiar Senate spot of entrenched position A talking past, or not talking to, entrenched position B and vice versa.

    To clarify, in case anyone else is having FIDo thoughts (God forbid); I don't think either KW or myself are trying to make this a popularity contest. It's not, and frankly if anyone thought that you shouldn't be posting in a place that prides itself on quality content.

    If anything, the idea is that this place could probably afford to open a few more doors and windows and get some of the stuffy, stale air out of it. Show some collective leadership in taking users - new users, both to the boards with Episode VII coming, and given the amazing opportunity the new forums afford you - on a journey about how to construct an argument. How to understand differing points of view, be they social; cultural; religious; economic; political, or other.

    To borrow from a fairly prolific book, from my POV anyway, it's about not storing your treasures up with moth and rust.

    So, factoring all this in, my question would be this: You guys own the Senate tab/forum as much as the Mods and the Admins and the site owners. The world you are living in is the Community forum with tab for sub-forums. What have you done to capitalise on that? What opportunities does that bring you (assuming seeing only challenges is failing to take advantage of it)?

    And bear in mind, those of you who were around when I was moderating this place (that excludes you FIDo, since you were on a ban, I argued for you to come back and your chronic recidivism saw me with egg on my face and you back out the door) - I did what I could when I could to promote this forum to the outside world and encourage participation.
  23. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 9
    IT WAS DIFFERENT. :eek: :_|
  24. Fire_Ice_Death Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2001
    star 7
    The change was really unnecessary, but that's besides the point. You're acting as if things are set in stone. They never and rarely ever are. But I do find it a bit amusing that you're acting like a stone wall on something that's not set in stone no matter how many fingers are placed in your ears. Or since this is type, your eyes. Which is just a very disturbing mental image.

    Thank you for confirming my worst suspicions about you, but you didn't prove a point beyond being insulting for..I guess I insulted your infantile chatter about 'CHANGE!' As if that's any better. Problem is the 'world I don't understand' was actually quite thoroughly investigated on the temporary board. The reasoning for the change wasn't sound, in my opinion.
    Last edited by Fire_Ice_Death, Nov 9, 2012
  25. SuperWatto Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Sep 19, 2000
    star 5
    Why would it have been bad?
    Because of... change? :p

    I think it sounds like an excellent solution to some of the problems mentioned. I never understood the need for forced, arcane Star Warsy names in the first place. I still get some boards mixed up.
  26. Mr44 VIP

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2002
    star 6
    The comms thread was the catalyst, but separate.

    If that's all you're arguing about, I agree with your position. The higher moderating standard are what make the Senate

    Yes, exactly.

    For the record, when we set up the forum the tags were "Social", "Debate", "Sports", "Media", "Polls" and "Games". We had second thoughts about it, though, so we moved back to using the names of the old forums. I like the descriptive tags better, myself.

    Those are more descriptive, but more plain and less community building. The thing is, none of this would be an issue if the Senate stays the Senate. The JCC stays the JCC, and every forum fulfills their role.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.