What would THIS have done for this site...?

[DeFecToR]

I can't help but think that this site has become a mess. Came across these alternative forum rules here: (edit: That i greatly thank tx3000 for pointing me to)

http://www.invisionplus.net/forums/index.php?mforum=xboxgamemods&showt opic=613

..and i'm sure that these rules would have created a more disciplined atmosphere far more conducive to 911 research.

[Craig W]

I agree that this forum would benefit from stricter moderation, specifically including far less tolerance of timewasters and poorly disciplined posters.

To those who think that that would stifle debate or discourage posters, I disagree. Just as with a child (and I have three), the lack of clearly defined and enforced boundaries encourages poor behaviour. Conversely, the presence of such boundaries encourages good behaviour (in this instance it would encourage constructive posting, useful threads, civil exchanges, etc).

Whether the above rules are a little too harsh, I don't know.

[TonyGosling]

[iro]

yeah sure - more rules...and watch this place turn into another controlled state of sorts

what this place needs is an atmosphere constructed through choice and a resonance of people coming together.
That is already clearly impossible as the 9/11 movement is full of diverse ego-maniacs and severely disassociated persons who cannot fit into a group dynamic.

Less rules the better - common sense does not require rules. After all is what you are all fighting against here not the encroaching big brother nanny state and the incursion into the everyday private life of the state and its terrorist tendencies?

This forum is already *, it will not and cannot be saved, so either enjoy it/take it as it is, or leave. Sometimes i come here to see if it has improved..and every time i do visit it just gets worse and worse - so much so it literally baffles me... but then such is life.

[TonyGosling]

[DeFecToR]

[Fallious]

Apparently the creators of the rules here looked at all the hard won experience and refined rule systems of other forums over the last 20 years and then went with their own idea of whats best.

It's not complex, there is a very simple and effective strategy for forums like this but apprently no one told whoever was in charge of forumulating the bizzare system in use here.

[DeFecToR]

[iro]

[DeFecToR]

[festival of snickers]

the less rules the better

[utopiated]

[marky 54]

theres no point IMO changing the rules when the current rules dont seem to be being enforced on eveyone fairly.

the recent debate with fred turned into a farce only because it was allowed to and rules was'nt enforced allowing accusations of allsorts which in turn then diverts the conversation through defending against those accusations.

it turns into a slagging match not a debate about evidence.

sometimes because the rules are not enforced you end up getting dragged into things and end up being guilty yourself of not staying on track etc.

if i have ever broken any forum rules its never been pointed out and ive never been warned so i dont know where the line is drawn apart from the obvious(swearing etc), i have sworn before even though in reply to being sworn at, even still the very few occasions i did it i wasnt warned and as far as im aware neither was the person who insulted me on numerous occassions before i lost my head.

the rules have to apply to everyone and as early as possible before the thread turns into a mess of accusations of shill etc. those keeping the forum in a good state should'nt be afraid of warning people regardless of who they are, nobody would have a problem with it if it wasnt just certain people pulled up while others are free to run amok.

[marky 54]

just to add, i understand it must be difficult to moderate a site like this and keep every thread on track etc. i dont see how changing moderators will help as i dont think thats the problem.

i think you just need a few more that are assigned to certain areas of the site. example moderator 1 is responsible for keeping general chat and news in order etc etc

[marky 54]

that way if its possible to do, no section is left unchecked and the time each moderator has im sure isnt enough to check the whole site.

so each moderator checks what they can in there time and all proberbly check at random, assigning each one to certain sections allows everything almost to be kept in check and gets the site back to some kind of normaility, IMO moderators need to work as a team instead of individuals.

i have no clue what life as a moderator is like so dont know if anything ive just said makes sense or helps, although i believe it would work if it could be done, hence the waffle.

[DeFecToR]

Proper enforcement of the rules (whatever they are) is key to the management of an effective forum. I dont really care what the rules are just as long as they are properly brought to bare. After all, if we choose to post here then we are choosing to abide by whatever rules this forum operates under. My point is that it is not working the way it is and that there could have been another way of doing things had proper analysis of the issues been carried out at the pertinent time. As it stands this forum is on a slippery slope to obscurity.

[DeFecToR]

[festival of snickers]

cheyenne indians had the best system i think

eu became meglamaniacs

[telecasterisation]

It matters not what rules you put in place, or what good intentions you have.

There is one major problem with administration on every site - and that is focus/uninterrupted cover.

By this I mean that admins are not waged or financially reimbursed for their time and effort, so the incentive to continually 'walk the halls' wears off very quickly. How often has a link to a sex site been posted here and it takes a couple off days before it is acted on by admin?

I have had my own chatroom and been admin on a guitar discussion site and finding individuals who can act as admin is easy - finding reliable people who can dedicate the required mental application to give what is essential for a smooth running environment that follows rules to the letter, is entirely another.

This is not a criticism, it is just an overview of the way things are.