I was new to the scooby scene 3 months ago, and therefore was looking for genuine help on certain subjects
Friends told me of this site and all the help and advice that was available here however it is apparent on certain threads there are a few unhelpful argumentative responses.
But hey were all big boys (well maybe average) and is our own responsibility whether to rise to the bait.

(1) But think if there was a section (moderator only) to name and shame the unhelpful/degrading responses to threads, Members could go here to see whose responses are worth ignoring...

(2) Put the thread in a jury section and let us the members decide if a reply/response is worthy of being put in another section of the board (none postable) to name and shame this would also give the author a chance to justify his her remarks.....

A time limit would also be worth looking at, A probationary period if you like Degrade a thread or person looking for help and get named and shamed for two weeks...

But all this said I find ignoring selective viewing and reading to work best.

Moderators you have the power

Mick.....




[Edited by ImprezaWRX - 10/17/2002 9:06:23 PM]

 

Lots of good suggestions so far (IMHO)
To follow on from one particular idea (already suggested in part by a couple of other members in this thread):


The problem? - Inflamatory/offensive/irrelevant posts on an otherwise serious thread.


Personally I think the community should be as "self-moderating" as possible.

So -

Every user starts with an invisible "SN-friendly" rating of 100.
3 additional buttons are added to the post headers.
(To go alongside the "Profile" / "Edit" / "E-mail this user" ones.)

The new buttons would be:

1. Rate this post Positive
2. Rate this post Negative
3. Report this post to Moderator

"Positive" would mean that the post is considered to be helpful / community friendly etc etc
"Negative" would mean that the post is considered to be inflamatory / irrelevant etc etc

- Every member (not just the thread starter) can vote.
- Every member can only vote once on a particular post.
- Every member would be limited to one vote per day.

- If your rating goes over 150 you are rewarded.*
- If your rating drops to 10, you receive an automatic e-mail from Scoobynet stating that you are sailing close to the wind and need to clean your act up.
- If your rating falls to zero, action is taken.**

The benefits of such a system:
- allows the board to be a bit more self moderating.
- relieves some of the pressure from the moderators who can concentrate on the more serious stuff.
- does not introduce "elitism" as your rating is not visible to other users.
- the vote limitations should prevent individuals being "victimised".
- rewards the "Scoobynet friendly" members.


*Rewards?
- a gold star?
- an avatar?
- your name in lights?
- a Scoobynet-Plus member account?

**Punishment?
- having your account frozen?
- removal of any existing "rewards"?
- banishment to a "sin-bin" forum for 30 days?



Just my thoughts...

Rich

 

Hi All

Gavin. (RB5)
I have received all 3 emails (2 of which were the same) and replied to all of them? Apologies if there has been some **** up. Please send again and I will reply.

OK..

Lots of constructive stuff in here.

It looks like the general concensus is that the ratings system is not favoured. That's fair enough, and as usual, the community will have the final say in that. I am always happy to be wrong.

But...

1) We will not impliment anything that either states or implies that someone is bad. a) because we can all be wrong and b) because it is a status (whether good or bad) which people of that mind can strive to attain.

2) Banning people that are bad is not a solution. It is fairly unworkable (except by some really extreme means which are incredibly labour intensive) as people can re-register, use different email addresses, different IP addresses, etc.

3) Self-moderating / we're all adults, is not a solution, as we can't make everybody feel that way.

4) Restricted Newbie forum is unworkable. a) Approval of that many accounts is impossible to be 100% fair / accurate on. b) post counters will innevitably ensue, and will call foul when they are accused of it quoting thread urls of other people doing the same. c) consistency of instances for putting people back in it, etc will be impossible to administer and will effectively result in a "police state" feel.

So...

The ONLY way I can see all this working is to just PROMOTE community spirit. Promote is differnt to reward.

1) We can arrange regular regional meets, by appointed regional organisers.

2) Possible a "True Community" forum in which posts of ANY negative / disruptive nature are moderated firmly. This will be posted as a sticky at the top. It will be the only place where this kind of "no-tollerance" approach will be used. HUMOUR will be 100% completely fine, but stomping on people's threads / posting ant-supportive comments on threads that people post in request of support, etc will be deleted immediately. This will be the place that the people who say "it wind me up when people cry about breaking their watch" will be told to simply not read if they don't like it.

3) A harder line will be taken on trolling. Not instant deletion, but it will be monitored more thoroughly and acted on more regularly.

The main thing in it all is to promote more of the community spirit, and I see the regional meets, etc as a good way of doing that.

Thoughts / comments?

All the best

Simon

 

My 2 penneth:

I was an avid Scoobynetter in 1998 when I first got my Scoob, until about the middle of 2000 when I emmigrated to Canada, and lost the Scoob.

After the announcement of the WRX in Canada, I have begun to surf Scoobynet again, mostly in the last 4 months.

I have noticed a very marked difference, quite inline with your observations Simon.

Scoobynet was a real community way-back-when, and now seems to be almost a max-power cussing match.

Innocent posts that previously would have resulted in healthy banter, are now met with full-on attacks, and quite frankly, it's just not cricket!

 

PS.. re : how many active users, etc.

The number of different accounts that posted in the last 4 weeks is around 9,000

the number of THOSE accounts that ALSO posted in the 4 weeks prior is around 8,000

I would use this to estimate that the community *of active posters* (remember the community stretches beyond posters) is around 8,000.

All the best

Simon

 

8000?
thats pretty good!


How many of them are nasty?
80 for 1%? about right?
It is a community then...

Meets are great - but i doubt it will include all 8000 people...

Karting League? - Support ur local area?
Then people could support from here too.

When someone has had bad news and tells all on scoobynet - the pages of support quickly gather...

Personally, I think the community spirit is alive and kicking

Be interesting to see how many active posters there were back in 2000.

 

As I said Simon, we don't have to fix it if it 'aint broken.

Keep this real people. It is after all, whether big or small, a part of our lives.

Let it remain so.

 

Simon,

I have read the whole 13 pages, my 2p FWIW.

Not sure if its technically possible, but why not give thread originators the right to delete posts that they deem inappropriate, on threads that they have started? If this goes too far then have checkboxes against posts so that the originator of the thread can mark a checkbox against inappropriate posts. The mods then see a list of threads with inappropriate posts checked and can decide whether to delete the posts.

This would require no record keeping, avatars, banning, coloured usernames etc., and would deter frivolous posters because once the post had been deleted no-one would know that it had ever existed. No elitism as no need to enhance status, just vape the offending posts.

Also if the originator doesn't revisit the thread then it can be left to the hijackers/muppets with no offence caused. People would be deterred from thread hijacking and more likely to open their own thread to maintain control of their posts. Something posted on my thread that I didn't find offensive like "You fat git did you finish all those chips?" posted by a mate, would not be checked, whereas a blatant hijack of a For Sale thread would.

The community would then be self-regulating to a greater degree and the better for it. If someone decides to delete every Mr. XYZ post on their thread then so be it. Mr. XYZ can start his own thread if he likes, and it is easier for everyone else to ignore if they want

I can see a potential problem with threads becoming discontinuous, but sensible originators will end up with sensible threads, and the less sensible will fade away as they get no hits. I think this sort of deterrent to bad behaviour also acts as a reward to good behaviour (Your serious posts will be read and replied to).

Good luck.

(Due credit to Rich Tee on p.10 whose post i read after compiling this. and BoxerFlat4, MarkO and DreamWeaver on page 12)

 

And my spare room is full!

Sorry, force of habit!

Just for once i agree with Neil.


Whole heartedly agree.

I personally don't feel a more heavy handed approach from the Mod's would be the answer. Closer to the mark would be if people just thought a little before posting some times. With so many user of the board disagrements from time to time are probably unavoidable, but how many of these start from a missunderstanding? (be it of humour or view point) FFS, most people who cause these 'flamers' and resopond, will probablly never meet in person. This of course could be the problem, too many Johny Rambo's behind keyboards. People who do know each other in person should sort out any greivences off-board.I can't belive the number of people who bite at these things when they are here through choice!

 

No, postable could be so much fun!


Sorry!

[Edited by muppet paster - 10/18/2002 1:33:58 AM]

 

Here I am, burning the way past midnight oil again
I would look at the so called problem in its simplest form

Anti-Community Spirit

First to have a community you have to have a common interest/belief/shared value (Scoobys) and if people don't share a common interest etc, then you will always get those that come along who only want to knock the group.

The way that I see it is, you can either try to include these individuals somehow or decide that once they have made themselves known by the way that they post, remove them from the board.

If it was down to me I would leave it as it is, because in the end people do get bored and move on. Also some of the flamers are very funny and they lighten up a somewhat otherwise dull existence. Maybe have a vent/windup forum where people can sprout off on any subject to vent their spleen and expect that people will give them inflammatory replies in return, which will enable them to vent even more. Then if people misuse the other forums by stirring it, tell them in no uncertain terms that they will be banned if they continue winding people up outside of the vent forum.
If none of this makes sense just ignore me and put it down to me being tired after yet another 20 hr day on that note I am off to bed.
ian

 

I personally do not like the idea of ANY type of rating as it attaches unwarranted weight to the replies of people who have a 'good' standing, as compared to others who are equally helpful and may have more knowledge but post less.

Can we not implement a process whereby if people find a thread/ reply offensive in terms of personal attacks or aggressiveness, they use the Report to Mod function. The moderators could then edit the post explaining that due to the nature and content of the reply the thread is being locked (not deleted).

People should have the right to freedom of speech but at the same time (on this BBS as in real life) other people should not be detrimentally affected by someone elses freedom, i.e. they should not have to suffer personal attacks or aggression from others.

The idea of the thread starter being able to lock a thread is the best idea so far IMO.

With regard to the greater use of smilies to indicate mood - to make this easier could we not have something along the lines of the message icon list on the reply form but with the relevant smilie codes so people can just copy and paste their choice into their reply. I am a lazy person and can never remember the codes and therefore do not use smiles much but if they were
available for copying and pasting........

Chris.

 

Simon: Do I detect a "cop-out" on your last thread?.
As I have stated earlier the use of "bad language" no matter how it`s disguised in a thread is prevelent in everyday life wether you like it or not but you have to accept it.
However I still hold the view that offensive responses to threads should be stopped,..... full stop, there is no excuse for it and it encourages other mindless idiots to do likewise.
We all know who these people are and imo the moderators should simply remove the offensive response to a thread in a similar fashion in which covert advertising is removed, almost instantly.
SIMPLE, no other vetting, points system, gold stars etc are required.
Bob

 

I honestly believe the deleting thing will work. i.e. if you are the thread starter, then you should be able to delete any replies you dont like, or the whole thread if neesd be

 

The thread originator being able to delete posts would'nt work very well IMHO.

What if the thread poster(A) did'nt like what they were being told and then removed someones post. The other person(B) then gets miffed and posts up a thread moaning about the guy who deleted the post.

A then tries to clear his name, but B can then just delete the post. Other people chip in but B only removes the ones that speak out against them, so inflaming A even more.

Don't think it would'nt happen like that, because it would. Its much easier to have people, in addition to the moderators(who can't read every thread every second of the day) using the RTM function properly and with more vigilence.

 

DW,

in a real community do you delete the voice of ppl you dont like? sounds like Thatcher with Sinn Fien in the 80's !

we will have threads my Beastman voiced by an actor!

 

OMG Tiggs just agreed with me

 

Active

Not a cop out in any way. Simply stating we will take a harder line. It would be foolish of any of us to think that simply deleting instantly will result in people thinking twice about doing it again. We already have "how long until this post is deleted?" posts. This would just become a game.

We have to do this more inteligently than simply throwing our weight around (although I do have some to spare!).

Making people WANT to stop is far more useful than trying to force them. If we take action like posting a response to them saying "look mate, we don't do things like that here... enjoy the community with the rest of us and you'll be respected. Otherwise, we're not interested." will IMHO have far more of an affect than just deleting every single post of it's kind. It shows others what kind of thing is not acceptable instead of simply trying to hide the fact that it ever existed.

Thread starters having mod powers
This is unworkable as you'll have people abusing it within minutes. Posting up all sorts of things and then deleting them so people never knew it was there. In addition you run the risk of someone getting annoyed and incredibly useful information being lost forever.

All the best

Simon

 

Don't know if it would be possible but would it be a good idea if you could be banned from specific threads? Either by a moderator or the originator?? Then whole threads which may be the majority good do not have to be deleted or moved, but instead the troll posts etc. can be deleted and can add no further comments?

Just a thought!

Andy

ps I have tried to read all of the previous posts but if someone has already mentioned this I am sorry!!

 

Have to say thread starters "locking" threads (but no more) sounds attractive. A percentage would spawn a second thread carrying on the argument but many would probbaly die at that point.

Deano

 

Dream Weaver,

I don't think it would be a good idea to allow thread starters to delete individual replies as this would result in the viewpoints displayed within the thread being distorted, which in certain circumstances (such as threads like 'Who's had good/ bad experiences of xxxx ?', would be against the spirit of balance and fairness.

I would limit the function to locking of the thrread.

Chris.

 

Fair point Tiggs, hold me hand up

 

Look at Saxo Boys post ("We're a nation of.....") if you want to see the new caring, sharing SN in action

bros

 

Tiggs: If I'm trying to sell something and someone butts in about what the weather was like at the weekend then I reserve the right to ignore them and not commit what they said to memory. They are then encouraged to open another thread to discuss their topic.

Simon: I don't agree that deleting posts is hiding the problem. The person whose posts get deleted will surely be discouraged from posting in like manner in the future. Threads will become more concentrated and less off-topic, and everyone will become a mini moderator enhancing the overall quality of SN.

Agree that some one sided posts will appear, but if a poster disagrees that their post should have been deleted the thread can still be reported to the mods.

[/constructive criticism]

 

Simon, the more I read the more I feel like I have stepped back many years into infant school with the suggested stick and carrot ideas. Sorry if this sounds offensive (it isn't meant to be), but do you want a BBS or an infant's class room?

Sorry, but slapping the wrists of the naughty boys and giving gold stars to the well behaved/brainier is childish beyond belief.

As a long-time member with a great regard for ScoobyNet I am dismayed at some of the things I am reading here. Time for me to move on I fear before the control freaks take over.

Ken

 

KenG

I'm inclined to agree with you on some points.

However - I still believe that the community needs to "self-moderate".

We can do it normally, by our own actions/posts or employ some other method (such as voting/rating systems).

Personally I favour the former, but as I read the first posts on this thread, I concluded that the we were being asked to suggest other ideas as the "community spirit" seemed to be floundering - hence the "stick and carrot" suggestions that I and others put forward.
This doesn't mean that I wouldn't prefer a more natural environment.

I'm quite encouraged to read that so many people care about Scoobynet.

Anyway - it's academic now as it appears that Simon has made his mind up which way he wants to take it...

Rich

 

Scoobynet HAS got community spirit, it is displayed by this thread alone.
I have meet an excellent group of people(friends) locally, thanks to Scoobynet and the people on board.

Please, take great care in what you decide to do in future, do not implement anything that may adversely affect the way that Scoobynet works. There is alot of information to be had, with such a varied group of people, with the sharing of one key interest.

Ideas.

Firstly Simon(webmaster), I can appreciate just what a task this is going to be, and I admire you for trying to tackle the subject. Shows all of us just what Scoobynet means to you.

1, Maybe all members should supply contact details to Scoobynet ie: E-mail address and contact telephone number. Failure to do so means no membership.
Any post which causes offence should be reported by "US" to the moderators (as is supposed to happen), or is acted upon by the moderators themselves. A way to act upon offenders "could" be for moderators to contact(via details supplied) the offender(s) with details of the offence and, to point out that this type of behaviour "will not be tolerated". This would keep everything OFF the board and, would give the person a chance to clear up what was meant by there post. A moderator could then asist the person to edit the post so that it could be worded differently so as not to cause offence( if a genuine mistake had been made).
Three contacts to point out offending posts would result in a thread being started by Simon(webmaster) with details of the three offences. The thread would be calling for a vote from "members" to decide whether the person stays on board or not.

2. Not really a solution, but may help.
How about a "voluntary" membership. A nominal amount of say £10 could be paid by each member for them to have a "tag" next to there user name (for example a star). This payment would give your profile the "star" for 12months, and then you repay for the next 12month period to keep your star. You could still use Scoobynet without paying, just don`,t get a star showing your support. All monies collected for your star would be passed on to charities nominated by the "members". This would distinguish genuine users who love the site and openly show there support.(also an excellent way of us Subaru owners to contribute to charity, and to show were not just a group of "boyracers")

Finally, A BIG THANKYOU to Simon(webmaster), All the people who give up their time to be MODERATORS and all the genuine MEMBERS on SCOOBYNET.
I (and alot of people) love this site, and I would continue to support Scoobynet even if I did`nt own a Subaru.
It is clear we all want to keep SCOOBYNET at the top of the tree.

 

Well said Rex93 i agree on that one.

Simon were do we send the cheque

I think most people on here would agree with that one.

Huxley

Profile search "Alarms CCTV Physical Secutity And save the best for last LED's and various other things

 

Seehttp://www.scoobynet.co.uk/bbs/threa...=140155&Page=3 for a prime example [img]images/smilies/mad.gif[/img] (fortunately jumped on by another Scoobynetter - tho' the fact that it's a first post gives me cause to wonder.....) This is exactly the sort of thing I'd like to see pulled by a Moderator for offensiveness: and that the justification for pulling it should be laid out in a set of conditions of membership banning, among other things, offensive posts of a personal nature.

Phil

 

what? John Felstead is offensive? Having met him Id have to say he isn't.

What on EARTH are you talking about? Please make the point of your post mor clear Mr Harrison. Thank you for your anticipated co-operation.

Buzz