packerrats by subscription

[Scott Campbell]

MTP-

I really don't care if RG runs the forum or not. I just want to know that is all.

The real problem with this forum is when rules got "flexible". There need to be set in stone rules and everyone plays by those rules. The rules can be whatever you want but they have to be fixed. Then there is no debate and no subjective judgement. You either crossed the line or you didn't. Then when a poster has a complaint to air he doesn't have to "guess" what action will be taken (or that he is appealing to a mysterious Admin Joe who is the alter-ego that poster is arguing with).

Also, I would suggest posting as two different people MTP. Everyone "loves" the crotchity MTP banter. It's fun. But when you are "acting" in the admin roll I think you have to change so posters understand that the "playing" is now over and you really need to listen to what I am saying and follow it.

I'm mostly in agreement. I think the "rules" should be set in stone - unless they aren't working and need to be tweaked.

I also think enforcement will often be subjective. Guidelines should be simple to write, and simpler to understand. Therefore they can't cover every situation. That's where subjective judgement comes in.


"Rules" sounds kind of oppressive. I think I like the word "guidelines" better. It's friendlier, and less likely to turn off prospective new posters.


Re: But when you are "acting" in the admin roll I think you have to change so posters understand that the "playing" is now over and you really need to listen to what I am saying and follow it.


I might even take it one step further. Like it or not, he's the chocolaty brown face of the PackerRats franchise. He's supposed to be the Goodwill Ambassador here. You don't take your Goodwill Ambassador and also ask them play the role of Bad Cop. Just like you never ask your sales people or customer service people to play the Bad Cop role when working collections. It inhibits their ability to function at their primary job. You let them play the Good Cop role.

Mad is in a tough position. It's more fun to just be a poster here than it is to be responsible for the site. Part of that responsibility is having to behave. And he may not enjoy behaving.

[mraynrand]

Re: But when you are "acting" in the admin roll I think you have to change so posters understand that the "playing" is now over and you really need to listen to what I am saying and follow it.


I might even take it one step further. Like it or not, he's the chocolaty brown face of the PackerRats franchise. He's supposed to be the Goodwill Ambassador here. You don't take your Goodwill Ambassador and also ask them play the role of Bad Cop. Just like you never ask your sales people or customer service people to play the Bad Cop role when working collections. It inhibits their ability to function at their primary job. You let them play the Good Cop role.

Mad is in a tough position. It's more fun to just be a poster here than it is to be responsible for the site. Part of that responsibility is having to behave. And he may not enjoy behaving.

I've suggest to Mad that he use his Madtown account only for commenting on topics and have an administrator account to 'police' the site. People will know it's the same guy, but it will give a more formal, defined separation of Madtown the poster from Madtown the admin and psychologically people will differentiate the two. I think it will work.

[mraynrand]

Personally, I would tell the football forum to pretend they're in the stands at a game.

I would pour my beer over Retail's head.

[retailguy]

I've resisted weighing in on this thread. But this post needs some context from the other side. Skin, I don't disagree with what you're saying necessarily, however, the context is one sided and the memory of events is as well. Please take the context and ignore any of my feelings that come through.

I'm done running this place, and that's not going to change. Happy to continue being the "guy that takes the blame", but it's important to see what happened from that perspective too. (I think so anyhow).

So, back to my autopsy...

I guess the other thing that really bothered me was the editing and moving of threads. The former more than the later, mostly since when we came here, we were told threads would never be edited, only moved if they were inappropriate. I understand having to remove something that makes you legally liable, but the rest was just subjective meddling.

Can I own some of this? Sure. All of it? No. MTP probably edited less than a half dozen threads, ever. This criticism is about me. I did almost all of the editing.

In the end, I probably edited fewer than 40 threads. And the vast majority of those? Posts put there in "retailiation" from the previous edits.

You talk elsewhere about growth, and the need for it. But you fail to realize that most of our traffic comes during the weekday. When folks are at work. Whether they should be here then or not, THEY ARE.

Keeping the Romper Room PG, or at the very minimum keeping threads without NSFW photos shouldn't be an issue, IF growth is important, right? Isn't that why we have a forum for riskque shit?

Keeping off topic discussion out of the Packer room falls here as well, right? Isn't it tough to have really good football discussion, if posters keep derailing the topic?

As a poster, Skin (and others), you guys have to accept responsibility for trashing threads in retaliation of a disliked edit or thread movement. There was no talk at all in your post about trying to strip out off topic stuff from good discussion, or removing senseless criticism not related to the purpose of the thread. It's a two way street. I can own my side and the mistakes that were made, but will you guys own the other?

That's one aspect of where I feel you became too wrapped up with the identity of the forum. Seems there was never really a time when someone could criticize something about the forum, or even a decision that was made, without being lambasted, insulted, and whatnot. I understand it's probably hard to disengage yourself from something you've put such significant time and effort into, but I think it was detrimental to the forum on more than several occasions.

I'll leave this for MTP if he chooses.

Some of those were when you were under mental duress and you were venting, but you can do that as a poster, in the appropriate area of the forum, without being abusive as the administrator of the forum.

This part I have to address. This doesn't work. I was repeatedly criticized about my admin role while trying to post my football opinions. Expecting this to be a reality takes recognition from the posters involved. Expecting that behavior whilst a poster feels frustrated won't work (It hasn't worked so far). No one here seemingly will ever pass on the opportunity to get in a "dig".

Finally, what Patler touched on about posters coming and going... I think changes were made in an effort to make some of the lowest common denominators happy and appeal to a broader audience. In doing so, the forum lost what made it unique. Namely that people could come here for pretty damn good football talk, but also to talk about any other event in the world. Going back to the last post for a moment, I think a couple posters destroyed the trust a lot of us had in each other, and not in an accidental manner. People stopped sharing. Off topic evaporated. The changes were too much for some, and not nearly enough for others. I feel it would have been better to stick to our origins and allow people to decide for themselves if they should be here or not.

Yes, I did this. Again, see above regarding the Romper Room. It should either be safe for work, or NSFW. You can't say one thing and do another. If it's NSFW, then what's the difference between that and the GC?

I see your differentiation with regard to topical content, but what about video's and photos? Where do you draw the line there? And, how do you blend topical freedom with the ever present reality of working hour traffic? You tell me, I thought I knew, but clearly don't get the big picture.

Long story just a little longer, I know it's not easy to have one rule that says the only thing not permitted is sharing personal information, because people came along who were destructive to the forum who weren't necessarily violating that rule and though they have numbered under a handful over the years, they've cost us good posters. I would say simplify, communicate, and enforce. Let the rest sort itself out. It's the content, not the structure, that's going to make people comfortable posting here. Like I said, we won't ever relive our golden year or two, since everyone knows there's pus and decay right behind those seductive lips of the dead, but you wanted sharing, so I shared. I hope it helps you somehow.

I appreciate your willingness to share. And agree with the whole philosophy of community rule. But, what do you do when the community won't behave? What do you do with "retaliatory posting"? You've admitted that you've done it. Those times would not be in support of the "spirit" you espoused above (which I agree with, incidentally). So, how and where do you find a happy medium with conflicting situations?

[Patler]

This is the single most honest, objective and well-intentioned discussion we have had about the forum itself in a long time.

I have a lot of replies in mind to questions and comments that many of you have made to me (Skin, Scott, Nutz and others) the last couple days. Some have asked direct questions, which I will answer. I also have some thoughts on the other suggestions and comments made last night and today, but I really want to think out my answers.

I have a lot to do today and tonight. I hope we can keep this discussion going a while yet, and that my comments yet to be made might still receive a bit of an audience anyway.

[SkinBasket]

But, what do you do when the community won't behave?

Then that's your community. We were kind of built on not behaving, by normal standards anyway. Having one person, or even a few, at the top trying to mold a bunch of people into something they aren't isn't going to work.

I want growth, but growth as a result of who we are, not as a result of trying to be something we aren't. If that tops out at a low level, then so be it. Changing the forum toward "mainstream" doesn't seem to have worked so well.

I'll respond to some of your other questions later. Fucking christmas.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I cannot make you any smarter or less ignorant, so I'm sorry you feel being proven wrong repeatedly in FYI is a personal insult.

Huh. But you don't discuss topics. You always switch to attacking character. That's been pointed out repeatedly. You ruin any discussion that doesn't involve people who generally agree with you.

[MadtownPacker]

FYI I am reading everything just not replying just yet because this thread is flowing so well like Patler mentioned. Don't worry about this getting forgotten after the holidays.

[MadtownPacker]

Huh. But you don't discuss topics. You always switch to attacking character. That's been pointed out repeatedly. You ruin any discussion that doesn't involve people who generally agree with you.

He did start out that way but once he got it out his system he brought up the legit answers I'm looking for. Let ease up this time for the sake of this discussion.

[Harlan Huckleby]

He did start out that way but once he got it out his system he brought up the legit answers I'm looking for. Let ease up this time for the sake of this discussion.

I'm talking about Skinbasket's "debating" technique in the FYI room, you stupid chimp.

Actually, I don't care about skinbasket's lack of debating skills. so never mind.

[MadtownPacker]

I'm talking about Skinbasket's "debating" technique in the FYI room, you stupid chimp.

Actually, I don't care about skinbasket's lack of debating skills. so never mind.

Then you need to steer clear of this thread because it is not about FYI or skinbasket. Hook a brotha up please.

[mraynrand]

Yes, I did this. Again, see above regarding the Romper Room. It should either be safe for work, or NSFW. You can't say one thing and do another. If it's NSFW, then what's the difference between that and the GC?

I think there's a large category of stuff that is NSFW that can be in the Romper Room and Packer Forums, that doesn't require going to the GC.

NSFW:

[SkinBasket]

Huh. But you don't discuss topics. You always switch to attacking character. That's been pointed out repeatedly.

Correction: You've made that accusation repeatedly but never backed it up. Now stop being so gay, you fugly brainless twit.

[MJZiggy]

The above can be labeled NSFW and posted without someone having something "objectionable" in front of them when they scroll down the thread. Many photos can't be simply labeled unless there is a guideline that states that anything NSFW should be linked to instead of embedded. I don't log in from work, so I don't really care what crops up in the RR, but that's one idea on how to handle it. We do have to keep in mind, though, that the GC was put here specifically to contain stuff that was NSFW.

[Zool]

Keeping off topic discussion out of the Packer room falls here as well, right? Isn't it tough to have really good football discussion, if posters keep derailing the topic?

As a poster, Skin (and others), you guys have to accept responsibility for trashing threads in retaliation of a disliked edit or thread movement. There was no talk at all in your post about trying to strip out off topic stuff from good discussion, or removing senseless criticism not related to the purpose of the thread. It's a two way street. I can own my side and the mistakes that were made, but will you guys own the other?

This was sort of the point of leaving JSO. We could say anything we wanted at any time here and for the most part, the mob kept it somewhat civil. When all the thread editing started happening, my interest in this forum waned to the point of me not even reading here for a week or 2 at a time.

Unfortunately I just can't quit you retards so I'm back again. The Admin Joe thing was a big gaffe and turned quite a few posters off to the site. It was a mistake that's in the past now but its a major point as to why this place just isn't what it used to be. If you have a truly open forum, you have to let the morons have their say as much as everyone else. Otherwise you're just hanging around talking to your friends without growth.

If there was a simple set of clear cut boundaries passed down by an administrator, and equal punishment delivered for infractions, this place could easily flourish IMO. You can't make it PG talk if it was started by a bunch of x-rated shit talkers unless you want it to fail or become just another board, then fail.

[SkinBasket]

The above can be labeled NSFW and posted without someone having something "objectionable" in front of them when they scroll down the thread. Many photos can't be simply labeled unless there is a guideline that states that anything NSFW should be linked to instead of embedded. I don't log in from work, so I don't really care what crops up in the RR, but that's one idea on how to handle it. We do have to keep in mind, though, that the GC was put here specifically to contain stuff that was NSFW.

The GC was made for the terrors and horrors of humanity, not for dick jokes and lesbians. People browsing from work need to police themselves, not have the forum curtailed for their benefit.

[SkinBasket]

Harlan used to be smarter... Then he became a huffer or a puffer, I'm not sure which. Maybe I'm just confusing it with fluffer.

Oh please.

I am tired of the huffing and puffing. If somebody threatens to leave the forum because they are upset by a poster, or a few threads, they should just be ignored.

[Harlan Huckleby]

not huffing. not puffing. you were complaining about the abuse you've suffered here, I pointed out you're a bit of a dick yourself.

[retailguy]

The GC was made for the terrors and horrors of humanity, not for dick jokes and lesbians. People browsing from work need to police themselves, not have the forum curtailed for their benefit.

I understand this perspective, and if NSFW is in the thread title, or the link is provided to a photo, that works just fine. But, suppose you are following a thread, and you click back in for an update, using the "latest post" button. Suddenly, you get a skinbasket original gay/lesbian photo, or a sampling of your crude photo humor, or one of easy cheesy's throwup photos on your screen, because it's the 1st new post. How exactly do you "police yourself" in that situation?

[retailguy]

This was sort of the point of leaving JSO. We could say anything we wanted at any time here and for the most part, the mob kept it somewhat civil. When all the thread editing started happening, my interest in this forum waned to the point of me not even reading here for a week or 2 at a time.

But, at the end of the day, does "for the most part" work? Did Paco Pete, Chevelle, Tyrone or (in the end) Partial keep it "civil" for the most part?

I think you bring up a great point, and your point illustrates the reasons that Skin's utopia didn't work. It worked for a while, but then "for the most part", became "for the occasional part", and was then followed by "for the slim and none part". I'm obviously biased, but, I think this was a bigger reason than the "thread editing" that you believe was the reason.

If there was a simple set of clear cut boundaries passed down by an administrator, and equal punishment delivered for infractions, this place could easily flourish IMO.

The group has to respect and accept the "equal punishment" for those infractions, but it doesn't and didn't. How many "Free Nutz" threads did we have exactly? (I don't just single out that one, but how many variants of that did we have?) 10? 15? When was any punishment ever accepted as reasonable?