BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Non-member lockout

 
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
Hieronymus
14:13 / 22.09.03
I'm wondering why Barbelith now has a members-only policy regarding reading posts. I tend to link Barbelith threads to non-member friends of mine as articles for them to read and now notice that one has to be a member just to be able to read given threads. Is this a new security protocol? And if so, how effective is this?

I understand circling the wagons in reaction to the recent bannings but if membership has now been shut down, is keeping the reading of the board to members-only useful? It strikes me as a bit unnecessary and even more isolationary.
 
 
Ganesh
14:17 / 22.09.03
I'm guessing it's a temporary measure to allow Tom a little uncluttered headspace to think about where we go from here...
 
 
We're The Great Old Ones Now
14:42 / 22.09.03
DM - I think you should wait and see a bit. This recent mess isn't over yet, and as I keep saying, Tom's not into arbitrary actions. I think there's a trust issue here - over the last little while, everyone has learned not to trust. Our social contract, if you like, has broken down. Let's see if we can unscrew the tension a bit.
 
 
Hieronymus
16:08 / 22.09.03
Works for me.
 
 
Tom Coates
16:16 / 22.09.03
Yes, this new move (which I wanted to mention to everyone before it happened) is designed to help us work through a variety of issues. It's not necessarily permanent (just like none of the decisions we make are) but it's going to stay in place until we have resolved this current range of issues and decided on a constructive way forward.
 
 
w1rebaby
16:36 / 22.09.03
Hmm. Unless there are going to be discussions of security measures etc here which are "classified" - and are going to be removed when the board is open again - I don't understand what it's meant to accomplish. And you know that any information will leak out anyway, there are probably dozens of fake suits that can be used to lurk and read, and people have friends and sympathisers remaining on the board.

It doesn't bother me particularly, if membership is restricted now I wouldn't want to just read either personally, but I just don't see the point, that's all.
 
 
Lurid Archive
18:29 / 22.09.03
I think that fridge has a point. Closing the board to new members will give us some breathing space in which our more disruptive members are less likely to make themselves known, but what does making the board unviewable achieve? You really think that modog/mod x and knowledge don't have access to suits?

btw. Why don't you tell us how you deal with these problems on urban, fridge?

Tom: I realise that letting things cool down might be a good idea, but I also think that we should get the discussion going asap. I guess its best to wait for you to start a thread about it.
 
 
Tom Coates
20:57 / 22.09.03
What specific kind of discussion are you talking about?
 
 
gravitybitch
00:09 / 23.09.03
(I'm soooo glad I looked here before starting a new thread...) I was a little surprised myself, but I don't mind this as a temporary policy change.

Are there benefits for all of us to having a really closed community for a while? It might be nice to hash things out with "just us" watching, but that seems kind of an empty thing as most threads and posts will be present if/when the board opens up to lurkers again.
 
 
Lionheart
01:16 / 23.09.03
What is the point in not allowing non-members to read the threads?

How will allowing non-members to read threads somehow compromise the board?

I agree with the membership policy currently in place. What I can't agree with is the current non-members can't read policy. What's the point?

What's the point?
 
 
Spatula Clarke
01:22 / 23.09.03
I don't know why Tom's decided to do it, but in theory it allows us to discuss recent trolling issues without actively feeding those trolls - if they get off on the attention they receive, yet the board needs to discuss them in order to forumlate a widely-agreed method of dealing with such issues if and when they appear again, then preventing them from knowing what effects - if any - their actions are having is a good idea. You can either do that by having a select number of people discussing the solution off-board, or you can allow everyone who's a member to be involved within the closed board.

That's in theory. Like fridge says, there are a number of reasons why it may not work in practice.
 
 
w1rebaby
01:31 / 23.09.03
Why don't you tell us how you deal with these problems on urban, fridge?

Well, Urban has a very different setup and situation, but basically: hardcore banning. Authoritarian jackboot stylee. There's a very high throughput of posters, and a relatively small number of moderators. Furthermore, the mod staff have tended to come to the conclusion that most persistent trolls are not at all amenable to persuasion or working things out in a reasonable fashion. Many are not amenable to social pressure at all - others have a small core of supporters who will always buoy them up, or actively take pleasure in the fact that everyone seems to hate them.

Most people don't come back after being banned - spammers, random bored trolls and so on. Those sort of people are not really present on Barbelith. We have had a number of people who are either admittedly or apparently mentally ill, and appear to compulsively return under new usernames to continue whatever behaviour caused them to be banned in the first place (e.g. posting child abuse threads during which they agree with themselves under multiple usernames). If contacting their ISPs doesn't change matters, these people have their real-world locations tracked down and the organisations which operate the computers concerned are informed. This is a bit of a harsh measure (and widely debated) as it can sometimes mean people getting thrown out of hostels and so on, but they are causing active psychological harm to others in such cases.

If modding U75 has taught me anything it is that some people really cannot be reasoned with. They absolutely will not stop. Terminator references aside, they are mired in delusion and cannot be argued with. In some cases, even multiple bans don't stop them, but all it means is you ban them again, and again, and again, with an increasing number of threats and actions, until they get the message. Engaging in discussion really doesn't help, something that becomes increasingly apparent if they engage in email correspondence. Thankfully, the vast majority do leave once it becomes apparent that they are going to be banned whenever they appear - and the version of vbulletin that we use has quite decent IP tracking facilities.

I'd say that multiple usernames are the first and best sign of a disruptive poster.

This is all for information purposes only. The moderation ethic of U75 is different from that of Barbelith, and the traffic to moderator ratio is vastly different. Also, it's only my personal opinion - I don't speak for the rest of the mods here.
 
 
Harhoo
07:24 / 23.09.03
Not quite sure how the board software works, but assuming it's based on a hacked version of something like phpBB, is it not possible to just make Policy & Help (and poss. Conversation?) member-lisible while leaving everything else open? Then you get a nice whitespace to work in while still allowing access to the majority of threads for non-members - who are unlikely to be interested in this sort of thing anyway.
 
 
Tom Coates
07:32 / 23.09.03
Let's just take advantage of the peace for a while eh - and come back to discuss this again at a later date.
 
 
Lurid Archive
10:16 / 23.09.03
Just a quick response to Tom's

What specific kind of discussion are you talking about?

I think we need to discuss how to deal with trolls more effectively. A random person with a keyboard should not be able to bring down barbelith. Either we go for the route described by fridge above (though, you don't seem happy being in that kind of role) or we find an alternative.
 
 
Lionheart
00:40 / 24.09.03
If this continues into next week then I'll boycott the board.
 
 
illmatic
08:36 / 24.09.03
I'd like to add my voice to Lionheart's in asking that this be revoked as soon as possible. I think it's a shame when people outside can't have a look in if they fancy it. And in this instace, the person whose been the biggest and most persistent pain up the ass is still posting, under his fiances's suit.
 
 
invisible_al
08:47 / 24.09.03
That's not very helpful Lionheart, Tom just needs some breathing space as this situation is doing his head in somewhat.

We do need to get the board open to new members again though and soon, I've definately detected a lack of vibrancy in the board over the last few months that I put down to it being the summer and people going out and doing stuff. But I'm thinking now we need new blood as I've not really seen any new people here in a long time.

But the problem is how to do this without opening the door to the trolls.

E. Randy Dupre suggested one way that GameSpot does it in one of the other threads, depending on the ISP you're using you have to give a variable ammount of information to get a login. No free mail accounts, just accounts from ISP's that Tom can get shut down should they be used to spam and troll. But this being only from IP addresses that have been used by trolls in the past, say from Swansea.

Would this work here?
 
 
Tryphena Absent
10:02 / 24.09.03
Right now this is a stupid conversation, not because the ideas are necessarily stupid but because we're discussing a small number of trolls who have access to the board through fictionsuits. They can see it anyway.

I think we need to wait, sit back and let Tom have some space to breathe. Let the board be member's only for a moment, a significant number of people are introduced to barbelith through other people anyway so they can read over people's shoulders. It doesn't have to be like this forever. Saying you're going to boycott is all well and good- but let's humanise Tom and think about how stressy it is when you watch your baby get hit by a load of morons. This place is three steps forward, three steps back and it's difficult to watch at the best of times, never mind at the moment.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
10:49 / 24.09.03
Useful comment, Lionheart. As usual. You might want to consider offering up some suggestions as to how else the situation could be dealt with. You might want to read some of the other threads around the place to understand why this course of action has been taken. You might want to realise that pathetic attempts at emotional blackmail are likely to be treated with the contempt they deserve, more so now than ever.

Just some thoughts.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
11:21 / 24.09.03
Indeed. I'd suggest that if you are unable to grasp either a) the fact that this is a temporary, emergency measure, and b) the fact that childish behaviour such as throwing a tantrum and threatening to leave the board is an invalid way to influence the development of Barbelith that has been explicitly stated by Tom to be invalid, then your presence will not be overly missed.
 
 
Lionheart
12:04 / 24.09.03
Well, lemme see if I understand this. The reason that Tom is preventing non-members from reading threads is cause he needs to clear his head? Huh? How is that solving the troll problem?

My questions are the following: How'd the trolls get so many fiction suits in the first place? Can't we all just solve this the way BBSes used to solve this? By having 3 types of membership:

1.) Probationer

2.) Sponsored Memeber

3.) Full member.

Basically probationers are people who can sign up by clicking on some "New Member" link. Then they have to undergo a certain amount of "Probation" where they're only allowed 5 posts a day and stuff. It's a type of membership with a huge amount of restrictions of what the Probationer can do. Then, when we feel that the probationer is alright, we'll let him onto the board as a full user.

Sponsored members are members sponsored by Full members. Let's say that I have a friend or acquaintance who wants to join then I'll sponsor him or her and thereby I'll be taking partial responsibility for the sponsored member's actions. The sponsored members will also have limits on their membership. Maybe something like 10 posts a day or some such thing. Then, when we feel that the sponsored member is alright we let him in.

And full members are basically what we are at the moment.
 
 
Lionheart
12:09 / 24.09.03
Oh, and in response to Flybody's comment " then your presence will not be overly missed."

I've went on hiatus from the board numerous times. Sometimes my absences lasted for months. And nobody noticed. So my lack of presence has never, and probably never will be, "missed".

(and all that I'm saying is that this is NOT a temporary, emergency measure for this action serves no real purpose. Closing down/restricting membership served a very good purpose. Putting in moderators served a purpose. Preventing outsiders from reading threads doesn't seem to serve any purpose. I could be wrong but I don't see how. If there's a purpose to preventing outsiders from reading threads then please inform me of it.)
 
 
Tryphena Absent
12:24 / 24.09.03
The reason that Tom is preventing non-members from reading threads is cause he needs to clear his head? Huh? How is that solving the troll problem?

I kind of got the impression that it's more to do with the internal problems that we have, the revamp of the moderation system and the fact that it generally is easier to think when you're 'alone in a room' without the grasping hoards around you.

The 3 tier system worked on a significant number of BBS' because it was aimed at people who flamed not people who trolled. Flamers usually come out in the first few weeks of joining a board and go on an all out bender. We have a problem with trolls who hang around for longer and put a lot more effort in but they're much rarer.

I'm not even going to address the problems with cliques, sponsored members and troll-friends (members of the board who are friends with trolls and support them but retain full membership and contribute normally). That just gets us in to the nasty abyss of trigger happy banning.
 
 
Lionheart
12:45 / 24.09.03
Anna, the sponsored members policy is already in place. In fact it's the only way to currently join the board.

And if friends of the trolls begin sponsoring them repeatedly then the those friends will be banned.

I also don't see this as leading into cliques. How would it get to that point?

And this will not lead to trigger happy banning because only Tom can ban people.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
13:03 / 24.09.03
On the old BBS system everyone's status is clearly shown to the world and no one is in a 'clique'. In fact that whole weirdness is, in my experience, exclusive to barbelith and rather predictably should the system change sponsored members would be viewed as in with the people already on the board. Why would the nature of our trolls change as a result of the entry system changing? Basically no one would be in a clique but the perception of cliquey cliquey would continue on.

if friends of the trolls begin sponsoring them repeatedly then the those friends will be banned.

That is trigger happy banning. Would you be happy with it in all honesty when you're not happy with a non-members policy? Getting rid of people because of their associations rather than their actions?

Instituting the BBS entry policy would completely change the nature of this board. It wouldn't tweak it, it would change it in to a place driven by an authority. I've administrated BBS', the first in 1994, the power system is not at all democratric and the entry is very tight. Frankly I prefer what we're doing now.
 
 
Lionheart
13:10 / 24.09.03
Waitaminute.. Are you saying that when Tom bans somebody cause they abuse the board then he's trigger happy banning? (Yes, I know. Horrible grammar on my part.)

And we already do have a sponsored member policy.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
13:33 / 24.09.03
Lionheart did you read what I just wrote?

1)Our sponsored member policy does not work in the same way as it does on a BBS as I have tried to explain above. Users here are given more anonymity and that makes a significant difference.

2)I didn't say that Tom is a happy-banner, I said that banning someone like, forgive my name dropping, Mayfly who was polite but supported a troll would be wrong and that getting rid of Nietzsch would be really pissy but with a system like that people in those positions are always getting kicked off boards.
 
 
Tom Coates
13:48 / 24.09.03
Oh for god's sake! Calm the crap down! You want to know the reason the board can't be seen by people outside? It's because trolls like Andrew get fueled up by seeing the results of their actions and they'll keep coming back as long as they can see people talking about them. The reason no one outside can see the board is because (1) there is a really significant cost now in having your membership revoked and (2) because I want the board to calm down and reach some kind of equilibrium before I let the trolls out there see it again. It's not ideal, but it'll work. Lots of other changes are hopefully coming too - some that we've been talking about for a while are very much like the ones that Lionheart suggests. But in the meantime - considering that I was freaking out completely and was seriously contemplating closing the whole place down - this seemed like the best option to try and calm things down!
 
 
sleazenation
13:59 / 24.09.03
If there's a purpose to preventing outsiders from reading threads then please inform me of it.

I believe the idea is to prevent the recently banned party from interacting with the board in any way.

Of course, that relies on other members/spouses(real or imaginary, and after the number of Calo sock puppets it is entirely possible that Mod3's girlfriend isn't entirely real) etc of the banned party not sharing their account with the banned party (which basically becomes a shared suit at this point).
 
 
Lionheart
17:57 / 24.09.03
All I can say now is:

Huggles.
 
 
Tom Coates
06:47 / 25.09.03
Sorry for snapping at everyone - I'm under quite a lot of pressure at work at the moment and (while I'd rather not be the person who has to make these decisions) I don't think they can all be debated before-the-fact. I am trying (desperately) to find an intermediate way to let people into the board as we speak.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
09:19 / 25.09.03
Snap away, Tom... to be honest, as I think I've said before, I'm amazed you haven't come round to all our houses with Uzis by now.

Huggles and again, thank you.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
09:49 / 25.09.03
Yes, for god's sake don't worry about apologising, just do what you need to when you can. And I'll try to be less rude and impulsive...
 
 
Char Aina
16:13 / 25.09.03
please, someone help me with the actual place for this, but...

couldnt we get a chatroom, like an IRC one, and let anyone from the 'lith in who wants to be in, except those who are trolling the board?

that way the discussion is only closed to the people who need to be excluded.

it would piss them off no end, but it wouldnt hack off anyone else. well, except their close friends.


like i said, i need help with the web-fu-knowledge to finish that thought off.
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply