We need a forum where the rules enforce themselves

It requires programming changes and if the past is any indication, it won't happen. They can't even fix the issues they have. You want one set of rules for your forum and another set of rules for the other forums. Basically you just doubled the complexity of the 'forum engine.' Opening up a program and tinkering with it also is a good way to introduce additional bugs. I really do not think it is reasonable to expect ATS to change a functioning piece of software to your specs. If they did 'open up' the software and solicit suggestions, you can bet a thousand people will have a thousand different ideas of how the software ought to behave. There's no real reason to choose yours over the other 999 ideas people have.

Yes, I get that you offer these ideas as a foundation for discussion. I'm discussing them and telling you why your ideas have a slim chance of implementation. Tweaking software based on one guy's ideas is not good IT management.

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: eisegesis

I don't see a big difference between your proposal and the current system except that it would be elitist and bar junior members from starting posts.

Elitist? That's one way to spin it. It's like saying an ISP is elitist because some cannot afford internet access. I guess they're just trying to keep poor people from engaging in online discussion.

How about viewing it as a goal you can work towards achieving? If any member doesn't feel it's worth striving for, that's their choice and they're free to access the rest of ATS.

And my proposal is nothing like the current system. If new member's can't deal from being excluded from one single forum, that can eventually be accessed with repeated contributions, I'm not sure how they're not being allowed to access it.

I believed you missed the point and fail to understand the dynamics of low vs high quality discussion. My idea is far from perfect and is bound to ruffle a few feathers. Oh well...

a reply to: Swills

Honestly I didn't look at a single link in that op. I read the premise and responded as to my knowledge and experience of it.

But honestly to be on topic, this forum already exists

a reply to: schuyler

Yes, I get that you offer these ideas as a foundation for discussion. I'm discussing them and telling you why your ideas have a slim chance of implementation. Tweaking software based on one guy's ideas is not good IT management.

Not if you've got the cash to spend!

In this round of donations, anyone donating $100 or more will be added to a private list of “ATS Benefactors” who will receive special access to a private forum dedicated to brainstorming on new ideas, technology, strategies, content, etc. for keeping ATS strong and moving forward.

Link

He must be an elitist, lol.

a reply to: eisegesis

He must be an elitist, lol.

wew I know I'm gonna get flamed hard for pointing this out, but yea.

Don't get me wrong, I love ATS. But it is a forum. The content is not site generated, it's user generated. So he asked people to give him $100 to continue giving him content for the site but have special privileges to areas that have user generated content only some can see.

originally posted by: eisegesis
a reply to: schuyler

Yes, I get that you offer these ideas as a foundation for discussion. I'm discussing them and telling you why your ideas have a slim chance of implementation. Tweaking software based on one guy's ideas is not good IT management.

Not if you've got the cash to spend!

In this round of donations, anyone donating $100 or more will be added to a private list of “ATS Benefactors” who will receive special access to a private forum dedicated to brainstorming on new ideas, technology, strategies, content, etc. for keeping ATS strong and moving forward.

He must be an elitist

Having a private forum is a lot simpler than changing the way forums work. Secondly, there is no indication that ATS has enough cash to even plug the leaky software they have, so your claim of "cash to spend" is not established. I really don't think you have any idea of the complexity and cost of what you are advocating. Also, I'm not interested in the "elitist" claims about this. I wasn't responding to them. You seem to be defending your idea at all costs, but there really is no compelling reason to implement what you want here. It simply is not necessary. There is no reason to suppose that YOUR forum run YOUR way would elicit posts and topics that are any different than what we already have. They won't be less contentious or better written or provide greater insight. If the way you are responding in this thread is any indication, it's the same old stuff. It's not an improvement. So why go to the trouble to do it?

a reply to: eisegesis

no - having an arbitrary reply size of a fixed word count is utterly insane - not all replys need to be 200 words

each reply - to each post needs to be simply :

a relevant , clear and concise reply - that addresses the facts , refutes or supports the replied to post [ dependant on the views , aims and ideology of the respondant ] , supplies citations where needed , humour if appropriate and a splash of vitriol in extremis

if you are finding oneself compelled to add extra words - just to meet the dictates of this ` minimum post length ` then what gets added quickly degenerates into a word salad that does not enhance the reply - but merely increases the word count in order to comply with the stated regulations of the new sub forum

mandatory word counts serve only to dd words - they most certainly do not enhance the quality of the argument presented within the bloated text

see what i did there

a reply to: schuyler
No need to tweak software or spend a single dime, all that is required for the experiment is a topic, the rules and a designated enforcer/moderator/referee for the thread.

I'll volunteer as a word counter.

I'd like to take issue with the 500 post requirement before a member can participate in the new forum.

All that 500 posts suggest is quantity rather than quality. Some members hardly post at all but their posts are well worth reading. Others have an opinion on anything and everything. Not always well thought out opinions, either.

Not to mention some up their post count by getting involved in peeing contests.

I am aware of new members who are desperate to make their first thread so they make inane posts in any available thread to get their post count up.

How many of us might have our threads spoiled with posts like that because newer members were desperate to get a look at the new forum?

And probably the majority of older members already have a post count of over 500 so your forum would be available to just about all of us.

You might want to think of another way to weed out undesirables.

a reply to: schuyler

Secondly, there is no indication that ATS has enough cash to even plug the leaky software they have, so your claim of "cash to spend" is not established.

You misread my reply. You originally said,

I really do not think it is reasonable to expect ATS to change a functioning piece of software to your specs. If they did 'open up' the software and solicit suggestions, you can bet a thousand people will have a thousand different ideas of how the software ought to behave. There's no real reason to choose yours over the other 999 ideas people have.

...your ideas have a slim chance of implementation. Tweaking software based on one guy's ideas is not good IT management.

I responded, "Not if you've got the cash to spend!," which implied that if a member, not ATS management, had enough cash to donate $100, they'd be "added to a private list of 'ATS Benefactors' who will receive special access to a private forum dedicated to brainstorming on new ideas, technology, strategies, content, etc. for keeping ATS strong and moving forward."

This supports the idea that ATS management is willing to listen and implement changes to the function and layout of the website, by possibly using the suggestions of a smaller group of members who have the ability to donate the set amount.

I really don't think you have any idea of the complexity and cost of what you are advocating. Also, I'm not interested in the "elitist" claims about this. I wasn't responding to them.

A little presumptuous, don't you think? And that last part about SO being an elitist was expressed with tongue firmly planted in cheek. Try to relax...

You seem to be defending your idea at all costs, but there really is no compelling reason to implement what you want here.

There is no reason to suppose that YOUR forum run YOUR way would elicit posts and topics that are any different than what we already have.

I'm not conversing in defense of my proposed ideas, they're merely suggestions that may get noticed without me having to donate money. Any criticism helps, even from members who just go around trying to poke holes in everything. I'm only advocating for suggestions based upon my ideas in the OP and find your "no way, no how, no point" attitude a little off-putting.

They won't be less contentious or better written or provide greater insight.

I get your point, but that really isn't where I'm going with this. It's not about producing better content, it's about growing beyond cheap one-liners, while maintaining respect and composure. Learning to make every post count by being as constructive and helpful as possible. If you don't see what's happening to this website like I do, then we're going to have to agree to disagree on many issues.

If the way you are responding in this thread is any indication, it's the same old stuff. It's not an improvement.

You can get down from up there when you're ready.

So why go to the trouble to do it?

Because, like I already pointed out, SO is looking for "new ideas, technology, strategies, content, etc. for keeping ATS strong and moving forward." That statement pretty much refutes your entire point.

originally posted by: MaxTamesSiva
a reply to: schuyler

I'll volunteer as a word counter.

Lol. Brilliant.

5.) Stars are disabled.

Actually I think they should disable both flags and stars completely. This is the main reason why you get so many repetitive threads and also why 95% of the material here is pretty much garbage.

Could the same things not be accomplished with Moderators?

a reply to: TinFoilSuit

Could the same things not be accomplished with Moderators?

I don't believe it can. I have lost faith in the moderators here. There are quite a few posters here with high post counts that can apparently post whatever they want in threads and not get called out on it.

There's actually several new forum software that has auto-enforcing policies, many of which can be customized. It's pretty cool seeing how these play out in communities. You can do a bit of rule-setting outside of the forum software on the server itself, and then do a lot of things specific to your community or what a healthy community would look like within the forum software.

a reply to: eisegesis

5.) Stars are disabled.

I'd be ok with that. Stars only serve to feed the confirmation bias of the forum gangs on this site. I cannot tell you how many times the number of stars I do not have on my posts has been used against me to say that my point was invalid.

originally posted by: mymymy
a reply to: TinFoilSuit

Could the same things not be accomplished with Moderators?

I don't believe it can. I have lost faith in the moderators here. There are quite a few posters here with high post counts that can apparently post whatever they want in threads and not get called out on it.

Bull#.

The mods on this site, many of whom I know will disagree with me on many issues, are very fair and reasonable. I have posts removed from time to time and I cannot think of an instance in which it was not deserved. Well, there was one or two that I disagreed with, but I was quickly reminded of my error.

a reply to: introvert

I'll agree to disagree with you here. I've seen your posts here and I would label you passionate, the posters I am talking about are almost ALWAYS off topic. I would say troll like but I can't call them on that. I have alerted mods and usually receive no response and their posts stand

Also, even if a post is very funny, if it is off topic, it is off topic

Please use this thread to discussion your ideas for changes
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thread closed.