Should we lock fewer threads in this forum?

Comms being less active doesn't equate to problems necessarily. Right now, people may be more focused on the film coming out or feel things have been discussed before. Perhaps they do feel it's not worth it because mods will do whatever they want. All I want to say is that you can't equate Comms activity with how the boards are doing. If anything, less problems brought up in Comms may be more indicative of a moment of tranquility. Now whether this tranquility is preceeding a calm day or a tsunami waits to be seen.

 

In short: If you want to lay blame on the 'dying' of Comms then lay it not only on the shoulders of the administration, but also upon your shoulders. Because its true.

Now I'm not going to turn around and say that this is purely because of the administration, because it isn't. I think that the people who have remained extremely active in Comms over the last couple of years have added to it.

Everyone who uses Comms is to blame for it's current state.

BUT, while 'regular' users are just as able as the administration in making posts of the correct nature, it is only the moderators that can turn around and enforce that. So there is a slightly uneven but not too distant gap in responsibility. It's part and parcel of the job.



And EV, without counting the people who do the whole highlight and respond style of posting which by it's nature is longer to read, there are really only Kimball, myself and a couple of others that do end up writing something that big. For me it's because I can type rather fast when just going on my thoughts (>100wpm) and that post above took less than 15 to write. Yes for some it's more to read and most only skim, fine.

But

a) I come from the "old school" style where threads did end up with several people posting like this because it usually meant that people actually did have to think about everything that they were saying and were able to present ideas in clearer ways.

b) While shorter post threads do end up with more posts, have a really good look at them. You do end up seeing more people, but they only end up responding to a partial amount of what is being discussed (usually only the issue that specifically starts the thread and not always some of the important stuff that appears later). And to top it off, because people are being sharper in their responses there is more confusion and misconstruing of what is being said, along with rapid fire alterations or counter-arguements between a small amount of people. You will find that many threads with large post counts have so due to a group of only 10-20 posters, regardless of the overall number of people that post there.



I personally believe in posting less, but making what I'm saying is clear so I don't need to waste another 5 reply posts just to go over the interpretation of a single sentance.


Edit: Fixed wording error.

 

on the topic of just the locked threads: It's easy for us to keep threads open, but as some people have said already, don't expect us to continue arguing on and on and on after someone with authoritah said something 'final'

would that be satisfying?


Comms problems aside, I mean.

 

"May I suggest something, something that I've wanted to say for a very long time but always bit my tongue?

You all want to say that possibly the administration is to blame for the dying activity of Comms. Fine, you're entitled to your opinion. But have you thought that its also oh I don't know also on your hands why this place has had less activity?

And one other thing and this is directed at everyone mod and regular user alike. Who in the seven hells wants to read something that takes up 3 pages in Word? I think if all the posts were shorter here activity would increase because a lot of users (myself included) don't want to read essay after essay after essay. And then you get the really technical ones and I just sit here and think: "WT[H] was all that gibberish?" and if I want to post I feel like a bloody moron because I don't make a 3 page post and get all technical. I think its awesome that you all care enough about the boards and your position to make such huge posts. But a lot of people just think to themself "tl, dr" and there goes possible new posters. In these hot debates its almost always the same people on both sides of an argument and most o fthem are doing essays upon essays to get their point across. In the smaller threads where people have a paragraph at most you see a lot of different faces. Why can't we have that in these huge threads that go on until page 7?

And no, I don't have tact.

In short: If you want to lay blame on the 'dying' of Comms then lay it not only on the shoulders of the administration, but also upon your shoulders. Because its true. "

So you're saying tl, dr? I agree.

 

Yeah thats pretty much what I mean Ignant, and the fact we agree on something is just *wow*.

I've gotta make this shorter than what I was planning as I cut my lunch break short just to make a post here before work. . .

Dingo I totally agree with you that quality pwns quantity. But there comes a point when having too big of a post is also detrimental to the forum as a whole. People don't want to come in and feel intimidated by people who write a 3 pages in Word on an issue. They don't want to have to read all that, they don't want to have to phrase it, and more importantly why should they bother when they just get ignored by members on both sides of said debate? I mean really the ones who get anywhere in this forum (as far as being heard) are those who typically have a bigger post, or those who have are 'known' in Comms. The irregulars who don't post in Comms too much have just as much of a right to be heard as Amazing does. As Kimball does. Ignant. [insert person] but they typically get ignored because everyone concentrates on one particular aspect of a discussion or just only responds to the people they know. Take a look at the recent title thread the regulars there are: Dingo, Amazing, Carmen, Jeff, Kimball, Genghis and maybe one or two others. Is that a clear majority of this boards users?

And I don't want to sound as if I don't care about Comms because I do, but why should anyone give a rats ass about an issue in Comms if the only people who are ever heard are the same ones? How is the opinions of a few mods represent the entire MS as a whole? How do the opinions of a few non-mods represent the entire JC populace? I mean I'd swear that just lurking in Comms makes it seem that the entire MS agrees with this or that the entire JC agrees with this based on the opinions of a few people.

Yes you don't have to repeat yourself as much with a longer post, but on the other hand you have people who may offer different opinions. You'd have more activity in Comms (user wise and post count wise) and isn't that what this place is for? For people to come discuss the administration and make changes? What is the point of Comms if its the same people allt he time who make pretty big posts that drown out others? Keeping it short will IMO increase user activity and give us more regulars. More people who want to chime in.

And now I'm late for work. DAMMIT. I went on longer than I wanted to.

Oh and KK don't worry about it. We all have our quirks, but I admit there have been plenty of times when I've gotten lost in your posts.

 

And now I'm late for work. DAMMIT. I went on longer than I wanted to.

I'm sorry, but that post was 497 words. I got lost somewhere in there.

There is a time and place for everything, even novel-length posts.

Kimball Kinnison

 

Take a look at the recent title thread the regulars there are: Dingo, Amazing, Carmen, Jeff, Kimball, Genghis and maybe one or two others. Is that a clear majority of this boards users?


Those "regulars" are just the people who are able to make incredibly long posts without too much of an effort.

I try and read every comms thread (icons not included), but I don't make long posts because I don't have the ability to write such essays without taking hours to do it. I think that may be another reason why comms doesn't have the activity of other forums. People just don't want to make the long posts because it is too time consuming. And if they make shorter posts, unless they are a revered user, like the "regulars", they tend to be ignored.

I know most of my posts in the past here have been completely ignored because they couldn't match the level of the "regular" users' posts. And I know that having your posts ignored is not fun or encouraging.

 

I was trying to get at this issue with this thread but it got derailed

 

I responded in it asking for discussion to resume.

 

Comms IMO is still a busy forum. Also its quite possible that many people grew tired of arguing every small thing that occurs. I mean lets face it the vast majority of people who post in Comms are the same ones.

And while you take the position that people got tired of arguing, I'd say it's because people got tired of trying to change things and being rebuked by the "We know better, we're the mods" attitude that became prevalent around the time of the turnover due to the Philip Wise situation.

You all want to say that possibly the administration is to blame for the dying activity of Comms. Fine, you're entitled to your opinion. But have you thought that its also oh I don't know also on your hands why this place has had less activity?

I can't speak for anyone else on this side of the debate, but I haven't been particularly active in Comms for the past year or so, usually only getting involved in the more light-hearted threads in here. But that's because I mostly stopped caring after far too many good mods, mods who were far better at what they do than their replacements, were forced out last year. You guys are making a lot of mistakes, ones that have previously been made, but you refuse to acknowledge that. But I'm just an ex-mod.

If anything, less problems brought up in Comms may be more indicative of a moment of tranquility.

I really think that's because people just don't care any more. The JC caters to the wrong segment of its population, doing too much to defend the easily offended while simultaneously creating situations where it's all but impossible to permban problem users.

on the topic of just the locked threads: It's easy for us to keep threads open, but as some people have said already, don't expect us to continue arguing on and on and on after someone with authoritah said something 'final'

I'm fine with that so long as it's made clear that you've said your piece and are moving on.

Amazing.

 

AmazingB summed it all up pretty well. Discussion is lessening because of the mods' attitudes that insinuate, or clearly state, "We know better."

Here's news for you. You don't. This is comms. Communications. Yet I see very little of that actually going on. Most threads are locked way too soon and a half assed reply is posted either "there's no more discussion needed" or "we're discussing it in the MS". Both answers should not be acceptable.

 

*snorts* Y'all have it easy compared to a lot of other forums...

 

From yesterday:

Jim, can I frame that? I seriously never thought I'd read that, ever.

Just because we were on opposite sides of a couple of issues doesn't mean I don't think you did a better job in here than the current lot.

 

Sometimes the long posts followed by long posts annoy me sometimes, but if the issue is important to you you'll read it. But sometimes I feel I should be making essays though.

 

but why should anyone give a rats ass about an issue in Comms if the only people who are ever heard are the same ones?

And therein, lies the true issue of what's wrong with the communication forum these days. That gets right to the core. There isn't a lot of diversity in the people who active in the threads here. And the problem doesn't lie with those people. The problem isn't that its those people responding, but that other people aren't. For whatever reason, it seems to me that the general populace of the JC either doesn't care what goes in here, is afraid/intimidated of what goes on in here, or doesn't think things are run well or their opinions don't matter/aren't listened to. That perception is truely what needs to be changed. And after reading through all of this, I agree with not being too quick about locking threads. I think it is a small step, but I think it is a positive step.

The environment in this forum right now is not condusive to what purpose it hopes to achieve. In here, issues that affect the JC are supposed to be discussed, with both regular users and mods giving input and listening to input. And right now, I don't see that happening. It shouldn't be the same people over and over again. Those people shouldn't excluded, nor are they anywhere in the wrong. But they shouldn't be the only voices.

Right now, the atmosphere of this forum is wrong. Ideally, this should be the most open and friendly forum on the boards. If you have a question, a concern, a problem you shouldn't have any hesitation in bringing it here.

But, this is the real issue that needs to be addressed here in the Comms forum.

Gosh, I hope my post wasn't too long for EV to read. I would hate to bother him.

 

Those "regulars" are just the people who are able to make incredibly long posts without too much of an effort.

I try and read every comms thread (icons not included), but I don't make long posts because I don't have the ability to write such essays without taking hours to do it. I think that may be another reason why comms doesn't have the activity of other forums. People just don't want to make the long posts because it is too time consuming. And if they make shorter posts, unless they are a revered user, like the "regulars", they tend to be ignored.

I know most of my posts in the past here have been completely ignored because they couldn't match the level of the "regular" users' posts. And I know that having your posts ignored is not fun or encouraging.

You know, I'd never thought about that before, but it's an excellent point. The internet in general (and the JC Comms forum in particular) definitely discriminates against people who either can't or aren't willing to invest the energy in writing up lengthy posts that sound "smart." If you don't write five-page-long posts, the logic goes, you must be dumb and not worth listening to. And the same if you don't use big words, or even (gasp!) don't type in perfect English. I seem to remember hearing some adage once about not judging a book by its cover.

See? You didn't get ignored after all.

 

You are my hero.