"Heading off topic"

[John Orentas]

Isn't this getting a bit silly, or have I missed something crucial.

 

Closing a thread 'because it is heading off topic'. Who is to say it is heading off topic if it has not already done so, bit like hanging someone because he 'might' otherwise have committed a murder. A thread by the way in my understanding is one single contribution in this case the entire topic has been closed.

 

I was tasked with this little job for two years or so and in that time I did not close close a single topic and very rarely deleted anything at all, in spite of at times some quite extreme personal provocation.

 

Is this going to be a regular occurrence, simply on somebody's whim, that it 'heading' the wrong way.

Edited January 28, 2007 by John Orentas

[Keeping Up]

The forum rules state that topics may be closed "where the topic is drifting away from the topic of discussion". However I would like to take this opportunity to state that on every occasion without exception where a topic has recently been closed on this basis, it has been after the site crew have received multiple complaints about the topic from other forum members.

 

I hope there will be no need for this to be a regular occurrence in future.

 

Allan

[blackrose]

A thread by the way in my understanding is one single contribution in this case the entire topic has been closed.

 

 

Just so we get our forum terminology correct, I thought a "post" was a single contribution, while a "thread" means all contributions up to the last one on a particular topic. The topic is simply the subject of the thread (or perhaps that should be the subject of the first post, since threads often go off topic.)

Edited January 28, 2007 by blackrose

[tomsk]

Just so we get our forum terminology correct, I thought a "post" was a single contribution, while a "thread" means all contributions up to the last one on a particular topic. The topic is simply the subject of the thread (or perhaps that should be the subject of the first post, since threads often go off topic.)

 

Thanks to our special correspondent "Rosie' for his insightful deconstruction of the terminology.... Now over to a Mr A Hitler of Berlin for his views on National Socialism.....

[doomed1]

.

Edited January 28, 2007 by Keeping Up
Content removed for contravening forum rules

[tomsk]

.

 

 

Thats nasty doomed1..... BTW John would you consider your boat would make an ideal liveaboard?

Edited January 28, 2007 by Keeping Up
Text from quoted post deleted

[John Orentas]

Thats nasty doomed1..... BTW John would you consider your boat would make an ideal liveaboard?

 

 

Hi Tomsk.

 

No I wouldn't but having said that I built it with a view to almost total flexibility. When I was working the main function of Squeers was as a weekend or day boat. Within a very few hours every bit of furnishing could be removed and lined up along the bank-side, it could then be refitted and repositioned. Obviously bulkhead and permanent cabins could be fitted very easily. I did think that in later life my requirements may change and include some extended cruising.

 

Anyway I wouldn't like to think of my beautiful boat moored in squalid surroundings with piles of old batteries, bicycles, firewood and general junk on the roof.

 

As an aside since we are partly concerned here with forum rules, I think that they might include a bit about multiple membership and hiding behind an unpleasant alternative identity. What is your view of that Mr Doomed 1.

Edited January 29, 2007 by John Orentas

[minerva]

blurdyhell...!

and they say women are bitatchy! LOL go boys go!

 

yey to the boys!!

[doomed1]

.

Edited January 28, 2007 by Keeping Up
Content removed for contravening forum rules

[NB Alnwick]

The forum rules state that topics may be closed "where the topic is drifting away from the topic of discussion". However I would like to take this opportunity to state that on every occasion without exception where a topic has recently been closed on this basis, it has been after the site crew have received multiple complaints about the topic from other forum members.

 

I hope there will be no need for this to be a regular occurrence in future.

 

Regretably, with the way the membership is expanding, action like this may be necessary more often rather than less.

 

I hope there are safeguards to prevent people from hiding behind dual identities (just to wind us up) or if not already in place, would the moderators consider the problem.

 

The moderators will also need to consider ways of identifying and dealing with Trolls . . .

[123]

Regretably, with the way the membership is expanding, action like this may be necessary more often rather than less.

 

I hope there are safeguards to prevent people from hiding behind dual identities (just to wind us up) or if not already in place, would the moderators consider the problem.

 

The moderators will also need to consider ways of identifying and dealing with Trolls . . .

 

I agree.

[magnetman]

I agree.

 

 

So do I, it only takes a minute. Difficult to enforce on account of email addresses etc

[minerva]

Regretably, with the way the membership is expanding, action like this may be necessary more often rather than less.

 

I hope there are safeguards to prevent people from hiding behind dual identities (just to wind us up) or if not already in place, would the moderators consider the problem.

 

The moderators will also need to consider ways of identifying and dealing with Trolls . . .

 

 

This is just a suggestion...... feel free to kick it into touch.

 

On one forum i went on, they deleted all the users to get rid of dead wood membership, and told all the regular peeps to re register....

 

that said, its will prolly only happen all over again... anothe 2 yrs down the line or less...

 

 

Ill get me coat!

[Janet S]

On one forum i went on, they deleted all the users to get rid of dead wood membership, and told all the regular peeps to re register....

 

I truly hope we never get to that stage.

 

Janet

[NB Alnwick]

This is just a suggestion...... feel free to kick it into touch.

 

On one forum i went on, they deleted all the users to get rid of dead wood membership, and told all the regular peeps to re register....

 

that said, its will prolly only happen all over again... anothe 2 yrs down the line or less...

 

 

Ill get me coat!

 

I think Minerva has the basis of a good idea there except that deleting everyone might be a bit extreme.

 

If non-active members were deleted automatically after, say, six weeks of complete inactivity - that would help to keep a good handle on the real size of the group.

 

There probably ought to be a way of controlling new members to prevent Trolls, trouble makers and dual identities. There are several ways of doing this but here are some from other groups that I have belonged to:

 

New members have to wait 48 hours before they are allowed to respond to any thread or post a new topic.

 

New members have to be proposed by an existing member and then approved by the moderator.

 

The first (or first three) new topic(s) posted by a new member must first be approved by the moderator.

 

Things like this may seem draconian but I've been in one newsgroup for nearly ten years and it runs very smoothly after having imposed similar rules many years ago.

Edited January 28, 2007 by NB Alnwick

[magnetman]

I think Minerva has the basis of a good idea there except that deleting everyone might be a bit extreme.

 

If non-active members were deleted automatically after, say, six weeks of complete inactivity - that would help to keep a good handle on the real size of the group.

 

There probably ought to be a way of controlling new members to prevent Trolls, trouble makers and dual identities. There are several ways of doing this but here are some from other groups that I have belonged to:

 

New members have to wait 48 hours before they are allowed to respond to any thread or post a new topic.

 

New members have to be proposed by an existing member and then approved by the moderator.

 

The first (or first three) new topic(s) posted by a new member must first be approved by the moderator.

 

Things like this may seem draconian but I've been in one newsgroup for nearly ten years and it runs very smoothly after having imposed similar rules many years ago.

 

There's certainly something in this. As someone who has grown up dying to expose weaknesses in all kinds of security and everyday situations I felt it necessary to experiment and its easy as ABC to have two IDs, or even 123. I am not into causing trouble but was interested...

 

I suppose the obvious thing would be to moderate more severely and exclude all non boat subjects. Trouble is it'd make it a lot more boring to a lot of people but my main interest is boats and boating and boat equipment and that's what I want to read about and contribute to.

 

mustn't grumble...

[grunders]

I think Minerva has the basis of a good idea there except that deleting everyone might be a bit extreme.

 

If non-active members were deleted automatically after, say, six weeks of complete inactivity - that would help to keep a good handle on the real size of the group.

 

I wouldn't like that idea - I don't think that inactive members cause any problems that I can see and sometimes people may 'leave' the forum for a while only to return 2 months later, or whatever. Maybe they've been on holiday...

 

I think it would be more useful to ban the 'trolls'.

[Audi Fan]

I follow these forums all the time as I hope to buy a narrowboat sometime in the next year or two,

but i rarely post as i've little to contribute. Should my account be deleted?

 

BTW, hasn't this thread moved off topic already?

[NB Alnwick]

I follow these forums all the time as I hope to buy a narrowboat sometime in the next year or two,

but i rarely post as i've little to contribute. Should my account be deleted?

 

I wouldn.t have described following the forum as not being 'active' - I think that if there are 'members' who have drifted off, changed hobbies, died or haven't logged on for months for another reason - they probably ought not to be included in the membership list.

 

Anyone who logs on - even if only now and again, should obviously remain a member.

[Ben2542]

The trolls will just re-register again in any case, so blanket wiping of the membership list wouldn't seem to work.

 

I just can't understand this wish to sabotage the forum ... it's madness, and must be really pi$$ing off those who put their money in to make this thing available.

 

Ben

[NB Alnwick]

The trolls will just re-register again in any case, so blanket wiping of the membership list wouldn't seem to work.

 

I just can't understand this wish to sabotage the forum ... it's madness, and must be really pi$$ing off those who put their money in to make this thing available.

 

Ben

 

To explain, we have had some strange threads that some of us took seriously and spent time trying to make the apparent 'new member' feel at home - only to find that it was probably a wind-up.

 

This thread has developed (as they often do) into a general discussion about how such events could be avoided. I am still a very new boy here but I thought it might be useful to pass on my limited experiences from other newsgroups . . .

[Barry]

To explain, we have had some strange threads that some of us took seriously and spent time trying to make the apparent 'new member' feel at home - only to find that it was probably a wind-up.

 

This thread has developed (as they often do) into a general discussion about how such events could be avoided. I am still a very new boy here but I thought it might be useful to pass on my limited experiences from other newsgroups . . .

 

Hold on a minute - we don't know yet that it is a wind up

 

imagine the harm that is being done to the original poster if he is real - and I for one have no reason to doubt it

 

just a word of caution

 

Edited to add - if I'm being niaive I'll live with it

Edited January 28, 2007 by Bazza2

[NB Alnwick]

Hold on a minute - we don't know yet that it is a wind up

 

imagine the harm that is being done to the original poster if he is real - and I for one have no reason to doubt it

 

just a word of caution

 

Edited to add - if I'm being niaive I'll live with it

 

 

That is an excellent point well made but we do know for certain that some of the topics or posts were wind ups and in order not to offend, I have been careful not to specify which.

If that makes sense

Edited January 28, 2007 by NB Alnwick

[Jon]

To answer the issues raised in this post:

 

John, as you are aware, topics can be closed when they start to drift away for the discussion. This was a rule which I used to vigarously enforce back in the old days prior to the upgrade, but since we have become so busy it is nearly impossible to do. At present, we are taking a very hard line to rid the forum of the petty bickering, arguing and unacceptable posts what have been all of the site recently. Some will argue that this is censorship, that we are being too hard or that we are being unfriendly. Unfortunately the actions of certain members recently have left me with little choice. I no longer have the time to log on and read through 10 to 12 PMs of complaints and deal with them. Again, 99% of those here do not represent a problem and I ask those people to bear with us.

 

As for re-registering under a different name, this is a problem all forums have and there is very little we can do to prevent it. I ask people not to do it please because it just creates more of a headache for me.

 

As for cutting back on the dead wood, it is difficult to do. We already have an e-mail verification process to stop trolls from getting on the forum without having some valid form of off-site contact details, and short of manually validating accounts which is not practicable, there is little more that we can do.

 

I certainly don't want to delete the existing member database, as this risks a serious database corruption if it goes wrong and at present I don't have the time to repair it. Unfortunately people to drift away from websites when they find something else more suitable.

 

I'm going to move this to suggestions for now because there are some valid points raised here.

 

Jon

[cheshire~rose]

I think Minerva has the basis of a good idea there except that deleting everyone might be a bit extreme.

 

If non-active members were deleted automatically after, say, six weeks of complete inactivity - that would help to keep a good handle on the real size of the group.

 

There probably ought to be a way of controlling new members to prevent Trolls, trouble makers and dual identities. There are several ways of doing this but here are some from other groups that I have belonged to:

 

New members have to wait 48 hours before they are allowed to respond to any thread or post a new topic.

 

New members have to be proposed by an existing member and then approved by the moderator.

 

The first (or first three) new topic(s) posted by a new member must first be approved by the moderator.

 

Things like this may seem draconian but I've been in one newsgroup for nearly ten years and it runs very smoothly after having imposed similar rules many years ago.

 

There are some good ideas here but a period of inactivity is (I suspect) something that would be considered quite normal on a forum full of narrowboat owners. Surely there are a good many very valuable members who tend to go off for the entire summer months to cruise. I do not think that they would be too happy to arrive back at their winter moorings to find that they had been deleted before they could even tell us about their cruising or post the pics of what they was along the way to keep us all going through the winter months.

 

With regard to dual identities....

I will probably get hounded off the forum for saying this but I have a second identity! It came about when for some stupid reason (after a period of inactivity) I found myself unable to log in. I have not actually posted anything using the 'other id' for months now (possibly more than a year?) I cannot remember. I had no idea that it caused problems for the site crew and to be honest have not really ever thought about it (other than the fact that some of my really nice photos were posted using the 'other' ID)

I will have a look at how to cancel it later

 

My point is I suspect there are a number of people who have accidentally found themselves with dual id's for no sinister reason at all.