BARBELITH underground
 

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


Functionality Wishlist, For Future Reference

 
 
HCE
18:46 / 03.08.07
This list is suggested as a starting point for discussion of what to keep and what to change as far as policy and software functionality. I do not intend this to be a thread about things like, "Should Barbelith be a place where we teach and persuade, and try to reach out to people?" or "Should sexism be as bannable as holocaust denial?" Those questions, having more to do with Barbelith's mission or sense of itself, may inform whether one votes for or against a ban. What I'd like to hash out is how many votes would be needed, who would be eligible to vote, and so forth. I understand that little to none of this may be possible to implement here, on Barbelith-as-we-know-it. However, it seems that more than one person is working on a new system which may some day be available for use by people who currently post here. This thread is to provide ideas for such a future implementation.

I. Signature files:
1. I like that Barbelith doesn't allow them. Let's keep that.

II. Clean, simple visual style:
1. I like Barbelith the way it is. It's relatively easy to read on a handheld device, and it doesn't scream Non Work Related to idle passerby.

III. Posting:
1. It would be nice to have a small cheat sheet on the new post form with some of the most common html, to cut & paste and avoid typos.

2. Another board that uses software from these guys as a base has a very handy feature. When I'm reading a busy thread and hit post, I get a warning above the composition window that says "new posts have been added" or something like that. When I hit post, if still more posts have been added, I get another warning. You can review the last few posts to that thread by scrolling down.

3. It would be nice if the software automatically limited the size of images to something that wouldn't break the frame.

IV. Distributed moderation:
1. Moderators who don't check in to at least read their list of tasks for a month are sent a reminder, and are removed from the list after three months.

2. I haven't been a mod here, so I don't know what the quotas are for actions, but presumably they're fine. Keep those, and add Suspend User and Ban User as actions. Suspend User would prevent posting for a week, would require 5 votes, Ban would require - maybe 75% agreement?

3. To prevent 'hey, what happened to my thread' questions, add a field like the one for requesting edits to a post where a reason can be given. This reason would be sent to the user by PM.

V. New Member Sign-up:
1. Another board where I post has a very closed system, it's by referral and then voting. Existing members email the address of prospective members to a mod, who assigns a numerical ID and password. The prospective member then has access to that board's equivalent of the conversation, as well as to a forum where prospective members are interviewed. Everyone answers a standard set of questions, and anybody can chip in additional comments or questions.

That board is very private and cannot be read if you are not a member. Voting on new members is open for one week, anybody can vote.

VI. Banning:
1. I suggest a process where there's a minimum number of people who have to request a discussion-of-banning thread within a set period of time, say a week. The person in question would receive notification by PM and email at the first request, with a link to the offending item and the text of the request. Discussion would be open for a week, with no voting permitted before the discussion closes. Eight mods needed to ban.

VIII. Private Messages:
1. It would be nice to be able to keep sent mail.

2. I'd also like a little unread/read/replied symbol.

IX. Usernames:
1. I'd like to prevent people from staying under the troll threshold by changing their name and waiting until the 'previously' tag expires. Also, some older conversation are confusing to read because people are being addressed by names from several changes back. Perhaps the user info page could list the display name history.
 
 
HCE
18:49 / 03.08.07
Oh, and

III. 4. Show the name of the last person who posted to a thread, to make it easier to tell if there are new posts.
 
 
Lurid Archive
11:12 / 04.08.07
I'm not sure if I am alone here, but I can't help but see most of these things as either cosmetic or not particularly important.

Lets see...sig files. I've never understood the reaction people have to them - a reaction which I've found more irritating than the sig files themselves. Still trivial though. The visual style? Ive never really liked it that much (I did like the previous one), but I'm probably in a minority here. Html tips are nice, but largely a trivial issue which is easy to implement and isn't really necessary for anyone with access to a help page on html...which is everyone.

I guess distributed moderation is a big deal, and I think it has largely been a failure. I mean, what is the purpose?The intention to have a self regulating community sounds pretty hollow since the one thing that people want - the ability to ban - can't be implemented because, in the end, only one person is in control. So the upshot is that distributed moderation creates a lot of pointless work, and doesn't really share any significant power.

Thats probably a bit unfair. One thing I can say that I helped to achieve as a moderator was to frustrate Tom's intention that mods should "clean up" the text of Barbelith by putting line breaks, commas, etc in the right place. I think I disagreed a good hundred of those kinds of request from Tom, maybe more. But I think it is instructive to bear in mind that that is what Tom intended for distrubuted moderation, and what it is arguably quite good for - text formatting police duties. Pointless, imo, but ymmv.

As for the important stuff, I think that the ability to ban in the hands of a few involved people would be most of what I would want. In that situation, open memeber becomes quite feasible.
 
 
HCE
14:36 / 04.08.07
Html tips are nice, but largely a trivial issue which is easy to implement and isn't really necessary for anyone with access to a help page on html...which is everyone.

I guess distributed moderation is a big deal, and I think it has largely been a failure. I mean, what is the purpose? The intention to have a self regulating community sounds pretty hollow since the one thing that people want - the ability to ban - can't be implemented because, in the end, only one person is in control. So the upshot is that distributed moderation creates a lot of pointless work, and doesn't really share any significant power.


To be clear, this thread is not intended for a discussion about what we can't implement here on Barbelith, such as banning. What the absence of a banning feature here does or doesn't imply about Tom's intentions is not relevant to the work that others, like Papers and interval, are talking about doing in their work on new software or modifications of existing software.

Trivial things are fine to discuss here so long as they have to do with thing that would concern a programmer. So, yes, having an html cheat sheet is trivial, but it's something a programmer could add. You may prefer to allow sig files and make people open a second tab or window with an html reference. I think that not having to correct html typos is useful, and a cheat sheet would help, and I think sig files add nothing but visual clutter. It's ok, we don't have to agree.
 
 
Lurid Archive
15:19 / 04.08.07
What the absence of a banning feature here does or doesn't imply about Tom's intentions is not relevant to the work that others, like Papers and interval, are talking about doing in their work on new software or modifications of existing software.

I guess I disagree. Papers is talking about doing a lot of technical work to implement a feature (distributed moderation) that I think one would be better off without. Is the experience of Barbelith and the use of this feature here irrelevant? I don't think so, especially if one is (like I am) questioning the desirability of the feature itself. I think that distributed moderation works (or would work) pretty well at what it was intended to do. I am much less confident that it would work well in a broader or different context.

Its not that I have a problem discussing trivialities, but I think that getting the things which are important from my perspective right might be lost in the desire to replicate the rainbow.
 
 
*
15:28 / 04.08.07
I really like and agree with most of your points, gourami, except one of the most dramatic—the join process.

The join process sounds agonizing. I think I would never even attempt to join a board with a process like that; it sounds scary and humiliating. How on earth do you even know you'd want to join, unless the topic is extremely specialized or you've got board zealots going round the internet saying how greeeaaaat their board is?

I'm actually in favor of a more open join process if the banning process can be made quick and painless. Which yours isn't, but it's better than what we have, i.e. none.
 
 
*
16:53 / 04.08.07
I don't know what I meant by "dramatic". Important, maybe. Sorry.
 
 
Bamba
23:48 / 04.08.07
Lets see...sig files. I've never understood the reaction people have to them - a reaction which I've found more irritating than the sig files themselves.

Seriously? Having seen this kind of utter nonsense (scroll up to the first post at the top of the page)? God knows I'd like to think that the people Barbelith attracts would implicitly rule out that kind of bullshit, but why take the risk? Signatures in forums are the worst kind of pointless and annoying self-obsessive crap in my opinion and utterly undefendable by any right thinking individual. If I understand the ethos here correctly, Barbelith is supposed to be about the message not the messenger, and signatures are 100% messenger, 0% message. To summarise a bit: signatures are all noise and no signal.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
00:53 / 05.08.07
Do you mean sig lines, Lurid, like when you type yr name after a post, or do you mean the half-page-long crapfest wherein one puts everything from ASCII roses to one's favourite Silverchair quotes, some sort of animated paperdoll thing, a scan of the felt-tip drawing your boyfriend did of you as your fursona, etc etc.? Just asking.
 
 
Tsuga
02:13 / 05.08.07
I agree with Zippy about the joining thing, I barely pursued coming here because of the exclusivity of even having to apply. Because, of course, I'm so special, why should I have to jump through some hoop? Not that it was really that hard, it seemed more so when I read the incorrect faq about it. But. Keeping it somewhat low-profile (if possible), and less prone to attract the kind of people who really wouldn't want to interact here if they knew what they were getting into, and being able to ban those that come anyway and try to make their utter importance known? That's helpful. Maybe just a letter sent to anyone wanting to join directly saying what the deal is, not just "read the faq".
As far as distributed moderation, Lurid, do you see any other iteration of it that may work? I mean, I don't like the idea of, let's say, each forum having a moderator, or One Moderator Over All. It is too easy for little dictatorships of one person's concept of what is right or wrong. I don't know the ins and outs of the functionality here now, those of us who don't do it can only get snippets of discussion or bitching from those that do. At least, I've not found any thorough discussion of how it works (or doesn't), what you guys actually see and do. But the version here does not need to be the only possible one, does it? I guess one other thing I'd address to you is about what you call the trivial issues. I would respectfully disagree to some extent, in that these small things make up the daily functionality and experience of using a site; the more pleasant the experience is in general, even the little things, the more likely it is to keep people happy posting, involved, and invested in the site.
 
 
Lurid Archive
11:39 / 05.08.07
Seriously?

Seriously. While I do see the objection to half page sigs, the majority of sigs out there are a couple of lines long. I don't like them, particularly, but I don't object to them that much either.

As far as distributed moderation, Lurid, do you see any other iteration of it that may work?

Hmmm. Yeah. A smallish number of board elected admins with the power to ban, relected every once in a while might work. A representative democracy kind of thing, if you want, with at least one person, the owner and maybe a technical person, who stays on to make sure it all runs smoothly. It sounds like a lot of hassle to me, but if you want a self regulating community you need democracy with effective powers. I agree that there is the issue of little dictatorships, but you realise that that is what we have here, right? A kind of absent dictator, who is pretty reasonable and so unobjectionable, but it is a mistake to see moderators as being more than they are. Mostly, we fix commas.

About the trivial things....I know what you mean in that they do matter, in the end. But as I said above, I worry that the big things get left behind in the rush to make sure we choose the right font, say (not that fonts are completely unimportant, in fact). The other thing is that I tend to disagree with most of the proposed decisions about the small things. That is fine, obviously, but I probably tend to see these things as less vital since I don't actually find them pleasant in the first place. Thats ok, since that sort of thing isn't what attracted nor kept me here.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
12:47 / 05.08.07
God knows I'd like to think that the people Barbelith attracts would implicitly rule out that kind of bullshit

With respect, you're on crack. The lion's share of our intake currently wants to talk about comics, science fiction and superhero movies and magic. These our subjects that attract baroque and page-breaking sigs.

I don't think sigs are a huge deal, but I also don't see anything wrong with the current status of sigs, where if you really feel that the repetition of your name or a Monty Python quote will represent you better than anything you actually say, you can type it in, or copy and paste it from a text file. It is not broke, and I see no reason to fix it.
 
 
Phex: Dorset Doom
15:53 / 05.08.07
The lion's share of our intake currently wants to talk about comics, science fiction and superhero movies and magic.

All as a result of Barbelith being named Barbelith- that is, named after a red shiny spacegod ball from a comicbook. As has been said before, migrating to a new board with a new, non-Morrisonian name would more-or-less end this problem. If we ever decide to have our BarbExodus then this thread will be important- as a list of things we require of our new online home.
Personally I agree with all of gourami's requests (though the Usernames section I'm not particularly fussed about). The only features I can think of would be purely cosmetic, flashy even. For example, there's a Barbelith Last.fm group that some of us are members of (I don't know how many since only Olulabelle and I are using are Barb' screen names). Since you can embed the group radio station on a page with a simple bit of HTML, why not have this radio station on the front page so we can listen to some quality music as we post?
Also in the cosmetic/flashy/impractical side of things- there's a good eight or nine inches of screen space on the main page that could be used for something useful- why not have an RSS feed of posts from blogs and online magazines that Barb' users suggest? Or perhaps specific feeds for specific forae?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
16:08 / 05.08.07
All as a result of Barbelith being named Barbelith- that is, named after a red shiny spacegod ball from a comicbook. As has been said before, migrating to a new board with a new, non-Morrisonian name would more-or-less end this problem.

Well, to an extent, but we will already have the people we have - joiners are an ongoing process, not an external force - and we will have to make a decision about sig files and graphics, which ultimately comes down to aesthetics and usability.
 
 
HCE
22:15 / 05.08.07
Zippy, I thought that one would be the least appealing to others here. I have found it to work reasonably well, in that it provides an opportunity to sound people out and sample their behavior. I would have loved to have had a chance to chat with Shadowsax a bit about his interesting views about women before giving him the run of this place, for example. It can be a little scary at times - I was questioned a bit roughly at first because these people didn't know me and some of my answers sounded suspicious at first. My not having a reality-tunnel-destroying meltdown seems to have been counted in my favor.

Recruitment winds up working a bit like LJ, in that you find people through other people, rather than them finding you through a search engine or similar. The membership is low and grows slowly, but people seem fairly invested once in. I signed up because a trusted friend asked me to, without actually knowing anything at all about the board.

I don't have any high hopes of convincing many people of the merits of this approach, but thought I'd run it up the flagpole. I continue to believe that if I want to talk to wide swathes of the internet, there are many, many other places where I can do that. Everything I like best about this place is everything it doesn't have in common with the rest of the internet.
 
 
invisible_al
07:43 / 06.08.07
Lurid I think you're not seeing what distributed moderation has done compared to what it hasn't, i.e. the ability to ban people.

Distributed moderation has,

- Stopped people from editing their posts when they start 'loosing an argument', or when they're 'Leaving Barbelith Forever' or they want to get round being not able to delete a post by editing it down to nothing.

- It's stopped people from deleting every single comment they've made on the board when they're leaving. It's stopped people deleting threads when they are pissed off etc etc because they have to justify editing things to other human beings.

- When we had enough moderators it stopped moderators from burning out with hundreds and hundreds of mod requests.

Also if it were implemented properly it would stop any arguments about ruling cliques or dictatorships etc etc.

Ignore what you think Tom wanted distributed moderation to do, that's irrelevant to what it can do and could do if we implemented it properly.

How about having three levels of board privileges, depending on how long you've been here. It's off the top of my head so the numbers and suggested powers are very rough

Up to 3 months - No mod powers
3-12 months - Can vote on editing posts/deleting posts and threads. Plus weather to allow new members on.
12 months and beyond - In addition can nominate posts for edits or deletions, can vote on banning users.

Now you might have to raise the quota of successful number of votes for stuff possibly, but I think it could work.

And the most important thing full distributed moderation gets around the issue of one person/a small group of people having control and not having enough time to do the work. Spreading the load would I think help a lot of the current moderators to enjoy Barbelith more because it wouldn't be the 'job' that it is currently.

I think it could work here as we do have a strong board culture and a reasonable agreement on what the board should be. I doubt we could have introduced this at the start of Barbelith but I think it could work at this point.

Other useful ideas -

New Member Invites - Each member gets a chance to invite a new member onto the board. It's all logged so and limited in number (say 1 every 6 months) so if someone invites someone who is banned/a sock puppet/etc they can loose that ability.

Hard Code The New Members Process - I mean at the moment it's a hassle due to the lengthy process involved, but simply adding a small box to the sign up form that says 'Why do you want to join Barbelith?' and having humans reading that will still stop drive-by trolls, spambots and the like. And anyone who can't write a few sentences in that box probably won't get on with Barbelith anyway .

As for why people should have to jump through hoops, well simply it makes the community stronger. If you've had to jump through a hoop or two you're more likely to value the space which you've got access to now and put the effort that a community needs, because you've already 'invested' something in the board.

Oh and Sigs can fuck right off, I hate them and they make boards run like an arthritic donkey while you're loading up the images.

Smallish avatars on the other hand I'm quite fond of as they give a bit more identity to people, than just a plain username. Except if they're animated, then they can die in a fire .
 
 
Lurid Archive
09:00 / 06.08.07
Invisible al: Yeah, I know that distributed moderation achieves those things, I just don't think it is a very good mechanism for achieving them. I'm not just basing this on what I think Tom intended, but I do think that distributed moderation is a tool that is best suited for a particular purpose. It would be much easier to stop people excessively editing and deleting if there were a time limit on edits and deletes (or simply no way to edit....I know, I know, the people would balk at not being able to correct their spelling mistakes). You bring up the fact that hundreds of mod requests get generated and dealt as if that is a good thing but it is a flaw, as far as I'm concerned.

Also if it were implemented properly it would stop any arguments about ruling cliques or dictatorships etc etc.

Has distributed moderation really helped this?

Like I say above, I can imagine that distributed moderation *could* work, I'm just not especially attached to it and I think that most of the things it does could be more easily done in other ways. But hey, if the majority think otherwise then so be it.

I think your suggestions for inviting new memebers are quite good, on the other hand.
 
 
The Strobe
09:25 / 06.08.07
So here's an idea I'm toying with, and I wanted to share it with the community. Also, I'm writing some software that's Barbelith-shaped, and I'm thinking of implementing this.

Sign-up as a moderation action.

So: you come to sign up, fill out your details, and get told that we'll be in touch with you.

All moderators have a new job. n mods need to agree to the user joining. Once they do... the user gets created and emailed, and told they're on board. Now, if the mods want to go googling for the prospective user's email address, or get in touch, that's fine. If they just blank-accept everyone... well, that's fine too.

Because every user's profile lists who accepted them.

Why do that? Well, for starters, it gives a degree of provenance: you can see who "let someone in". It also acts as a kind of sponsorship system - if the user's a problem, those sponsors are the first people to go to. At school, we had an "uncle" assigned to us for the first few weeks, who would be our go-to person for any problems we had. This is the same.

Of course, the admin can do a David Blunkett and fast-track applications. That would also be publically noted.

This allows us to have something approaching a vetting process if we want it, but also makes membership more transparent.

Thoughts?
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
09:46 / 06.08.07
Lets see...sig files. I've never understood the reaction people have to them - a reaction which I've found more irritating than the sig files themselves.

I think the best approach with sigs would be for them to be technically possible - but anybody who did utilise this function would be immediately banned without warning. And there should be nothing about this in the FAQ.

I’m joking, but I can’t stress enough that we should not have sigs on the board. They render large sections of the internet, places that are theoretically venues for discussion, entirely unbearable for anyone with a shred of emotional or intellectual intelligence.

What’s really horrifying is that you’re suggested this, Lurid, in tandem with taking away post editing, which in practice would lead to people posting new posts containing minor corrections and clarifications to their previous ones. Now imagine that every time someone posts a new post correcting a minor spelling mistake in their previous post, they do so with a sig containing several lines of text and an image. It sounds like Hell on Earth, with a signal to noise ratio that’s like looking for a marble in a reservoir of effluent – and yet an awful lot of websites are like this. Whatever problems Barbelith has now, if it was like that, I would not be there at all and neither, I strongly imagine, would 90% of the people with whom I am at all interested in having a conversation.
 
 
Lurid Archive
09:46 / 06.08.07
I like it. Its a good idea, though to really work it would require quite a lot of moderators.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
09:50 / 06.08.07
Anyway to keep a note open to moderators that lists if a member knows someone? That way if someone is fast-tracked for that reason there will be some awareness of it. Otherwise: sexeh, I like it a lot.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
09:50 / 06.08.07
... we already have a lot of moderators.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
09:54 / 06.08.07
I think it has definite potential. It couldn't be combined with Invisible_Al's time-based model, though. I'd go further and say that Invisib's time-based model would not add value unless our banning parameters changed - plenty of people can hang on for six months, or make a required number of posts, while being quite unhealthy in board terms. Making people mods is, I think, one of those places where you need a blend of democracy and oligarchy - you can't risk automating it.
 
 
Lurid Archive
10:02 / 06.08.07
Previous in response to Paleface, obviously.

So you are saying a post like this, Flyboy, makes you want to leave the board? If only all those trolls understood your Achilles heel.

Lurid, bringer of Hell on Earth.


....

But seriously, I'm not a big fan of sigs, I just don't see the big deal unless they really are half a page long. Keep them out though, by all means. (Along with avatars and smileys.)

Text editing and generally caring about typos is something else, however, and has always felt like a dimension of the board which I have never really understood. So, yeah, the idea that edits would not be possible is terrible to some. Ideally, I think that being able to edit a post for about an hour or so is the best solution. Developing software so that a team of moderators can vet and approve the insertion and deletion of apostrophes doesn't seem to me to be....proportionate. But ymmv.
 
 
Disco is My Class War
10:30 / 06.08.07
No sigs, please. And editable posts, please, not just for an hour. The clarity of the text is important.

I also like the sign-up idea, and I think it would work with lots of moderators.
 
 
invisible_al
11:33 / 06.08.07
Just to clarify my 'time based/posting based' for moderatorship, you'd never be able to approve moderation requests for you own stuff and if you expanded the amount of votes needed, while throwing up a moderation request every so often at random for people to approve, I think that should keep people from gaming or manipulating the system.

Haus, good point but I think the system would spread out the drudgery of moderation and allow people to get on with the real work of encouraging conversations and acting as hosts which I think the 'approving edits etc' kind of gets in the way of atm. I could be completely wrong of course

And Paleface, yup that's what I was suggesting just that everyone is a moderator and has the ability to post. It'll work either way though, just as long as it's simple for both applicants and moderators to use.

Btw Anna, I'd be interested to know exactly how many moderators we have who are 'active' as I know there's a few that are listed that don't want to moderate any more, and some who don't even post on Barbelith.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
12:12 / 06.08.07
I disagree with Lurid on the post editing aspect. It often takes me more than an hour to spot an error in a post. I've gone back and edited new info into posts I made in 2001 before now. The one thing I like about distributed moderation, and the reason I would like to see it preserved, is that this kind of edit is possible but gutting a thread for no good reason is not.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
12:24 / 06.08.07
Glancing at the fora we have at least 30 moderators who are actively posting and presumably fulfilling moderation duties. We have two moderators who I know are permanently locked out of barbelith (their suits will never function again). A few moderators have been removed from their duties at their own request recently (including me and Apophenia).
 
 
Lurid Archive
15:45 / 06.08.07
The clarity of the text is important.

I often wonder if my upbringing - as the son of immigrants, growing up in an immigrant community - has a big influence on my perspective here. But certainly I find it extremely hard to see the vast majority of requested changes here as being anything to do with clarity. They are more often about correcting typos, which don't usually cause me much difficulty in comprehension (just as speaking to someone with less than perfect english is also pretty easy and absent of frustration for me). Isn't it more about the aesthetics of reading a spelling mistake or similar? I think I understand the distress some of you experience when you see something spelt wrongley, but I don't share it.

Anyway, in the cases where clarity really is at stake, using subsequent posts doesn't seem like it would pose a problem. Personally, I never edit my own posts, so I find it a little difficult to see the fundamental need for them. No real point here, I just thought I would share, even though I realise I am in a minority here, possibly a minority of one. And ultimately my only real objection is that this functionality - which I see as pointless, at best - may well require such a large amount of effort that the whole project becomes unviable. Much as I see most of the current problems on Barbelith to do with the fact that it was seen as important to get distributed moderation working, which in turn shut down the possibilities of other sorts of (more important) functionality.
 
 
HCE
16:22 / 06.08.07
To some degree we are always going to be at the mercy of the software, and the engineers. They'll work on the problems that seem most pressing (and interesting) to them, I imagine.

Programmers, I will give you the dessert from my lunch and be your best friend if you put in the features I requested. Also, here is a crisp five-dollar bill: [$5]
 
 
Spatula Clarke
22:30 / 06.08.07
So I'm looking around the other boards that I'm a member of, and one thing strikes me square in the chops: forget functionality on its own for a moment, what Barbelith's currently missing is a sense of community.

And I've got a bunch of ideas as to why that is, but I just want to check before I launch into this one: is it just me?
 
 
HCE
23:36 / 06.08.07
I think there is a sense of community, I just think the community's depressed, but I might have a different notion of what constitutes a 'sense of community'. Do you have some ideas about software fixes for the problem you perceive?

Not to be a milk monitor but I'd really like to keep this thread pretty close to the topic. Ideally, somebody who wants to write code for a new board or adapt off-the-shelf code should be able to refer to this thread for ideas. I don't mean to squash all conversation about the reasoning behind liking or disliking a function, but if the connection to a specific bit of mechanics could be made clear that would be great.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
09:15 / 07.08.07
Spatula, I think you should start a new thread for that topic. (I think barbelith is missing a sense of community too or rather most of "my" community left or lurks now and I haven't really bonded with a lot of people since.)
 
  
Add Your Reply