Ad tests commencing

[Super Mario]

I'd like to see this. Screenshot pls.

Doing a Mumble now.
'See, this is how crazy Batman's made Gotham!'



You mean like how FF7 isn't literature?

Shhhhh! bexy..!! you'll bring my locked up persona out again...! T___T

 

[Bex]

The Staff Section discussion has ended. No more postings here about it, please.

Yopy offered, therefore one expects him to be true to his word.

 

[Mormz]

The Staff Section discussion has ended. No more postings here about it, please.

Poast about staff section. +1

 

[Super Mario]

And to be a man of one's word is the ticket to a blissful and happy society where no nazism or facism can happen.

 

[Cthulhu]

I'd like to see this. Screenshot pls.

Yeah, no - due to privacy reasons and other sensitive info, we can't do this. The run-down is as follows, though:

* About seven reported post threads over the last week
* About three warning threads over the last week
* Topic on members that should be kept an eye out and/or suspended when they next cross the line
* Topic on when to put threads into the Junkyard, our rubbish section
* Topic on staff contact info
* Topic on Aaron wanting to get back on staff
* Topic on whether the ACC spoiler section should be merged with the AC section
* Topic on someone wanting to post a petition on our site

That kinda thing. Now guys, quit spamming this thread up with unrelated posts, quit complaining, and quit dramawhoring. If you're bored, go do something interesting.

 

[Makoeyes987]

I love how this thread has completely and utterly been hijacked to hell over nonexistant drama, for no reason. This shit stirring and spam needs to stop so we can discuss the actual topic of ads and donating, now.

Nevermind. What Yop said. Thank you

 

[Alex]

I have no problem with the ads except when they're telling me to lose weight. Thats my stance on it. That may change in the future though and might even inspire me to donate.

 

[Cthulhu]

I have no problem with the ads except when they're telling me to lose weight. Thats my stance on it. That may change in the future though and might even inspire me to donate.

Fair enough, . Just don't talk about your weight and you'll be fine.

 

[Tennyo]

Sensitive information about warnings? Right, because that's so confidential.

Which members to watch out for? So basically, picking favourites?

Discussion of what's planned and what to watch out for? You realise that's the type of shit the COMMUNITY should know, right?

It just can't be trusted, eh?


Damn shame.

So what do we do when there's an issue that staff needs to discuss that certain regular members don't want the entire forum to know? Someone might get a warning, and maybe they are more sensitive than you are and really don't want people to know about it? I mean for the short amount of time that I was on staff at ACF I had a person who seemed to only want to cause unwarranted drama, and I needed to make a thread in staff to ask for help and get advice on the issue. It was a private matter that I'm sure the member wouldn't have wanted the entire forum to know about. Think of them.

I mean really, if it concerns us we'll know. As for now I can't imagine anything that is talked about in the staff section that I would even care about or would effect me. It's really not important.

That being said, the ads look fine to me. Would it be possible to just have them on the bottom or is the one at the top important? At least now that they are only text ads they blend in, and I know what forum to go join to get help with my eating disorders.

EDIT: Oops didn't see Yop's post, sorry. But anyway...

* Topic on whether the ACC spoiler section should be merged with the AC section

This made me laugh for some reason. Oh yeah, because I'm the one who pitched a fit wanting that section created in the first place. XD

 

[Ⓐaron]

if this place has to have ads then revenue should be used to raise money to move to a less restrictive host, given that people are starting to get afraid that even sending each other content via private messages will lead to problems given reports we've had of Bluehost being fascists.

That said, I don't really mind the presence of ads as long as they don't have sound and aren't intrusive and/or pop-ups, but I was under the impression that people who donated were given the impression that donating would help keep the site ad-free for everyone, which kind of makes me wonder.

 

[Tennyo]

In order to make the site ad free we'd have to do pledge drives with people making more than just one time donations. I mean that money will eventually run out. Ad's for non donating members, and maybe one day only non-members, will always be needed.

 

[Dashell]

if this place has to have ads then revenue should be used to raise money to move to a less restrictive host, given that people are starting to get afraid that even sending each other content via private messages will lead to problems given reports we've had of Bluehost being fascists.

Usually they don't do anything unless they get a lot of reports on a site. I know when I was with them I asked how strict the no swearing rule was and they told me they only enforce it if they get a lot of complaints against a site. So really I don't think there'd be a problem here since there's no porn or warez.

 

[Ⓐaron]

Also regarding staff forum discussion, I can see why warnings/post reports/promotion discussions would need to be private but apart from that, there's really no reason for secrecy about anything. Policy should ideally be agreed upon by staff and as many members as possible, and if staff are trying to enforce policies on the boards that prove to be highly unpopular then it's probably the policies that are at fault and need to be changed. At least, doing so will vastly reduce conflict between members and staff and probably make the site vastly more enjoyable for all involved.

 

[Cat Rage Room]

That's all fine and good, but staff forums being private is universal on most forums/sites for a good reason. I'm all for unilateral opinions and all, but everyone aren't going to get what they want all the time. Sometimes no means no, and its for the good. It's nothing that we're trying to hide, but it's private for a reason, many reasons. Everything isn't going to go by democratic process just because people want something. Just let it be.

and if staff are trying to enforce policies on the boards that prove to be highly unpopular then it's probably the policies that are at fault and need to be changed.

Ideally this is true, but in practice, it really isn't.

 

[Ⓐaron]

Fine, then present me with an example of a case in which enforcing unpopular and draconian policies against the will of the board's populace actually results in improvement of the board for the majority of people visiting it.

 

[Cat Rage Room]

Unpopular and draconian aren't always hand in hand. Hey, while we're at it, let's have a poll to decide if everyone should have Admin powers. Let's see how that turns out.

This is a difference of fundamental beliefs. I don't feel it is always a terrible injustice not to have my way all of the time.

 

[Ⓐaron]

Hey, while we're at it, let's have a poll to decide if everyone should have Admin powers. Let's see how that turns out.

By making such an absurd and blatant straw man you've just proven that my entire point flew completely over your head. Not only that, but you directly evaded the request I made of you. Poor form, man.

 

[Cat Rage Room]

I don't feel like arguing, man. It's 3:30 and I have to get some sleep. I stand by my opinion on the matter, and not to speak for the other staff, but at least some of them already made their stances on it as well. Maybe someone else can go back and forth with this.

 

[Dashell]

Uhm ... the board has been rather slow all day for me... do the ads have something to do with it or is it just me?

EDIT:
oh sorry, I didn't realize there was a conversation going.... carry on.

 

[Ⓐaron]

Really though,

14. Opening up access to the staff section would most likely lead to arguments and such over past given warnings and suspensions, thus, no staff access. If there was stuff of some importance in there, Aaron would've probably leaked it by now, .

This is pretty much true, so there's one obvious solution to this problem

 

[Cat Rage Room]

Fine, then present me with an example of a case in which enforcing unpopular and draconian policies against the will of the board's populace actually results in improvement of the board for the majority of people visiting it.

To actually try to address this however, I can bring up a case for the site in my signature. There was a time a while ago when the site admin (the head honcho and owner) decided to remove a very popular forum when he updated the site, in favor for a new feature he wanted to try out and replace it. Everyone, everyone, including myself, gave him a TON of shit for it and the decision had a huge backlash. Some people even threatened to leave. He stood his ground and refused to budge on it. At all. He went with the 'I know what's best' logic. Some time later, the new version of the site was released, said forum was removed, but the replacement feature was added. Everyone bitched.

Fast forward to about a month when site traffic skyrocketed, everyone loved the new feature, and pretty much forgot about the forum they damn near gave him hate mail for removing, and everyone pretty much admitted to feeling dumb for railing in the first place.

Just an example for you. It may not directly parallel, but it's an example.

 

[Ⓐaron]

That... really doesn't qualify as a "draconian" policy. I would say it's probably a bit questionable the way he handled it; I would've waited to remove the forum until the new feature was ready to be unveiled. But it's not the same thing as handing out warnings over shit people don't think needs to be warned or suppressing free speech in any manner.

 

[Cat Rage Room]

It was most definitely draconian, given the subject matter of the site. What he was doing was the most controversial thing ever. Frankly, the guy himself is pretty draconian. While he does take good suggestions, he's notorious for once making up his mind, that's pretty much it. There are no polls, no democracy, no nothing.

He is the king of 'what I says goes'. I honestly don't get along with the guy too much myself, however, he runs the site damn well. If we did have polls and user input for everything the memberbase disagreed with, the site would be run into the ground ten times over. In fact, there's another site I used to frequent that died the exact same way. 'HEY GUYS WE DISAGREE WITH THIS LET'S HAVE A POLL ABOUT IT AD INFINUM' *site goes up in flames*

 

[Cat Rage Room]

I would've waited to remove the forum until the new feature was ready to be unveiled.

To be fair, that's what he did.

But it's not the same thing as handing out warnings over shit people don't think needs to be warned or suppressing free speech in any manner.

Of course shit like that can be discussed and debated. I'm just saying that there are some things that just shouldn't be held at the mercy of polls and what 'a whole bunch of members want'. I think some things should be rather non negotiable, and for example, opening the Staff Forum for everyone should be one of those things. Of course stuff like unfair bannings and warnings can be tossed back and forth.

 

[Ⓐaron]

You and I have severely different definitions of the word "draconian." For me "draconian" means warning and banning people for flimsy reasons, suppressing free speech, and so on.

Now maybe this personal anecdote worked out well over for the community the long run. But there's still the fact that the way he handled it over the short run was utterly retarded. You can't possibly mean to argue that it was more constructive to shut the forum down for the time said feature wasn't unveiled without discussion than it would have been to refrain from closing it until the feature was ready. You yourself explicitly said that there were fucktons of arguments and that it was hugely unpopular.

I'm not saying there should be polls for every little board policy. I'm not even saying the member base has to be able to input into staff discussion about all policies. I'm just saying there's no reason they shouldn't be able to see the discussion about forum policies. A lot of times staff just shove their decrees down from on high without bothering to explain their reasoning, which makes their policy even more unpopular than it otherwise would be. Making said discussion to be public goes a long way toward making sure that doesn't happen, and even better still, is likely to implicitly encourage them not to provide half-arsed explanations. Personally, as far as I can tell it's win-win.

edit:

To be fair, that's what he did.

What? That directly contradicts your original account of his actions.

If the replacement feature was up immediately, and really WAS an adequate replacement for the removed forum, then there's nothing draconian about what he did. AT ALL.