BARBELITH underground
 

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


State of the board at present

 
  

Page: 12(3)456

 
 
Haus of Mystery
17:17 / 13.02.05
I'd just like to add that that was a lightweight joke thread done whilst bleary-eyed on a Saturday morning, and I can't believe the amount of offence it has caused. I've posted here for years and am not a troll, or an idiot. Seems that some people have their mind made up about me though. Cheers.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
17:26 / 13.02.05
I'm pretty sure that nobody's said that you are a troll or an idiot, just that the thread itself was shit and likely to stay that way.
 
 
40%
17:36 / 13.02.05
Haus, you can try and turn it back on me if you want, but you've not made any case for why I've misunderstood. Your statement was:

It's a point... maybe the well-adjusted, interesting and useful people who have read the Invisibles turned up here a while ago and all that is left is a slow drip of fools.

I would be ashamed to speak about fellow human beings in such a manner. Maybe you feel differently. But if we're here discussing how the board should be run, I just don't think that talking about people in terms of such harsh criteria is any help whatsoever. If you want to have a better go at explaining why you feel I've misunderstood, fair enough, but the meaning of your original statement was pretty self-evident to me. And that kind of talk is not going to help the board progress, in my opinion.

[Incidentally, I’ve been racking my brains as to how you know it’s my birthday tomorrow, but thanks]

Xyu – yeah, it’s me. Hope you don’t remember too much

Spatula – seems I didn’t get the point you were making re. The times. I understand now, you couldn’t have been referring to me, so a lot of what I was saying above was based on a wrong assumption. Sorry about that.

As for the U2 thread, whether it could have progressed into anything more useful hardly seems like the point. I’m not saying it should have been left alone in anticipation of it turning into something good. It was never going to. It should have been left alone because there was nothing to be achieved by trying to stamp it into the ground. I care nothing about that thread, but I was bothered by your tone in the thread and the sort of terms you were using. For one thing, signal vs noise is a pretty subjective thing, and I don’t see how anything useful can come of discussing things in those terms, in the U2 thread or in this one. I’ll be interested to see what responses people make to your serious question about the signal to noise ratio, but I’m not holding out too much hope. Asking positive and open-ended questions like “what do people want from the board?” seems a lot more helpful.

I’ve always taken the view that a thread being crap or pointless is no reason to interfere with it. Let democracy work it out. If enough people want to post in a thread, who are the moderators to say it’s not worthwhile? Ultimately Barbelith has its core values, and I think they’re strong enough that they don’t need quite the level of protection that people are trying to give them. My view has always been that if something’s offensive, it should be moderated. If it’s taking up excess space, it should be moderated. If it’s crap, pointless or annoying but nothing more, it should be left alone, and the Barbelith community trusted to treat it with the contempt it deserves.
 
 
Haus of Mystery
18:07 / 13.02.05
I do see that these kind of threads get on people's tits, especially those who moderate. I do however feel there may be a slight exaggeration of the 'noise' problem on Barbelith. Do people really feel there are that many threads that are pointless, unstimulating or just plain shit?
It strikes me that Barbelith has a good mix of high and low brow discussion, but it seems I might be in the minority. perhaps some people have simply been here too long, invested too much in the board. The U2 thread was just me having a laugh (although it's painfully obvious I was misguided there) - I'm sure it would have died a death quickly and quietly. The disdain dished out at it is rather disheartening however. I certainly didn't intend it to be held up as yet another example of the apparent intellectual deadening of Barbelith.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
18:12 / 13.02.05
I would be ashamed to speak about fellow human beings in such a manner.

I'd be ashamed of being so incredibly, self-aggrandisingly preachy, especially while screeching "control freak" at anyone whose opinion you don't like. I said that the people being attracted to Barbelith now because it is called Barbelith may no longer be value adds. It was said before that the real irritants to the board often seemed to have turned up in the hope of meeting Grant Morrison, or make assumptions (and act on them) on the assumption a) that they know Grant Morrison's mind and b) that the board should be run according to their knowledge of Grant Morrison's mind. I don't see that as controversial. If you think it is, support your contention.
 
 
---
19:31 / 13.02.05
I said that the people being attracted to Barbelith now because it is called Barbelith may no longer be value adds.

I'm a sure lot of you older and wiser people here joined because it was Barbelith, and you seem cool now. It's easily possible that with a little more tolerance for people having a laugh, making the odd pointless thread etc, (which can just be moved to the convo) many of the people that presently irritate you could in time be people that you grow to like.

The thing that worries me (not that I'm under the impression that my worries are really going to change anything) is that you people had Barbelith to join and meet with like minded people, and it's possible that with the ideas in this thread that won't really be there anymore for others like yourselves in the future. This board will hopefully still be here, but it might not be as accessible for that type of person to want to stick around.

Just a thought or two that I feel should be added. I hope you all work something out that's for the best of the all anyway.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
21:16 / 13.02.05
I certainly didn't intend it to be held up as yet another example of the apparent intellectual deadening of Barbelith.

That wasn't why I linked to it here. My main point was asking the question about possible reaction to any moderation of similar threads - reaction which has tended, in the past, to come from people who previously had no interest in the threads until a moderator had decided to step into them, when suddenly they became a cause celebre - and the one about noise/signal that I expanded on in the last post of the previous thread. Admittedly, I should have worded the post better.

Xyu> The main point about the name is that it doesn't give an accurate indication of what this place is. The majority of new people finding and posting to a board called 'Barbelith' are, as Haus suggests, going to be thinking it's a site mainly for discussing the ideas examined in a comic book that's ten years out of date. That doesn't profit either them or the board any. If a name that properly represents what the board is here for can be found, it can only be for the good. Although, first we have to define what the board is here for, and every previous attempt to do that has ended in complete failure.
 
 
---
22:28 / 13.02.05
The majority of new people finding and posting to a board called 'Barbelith' are, as Haus suggests, going to be thinking it's a site mainly for discussing the ideas examined in a comic book that's ten years out of date.

I looked back at the comic yesterday and I think that one of the qualities it has is that on several levels it stands outside of time. I've been getting inspired by some of the ideas in it again, albeit with a calmer mind, but as to what you said here :

If a name that properly represents what the board is here for can be found, it can only be for the good. Although, first we have to define what the board is here for, and every previous attempt to do that has ended in complete failure.

One thing that could be done is to list everything that this board discusses and on what level those things are discussed at, maybe that could help nudge us closer to something. I agree that it could be a hard task though. I've loved Barbelith for the reason that the Barbelith entity is something that guides people on their journey, and with there being so many different things talked about here it seems to fit well, but I can understand that after 10 years of the comic, and with you all experiencing so many people joining thinking it's mainly an Invisibles discussion site, it could grate on your nerves.

Hell I've not really been too bothered though, if it hurts me so much I can design and set up my own site for something like The Invisibles and related things in the future.
 
 
PatrickMM
02:24 / 14.02.05
I know the Barbelith name, and the board's connection to the bomb, was what first attracted me here, back in November 2002 or so, and at first I was wondering why there were so few Invisibles threads, but I gradually realized that the board had evolved beyond just being about The Invisibles, and I'd imagine that a lot of people attracted by the Barbelith name will gradually realize that too. Also, I don't think a name change is necessary, because people who haven't read The Invisibles will just think it's the name of the board, and wiill judge things on the merits of the board itself. Basically, it will attract some people, but I don't think it will put anyone off.

As for the state of the board, I feel like in the comics and film boards, everything seems to be an opinion thread, and there's no analysis. I know it's tougher to analyze a typical movie than something like The Invisibles, which is made for interpretation, but there's plenty to discuss in any movie beyond just whether you liked it or not, and maybe that should become a goal with discussions there.
 
 
_Boboss
09:14 / 14.02.05
just open the doors and let the new members in. please? it's the only concrete solution being offered, but the peripheral arguments here are distracting from that. trolls get banned and banned good after agreement from two mods, and no-one frets about their cybil liberties, they just accept the changes or piss off somewhere else. why can this not be quickly initiated?

we should maybe have a vote on the name change, let everyone feel invested in the rebranding.

i offer 'chant:morrison.com' (talking about grant morrison comics is the only thing this site does better than any other - why are people so shamed by that?)
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
09:52 / 14.02.05
How about "Tom's Peter Purves Fan Site"?

OK, so we open the board to new members. If we can have suits banned after two votes from moderators, that makes life easier, although if other moderators can veto it things get a bit more complicated. However, it still means our more unhinged trolls can register a thousand suits in a day of maniacal button-pressing and go to town...

I'd suggest one more bar to entry, or at least one more disincentive to multiple suit registration. What that is I don't really mind. The problem is, every option will be in some way exclusionary. So, there's the $5 one-off payment that Tom mooted before. There's registering with a "proper" (i.e. non-webmail) email address, and having a passcode sent to that email address before registration is possible, but again that potentially excludes people. There's sponsorship, or there is a mix of all three... or some other option.

So, somebody wanting to join could pay a one-off fee, if they had a credit card. They could provide a static email address, if they had one. Or they could send an email to new_members@barbelith.com, or similar. That prevents automatic registering of thousands of multiple suits, but also makes getting in easier than it is at the moment (again, the "back door" at present is simultaneously hard to get hold of but open to abuse - all the downsides of emitism without the benefits - and I for one have no idea if the new members currently arriving are Tom-sanctioned or have just been told how to register).
 
 
Bear
10:08 / 14.02.05
Allowing new members would help I think although I think it's obvious that Barbelith is changing, it's almost like it's splintered into two groups.

How many active users do people think we have at the moment 50? It's not really much of a community more like a street I'd love to see some newbies joining, one of things that I love about Barbelith is the mix of interesting people with interesting lifestyles and interesting jobs and basically I know a fair bit about most users now and I'm nosey and want to find out about new people.

Also wondering how many new members would sign up if the board was opened up, does anyone know how much traffic the site gets? How many people are actually waiting to be allowed through the doors, hundreds? Thousands? 5?

I'm afraid I'm all about questions and less about answers, but I see nothing wrong with opening the doors but kicking anyone that mods agree is causing hassle.
 
 
_Boboss
10:27 / 14.02.05
perhaps asking for a donation, a regular donation even, after three or six months? i think i'd have to have invested some time and interest in a place before i'd be willing to invest money.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
10:35 / 14.02.05
Yeah, but that's no good for preventing our more psycho trolls from registering hundreds of suits, which would be the main aim... or at least making it expensive to do so, since they'd be expecting the suits to be banned before three or six months, anyway.

So, if somebody didn't want to pay the $5 fee for automatic registration, they could apply with a valid, ISP-based email address or submit a request...
 
 
Bed Head
10:49 / 14.02.05
Is it worth saying that $5 is, what, £2-50? As a deterrent to random nuisance it’s okay, as a deterrent to a crazy who’d probably quite happily set aside 20 quid for a Saturday night in, maybe not so useful. Taking untraceable one-off webpayments can only properly work if combined with something else, it’s no good being able to pay your way out of other checks if the fee is set so low.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
11:37 / 14.02.05
I don't see an enormous problem with preventing people from registering with email accounts from Hotmail, Yahoo, Gmail, etc. Everyone with home access to the Internet has an email account linked to their ISP, don't they? Students will have a university-based email address, people at work probably have work accounts, etc. Maybe I'm not thinking it through properly, but I don't see how it'd exclude people to any significant degree. There'd be those whose only access is in webcafes and the like, but otherwise it wouldn't be a massive barrier to the legitimate registration of new suits, would it?
 
 
Spaniel
11:40 / 14.02.05
Sorry to drag this out, but...

...I do place more importance on the policy and help than it being one forum that many people never read. I see it as being the hub of the operation.

Okay, but I thought you were making a more general point: that the threads in The Policy are dragging the board down for everyone. I mean, just because you value and read The Policy forum doesn't mean everyone does. In fact, I think it's pretty obvious that it goes largely ignored and, therefore, threads like this have little or no effect on most people's board experience.
Also, I think it's far from clear that people stumbling across this thread would share your opinions.

And if there are only a couple of threads where people are talking, in generalised terms, about contributions to the board not being up to standard, and what should be done about it, that’s too many.

Why? I simply don't understand why we can't demand things from Barbelith.
You seem to be under the misapprehension that all those who have expressed discomfort with the current state of the board are suggesting that it's the fault of foolish Johnny-Come-Latelys. I'm not sure anyone's saying anything quite so simplistic.
 
 
Haus of Mystery
11:42 / 14.02.05
How about we take the US immigration technique - give people a little form with 'Are you a troll - YES/NO?' to fill out.

Question is, would the money deter potential trolls - they seem like pretty dedicated troublemakers, and might consider a few quid worth it to cause a shit-storm.
 
 
Ariadne
11:57 / 14.02.05
I think the hotmail/ yahoo ban would be a real problem for lots of people. Loads of people don't have access from home. Or share a computer - for example, my access is via O2, but Loomis doesn't have a BT email, just a Hotmail one. I know of other Barbelith people who theoretically have an email address through their ISP but have forgotten what it is.
 
 
Axolotl
12:14 / 14.02.05
As a long term lurker and semi-regular poster for the last year or so I just thought I'd throw in my two cents. I think things are going through a fallow patch here at the moment and that we could do with stirring things up a bit. How much we can actually do without Tom's active involvement is something that could do with being defined.
However we must remember not to be overly critical, compared with most other message boards Barbelith still stands out like a beacon of correct spelling and reasoned argument.
I also think that Barbelith can support many different levels of discussion and that we should try and remember that asides and jokes that would be completely unnacceptable in some fora are fine in others, especially if not out of tone for the rest of the thread.
Perhaps we could try running a series of seminars in the more serious forums, perhaps with recommended journal articles, books and websites in order to boost the level of discussion about a particular topic. Barbelith has always struck me as a brilliant way of learning about and discussing topics that you just can't talk about down the pub.
Having new people involved I think is a vital part of that both to inform and spark debate, though we really do need to work on keeping out trolls (or rather specific trolls). I would go along with either banning automatic registrations form webmail accounts (possibly allowing them to register via an e-mail) or with the charging of a nominal fee or a combination of the two.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
12:22 / 14.02.05
Is it worth saying that $5 is, what, £2-50? As a deterrent to random nuisance it’s okay, as a deterrent to a crazy who’d probably quite happily set aside 20 quid for a Saturday night in, maybe not so useful.

Yeah, but it mounts up, and, as has been mentioned before, we're not overly concerned about individual evenings where a nutter decides to spend 20 quid sitting in and getting banned from Barbelith 8 times. We're talking about nutters who have previously registered scores of suits at a time and used them to wage a concerted campaign of harrassment and stalking. At $5 a time, that could be pretty ruinous, especially if combined with moderators having the power to ban users - a big step, but possibly a necessary one if Tom and Cal are not around and the board is open again. It's a question of making persistent trolling inconvenient and/or expensive, and also of providing a clear paper-trail to the person on the other end.

Henmce the multiple options. If someone has a credit card but no ISP-based email, like me, they can pay $5 for an easy sign-on. If they have an ISP-based email that they (and we) can check, they can apply for membership that way. If they have neither a credit card or an ISP-based email, they can click on a button and send a request to join which would be read and responded to - again, that means a lunatic troll would have to write lots of individual requests, rather than mechanically repeating a single process. It's about slowing down, again, without making it actually impossible for anyone to join unless from a banned IP range or similar.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
12:24 / 14.02.05
Ariadne> I was thinking that in cases like that, where it's a shared home machine, one or other partner might have a work email account or similar. The email account would only be of any importance for registering - select username, input email address, get password sent to that email address for verification of username, join board. That'd be the only time when the email address was needed or had anything sent to it - it wouldn't be required for future access to the board.
 
 
Bear
13:06 / 14.02.05
Does anyone else think it's maybe a little cheeky asking for money? The board's not at it's best so we need new people to come along and freshen things up a little, everyone agrees that new members are needed right? So you're going to ask people to come along and help get things moving and charge them for the privilege?

I know it's not much and the main point is to stop people registering lots of suits, but it still seems a little strange.
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
13:28 / 14.02.05
Might there be a way to limit the number of suits that can be registered from each IP address? That might help a bit with the multiple suit thing, though it wouldn't solve it. But I don't think there's a way of solving that problem that doesn't create new problems. Perhaps we just have to accept that the board will get trolled, and perhaps quite badly trolled, from time to time; open to new members, see how it goes for the first couple of weeks... It will require greater activity from moderators, but since many of us would like to open to new members in order to invigorate discussion, it may be worth it.
 
 
Lurid Archive
13:40 / 14.02.05
I agree with Kit-Cat, that if we are to open the board to new members, we need to be prepared to deal with trolls as they arise and continue dealing with them for the forseeable future. I'm prepared to put in the effort in order to see the board come back to life, but we should be ready for the change of pace.

Having said that, and correct me if I'm wrong, isn't the only way this is all likely to happen is if wee move to some pre-written board software and abandon attempts at customisisation and distributed moderation? If so, then I say that that is the way we should go and give up on the experimental aspects that require too much of Tom and Cal's time.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
14:32 / 14.02.05
That's certainly a factopr - or we find other people who can code the script the board is built in at the moment.

Bear - well the precedent is Metafilter, although Metafilter has a lot more members. But, yeah - which is why the only people who woudl pay $5 would be people who didn't want either to get an ISP email address or send a request for membership using a form, essentially.

Limiting suits from particular IP ranges is also a possible, although its utility is limited, as are posting limits...

Basically, trolls will crop up. Our trolls have at times been unusually insane and virulent, and have had remarkably little to do with their lives, and thus unusually dedicated. Taking that into consideration, we need to strike a balance between making it hard for suits dedicated to trolling to be created and maintained, easy for new people to come in with the right aims, easy to moderate any problems arising from any influx of new people, and make it easier to deal with trolls. Any or all of which may be pure speculation unless we can alter the way this code works or move to a different package, but we may as well have the discussion now - in fact, maybe it's worth a page on the wiki?
 
 
Smoothly
14:40 / 14.02.05
FWIW I also think it's worth taking some risks in order to open the board up again. At the moment, one method of gaining entry is to ask Tom directly. If we supplemented that with automatic registration with an IP-based email address, a few worthy people might fall few the cracks, but it'd be a good start, wouldn't it?
Extending moderator powers might be controversial, but it might be a necessary evil in the short-term. But why would we need to move away from distributed moderation? Could suit deletions not be voted on in the same way as thread deletions?
I get the impression from this thread that mods would be more than happy to be extra vigilant as the draw-bridge is lowered. And if there are concerns about additional pressure on existing moderators, couldn't we just make more of them? Speaking of which, what happened to loose plans once mooted to give everyone a tour of mod duty? It’s my experience that there's no better way of allaying fears about cliquey-snobtroll control-freakery than seeing the moderation process from the other side. Giving more members park-ranger responsibilities in particular fora might also encourage people to get more involved/raise their game.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
15:58 / 14.02.05
Xyu I'm a sure lot of you older and wiser people here joined because it was Barbelith, and you seem cool now.

It also makes me irresistable to women. But in fact, the real secret of Barbelith's success was not it's connection to The Invisibles but the fact it was being run by Tom, who was already achieving fame and fortune as a blogger, or at least a lot of people saw the blog. I think a number of the 'great old ones' you're thinking of came because of the blogging, rather than comics connection.
 
 
rising and revolving
16:43 / 14.02.05
So, my only question regarding the board as experiment is - does it work? Is it being run as an experiment, or is that just a nice way of saying things are pretty freeform and roll as they go?

This whole distributed moderation? Is it working well? Does it offer something other boards don't? What?

I admit, it sounds a little to me like it's a sort of meta-board game that the popular kids get to play, while at the same time doing no good for anyone who isn't a mod. But given I can't see the nuts and bolts of it, I can't really offer much comment. I'd love to know if it IS fun for the mods, and what they feel it offers.

I also feel a little ... I dunno. Annoyed at the "this board is an experiment, first and foremost" position. Mainly because it reduces those people who are using it as a message board, to discuss things that interest them with other likeminded people to the position of lab rats. The actual DIALOG is unimportant, if the experiment is the prime factor. That would suck, and certainly means those not taking place in the experiment (ie, the non-mods) are effectively being told they're not really welcome - they're just the pawns in the experimental community.

But you know, I'm over my concern about that. I think my biggest question remains "Is it working?" and secondarily "If it's not, and it's an experiment, isn't it time for change?"

As for people making the signal to noise arguement, my opinion is simple.

A) Most of the noise is people complaining about the noise.

B) The best way to raise the ratio is to add signal, not fret about noise.

Finally, requiring people to have a valid email address is usual. I really don't see why this would be problematic - sure, it excludes a small few. Given the other option is exluding *everyone*, a small few doesn't look so bad. Whereas charging seems both elitist and asking a bit much. Frankly, the board would need to offer more in order to start charging people to come on.

I don't think there's anything wrong with enforcing silence, either. New users don't get to post for a month - gives them a chance to become enculturated before they open their flaps.
 
 
Spaniel
17:10 / 14.02.05
Just a quick comment: I've got a train to catch.

Sand, distributed moderation is about being fairer to the board members. It means that no moderator can act unilaterally. It means that there are always checks and balances in place.
 
 
sleazenation
17:22 / 14.02.05
so, do supermods have the power to lockdown suits? cause that is the only way I see this working. If a
 
 
Spatula Clarke
17:48 / 14.02.05
Firstly, I said that the board is an experiment in online community. As such, of course dialogue is important. Community. Dialogue. Secondly, almost the entire thread is people agreeing that change is necessary. What's being debated is what form that change should take.

On moderation: Boboss is entirely correct about the reason for the system of moderation on the board now. Something this size, with this number of members, wouldn't run as smoothly as it currently does if there were no moderators, but we have a slightly more complex form of moderation in order to guarantee that no one moderator can run amuck (as has been know to happen on other moderated boards). It also provides moderators with a necessary defence against accusations of abuse of power.

The nuts and bolts, as far as I'm aware, are explained somewhere in the wiki.

No, moderating isn't fun. It's dull at best and deeply frustrating at worst. Is distributed moderation working? I can't see a solid argument for how it's *not* working, other than that it sometimes takes a little longer for actions to get passed than would be the case otherwise (which, admittedly, can be a problem, especially in fast-moving threads). But that's why we've got the other thread, to see which moderators still visit on a regular basis and whether or not the list needs to be updated.
 
 
w1rebaby
19:25 / 14.02.05
A few points:

1. Barbelith has *not* had anything in the way of trolls compared to other sites. We've had one obvious recurrent one and a few irritating posters who've been banned. This is *nothing*, relatively speaking. You want to know about real trolls, try people who won't stop re-registering until you find out where they're posting from and get them fired, or banned from that branch of web cafe. I repeat, Barbelith's trolls would make most forums laugh.

2. Dealing with trolls who re-register is, unfortunately, one of those things that board moderators have to do. You can ban new registrations, which stops trolls re-registering but means the board dies a slow death. You can validate them on the basis of "proper non-webmail email accounts" (hahahahaha, meaningless). Or you can let them through and hope they're not registering multiple accounts from the same IP. Or you can just ban them when they start posting bullshit. It's all work.

A lot of the ability to check this sort of thing comes from software. I know what is possible with standalone packages like vbulletin, but barbelith runs on custom code, so I can't. As a PHP programmer I know what is *possible* but I don't have any influence on the actual board.
 
 
rising and revolving
19:36 / 14.02.05
I repeat, Barbelith's trolls would make most forums laugh.

Fridge, I think I love you.
 
 
rising and revolving
19:56 / 14.02.05
Something this size, with this number of members, wouldn't run as smoothly as it currently does if there were no moderators, but we have a slightly more complex form of moderation in order to guarantee that no one moderator can run amuck (as has been know to happen on other moderated boards).

Has it ever been an issue here? Moderators running amok, I mean. Or does distributed moderation solve a problem that never really existed? Again, I'm not throwing accusations, I'm asking the question.

It's been known to happen on other boards, yes, but it's also pretty easily dealt with. As far as general policy goes, the rule of thumb that does the trick is a simple "mods don't moderate threads they're commenting in" - there's certainly enough mods here to handle that sort of rule.
 
  

Page: 12(3)456

 
  
Add Your Reply