| New Rule???
Posted: 4/23/2006 3:52:42 PM | And My_Island, if we were all "goody" like you, the world would be a mighty boring world don't ya think? Some of us like to have fun in our lives
Unfortunately, this rule had to be imposed because those who call it "having fun" are doing it at other's expense. It's not the "boring" people causing the rules to be changed but it is the "boring" people having to pay a price for those who imposed their interpretation of "fun".
I like the rule.
(we'll talk after the next 10 posts - lol) | |
|
SnS
|
Joined: 3/3/2006
Msg: 27 | |
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/23/2006 4:13:25 PM | uhhhh yeah, back on topic now My_Island, I do believe the topic of this thread was the new rule and not cliques and all that jazz.
EDIT: Have to conserve my post but right on Dud! That's what I was trying to say, was just curious about the party threads, that's all!
ETA again to preserve my posting abilities: WELL SAID JUSTIN! | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/23/2006 4:14:42 PM | what it comes down to is that the site can do whatever the hell it wants.
if there was something better out there, then people would go to it.
but everybody's here, so it cant be too bad
do i have a point here?  | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/23/2006 4:20:23 PM | I don't agree with this rule it is quite possible for three people to have a heated debate about a certain topic. They would have to wait for several others more to debate the topic. That just does not seem right. Some people use these forms to share thoughts and pass time. It would be very frustrating having something to say on a certain topic that you may have overlooked and not be able to get it out.
I understand the concept and what they are trying to do, but I do think it is the wrong way about going about things. The posters that do less chit chat and more thinking are now gonna suffer for those who excessive chat. My advice is just strict penalties for too much of chat. Word goes around here fast, it would not take too long to realize how harsh a punishment can be.
[and you don't think we've thought of that? hasn't been entirely effective so far, or this move would not have been necessary./pandy]
Furthermore, yes the forms are developed for thought sharing and advice for the most part. But, sometimes you have to embrace what something becomes, not only what it was made for. This is an escape for some from the other side of the thread. A direct interaction with potential mates. It seems like the rules are putting alot into take the personalities away from the people. I think that is a big mistake and what the site is most designed for is interaction and getting to know people. Joking the odd time and a little flirting here and there will not hurt anyone. It helps us build friendships and relationshis. Just enforce the rules harsher on the avid chatters.
[and as those friendships build and strengthen on the threads, new people are more and more disinclined to join in. When we cracked down on chatting in the provincial forums the first few times, the level of first time posters jumped rather dramatically. Having a tightly bound clique does not help these forums or this site in the least. It has to be easy to navigate and friendly to use for new people as well. I wouldn't want to join a brand new forum and start reading a thread on photography only to find it full of "hey, Joe, how was your weekend" type posts. This discourages new people. /pandy]
My Island, it is true, everyone cannot be the same it takes all different personalities to keep the forums interesting and nothing wrong with having some fun form time to time. The forums have grown to more than just an intellectual thought sharing thing. It has became friendship for alot and alot of fun for some. I would encourage this if done in a excessive manner.
Thumbs down to this idea for sure
Now, I just hope someone does not get back with a different opinion that somewhats changes my mind or makes me want to describe my point of view a little more indepth. Because, I will now have to hope that a certain number more posters will respond. Heck, I may never get it out, maybe the thread will just fade. Grrrrr, maybe should cross analize everything before hand, leaving out no room for ever or questions. There for there would not even be a reason for anyone even to respond. Maybe, we can just make a thread 1 post maximum. That way no one can interact or chat. Wow, how easy wouold that make your jobs.
Again big thumbs down. An arrogant attiude is also coming through from that mod. These people are suppose to represent you bigfish. Having an immature attitude as they have. Kind of telling everyone if you don't like it go somewhere else is a little harsh and comes off stong. All people are doing is sharing their thoughts, just because a rule is a rule, does not mean that it must be etched in stone. Ideas and change build things to be better and never helps anyone to be close minded.
[again, "this site sucks" posts are NOT inviting for new users. Suggestions for improvement/complaints are answered in moderator email, and dealt with in the appropriate forum (help and suggestions). /pandy] | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/23/2006 4:25:10 PM | if you meant me, im not a mod... i was just sayin lol
ok so now we'll see this rule in use. justin and i cant explain anything else to each other for a while. maybe its bad, maybe good... i dunno. id rather the rule was not here, but its not my site | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/23/2006 4:30:08 PM | | no i did not mean you at all dude. lol. But, yea you just brought up something important. What if something wa smistaken and now i good not appoligize to someone, maybe forever if the thread died | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/23/2006 4:32:06 PM | | I say yay to this rule, now itll give newbies and the forum lurkers a chance to be heard without feeling like your interrupting a private conversation between the regulars. | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/23/2006 4:37:16 PM | 1. This new rule does not apply to party threads.
2. This wasn't ment to kill chat, or anything to do with chat although that is a great side effect. The main reason is to bring up the quality of posts.
3. I constantly test new stuff and if it works i Keep it, I base my decisions on stats i gather as people use the site. If the site is positively effected things stay. | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/23/2006 4:38:48 PM | What if something wa smistaken and now i good not appoligize to someone, maybe forever if the thread died
Email them???....
For the record, I do agree with a lot of the views that Justin has expressed in his essay...errr....I mean novel. However, I do ALSO agree that the new rule is a good one. Kinda sucks though when you are passionate about something and you want to express your opinion and you end up sitting and 'refreshing' your page until more posts have been made.
Maybe there should be some sort of timer? like a 15min rule or something like that and it will reset itself?...hmmm...MOST of us know that there is some timers on here that can go from 3 days to 28 days....
Imagine hopping from thread to thread having a new timer set for each individual against every thread they've entered, the amount of continual checking against a variable number of timers for each user against every thread they've been to would be a programming nightmare if not resource draining /ToB
Just a thought!  | |
|
SnS
|
Joined: 3/3/2006
Msg: 35 | |
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/23/2006 4:43:47 PM |
1. This new rule does not apply to party threads.
2. This wasn't ment to kill chat, or anything to do with chat although that is a great side effect. The main reason is to bring up the quality of posts.
3. I constantly test new stuff and if it works i Keep it, I base my decisions on stats i gather as people use the site. If the site is positively effected things stay.
Then Mr. Admin! Once again I  your new rule!
PURR-FECT!
The party thread was my only concern as they're designed to get people hyped up for a party...honestly, what else are you going to talk about in a party thread??? | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/23/2006 5:17:36 PM | Since MY ISLAND seems to be the one non-mod most heatedly supporting the rule, I have one small thing to point out to you, MY ISLAND....
Under this new rule, you yourself have broken the rules in this very thread.. see how easy it can be done, and how innocently! Again, i stand by the fact that some threads DO call for more leniency in the frequency of posts.
Yes easy. much the same as you did with your opening remark?With respect to your second remark, a point of clarification was requested on the subject matter during thread moderation dialogue /ToB
The timer idea seems MUCH more reasonable! | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/23/2006 5:37:28 PM |
Under this new rule, you yourself have broken the rules in this very thread.. see how easy it can be done
I see your point.
However, my one post (#27) was a question directed at the moderator for clarification.... not a thread discussion or chat. | |
|
rks58
|
Joined: 1/28/2006
Msg: 38 | |
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/23/2006 6:28:53 PM | Here's a quick hint based on what I've seen with my own posts in the last day or two (in some threads I've had 4 or 5 in the last 10)
Keep it reasonably on topic (but we already knew this)
Make the length reasonable (it doesn't have to be a novel like justin wrote but something like runs in...gives hugs...runs out won't pass the test)
And try to avoid pushing buttons (no, not the ones on your keyboard, just the ones under peoples' skins)
Stick to these ideas (and this is just imo) and you should be ok even if you do go over 2 in 10 | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/23/2006 8:27:29 PM | Well, I guess I have to ammend my previous post. I still agree with the theory behind the change, to cut down on chatting. God knows i've seen lots of posts of useless chatter since getting on here, but there has to be a better way. Maybe boot the person for a period of time (eg. 1 month for a first offence, 3 for a second, 1 year for a third) and enforce it. The problem I have with the current set-up is that i've now had to wait a day and counting to post on some threads in order to respond to someone! It's driving me crazy! And i've noticed a definate drop-off in posts since this was implemented.
Food for thought for this site's administration. | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/23/2006 8:41:06 PM | There is a good and a bad to this new rule. Yes it is a good way to hinder the chatting (especially if it gets into a heated arguement between two people), but there's also a negative side to it...people sharing ideas or trying to respond to someone for help...or just generally wanting to post a comment to the next user tends to also bring a damper onto the situation. Debate is what the forums is all about...but it's also here to communicate with other people in a respectful and fun manner. We all say or do something that's within our normal personality or character, but I would like to think that being adults on here, that whatever is posted is not to be taken so literally.
So while the rule does help to cut down on the over use (or abuse) of posts, it also kind of blocks any form of friendly discussion or allowance to respond to that post without having to wait for someone else to reply a few times before you can speak. Does it give you time to think about what you're going to say? Perhaps...but generally, for anyone just joining the forums and wanting to be part of the converstation...it is a hinderance to be sure. | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/24/2006 11:47:06 AM | | thanks bigfish for clearing up the rules and that it doesnt apply to the party threads...unfortunatly, it applies to the 'after party pics' threads...which kinda sucks cause they are normally chattish threads as well and are fun to participate..thats my only complaint on the new rule | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/24/2006 6:06:40 PM | moderators aren’t paid so why should they have to repeatedly over and over tell users NO CHAT NO CHAT. I would think that ONE WARNING should be sufficient enough per user.
Even more Adminstrative work .... usually the ones that break the Rules that seem to come up with endless and infinite schemes to create even more work for us.
A Ban is a Warning with a little sting to make it real to you that more Bans will follow should you continue to break the Rules. Don't expect to waste a Moderator's time to delete your Chat & Off-Topic Posts because you do no wish to read or abide without a little something extra, since we assume that the Ban will not take any further Attentions of ours in respect to your posting habits.
Warnings without Bans are for those who usually abide by the Rules and rarely infract on them.
then there wouldn't really be a need to worry about the 'dictatorship rule of no chat'
This is a Forum, not a Chatroom.
* Chat noun, adj., verb (regular modified) 1. talk socially without exchanging too much information 2. casual conversation 3. An Interchange devoid of any Subject or Topic.
* Forum noun, (pl. "fora" or "forums") 1. An online community where visitors may read and post topics of common interest. 2. Any discussion group accessible through a dial-in BBS, a mailing list, or a Usenet newsgroup. A forum functions much like a bulletin board; users submit postings for all to read and discussion ensues. 3. An online discussion group. Online services and bulletin board services (BBS's) provide a variety of forums, in which participants with common interests can exchange open messages. Reading a forum's archives can be a good way to obtain a basic knowledge about a topic, and it also provides a historical perspective on trends and opinions.
Forum Rules - Specific
It seems like the rules are putting alot into take the personalities away from the people.
This is a Forum, not a Chatroom.
I think that is a big mistake and what the site is most designed for is interaction and getting to know people.
This is a Dating Site, The Forums are for Discussions, your E-Mail and 'Instant Messenger' other Interactions. That is the Design.
Joking the odd time and a little flirting here and there will not hurt anyone.
This is a Forum !!!
Just enforce the rules harsher on the avid chatters.
And that is the entire point to this Rule.
it takes all different personalities to keep the forums interesting
The Forums are for the Discussion of Topics and Subjects.
The forums have grown to more than just an intellectual thought sharing thing.
 | The Forums will remain Forums, not grow into anything else. |
|
| |
|
late™
|
Joined: 1/9/2005
Msg: 43 | |
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/24/2006 8:45:08 PM | A few points:
1) It's not a "new rule", or even a "rule", it's a forum site-filter protocol.
2) Those who take the effort to compose informative responses/contributions to thread topics, ...won't even know it's there - it is content specific.
3) OTOH, persistant chatters, and those who make repeated one and two line running commentaries/troll posts/wise-ass remarks in threads will now have difficulties in derailing thread topics.
4} It's only been applied in areas of the forums that need it, site policy evolves to curb problems and promote quality, and decorum.
5) This has not been done to ban "fun", unless one derives enjoyment from being a nuisance (see #3).
Question: Shouldn't the OP be exempt from this rule (it is their topic)? He/she should be able to respond as the posters comment - no?
This rule is not in effect in areas of the forums where an OP responding to posts isn't considered:
- "Broadcasting" via "Bill-boarding/Talk Show Hosting"
See: Forum Rules - Specific | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/25/2006 6:53:27 PM |
This new rule does not apply to party threads.
Then why can't I post again in a party thread? After being 2 of the last 10 to post, I was going to answer someone's question. | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/25/2006 7:07:00 PM | Clarification - it DOES NOT apply to the initial person who posted the party topic.
It does apply though to everyone else chatting in the thread.
This way the host can address questions & concerns about the event without worry about chat getting out of control. | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/25/2006 7:09:32 PM | Ah, ok. Thanks for qualifying that.  | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/25/2006 7:10:28 PM | | I think that this rule is a pro active way to control excessive chatter! The fact that it is not applicable to the OP seems only resonable to me! | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/27/2006 2:29:55 PM | | We have a coffee night established in Hamilton and I wasn't allowed to answer a new POFer's question about attending because I had 2 posts in the last 10. Since coffee is every Tues and people generally don't post until Monday night or Tuesday morning, I couldn't tell this new member that everyone is welcome. But, I suppose rules are rules. I don't dabble in idle chat but was kind of frustrated at not being able to welcome a new member to the coffee group. | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 4/27/2006 5:25:42 PM | Thanks for taking the time to answer some of my concerns and complaints in a mature fashion. You do make alot of good points. But, I think one thing you are overlooking is that these people come to the local forum for Ontario. Just by clicking on that, shows the interest in getting to know people close to you. If any of these people who complain because they are new and really wanted a totally chat free, inpersonal forum. They could always go to the global forums. But, by coming to their regional forums, that shows the first step into wanting to see the personalities of those who are close to them and wanting to interact.
If you think about it, that really makes sense. If they wanted just debates without interaction or personality, they could get that in any global thread. But, they want the interaction. They want the personality. Like it or not, that is why we are all here. Or we would not even bother with the local forums. Too meet and get to know real time people for our area.
But, saying all this I do not know how hard your jobs are as moderators or how hard it would be to monitor the people and individualize these excessive chatters instead of making this new rule. But, just sharing my thoughts.
One little side note. Newbies or oldies.
Most successful threads: Say something nice aobut the person above
Crush Thread
Dating games
Other personality threads.
They serve the chatters, not discussion forums - leniency is given, an inch is offered, a mile is usually what's taken, we're shortening that mile to a compromise.
These threads were all about interaction and were the most viewed and most posted on threads made. I seen first hand, when I started a crush thread how many newbies came to the forums. So this makes me wonder on your assessment of interaction being a negative thing.
interaction and camaraderie can still be fostered within discussion, not continued banality
But, again I do not know how hard it is to moderate the poeple who just get carried away and chat with each other in every thread that is made. I think a few harsh suspensions would take care of that. Maybe even a thread showing who got suspended and how long they got suspened for would open peoples eyes quick enough.
to what end? threads discussing user bans, gossip, more cleanup work - consequences meted out are a private matter between the posters and administration only/ Trappedonbayst
Again, thanks for responding to the last thread. We are on your side and just trying to share what we think is best too. | |
|
| New Rule???
Posted: 5/1/2006 11:59:44 AM | shoot i wish one of the mods or the big fish would of answered this post. Would really like to hear their point of view
| |
|
Home
login 
