**THE THIRD SENATE FLOOR FOCUS GROUP REPORT** (Contains new policies)

Present:

MODERATORS/VIPS: Kimball_Kinnison, Mr44, Knightwriter, Ender_Sai, and Vaderize03

USERS: Cheveyo, darth_paul, Fire_Ice_Death, Jedi_Keiran_Halcyon, JediTre11, J-Rod, Lost_On_Hoth, and son_of_the_tear

---

[b][color=firebrick][u]An Introduction[/b][/u][/color],
by [b][color=royalblue][hl=darkslateblue]Ender_Sai[/hl][/color][/b], Moderator, [i]The Senate Floor[/i]

Hello, and welcome the report from the third Senate Floor Focus Group, or SFFG for short.

Upon my promotion to Moderator, I immediately contacted [b][hl=darkkhaki][color=maroon]Mr44[/hl][/color][/b], my cohort in many Senate threads in days passed, and asked him to help me create a focus group. I wanted to do something different. Previously, if I had an idea for a SFFG, I'd pitch the mods, and supply a list of 20 posters of varying ideology to which the moderators would agree upon 10. It worked to a point, but it meant also I did most of the work. This time, I said, let's get people who want to be a part of it, who care enough to volunteer. We did just that, and as such I'd call this Focus Group a success.

What I wanted to do was to take the Senate and make some changes, changes I thought we needed. I also knew with the accusations of bias and the "us versus them" mentality that was beginning to develop between some users and the mods, we needed to have a frank discussion about the Senate. It wasn't just a case of us telling you what we want; it was also you telling us what [i]you[/i] want.

I won't say much more, since I'd be taking time away from other users. After you've read this, feel free to ask questions of any of the involved parties and we'll try and answer them as best we can. Also, there will be another FG in three months, so if you want to get involved, you need to keep a lookout for the signup thread.

[b][color=royalblue][hl=darkslateblue]Ender_Sai[/hl][/color][/b]

[hr]

[u][b][color=seagreen]The New Look and Feel[/color][/b][/u]
Every proactive introspection needs an equally proactive look at the exterior. What better way to make a forum feel young again than to get a face-lift, and maybe a bit of tan (Midlife crisis sports car is, of course, optional). After almost a year with the same face, our Senate is due for a little nip and tuck.

A most obvious wrinkle was the Americanized central theme of the old banner. To better illustrate the true intentions of the Senate and alleviate any sense of single nationalism, national symbols would be purposely omitted from the new design.

The new design would also give a nod to the concepts of the original Roman Senate forum, where citizens came together to address and debate the concerns their time. It stands as the core purpose here: to discuss, to debate, and perchance even to enlighten on occasion, through the exchange of knowledge and experience.

[b][link=http://boards.theforce.net/user.asp?usr=529310]Cheveyo[/link][/b]

[hr]
[u][b][color=firebrick]On the Atmoshpere of the Senate.[/b][/color][/u]
At times, it seems like every topic that has even the slightest hint of controversy ends up a mud-slinging contest. Threads can get so heated that posters will fire fifteen hundred word dissertations or address every last sentence in response. Thread ownership is a key to improving the atmosphere in the Senate. Thread creators are encouraged to direct the conversation, either actively through a PM to a moderator when things are getting severely off topic or hostile, or passively by constructing a clear goal for discussion or thesis for debate in the first post. Even simply restating the original thesis can bring a thread back to a focal point. And, like any good academic work, a clear course or goal will self-limit the length and scope of threads.

As a general guidline, a topic should be focused enough to cover in two-t

 

Was tea, coffee and biscuits served at this focus group? If so I'm in line for the next.

Actually I'm a tad concerned about the creator of threads becoming the owner and becoming responsible for the discussion. Did I read that right? I personally don't like the idea of thread nazis who aren't mods telling people what or how to posts in threads they "own".

 

They always promise you SO MUCH and never deliver!!

But anyway, I also worry about 'thread ownership' as unlike in Fan fiction, there isn't the cabability of unlimeted editing.

 

By thread ownership, we don't mean that the thread creator gets to be some sort of dictator over the thread. Instead, we expect users to help guide threads that they create, as well as do what they can to keep it from going off topic. We want people to take pride in their threads, provide more meat in their initial posts, and actively try to make it a good, healthy thread. We want them to help moderate the thread, but not in the sense of "do this or you'll be banned", but more like a moderator at a debate. Perhaps the term "discussion leader" would work better.

We don't want people to do threads like "Current event: what do you think?" and then disappear for 100 posts.

Kimball Kinnison

 

I can't believe I wasn't invited to join this focus group. What an insult, I have been here longer than all of you.

I quit. Goodbye.

 

No one was invited. We all gate crashed.

 

OWM, there was a signup thread posted. If you'd wanted to be involved, all you had to do was ask. The particpants (save for Mr44, myself and KK ) all asked to participate, including KW who didn't have to ask.

Thread ownership does not automatically imply thread nazis, and I thought I was clear about that. It's simply a case of being like FIDo in the Atheism thread and setting the course for the thread, and if it gets of course, asking people to please correct it.

To continue the naval analogy; we're not giving a letter of marque to authors. We're saying you know what you want to achieve from a thread, so you should try and be responsible for achieving that. In fact, didn't I explicitly mention it wouldn't be a "plz ban him liek thx"?

Loopster... Did you read it all, properly.

E_S

 

No.

I read some of it cross eyed. Stupid me.

 

There there.

I hopefully will run a FG I'd say, twice a year or so, just for feedback. If you want to have a say, and I post a signup thread, that's how you do it. If not... No complaining!

E_S

 

I know what you're on about, I just don't think giving ownership to thread creators is a good idea. It could lead to arguments amongst users. I know I used to get irritated when you carried on like you owned your threads, talk about what I want to or get out type posts abounded.

 

Loopster, it's not mandatory. Some people create threads for passing interest, some out of genuine passion. It's the latter who will take the initative with this. I'd point to both FIDo, again, in the Atheism thread. He doesn't mini-mod, he just asks "can we please stay on topic."

The idea isn't to give users a power trip, nor to create and officious underling class. It's to give people who genuinely care about their topics a level of responsibility so we don't have to come in and drop the hammer on people. It was agreed that such a move would not only cut down the perception(s) of bias, but also enhance the overall quality of threads and the sense of community.

E_S

 

Chastized for the least imposing solution on the table. Amazing.

 

I know what you're on about, I just don't think giving ownership to thread creators is a good idea.

I want to offer some answers. Thread creators make their threads and they essentially own them and are expected to take responsibility for them. Until this practice was brought up there was absolutely nothing that a thread owner had to be concerned with. If a person a cannot be bothered to take ownership of their own creation then they just shouldn't make the thread. It's as simple as that.

EDIT: Also, I don't mini-mod and I only get involved in things that concern the thread when needed. Say...a religious type derails the thread. Or an argument not relating to the thread comes about. I just remind them to get back on topic and if needed the mods will handle it.

 

Loopster, we actually used the phrase crack down elsewhere, and yeah as they said, you're worried about encouraging authors to care about their topics?

I love this face:

E_S

 

I wholeheartedly agree with Cheveyo about a new look. Mushy pea green is old and the header is too US-centric.

 

How 'bout mug shots of the mods?

Peace,

V-03

 

That'd put me off my dinner quicker than the mushy pea green.

 

Emesis basin!

 

I think thread ownership, or thread sponsorship(whatever you want to call it) is a great idea. It will make people more likely to carefully consider the topics they create and if it will invite a good discussion.

I also like the publicness and transparency for warnings.

Wow, could we call this a case of decentralisation?

 

Congratulations to everyone involved on this project. It's a solid statement of goals for this forum: even handed and helpful in defining standards of behavior for everyone who regularly posts here.

 

Heh, it's what happens when an Activist Mod gets promoted!

E_S

 

Except when I tried to take responsibility of a thread (and did so without a Mod asking me to do so) such as in my Judaism thread.... I basically got called a fascist who didn't want to debate and Judaism versus Christianity and become "open" to the idea that Jesus was the Messiah and had to deal with a series of temper tantrums -_-

The whole thing was worse than that dream I had about Ender in a cheerleader uniform.

 

You have to consider the possibility that some threads will never succeed, no matter how great the forum, no matter how respectable the intentions behind the posts.

 

Is it amazing that I don't have a problem with anything else suggested? Must be your idea.

Well, excuse me for having an opinion. Don't invite comment next time if you're just going to slam those that do.

 

Precious!

E_S