Suggestions for RPF.com

[BIG_J]

In 99% of forums you guys would have been IP banned. These mods & admin are probably the most liberal I've ever seen; & YOUR BITCHING ABOUT IT...

W. T. F.

 

[UtahApocalypse]

I'll do it right here. Questioning of site moderation should always always always be done privately. It is totally inappropriate to start and contribute to threads raising hell about the moderation, especially since the site doesn't belong to you. The people complaining about this are the same ones that were making this place horribly painful. For example, were you hear the night Ghemminger posted fifty threads about how drunk he was in the Ron Paul News and Discussion forum? Or the time Utah Apoc. started a thread to tell everyone he was going to work to make sure Ron Paul lost the election because he got in a fight with his Meetup group leaders? Or Revolution9's long string of nonsense? Are you sure you want to be associated with these guys?

And it was members of this forum that talked to me and calmed things down. They were able to remind me of the stakes. they were able to give solutions. They were what has made me work harder. Now this forum is breaking up and we could lose the community we had formed.

 

[ThePieSwindler]

Hey guys im high as fuck and i think we should all just cool out. The good doctor would not be pleased to seec this infighting. Discuss prblems but dont take snipes@each other n stuf. And banning shouldn't be done just cuse you disagree or think people ar going overboard - bannin should be done only when someone has commited a SERIOUS offense or done so multiple times (Like starts vitrolic flame wars in literally every thread) etc.

But yeah just cool the fuck out and remembers is a loveolution or what not!

 

[BLS]

Josh...


Personally...I don't care how you do it.

But I will offer one suggestion.

The trolls are out in full force...and it's only going to get worse I suspect with RP's high Straw Polling results.

We need to find a way to weed these jerks out before threads turn into 3 page flame fests and the trolls accomplish what they came here to do. Discourage us, annoy us, and change our progression. People spend hours calling these jerks out, and thats what they want. To do anything but doing what we are doing now with is grassroots support projects.

That being said, I don't have much of a solution, but if we can sniff em out early, they'll be discouraged from trying to get in.

Got cookies??

 

[PrimarilyPaul]

My biggest complaint is the titles of some forums are totally disconnected from their description. Even with Bryan's suggestions I see the same problem in several forums. With Bryan's suggestions there are way too many subforums that will generate too little discussion with too much overlap between them.

This forum isn't that big and if you break it in to a bunch of tiny subforums there won't be much discussion. Here is an expanded version of what I posted before, it is only for the "News and Discussion" part:

Ron Paul News and Discussion
News and discussion about Ron Paul goes here.
-----Media Appearances (subforum)
-----latest interviews of Ron Paul, newspaper articles, etc

Ron Paul on the Issues
Clarifying Ron Paul's stance on issues, some minor discussion

Ron Paul Misinformation
Cataloging misinformation, disinformation, ad hominem attacks and more

General Politics
George Bush, Iraq war, current congress, local politics, libertarianism, socialism
-----Conspiracies (subforum)
-----9/11 as an inside job, conspiracy theories, new world order

Off topic
Talk about your cars, stamp collections, computers, hobbies, weekend, etc.

 

[Nihilist23]

In 99% of forums you guys would have been IP banned. These mods & admin are probably the most liberal I've ever seen; & YOUR BITCHING ABOUT IT...

W. T. F.

We aren't 99% of people. We're trying to save the country and the world here with a one-of-a-kind presidential candidate. I'd expect more free speech here, not be especially appreciative of it.

 

[kylejack]

My biggest complaint is the titles of some forums are totally disconnected from their description. Even with Bryan's suggestions I see the same problem in several forums. With Bryan's suggestions there are way too many subforums that will generate too little discussion with too much overlap between them.

This forum isn't that big and if you break it in to a bunch of tiny subforums there won't be much discussion. Here is an expanded version of what I posted before, it is only for the "News and Discussion" part:

Ron Paul News and Discussion
News and discussion about Ron Paul goes here.
-----Media Appearances (subforum)
-----latest interviews of Ron Paul, newspaper articles, etc

Ron Paul on the Issues
Clarifying Ron Paul's stance on issues, some minor discussion

Ron Paul Misinformation
Cataloging misinformation, disinformation, ad hominem attacks and more

General Politics
George Bush, Iraq war, current congress, local politics, libertarianism, socialism
-----Conspiracies (subforum)
-----9/11 as an inside job, conspiracy theories, new world order

Off topic
Talk about your cars, stamp collections, computers, hobbies, weekend, etc.

This one's pretty close to perfect, though it could use a section for Activism, sub-divided into online-only stuff ("Vote in this poll" etc) and real-world stuff.

 

[FluffyUnbound]

If all these people want all the threads ghettoized, and if all the people who don't want that done are "trolls", why are there 122 people in News and Discussion and 6 people in the next most populated forum?

If spreading the threads out over all the forums is such a great idea, why aren't you people in those forums instead?

 

[Razmear]

At the very least, move everything under Take Action into one forum, then there would be 9 folks looking at all the action items instead of 0 looking at the project I started today, posted looking for advice, came back and found moved to Tech and Web projects with no new posts since it moved to that wasteland.

eb

 

[angelatc]

okay ban me.

anyways josh im sorry but the current system IS PERFECT. keep it

I think things are fine the way they are.

I don't like using "New Posts" like Foo decided we should because the "Hot Topics" stuff shows up there.

 

[DeadheadForPaul]

I really think there should be no discussion for conspiracies or inside job stuff. Let's focus on the campaign

 

[kylejack]

If all these people want all the threads ghettoized, and if all the people who don't want that done are "trolls", why are there 122 people in News and Discussion and 6 people in the next most populated forum?

If spreading the threads out over all the forums is such a great idea, why aren't you people in those forums instead?

It will take a bit for people to adjust. Right now they're taking sides in the fallout.

 

[Revolution9]

If all these people want all the threads ghettoized, and if all the people who don't want that done are "trolls", why are there 122 people in News and Discussion and 6 people in the next most populated forum?

If spreading the threads out over all the forums is such a great idea, why aren't you people in those forums instead?

Badaboom!

Randy

 

[constituent]

well, i for one believe that drunk typing is almost as bad as OHT. that being said, perhaps drunk typing should also be a bannable offense. that will cure us of all evil w/ one fail swoop... after hi typing, and uh, well... you know, those long long long rant posts... TWT. UWT. I don't know what would best describe it.

 

[Revolution9]

I Or Revolution9's long string of nonsense? Are you sure you want to be associated with these guys?

Or kylejacks control freak exclusivity trip.. Come on pal.. Show me what long string of nonsense and I will mop the floor with you feeding you reams of real world data to back up anything I have posted. Yer a mouthpiece for sure..and totally innocent of any baragrugous behavior in your mind. Ban people ..yeah..yer a real healthy boil on the campaign trail.


Randy

 

[PrimarilyPaul]

This one's pretty close to perfect, though it could use a section for Activism, sub-divided into online-only stuff ("Vote in this poll" etc) and real-world stuff.

The "News and Discussion" section:

Ron Paul News and Discussion
News and discussion about Ron Paul goes here.
-----Media Appearances (subforum)
-----latest interviews of Ron Paul, newspaper articles, etc

Ron Paul on the Issues
Clarifying Ron Paul's stance on issues, some minor discussion

Ron Paul Misinformation
Cataloging misinformation, disinformation, ad hominem attacks and more

General Politics
George Bush, Iraq war, Congress, local politics, libertarianism, socialism
-----Conspiracies (subforum)
-----9/11 as an inside job, conspiracy theories, new world order

Off topic
Talk about your cars, stamp collections, computers, hobbies, weekend, etc.

------------------------------------------

And for the "Take Action" section:

Activism
-----Online
-----Vote in this poll, digg this article, blog about my new article
-----Offline
-----Meetup groups, rallies, flyering, phones, mail, etc.

Projects and Brainstorming
Brainstorm, work together, or get help for a new video, website, or writing project

Campaign Material
Flyers, t-shirts, posters, bumper stickers

 

[Bradley in DC]

I'll do it right here. Questioning of site moderation should always always always be done privately.

So now you're complaining about JOSH?!

 

[michaelwise]

Reduce the number of forums to 5 at the most. Make 1 forum, Great Ideas. Do not move anything from general discussion, except trolls, for at least 1 week. If it's a bad thread, it will bury itself.

 

[foofighter20x]

I think things are fine the way they are.

I don't like using "New Posts" like Foo decided we should because the "Hot Topics" stuff shows up there.

Use this link...

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/search.php?do=getnew&exclude=54

Bookmark it.

 

[mdh]

I'll do it right here. Questioning of site moderation should always always always be done privately. It is totally inappropriate to start and contribute to threads raising hell about the moderation, especially since the site doesn't belong to you. The people complaining about this are the same ones that were making this place horribly painful. For example, were you hear the night Ghemminger posted fifty threads about how drunk he was in the Ron Paul News and Discussion forum? Or the time Utah Apoc. started a thread to tell everyone he was going to work to make sure Ron Paul lost the election because he got in a fight with his Meetup group leaders? Or Revolution9's long string of nonsense? Are you sure you want to be associated with these guys?

I don't know that "questioning of moderation" is particularly pointful anyways. I do think constructive criticism and sharing ideas are, and I think that's best done in public. Let's face it - we've got some folks here with lots of personality, as it were. That's not necessarily bad, it just means there're going to be conflicts. Dealing with them in a way that leaves those folks feeling like you give a damn will relax the mood and quell the conflict - dealing with them in such a way that makes them feel like you don't really care at all will heighten the conflict. Most people just want to be heard out, have things explained to them rationally, and come away with at least the sense that you gave a crap about their opinion, even if you still disagree in the end.


Those who continue to push conflicts after all that's been done are a whole other class of individuals, but that's neither here nor there.


Here are a few tips for folks to consider.

1> Be polite in public. Make people feel like you're listening to them, and respond in such a way that explains your points of view as well. Keep it public unless it gets out of hand to the point that uninvolved parties are inviting themselves into the discussion, or it's otherwise wasting peoples' time who aren't involved. If possible, avoid annoying mods/admins with interpersonal issues.

2> If it gets to a certain point, take it private. Maintain decorum anyway.

3> Don't blow people off when they make points. If they simply refuse to see your point of view and agree to disagree, simply state that you appreciate their viewpoint but cannot agree at this time. Make it clear that continuing the argument past a certain point won't be useful, but do so in a way that's polite and respectful.

4> Hold yourself to a higher standard than the person you're dealing with. This doesn't mean you have to maintain some ultra-super-Ghandi persona if they're being an outright asshat - just try and stay a step or two above where they are. When they start airing the dirty laundry in public in an attempt to garner support, you'll be glad you did.

5> Weigh people as individuals. Gauge the sum of a person's contributions to determine their intent. If more of their contributions have been negative than positive, they are probably simply a negative person (or you've created a negative atmosphere... seen that happen, too.) If they have little or no positive contributions despite a growing pile of negative, don't be afraid to simply get rid of them. Banning negative people early has an overall positive impact. Leaving them to fester will drag down others around them, as well.

6> Don't allow personal bias to creep into things. Don't allow people you don't like to become the victim of regular trolling just because you don't like them. Prosecute any negativity with equal zeal.

7> Always be honest to an absolute degree. Some people will appreciate it, others will loathe it, but at the end of the day, none of them will be able to call bullshit on you for it.

8> Respect peoples' privacy. Don't drag disputes that were being handled in private back out into the open, and admonish/punish others who choose to do so. Interpersonal issues need not drag in others. Even good people are up for some conflict every now and then, and you can end up with otherwise good people jumping into bad situations.

9> Try not to let folks feel ignored. Feeling ignored leads people to feeling frustrated, and frustrated people do stupid, harmful things.

10> Don't be too ambiguous with the rules. Those charged with enforcing them need clear guidelines as to what is desired by ownership. When your mods are not in clear agreement over actions, you are probably too ambiguous!

11> Don't be too stringent with the rules. People should apply common sense to their behavior. People who lack common sense are trouble-makers and ought be weeded out. When your users try to use your rules against you in violation of good sense and courtesy, you are probably too stringent!

12> COMMON SENSE FTMFW, GUYS.

Take care.