BARBELITH underground
 

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


Underground > Policy & Help >

Barbelith II: thoughts

  
  

Page: 1(2)34

 
 
Naked Flame
10:48 / 03.02.02
Trepidatious here. very. I realise that the board is due for a new evolution of some kind, and I also acknowledge that Tom almost always makes the right call on these things. But despite the fluff and such, we do have a groove going here. The changes you're talking about sound like a good idea in terms of improving the signal-to-noise ratio. But in terms of the community we have now it sounds like the kiss of death. And yes, there are other places where we could get all of the fluff etc. out of our system. But they're not Barbelith. It wouldn't be the same....
 
 
betty woo
14:08 / 03.02.02
I think the idea of limiting daily posts will do good things for the discussion around here. Sure, the debate might range over a couple of days rather than a couple of hours - that's encouraging to visitors who only check in once a week, rather than once an hour, and who may be feeling shut out by the rapid response nature of a lot of debates around here. Not to mention encouraging calmer discussions by giving everyone the space to cool off and think through their responses, rather than just lashing back - if posts are limited, maybe fewer people will spend those posts making snippy comments.

Barbelith has developed a very stable status quo and, while it's touching that so many people are jumping up to defend it, I think that shaking things up and changing the game rules can only be good - if for no other reason than to show us how we cope with an altered playing board. If we don't like it, we can always change the rules again, after all.
 
 
Tom Coates
14:14 / 03.02.02
Betty is of course completely right. Any changes we make can be changed back. So shouldn't we be being a little more experimental with our experimental community!?
 
 
Hush
14:30 / 03.02.02
I hardly ever post at the moment, and am having one of my bored with Barbelith, bored with the same ten multiposters, and welcome a temporary period of restraint and re-evaluation. A period of mourning in fact, before the all new, all better board takes over from this husk.

To my mind the board has lost it's interest in experimentation, particularly in the film, books and comics section, and is being used to consolidate prejudices rather than to stir up excitement in new things.

The Conversation has the compulsive quality of a participant soap opera, and is in many ways a very special case. I look most days to catch up on Haus V. Nous, and feel exactly the same sort sort of embarrassment I do at admitting to watching the Archers. Maybe it should be split off, or made self funded or something.

Whatever you do, Tom, I will follow with interest; but please let us broaden our content beyond a large core of retreads of Cult TV, books we read at school, and mainstream comics.

But can we have a nice funeral, with a collection of found items, and Barbelith memorabilia, and as many of us as possible on line at once as possible?

I'm broadly in favour of a short term limit on posting, and reckon you should have a unused suit cull before the switch-over.

[ 03-02-2002: Message edited by: Jones ]
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
14:37 / 03.02.02
quote:Originally posted by Jones:
but please let us broaden our content beyond a large core of retreads of Cult TV, books we read at school, and mainstream comics.



Start a fucking thread about what you want to talk about, and don't blame everyone else for not doing it for you.
 
 
Naked Flame
15:31 / 03.02.02
Been thinking. You're right, Tom, we do need a kick up the collective arse. And I'm rather intrigued now, as re-reading your posts is making me wonder what mad shit you have cooked up for us next. I'm reminded that the Web is still a very new thing and that the 'stability' we've got on the Net as a whole now is something that's only been there for the last couple of years. We're all freaking out about a change to something that's been changing all the time anyway... I percieve a in you desire to take Barbelith One! Step! Beyond! and based on that I'm going to follow the changes with great interest.

One thing that occured- would it be possible to link directly from Barbelith to some of these satellite boards that have popped up? I know there's a spare Barbelith board out there. perhaps we could work on a fluff-goes-on-the-freebie-boards rule, by using the spare Barbeboard as a Conversation replacement.

If you decide to go with a posting limit, could I make a plea for the Gathering to be exempt? RL Barbestuff should be given every chance to happen, and it shouldn't affect the meat of what the board is about.
 
 
Hush
16:05 / 03.02.02
Flux = Whatever wrote
quote: Start a fucking thread about what you want to talk about, and don't blame everyone else for not doing it for you.


Been there done that; fewer people than expected interested in Films like Ghostworld, prepared to consider foriegn language films,(esp Asian Cinema) to take a director lead view of cinema development. Have posted on favourite writers (Such as Joyce Cary), and realized that the board has moved. And I've got bored with where we are. Maybe I should cancel my subscription, and move on.

But I thought I'd write a letter about it; because I don't think my opinion is worth a fucking thread in it's own write. Now don't be so fucking touchy, bucause fucking swearing is fucking easy. And Glib.

I think that Tom's suggestion may move back towards quality from quantity
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
16:33 / 03.02.02
I honestly don't feel that limiting the number of posts will have a positive impact on the quality of the posts in general, or push the conversation in the more elitist direction some of you seem to think it will move in... I think things will be exactly the same, only there will be less topics to discuss.

Anyway, I would be happy to talk about Ghost World, since I am a very big fan of that film. However, that topic came up twice in films and once in comics already, and that combined with the numbers of hours I've talked about that film and its creators in depth with people I associate with in real life, I feel I've talked myself out with that topic for the time being... If you started a new Ghost World thread, I would certainly involve myself, I would think. So would a lot of other folks here, especially since Ghost World has opened in the UK and the conversation about the film over the summer was limited only to the US audience...

The other topics you mention I'm personally not terribly knowledgeable about, and in some cases not very interested in, and I think that could go for a lot of people - I think it is fairly unreasonable to expect everyone here to have the same obscure interests, no matter how smart and cool you may think Barbelith is. I know that there's a number of topics/artists/etc I would like to discuss that I've backed away from having a gut instinct telling me that no one else would want to talk about them with me. Maybe that's a mistake.

Still, it's just a huge pet peeve of mine to see people in a forum with almost no moderation say they are alienated from it because no one wants to talk about their interests with them. This just implies a laziness on their part to take control of discussion.

I also resent the snobby attitude that dismisses topics in the spectacle that obviously a lot of people have an interest in here...
 
 
Hush
17:22 / 03.02.02
Sorry Flux. I went of on one a bit.

The point about cinematic timelag between US and UK is a good one. For the brief time I was moderating the film forum on the Nexus it was a huge irritant; My usual practice was to go back and revive old US threads rather than waste space and good points by starting new ones. As I did with Ghostworld.

It's not the things that are there on the comics tha worry me. I like superheroes. It's the things that aren't there that suprise me, and I'd like them to be there. (Sam Keith, Clowes get very little consideration) So I'm a bit sad. But then I miss LookNickWhaddam, and all the structural and semiotic criticism and pretentious bullshit.

And I should take the time to push things forward, and probably wil in the future. It's just I don't now, and would like a better Barbelith in the future. When I have the time and energy to do it.
 
 
bio k9
17:38 / 03.02.02
This post is complete rot but if I could only make three posts a day it would still be here. So there.
***** ***** ***** *****

It's not the things that are there on the comics tha worry me. I like superheroes. It's the things that aren't there that suprise me, and I'd like them to be there. (Sam Keith, Clowes get very little consideration)

Maybe we should have a thread on the merits of Sam Kieths writing skills. As for the indie guys like Clowes, Tomine and Ware; they get a mention every time they put something out but they don't release 50 comics every week like the big companies do. And they don't have 30 years of continuity for people to argue about, hense less "discussion".
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
17:44 / 03.02.02
re: cinematic timelag

This has been a leading reason why I just don't bother with the film forum so much, because I rarely get a chance to rent old movies, and every time I see films in the theatre, they are usually not out in the rest of the world just yet, mostly stuff that's only screening in NYC and LA. I'd really love to talk about Todd Solondz's new Storytelling - I've got a lot of things to say about that movie, quite a bit of critical analysis - but it's not even in full release in the US yet. I think that by the time it's out in the rest of the world, and enough people here have seen it to get a good conversation going, I'll likely not even care enough to write anything about it anymore.

re: Clowes

I don't really bring up Clowes (my single favorite comic creator, by far), and few other folks whom I would consider his peers on the comics forum for a few reasons:

First, the work comes out so rarely so yr mainly talking about back catalog, a lot of which some people may consider old news or have nothing new to say about it.

Second, and this is more my own personal reason, but sometimes I just can't get the words out - I could potentially talk about the latest Eightball issue for hours, but I just can't seem to get it out of me. Maybe if someone got the ball rolling, I could do it... The last Optic Nerve is a similar deal, but also hit me in a very personal way that I know I find it hard to talk about. It's so much easier to chat up industry politics and superhero stuff, and that is a bit lazy, I know.


I think that I'm just going to take my own advice and start up critical Storytelling and Eightball threads sometime later on...
 
 
Hush
18:08 / 03.02.02
See you there. I'm new to eightball and haven't got much further than knowing I like it. I need guidance.

As for discussing old stuff, I wouldn't worry. I never really know with Film's or Comics if anything's good until it's old. That's my three.

Now lets think about the funeral, and lets make it a goodun.

[ 03-02-2002: Message edited by: Jones ]
 
 
moriarty
18:23 / 03.02.02
Psst. Thought I'd start a topic dealing with the comic stuff before the big kids put sand in our shorts.
 
 
Seth
18:53 / 03.02.02
I'm all up for limiting the number of posts - personally I think five per day would be good to begin with, and see how things go from there.

Is there any way a more complex topic search could be developed? Topics could be grouped under specific subheadings within forums, which would make it that much easier to go back and see if someone had started a similar thread earlier. I think we'd then be more inclined to go back and look at what's already been written, and plough existing topics for more depth.

Is there any way a "thread merge" function can be bought into operation, so that two similar threads can be combined, in order to reduce clutter?

Is there any way in which we can encourage people to post in more than just a few forums, without making it a "law." It'd be lovely to see the Magick forum get more attention from the regular posters who frequent the rest of the site. I think there'd need to be a FAQ section for each of the meatier forums if more cross-pollination were to be encouraged.
 
 
w1rebaby
20:43 / 03.02.02
quote:It'd be lovely to see the Magick forum get more attention from the regular posters who frequent the rest of the site.

I'm not sure this is going to be possible without changing the entire focus of the forum... perhaps including folklore and anthropological explorations of "magic(k)", but would that not piss the current enthusiasts off?

I dunno, I've only posted there once, with a question about trickster figures in different mythologies.
 
 
SMS
00:44 / 04.02.02
quote:Originally posted by expressionless:

Is there any way in which we can encourage people to post in more than just a few forums, without making it a "law." It'd be lovely to see the Magick forum get more attention from the regular posters who frequent the rest of the site.

I think people would need only to see the titles of topics from across the board. Right now, I couldn't name a topic being discussed in the Films section, simply because I never go there. If I used the "Today's Active Topics" page, I'd probably visit more forums. But I don't. Don't know why, really.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
01:09 / 04.02.02
quote:Originally posted by SMatthewStolte:

If I used the "Today's Active Topics" page, I'd probably visit more forums. But I don't. Don't know why, really.

Wow, really, you don't use it ever? That's interesting. I love that feature, enough that my link in my bookmarks file takes me there rather than the front page...
 
 
netbanshee
04:14 / 04.02.02
...psst...what about front-end stuff? Sounds like you're busy...do you want some help? I have a bit of time coming up and am web-saavy. Email me if you think anything can be handled by your members. As I'm poor, I can't contribute beyond discussion @ the moment but I do have time.

Otherwise...I look forward to change in any way. And the general posting concerns...sounds like 10 a day should be better.
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
07:48 / 04.02.02
Well... I recognise that the intention of all this is to create a board with more and better heavyweight discussion - something that fits the original idea of the board slightly more snugly than its current incarnation.

BUT I'd just like to agree with Flame On - one of the most important things about barbelith is the community which has been built up, and one of the things I really like about the board is that when an issue crops up (such as the Knodge) we can sort it out by literally thrashing the topic on the board. It's really transparent, and I feel that I personally have learnt a lot from that. And I would hate to see the supportive, more personal aspects of the board fall by the wayside. I come here for discussion, of course, but also because I like the other posters and it makes me laugh - and I think that's really valuable...

Flame's point about the Gathering is also good, I think.

Post limits - OK, but only as a temporary measure, and I think that 10 would be a reasonable level.

I share Ganesh's sense of trepidation, but I don't think that means I'm against change on the board full stop - anything that makes the board more exciting, and which helps us to realise its potential, is good - but there are some great things about this incarnation of Barbelith which I don't think should be ignored or seen as less 'valuable' than others. Just want that to be kept in mind...
 
 
Saveloy
08:41 / 04.02.02
[Apologies if this has been discussed already, I've only had time to skim through the second and third pages...]

I think the limit on posts is an excellent idea. How about taking it further and limiting the number of threads? Let's say 3 discussions per forum at any given time. At a pre-agreed time, or their natural death, they are moved to an archive folder. Topics would be selected for discussion by the moderators responsible for the particular forum (there could be a thread in the Policy for people to suggest topics - using a generic fic-suit, to avoid accusations of bias and cliqueiness etc).

The point? To focus attention and - this will sound a bit wanky - increase the sense of Barbelith as a community. As a member, your choice would be to engage with the community as a whole - ie post to a discussion that everyone is likely to be looking at - or not at all (ie lurk, which is fine). As Tom says:

"...debate where all parties have to actually believe that the comments they are making will add something to the debate and WON'T just be ignored."

At the moment, I think Barbelith is like cable TV - a endless series of brief distractions. I'm not sure if it would work for all forums; it could, but I think the Head Shop and Switchboard would benefit most.

I can imagine all sorts of problems with it, but as an experiment, maybe?

[ 04-02-2002: Message edited by: Saveloy ]
 
 
Seth
08:41 / 04.02.02
quote:Originally posted by w1rebaby:
I'm not sure this is going to be possible without changing the entire focus of the forum... perhaps including folklore and anthropological explorations of "magic(k)", but would that not piss the current enthusiasts off?

The forum already deals with stuff like this. There are a number of regular Magick posters who are extremely well versed in these areas.
 
 
The Return Of Rothkoid
10:06 / 04.02.02
quote:Originally posted by Saveloy:
How about taking it further and limiting the number of threads? Let's say 3 discussions per forum at any given time.I don't like this suggestion at all. Sorry. It sounds like it'd turn a relatively good community (despite the Januaryitis that's had the place bogged for the past couple of weeks) into something like a low-traffic mailing-list.

No thanks.
 
 
mondo a-go-go
11:24 / 04.02.02
don't have much time, but i do want to take issue with this:

(jones was complaining that he was fed up with starting "serious" threads that got ignored. which i have to agree with, from my own experience. often on the same subject matter!)

quote:Originally posted by Flux = Fauxhemian:
The other topics you mention I'm personally not terribly knowledgeable about, and in some cases not very interested in,

and are you not even interested in learning about them from other people who are interested and enthusiastic about them? or are you only going to follow topics that you can prove your knowledgable credentials in?

i don't know if that's what you meant, but the inference is depressing. maybe people don't really want to learn about new things unless they can prove that they're much more clever than everyone else in the process. i'd like to believe that isn't really the case, but sadly that's the impression one gets.

quote:I think it is fairly unreasonable to expect everyone here to have the same obscure interests, no matter how smart and cool you may think Barbelith is.

that's true, however, i think that there's an opportunity for opening up new avenues, and people don't always follow them up, which leaves the same people talking about it.

for example, there are never any women posting in the comics forum. and i got fed up with it because i started to feel like a spokesperson for my gender, so i never post in there anymore.
quote:I know that there's a number of topics/artists/etc I would like to discuss that I've backed away from having a gut instinct telling me that no one else would want to talk about them with me. Maybe that's a mistake.

any maybe you won't know until you've tried, although in my experience, i just got fed up with trying. a lack of response can be disheartening.

quote:Still, it's just a huge pet peeve of mine to see people in a forum with almost no moderation say they are alienated from it because no one wants to talk about their interests with them. This just implies a laziness on their part to take control of discussion.

or maybe people start the discussion with hazy ideas and are hoping for some follow-up debate that will help them form stronger opinions (that'd be my reason). or maybe they've said all they want to say in the very first post and can't say anything else without repeating it all until someone else joins in (also my reason). or maybe they start a serious thread and watch it struggle to 10 posts over the course of a week. they start a fluffy thread and watch it surge to 10 pages in two days (which has happened to me far too often.)

on the other stuff: i think the post-limit is a pretty nifty idea. but then, i have been endorsing the sit-back-and-think-before-posting-kneejerk-reactions line of thought.
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
11:40 / 04.02.02
Yes, I can see your point about people maybe being unwilling to follow up ideas and discussions with which they are unfamiliar (though I think that this is a little unfair... plenty of people seem to have been willing to engage in the recent gender/trans threads, for example), and that perhaps we collectively need to make more of an effort here... but I have to say, I don't know how well this will work in the Spectacle. Specifically with reference to books - if you start a topic on an author and no one else has read anything by hir, how realistic is it to expect people to go away, source the book, read it and then come back and post in time to stop the thread starter feeling disheartened? It's a tricky one, and one that is only partially solved by the Book Club - we can't cater for everyone's tastes all the time, but that doesn't mean that everyone is closed to trying new things either.
 
 
pointless and uncalled for
11:52 / 04.02.02
For my miserable two Canadian cents on this one.

Limiting the posting capacity would be bad as a blanket measure. If you want to limit it, then limit on specific segments. Headshop and Switchboard being the two major ones.

In response to that then there should be an increased move rate from the existing segments for those threads that veer into the serious debate/theory territory.

Conversation is, and should be even more, like a conversation. Rapid posting make some of the threads great (All the colours of the bow being a prime example of this)

Limited posting on the more "dangerous" topics could invite far more pre-post consideration.

As an attempt to understand your thinking, why would you want to limit the capacity of posting on the subject of movies or more so in the Gathering section where an open policy on posting is practically a nessecity?
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
12:03 / 04.02.02
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kooky wants to be a Cockette:

and are you not even interested in learning about them from other people who are interested and enthusiastic about them? or are you only going to follow topics that you can prove your knowledgable credentials in?

Well, I was specifically talking about the topics that Jones was talking about, and not speaking in the broadest terms. He mentioned a writer with whom I am not familiar with, which would naturally make my own contributions to a thread about him rather difficult, and mentioned Asian cinema, which I've never been particularly interested in. This doesn't mean I couldn't change my mind or become motivated to check up on these things if the writing in a thread about these topics were enthusiastic and interesting. But as it stands, I don't have much interest, and the fact that no one is talking about these topics here certainly isn't helping that. I imagine this is the same for most everyone in one way or another.

I think we pretty much feel the same way about this, Kooky - I think that at best, Barbelith is like a huge mass of people educating one another, and maybe lately people have been getting a bit lax on what they want to discuss/teach because they've been met with frustrations in the past, or have preconcieved notions about what the rest of the Lith are interested in. I think that maybe everyone who has 'serious' topics in mind should bring them up, and forget about whether or not they sink or swim - let's just get on with it. Let's take control of the content in an organic way.
 
 
Ierne
12:46 / 04.02.02
Oh my. I don't know where to start. How about with what's closest:

It'd be lovely to see the Magick forum get more attention from the regular posters who frequent the rest of the site. – expressionless

I disagree. Most of them don't have an interest in Magick – if they did, they'd be posting there. Despite all the flak we get about being a "Ghetto" forum, The Magick doesn't have the difficulties some of the other forums have had/are having. And we get new people posting all the time, with interesting things to say.

As for posting limits – well, I'm already over the 3 post limit, eh? One in Books, one in Magick, two here. (And it's not even 11 AM!) I'm not so hot on that idea. I do like the Moderation ideas though.

[ 04-02-2002: Message edited by: Ierne ]
 
 
Ariadne
13:11 / 04.02.02
Yes, I'd vote for moderation rather than posting limits - i think limits would kill a lot of discussions.

I'm not sure what the aim is of the redesign. Is it to bring the board back to a more 'intellectual' site rather than a chatty one? That's the impression I get. And that's fine, but I don't know how much I'd have to contribute personally - I read the head shop etc but rarely feel confident or knowledgeable enough to post there. And I think there are a lot of us who would be the same.

So - I understand if you want to take it in that direction, Tom, and it's your baby. But I would be sad to lose some of the funny, clever stuff that gets posted in the Conversation, the inspiring threads in Creation and the boost to my social life that is the Gathering!
 
 
rizla mission
14:48 / 04.02.02
posting limits - BAD IDEA!

Tom's proposed moderation system, maybe shifting the Conversation elsewhere - GOOD IDEA.
 
 
grant
18:02 / 04.02.02
quote:Originally posted by expressionless:
Is there any way a "thread merge" function can be bought into operation, so that two similar threads can be combined, in order to reduce clutter?

Seconded.

And, I'd like to say, I'd be all in favor of extreme post-per-day limits *if* there was some way to automatically put "seconded" under a thought without making it a post. A few kind of fluffy posts tend to be of the "right on!" variety. Or the polar opposite, "no way!" variety.
Problem: the reaction is hardly ever to the whole post, only to one or two lines. Can't offer a solution to that one.

I'm also wondering if a post-limit would be extended to starting new topics; I quite frequently start four or five in the Lab in a single day just because that particular day is when I get me weekly newsletters in the email inbox, with links to all sorts of fun discoveries.

Then again, if the moratorium's only to last a month, it's a worthwhile experiment.


quote:Is there any way in which we can encourage people to post in more than just a few forums, without making it a "law." It'd be lovely to see the Magick forum get more attention from the regular posters who frequent the rest of the site. I think there'd need to be a FAQ section for each of the meatier forums if more cross-pollination were to be encouraged.

I agree with this, and I think it might be accomplished (you might hate me for saying this) by making the zine more integrated with the site, cross-linking to several pertinent threads at once & so on. Mostly, this might be a visual thing, making the links *seem* more integrated or larger - or even making the text of the articles work memepool/blog style, with various words linking to off-site articles and stuff here in the boards.

I also don't think moderators should have term limits built in, but maybe could be regularly voted out, voted in - and could have the ability to transfer their own moderatorship onto someone else, maybe. So, like, if someone has to leave the country for a month, they can pick someone to moderate for them without it going through the Central Authority of the Archon.

Looking forward to the shit getting stirred up.
 
 
Tom Coates
20:39 / 04.02.02
Ok a few thoughts about the way discussion has developed.

Someone suggested to me (I think it was Ganesh) that we might develop some kind of 'late show" style part of the site. - and I'm thinking this might be a really good idea.

It also might work to extend the sugegstions someone made to make the place into concentrating on three threads at any one time.

How about this instead: the board operates pretty much as normal, but people could also propose to start a 'featured' discussion - which would be proposed as a title and a summary of what was in the thread. Once a week people could vote on what discussion to have and then the person who started it could have complete moderation rights over that forum - in terms of approving all responses to it. You could get a really dense, high-brow discussion out of that, that would be a focus for the whole board, but which wouldn't limit discussion to just those subjects.

It would be like a 'hosted' discussion - clean, dense, fluff-free. But parallel conversations could be had in the main board if necessary.
 
 
The Return Of Rothkoid
20:53 / 04.02.02
Well - as long as that wouldn't circumvent any other conversations in forums, that'd be cool. It is worth remembering, though, that many of the discussions here are highly polarised - is giving absolute moderation or total control over a thread to the person who starts it (and may have leanings strongly to one side of the argument) a good idea? I think a kind of BarbeThinkTank in which fluff's strictly verboten for elected threads is a good thing - but how to keep it that way without invoking the much-despised heavy moderation is a valid concern.

Unless, of course, you're limiting post numbers only on the thinktank threads?
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
09:04 / 05.02.02
Could you be more clear on what "late show" means? I'm not really familiar with what that could mean to you.

I think yr on the right track with the 'featured discussions' and keeping the rest of the site running fairly normally. I'm very curious to see which topics would be selected, and whose agenda it would reflect.


Also: Will the new version of the site have a different look - I think it might be nice to *slightly* alter the look of the place to highlight the new approach.

[ 05-02-2002: Message edited by: Flux = Raised By Wolves ]
 
 
the knowledge +1
09:04 / 05.02.02
I reckon moderator ideas are okay but there needs to be a higher turnover of said moderators, with perhaps only one per thread?

Late-nite unlimited posting a dull idea -
I kind of like the international posting 'ting.

One 'conversation' conversation thread is a good idea.

We need to do more things to encourage foreign posters to post.

Don't like the limited posts idea much, but we should give it a try. - Thing is in the convo it's stupid because conversation can be about rapid back-and-fors. A link to a chat room is a good idea to replace this. In the more thinky threads it might be worth post limits, or longer times between posts, but these threads don't see such an influx of posts anyway, so it's the conversation which you're really talking about changing. Mind if I ask why?

Maybe a limit of one new topic each forum a day? (per member)

Will the editing of posts be effected by this rule?

More if it occurs.

p.s. Greater variety of smileys!!! (Psychotic, dumbass, stoned, schitzophrenic)

[ 05-02-2002: Message edited by: The Knowledge ]
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
09:04 / 05.02.02
Flux - I think 'Late Show' here refers to a UK TV magazine programme - very discussion-heavy.

Yeah - it seems like a reasonable way to bolster the more heavyweight side of the board without losing some of the other good stuff about it.

Moderation - just needs to remain transparent and as uncomplex as possible - ease of use...
 
  

Page: 1(2)34

 
  
Add Your Reply