Whats happened to this forum?

[gollum]

Tosainu: its your board and your call.

However consider that what tw was is gone. Its something different now and this site cannot remain connected to its present reality with the line it has but only to the memory of what was its reality once upon a time.

The org is special and a nice place to be. It may be getting a bit too special and too nice though. The things you say are true and also not true - we can analyse it in depth but it will be useless because i know just as well as you know that there is a subjective/personal element there (as it should be), the collective subjective element of admins + staff that sets the line of what type of member (with its attendant behaviour) is and is not acceptable, what opinions are and are not debatable etc. It isn't simply a matter of saying that different opinions etc are possible in paper - it is a matter of seeing how this pluralism is happening in reality. And the reality is that there is a homogeneity that is protected and defended by the majority of the regulars/staff/admins proudly even. The homogeneity does not only encompasses behaviour but also trends of opinions in many cases.

However, i repeat that tw is not what it used to be and so the org is not what it used to be. This is a real situation and you guys have a real choice to make. I know that you are strong willed, and that's a virtue is many instances. However not in all. In any case the decision is up to you at the end of the day and the rest of the staff. I am well aware that the org most likely will keep the course it has at the moment. However, i'm not sure if it will help it in terms of environment. The last line of integarted regular members have matured (yaseikhan, count arach, psychonaut/rythmic), and assuming pevergreen becomes a mod too - what then?

Who will take up the torch then? There are almost none left i'm afraid and even fewer in tw strictly related sub forums.

[pevergreen]

The last line of integarted regular members have matured (yaseikhan, count arach, psychonaut/rythmic), and assuming pevergreen becomes a mod too - what then?

Who will take up the torch then? There are almost none left i'm afraid and even fewer in tw strictly related sub forums.

You have to look at the join dates. Some were years before me, some a year or two after. When I came here, it was pretty much the first big forum that I stayed at for more than a week or so. The moderating team was just...right. (I know this is probably going off on a tangent)

I've always held the opinion of .org staff, that they are generally older, more mature people than the average member. (Hence my surprise when I first saw a picture of BKS). Its true quite a few of the more 'recent' moderators are coming down in age, but they do show maturity here, if not always IRL *looks at CountArach *

They do a great job of enforcing and being a normal member as well. Don't know how Tosa/whoever else picks them, but they seem to do quite well.

Hence why I won't be becoming a mod

[TosaInu]

Hello,

There have always been young to very young staffmembers. Age is not a criteria. I know people who are only 10 years old who act like a stable 40 year old adult and I know 40 year old adults who act like a 10 year old kid. That doesn't need to be a reason to reject a member to become staff. A youthful approach will be refreshing, but how will he or she act whenever there's some stress.

[gollum]

You'll become a mod when you stop wanting/wishing to become a mod. I think you have uncosciously (and a bit consciously) understood this, and so you are on your way to there. Being a mod requires one not being dragged by his passions and liking and understanding people in general, as well as knowing what good measure is and what is not. It also requires a genuine love and knowledge forthe area one will be called to moderate. You'll get there eventually, but slowly - a step at a time.

PS By "the last line of integrated regular members have matured" i meant that they have matured in terms of their membership. I mean matured in the cycle "lurker, newby, established member, senior member, mod, senior member, lurker".

[tibilicus]

Iv'e actually wondered how the selection process for moderation happens. I kind of assumed you had to make it known that you wished to moderate a forum before you were offered the position of moderator. I'm not aware how one would go about doing that though.

When I was an assistant moderator I was voted in (fun times). I did of course volunteer before hand. Unfortunately my replacement isn't, errrrr, with us any more, but the whole voting for the assistant moderator was specific to the time and the type of forum I was assistant moderating. Again, still no idea how moderators emerge.

[Centurion1]

I just want to know gollum when you decide a member has become accepted by the community? when they win an award......

[Subotan]

In that case I will never become an accepted member.

IMHO, the awards are part of the problem. They encourage clique-iness

[pevergreen]

In that case I will never become an accepted member.

IMHO, the awards are part of the problem. They encourage clique-iness

How so?

CoH is the most distributed award, any of you could go get it now. Writing Contests/Photography/History/Screenshot etc are based on the contests that happen.

Ignoring the old MP player of the month and STW era stuff.

HoF. Thats pretty much it.

How is the Hall of Fame encouraging a clique to form?

I havent discovered a hidden subforum and become best friends with other people.

Are the moderators a clique? I'd say no. Apart from the mod subforum, but thats needed anyway.

Are senior members? No, apart from a silly Super Exclusive Senior Members only club. That has like 7 people in it and nothing happens there. Plus its a social group, with brings me to:

The only thing I can think of on this board that encourages people to form their own groups and avoid other parts is: Social Groups.

[TosaInu]

In that case I will never become an accepted member.

IMHO, the awards are part of the problem. They encourage clique-iness

Where to draw the line? There was a short phase back in 2002 when I became administrator, where all accounts were equal. I don't quite remember whether I also hid the postcount, but I do remember we had silly strife about that before: "So you think you're l33t, because you have 500 more?' Stupid hostile ad hominems about yellow being better than blue instead of constructive discussions, laughs together and sound interactions.

The outcries about this communism were big. People want to be different and more, until the other has something else that doesn't suit their own views and then silly arguments about it pop up left and right.

It's right that the social groups have far more potential to create cliquishness than HOF awards. Yet, none of them warrants it and people are bigger than those trivialities? Or not?

[pevergreen]

Yet, none of them warrants it and people are bigger than those trivialities? Or not?

I do believe so, even through all the 'strife' the org has gone through. People have risen above it and continued on contributing to the org.

Or they've left.

But sometimes they come back.

[Gregoshi]

In IMHO, the awards are part of the problem. They encourage clique-iness

Funny, we were just talking about that the other day over champagne and caviar in the Awards Lounge...

As to some of the points discussed:

1) It may be time to drop all restrictions on new members, at least for a trial period and see how it goes. There are so few restrictions (editing and Backroom?) on the accounts now, why not? There were/are reasons for it, but despite the intentions, the system seems to be seen as a "guilty until proven innocent" thing. Perception is reality.

2) A re-examination regarding the direction of the Org is a good thing. However, we don't know if the staff has done this already unless they open up the discussion to the general membership. I see no problem with staying with TW, but us of the old guard have to accept that the game has changed from STW/MTW and need to cultivate the fans of the newer releases. An appropriate moderator is not the key other than having their hand on the pulse of that particular community. A mod is a mod - not a cheerleader.

3) In my experience, the selection of moderators is essentially based on maturity - showing good judgement in posting on sensitive issues, not trolling, avoiding troll bait and generally conducting themselves as good patrons. Active participation helps too.

4) As for limitations on what can be discussed, that is based more on how the topic is handled by the membership. Guns and abortion were banned topics long ago because they always ended in flame wars. A couple of years ago, it was decided to give them another try and this time around the discussions were handled much more maturely by the membership, so they are no longer verboten. Community wars (multiplayer, clan-based mostly) are off limits because Tosa and the staff doesn't want the Org to turn into a battleground for such games. The bottom line is that they want to Org to be a nice, fun place to visit. Any discussions that disrupt that turn into off limits topics.

That's my two cents.

BTW good topic and interesting discussion by all.

[Centurion1]

i think you should have to get permission for backroom. Many of the discussions in the TWC put the backroom to shame in the immature category. And its not like a real screening anyway.

[Tellos Athenaios]

@Centurion:
That used to be the case. “Backroom” is still a special Member Group (just like Europa Barbarorum is) which gives you access to associated forums. Which in turn means only “Europa Barbarorum” members should be able to visit EBH and only “Backroom” members the Backroom.

However at some point the forum staff decided they'd like more souls in the Backroom and extended membership to automatically include every member. Backroom is still invisible for people not logged on as a member though.

[tibilicus]

Where to draw the line? There was a short phase back in 2002 when I became administrator, where all accounts were equal. I don't quite remember whether I also hid the postcount, but I do remember we had silly strife about that before: "So you think you're l33t, because you have 500 more?' Stupid hostile ad hominems about yellow being better than blue instead of constructive discussions, laughs together and sound interactions.

The outcries about this communism were big. People want to be different and more, until the other has something else that doesn't suit their own views and then silly arguments about it pop up left and right.

It's right that the social groups have far more potential to create cliquishness than HOF awards. Yet, none of them warrants it and people are bigger than those trivialities? Or not?

Ah, a .org commune. let me guess, it should of worked well in principle but didn't work in reality?


I actually think the clique-iness of the .org is less than it used to be. Back in 2005 when I first joined, a lot of the moderating staff were members who had been part of the old Shogun/medieval community, in particular the multiplayer community. From what I gathered this was more so before I joined and prior to what I would imagine was either 2003 or 2004 most of the moderating staff were linked to this close knit community in some way. I wasn't around when it was like this and I only saw the tail end of it if you like, but some people saw this as a type of clique.

From about 2005 onwards though a lot more moderators were chosen from different areas and this old community clique kind of faded away as people left the .org or retired their position for whatever reason. Indeed, I don't really see there being a clique any more. I guess it could seem like there still is a clique but I would put that down to the size of the .org more than there being a kind of sub-community.

[Peasant Phill]

We can talk all about measures on how to improve the recruitment of new .Orgmembers as much as you like but until there are definite indications about the reasons for our diminishing and aging (meaning fewer new members) membership base, those measures will just be blind acts.

Do other TW-based sites also have the same problem? => maybe the fan base committed enough to contribute to forums has shrunk (in which case it's out of our hands)
What do still dynamic TW-based sites do differently? => that's the measures we're now discussing but a more systematic approach may prove more fruitful
What changes has the internet undergone since the start of this forum that may make the .Org not desirable for the large base of players base of total war games

Only when somebody can come up with good answers to these questions, only then can a constructive and fruitful debate take place imo.