BARBELITH underground
 

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


The future of Barbelith Membership...

 
  

Page: 1(2)34

 
 
Sax
09:35 / 15.03.02
As far as sponsorship and/or mentoring goes, if that was in place before I joined I wouldn't be here now. I don't "know" anyone elsewhere on-line or in IRL who uses the board.

<<wipes away tear and pats wide-eyed puppy, my only friend>>
 
 
Our Lady of The Two Towers
09:35 / 15.03.02
Hmmm, something in me dislikes intensely the idea of sponsorship and i fail to see how it would work. Say I was coming here for the first time, would I have to go through these boards and find someone who seemed to be acting sensibly and email them asking if they wouldn't mind sponsering me? How long would this take? How could I prove my bona fides? What if I accidently find someone who can't be bothered to help me? If the worry at the moment is that having to close the doors means we are talking amongst ourselves and not getting new blood in I see sponsership as doing the same only wider- we'll only let people in who tend to 'be like us'. And I don't see this method as keeping a troll like Knodge or Eloi out. they just have to pretend to be rational until they get in.

Will continue after I've had some lunch...
 
 
Robot Man Reformed
09:35 / 15.03.02
I am thinking hard and long about the many issues raised in this thread ans in others. But for all that I think and try to persuade myself on the relative merits of having an 'exclusive' membership - which to me already existed because you people can behave soooo clique-y (and might explain why this place was virtually "troll-"free) - my gut feeling is that this place will lose the special something, that which can attract cool, new people, that which makes me go back, again and again.
 
 
The Natural Way
09:35 / 15.03.02
I cannot fucking tell you how crap the idea of no new members is. This is going to sound stupid and I'm going to get flamed, but....

What's so bad about the trolling that we have to take these measures? Bandwidth? General offense caused? Hacking (which we've had sod all of)? Is it so bad? Illfigure? Knowledge? So?

I love Barbelth, but I'm not so precious about this community that I can't deal w/ a few twarts.

Hurt me.
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
09:35 / 15.03.02
For me it's more the way the entire board gets caught up in it - I mean, the Knodge issue has dominated the board for the last, what, two months; that's ridiculous. It only happens because people have invested enough in the board that they hate to see people misusing it and abusing the members, but it does happen and it shouldn't have to.
 
 
deja_vroom
09:35 / 15.03.02
On Persephone's thoughts about ignoring the trolls:

What if there was a DON'T FEED THE TROLLS policy? Really, most of the trolling cases lately would have had minor consequences if people would stop poking the trolls, KNOWING that they would bite back, and just PLAINLY IGNORED EACH AND EVERYONE OF THEIR POSTS.

If you're one in a group of trolls commited to ruin a board, then the ignoring solution wouldn't work that perfectly, but, for example, in Knowledge's case, he was alone and would have withered and eventually get bored of no one replying to him. It works. It's not funny being a prick when the adults won't pay attention.

I know this solution would more likely to be an accessory, aside with other more technical and strong measures, but that would help immensely.
I'll even get meself a barbe-tee with a "don't feed the trolls" logo...

[ 15-03-2002: Message edited by: Jade has left the building ]
 
 
Fist Fun
10:04 / 15.03.02
I think part of the problem is just the messageboard medium. Everyone can adopt a fictionsuit and behave how they want. There is no face to face contact, everything is depersonalised so we can indulge in some of our more anti-social tendencies.
Knowledge was an extreme case but I am sure we all do it to one extent or another. If we are going to consider drastic technical measures to prevent trolling then we should also consider a few personal measures. It is obvious that some board members enjoy confrontation, but if we could calm that down a level and keep it constructive then grudges aren't going to build up and trolling is going to be less of a problem.
For instance, the incident of name calling above seems pointless. Isn't that the kind of thing that responsible posters should refrain from? It certainly doesn't benefit Barbelith.
 
 
Haus about we all give each other a big lovely huggle?
10:13 / 15.03.02
I'm sorry, but what name calling? I am a litle confised....
 
 
Trijhaos
10:13 / 15.03.02
Why are so many people hesitant about the sponsorship thing?

Since so many are hesitant, what about a semi-sponsorship thing? You know, anybody can join the board, so new members are coming in, but when they come in, they can only post 3 messages a day. For them to post more than those 3 messages, they'd have to have somebody that's established on the board say something along the lines of "Hey, I think this person has made some great posts and they shouldn't be limited anymore".

Just a thought.
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
10:15 / 15.03.02
It wasn't real name-calling... I picked a ridiculous example of a disagreement from a ridiculous thread, and Haus came back at me in a thread-rotty way...
 
 
Fist Fun
10:28 / 15.03.02
Perhaps not name calling but I was referring to :

quote:When I began referring to reidy as a new fictionsuit of the Knowledge, it was not entirely in jest. He is ... not very bright

Maybe I haven't picked this up right and this is just some jokey banter between friends. Otherwise it doesn't seem very nice and it seems the kind of thing that grudges are made of. Perhaps that wasn't intended and
I have just missed the joke and look awfully silly... anyway it is the kind of thing that most people do at one time or another. I am certainly guilty of being a bit too confrontational sometimes. Perhaps not going out of our way to wind people up is a way to cut down on trolling...
 
 
Graeme McMillan
10:33 / 15.03.02
quote:Originally posted by Trijhaos:
Since so many are hesitant, what about a semi-sponsorship thing? You know, anybody can join the board, so new members are coming in, but when they come in, they can only post 3 messages a day. For them to post more than those 3 messages, they'd have to have somebody that's established on the board say something along the lines of "Hey, I think this person has made some great posts and they shouldn't be limited anymore".


That's the best idea I've read on this so far... The idea that ANY new members can only join if someone here vouches for them is depressingly incestuous, isn't it (not to mention making us seem more like a secret society, which is almost cool)?
 
 
Our Lady of The Two Towers
10:33 / 15.03.02
OK, my proposed solution.
1) The Ignore button. I was against it at first but now that time has passed I see the logic.
2) People can join more or less the same as now BUT there is a 14 day no posting period. On newsgroups it is recommended that people lurk to get the feel of groups first, with a board like this we can make that an enforceable rule. Whilst this wouldn't stop the Knodge's and the 'why haven't you killed an MP if you're so anarchist[sic]!' brigade having to wait 14 (or however long) may put off the simple troller.
 
 
higuita
11:07 / 15.03.02
I too like Trijhaos' idea. It's like the free limited text messages you get on Lycos (other sms sites are available) - you tend not to piss about sending garbage. If people want to troll, they'll soon eat their lives up and not have their membership renewed.

If there had been a 14 day waiting period, I might not have stayed. I don't know whether I add anything constructive to the board - I have tried - but as someone else mentioned above, this is the only bb I belong to. If I hadn't been able to interact, I would have floated off.

From this, I would have missed out on a lot, and I would never have got to meet the Brumbelith lads, Mssrs Rollo & Puck.

And to be fair, I think the sponsorship thing could work ok, as I came to this site via the good offices of Adam Swish.

Despite rule one, which as I remember was - Rule One: You do not talk about Barbelith.

In response to the people who've been saying 'why bother - what was so bad about what K was doing', I would like to say that I don't believe I had any doings with K. Why he decided to drag me in via email as part of his ongoing loggerheads I don't know.

I do know I don't f'in appreciate it.

What I do appreciate is the work Tom puts into this place - there are some things you shouldn't have to put up with. If it was me getting all the shite he has, I'd have taken the ball and gone home.
 
 
Haus about we all give each other a big lovely huggle?
11:20 / 15.03.02
quote:Originally posted by Buk:
Perhaps not name calling but I was referring to :



Oh, hardly. SFD had asked why Reidy had singled her and myself out as more annoying than the Knowledge and more delterious to the ideal Barbelith. I was attempting to explain. Rather well, I thought.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
11:36 / 15.03.02
I'd like to point out that the more complex we make entry to the board, the less likely that I think a lot of the more vital members of society and culture would be inclined to join up - most of these people are fairly busy, and won't be as eager to take a special test or prove their identity as someone who works in an office somewhere.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
11:42 / 15.03.02
Trijhaos' suggestion seems, to me, like the best (be warned- "c"-word coming right up) compromise I've seen so far. I'd be all in favour of the "no new posters" idea were it not for two things- 1, I'd never have got on here (I found it by accident), and 2, I think, though we have a fuck of a lot of people with a fuck of a lot to say on here, stagnation would inevitably set in.
Of course, the ignoring the trolls thing is the BEST idea, but I don't think any of us could really put their hand on their heart and say they would do that under all circumstances. And, as has been pointed out before, trolls don't need a lot to live on.
 
 
gridley
11:50 / 15.03.02
I have to second Sax on the sponsorship thing. I would have never made it in here if that was the case cause I didn't know any of you elsewhere.

I'm sure this has already been considered, but why not just suspend people when they start acting like morons. If two moderators agree that you were behaving improperly, you get booted from the board for two or three weeks. If on youre first day back, you do something idiotic again, you get booted again.

The trick would be to make it easy for moderators to suspecd someone, (the press of a button in their ID), that way it wouldn't help that much if an offender made ten different suits.
 
 
Haus about we all give each other a big lovely huggle?
11:50 / 15.03.02
quote:Originally posted by Flux = Sweet City Woman:
I'd like to point out that the more complex we make entry to the board, the less likely that I think a lot of the more vital members of society and culture would be inclined to join up - most of these people are fairly busy, and won't be as eager to take a special test or prove their identity as someone who works in an office somewhere.


How do you define a "vital member of society and culture", Flux?"
 
 
Spatula Clarke
11:57 / 15.03.02
Echoing Sax's comment, I didn't know anyone here when I first started posting and this was the first and (still) only message board I've become involved in. So, while it probably wouldn't make much of a difference to anyone but me, the sponsorsip idea would automatically mean that I never became a member here.

I can't help feeling that the sponsorship method of enrolling new members is exactly what we don't need here. If you want discussion to stagnate then it's the right way to go. The board has always been liveliest (sp?) and most enganging when a new member arrives with a viewpoint that's generally unpopular or hasn't been properly considered before. If you limit membership to people who already know each other, that's far less likely to happen.

The idea of introducing an enforced delay between enrolling and posting (mentioned last time this issue came up) seems to be the most acceptable solution. That way, new members are more likely to read the threads they wish to post to without simply joining upi to post some immediate knee-jerk reaction. It could be linked to a limit on the number of new members enrolling per week/month.

When all's said and done, some of the ideas expressed in this thread seem a little like an over-reaction. We've had trolls here before and we'll have them here again, no matter how strict we make membership conditions. The current problems are peculiar in that we're dealing with a particularly persistant troll this time. I can understand Tom's sense of exhaustion at the entire situation, but maybe we ought to take a step back and consider whether this is being blown out of proportion a little?

Oh, and can we please not turn this into another Haus/Reid mutual hatred ego-boosting exercise. Start another thread for that if you really feel the need.

[ 15-03-2002: Message edited by: E. Randy Dupre ]
 
 
Trijhaos
12:02 / 15.03.02
See? Like I said a great number of people seem to be against the sponsorship thing.

So, what if posts were simply limited to a certain number until the post count hits, say 30? You know, it'd kind of make sense since at 30 don't you get to replace that "Junior Member" title for the nice shiny one of "Member"?
 
 
Haus about we all give each other a big lovely huggle?
12:13 / 15.03.02
I'm afraid I can't be held responsible for the actions of my admirers...

The delay to entry makes more sense than ID (which requires countercultural drug-taking arrest-resisting types to provide their bonafides, putting them and Tom in a potentially difficult position), and sponsoring (which risks both insularity and the floodign of the board by the friends of the more gregarious types) but is that just because, actually, it won't be much of a troll-proofer anyway, unless trolls are very quick to lose interest. As a filter, it seems to be as valid as any other, but its efficacy can probably only be established by trying it.

Personally, I still like the idea of a weekly ostracism. Everyone has to vote, whoever "wins" has his or her accountr shut down for the next week. A kind of yellow card, if you will, but with added democracy.
 
 
Morlock - groupie for hire
12:16 / 15.03.02
The problem with a delay between registering and posting is that I suspect most newbies register because they've just read something they wish to respond to. With a delay how many potential members will decide maybe their post isn't worth the hassle? And it does make the board look very defensive (paranoid?) no matter how justified.

Ideal solution would allow newbies in quickly but keep them away from sensitive areas until we get a feel for them. Tom, how hard would it be to keep individual members away from our collective soft underbellies? I'm thinking of Profiles, PMs and the Gathering specifically, though there may be more.

This way newbies can feel like a member while we can decide if they are Knodge-a-likes or not. Even if a troll makes nice for a month, once they return to type we can block them from this stuff again as a first warning. Would limit the options for hacking and mail-based Knodgeness a bit as well.

As for sponsorship I wouldn't have gotten in either, for what that's worth, but maybe we can use it as a procedure for full access...
 
 
Persephone
12:20 / 15.03.02
I'm inclined to think that we ought to just close house for a certain amount of time and take the time to clean house, meaning get ourselves settled down and not stabbing at everything that moves behind the arras.

I wish that people would not be so quick to brand other posters as trolls or knodges. In the current climate, it's incendiary & it's demagoguery. People are cleverer than that, think of some other way to insult each other for the time being.

I'd like to reiterate that a "don't feed the trolls" code isn't being proposed as a single solution for the board, but rather to work in concert with whatever other measures are implemented. It isn't about getting 1,000 posters to toe the line all together, it starts with each individual person taking responsibility for hir own choices and, as they say in Al-Anon, taking it one day at a time. But imagine if it caught on, if it became an epidemic... if you could sense that troll-baiting was not in the culture of this place, you could borrow from the strength of the community. For an example of how an epidemic works for the bad, you only have to observe the present situation. But I believe that we can turn this around.

We are far from this, though. Mostly I see people saying "we can't" or "I can't" or even that it's wrong to let certain things pass. I think that this is very worth discussion, perhaps in a separate thread.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
12:22 / 15.03.02
quote:Originally posted by The Haus of Horror:


How do you define a "vital member of society and culture", Flux?"


Well, I'm thinking of a lot of the people who would normally be people we might write about - professional writers, artists, musicians, professors, doctors, lawyers, scientists, on and on.
 
 
Lothar Tuppan
12:29 / 15.03.02
I personally don't mind the 'six degrees of separation' sponsoring idea but I understand the concerns of others.

Here are two ideas that work with real life groups that may be completely unworkable on a board but maybe better minds than me will get some brilliant ideas...

Both of these suggestions are operating under the assumption that non-members will still be able to read the board.

1) Work membership to an extent like an APA, with a set membership (based upon hosting bandwidth limitations maybe?).

When membership is full, people who want to register are put on a waiting list.

Membership requires a certain minimum level of participation. Once participation drops below that mark, an email is sent out that their membership status is at risk. If after a set period of time, that participation hasn't increased, the person is dropped and another spot opens up. The next person on the waiting list is given the first opportunity to sign up. Etc.

2) Close membership except for at certain times of the year (every 4 weeks, every three months, etc.) when a period of new blood is allowed in. This way, the board can continue to grow but the surges are controlled to some degree.

IMO, these have worked really well for RL groups/organizations. I'm just not sure how well they'll work for a BBS.

And no, the above suggestions don't deal with the perceived troll problem. Hopefully though it will only encourage those who are actually interested in constructively participating.

[ 15-03-2002: Message edited by: Lothar Tuppan ]
 
 
Ganesh
12:30 / 15.03.02
Persephone: I'd actually disagree: I think the 'take personal responsibility/just ignore them' thing has been debated black and blue, and is unlikely to progress any further without at least experimenting with changes in the structure of the place ie. the almost-implemented Ignore function. Until then, saying 'we can do it if we just work together' is at least as true-but-impossible as saying 'we can't'.

I can resist everything except temptation.
 
 
Sax
12:32 / 15.03.02
quote:Originally posted by The Haus of Horror:
Personally, I still like the idea of a weekly ostracism. Everyone has to vote, whoever "wins" has his or her accountr shut down for the next week. A kind of yellow card, if you will, but with added democracy.


But then some of us would just feel left out if we didn't get ostracised. Clique!


quote:Originally posted by Flux = Sweet City Woman:
Well, I'm thinking of a lot of the people who would normally be people we might write about - professional writers, artists, musicians, professors, doctors, lawyers, scientists, on and on.


</Bob Mortimer/> I know important people! Doctors, dentists, lawyers! </Bob Mortimer/>
 
 
Ganesh
12:32 / 15.03.02
quote:Originally posted by Flux = Sweet City Woman:
Well, I'm thinking of a lot of the people who would normally be people we might write about - professional writers, artists, musicians, professors, doctors, lawyers, scientists, on and on.


Phew, I'm in. Hands up anyone else who's "vital"?
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
12:33 / 15.03.02
How about having the Conversation be a sort of Barbelith Junior? Newbies would be able to read any forum except the Gathering, but they would only be able to post in the conversation at first. I also think that blocking access to profiles and PMs until the newbie has served out their apprenticeship is a great idea.

The thought occurs that these measures wouldn't be 100% successful in the case of a long-term member who turns nasty over the course of a few months, but would certainly stop the likes of Elmo.

[ 15-03-2002: Message edited by: Mordant C@rnival ]
 
 
Persephone
12:35 / 15.03.02
Y'know, Haus proposed something a while ago that I liked, and I don't know if he was kidding... but I will throw it out again, and he can throw it back.

Suppose that *every* poster after hitting a certain number of posts get an automatic vacation of say, one week, or two weeks? I like this not only because it encourages people to step away from their keyboards and get some fresh air and bring fresh air back in, but also because it's not punitive; it's a mechanism that the community could implement for its own health & people would hopefully be good-natured when their time came, and parties thrown for them and so forth. It would be interesting b/c some people post lots and would get more vacations, whereas someone less prolific might be surprised when they finally got to the magic number.

[ 15-03-2002: Message edited by: Persephone ]
 
 
Haus about we all give each other a big lovely huggle?
12:36 / 15.03.02
Ah. The better class of people.

Well, the easy way around that is probably to have a quick quiz section where people are asked what they do for a living and, if they are career creatives or members of the professions, they are given full membership immediately. Senior management have restricted access, junior management and administrative staff need a sponsor and have to serve a 14-day waiting period, and the unemployed can be rejected out of hand.

You know, I'm getting a good feeling about this. I think it will make the board a lot more efficient, a lot more streamlined and a lot a lot more revolutionary.
 
 
Goodness Gracious Meme
12:36 / 15.03.02
uh-oh.

*thinks*

can I be the 'great unwashed' rep. please?

edited because Haus has already covered the likes of us.

surely you've got to have at least one of us, just so's you know what you're distinguishing yourself from?

thassit, can I be the token dolescum dialectical tool please?

sorry. going now...

[ 15-03-2002: Message edited by: Lick my plums, bitch. ]
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
12:39 / 15.03.02
Oh come on ... I wasn't suggesting that these people were *better* than any of us, just that potentially excluding people who have less free time on their hands may not be a very good idea.

[ 15-03-2002: Message edited by: Flux = Sweet City Woman ]
 
 
Ganesh
12:41 / 15.03.02
quote:Originally posted by Lick my plums, bitch.:
uh-oh.

*thinks*

can I be the 'great unwashed' rep. please?


Lend us thirty quid, guv?

 
  

Page: 1(2)34

 
  
Add Your Reply