Lack of new people is killing the backroom and the entire forum

[Andres]

When I first joined up here 8 years ago, there was a member system based on post count. You couldn't choose the avatar, but it changed with the post count. I remember I liked it and it encouraged me to post more to get to the next level.

Funny, same here. And when I finally reached the sufficient postcount to take the avatar I wanted, it was decided that all avatars should be available for everybody

I don't think avatars are the main issue here, though.

Getting rid of the junior member system is an important point and shouldn't be too difficult to solve (I assume, what do I know...). Gameroom should be open for all, for those who like forum games, it's an excellent place to be, really. Maybe not a selling point for a TW fansite, but certainly something that convinces members to stay until the next TW game is released. Heck, I think many members joined this place exclusively for the GR. If the BR is openend for all, the GR should be as well.

[pevergreen]

You can retain your current avatar, you won't be forced to upload an asian model or animated dancing goat, so how will it affect you? If people's avatars offend you for some reason, then that rules you out from viewing 99% of all other online messageboards, forums, blogs, etc. Other members here could have their own avatars, whereas you can still use the same one. Why stop everyone else from having something good just because it doesn't appeal to you?

You're not a moderator - though you're obviously dying to be one - so how can you possibly know who gets preferential treatment without inside information? There are certain backroom members that get off lightly time and time again, simply because the mod dealing with it can relate to them both politically and culturally, there are others that are routinely slapped for offences the former would have gotten off with. There was one old backroomer that had committed far more offences than your average member, yet was awarded Senior Membership for reasons unknown. I'm afraid that like anything else, it's simply "who the staff like" that counts.

I'm well aware that I can retain my avatar, in the situation that custom ones are allowed. All I meant by the comment was, that in the case of another poll (like the 2 that I can remember) going up asking the general opinion of if the avatars should remain restricted to TW themed, I would vote yes. The members did both times before. That may very well have changed now.

I identify people by their avatars here. I often read the threads and don't pay attention to the names, but can tell who it is based off the avatar. I like that everyone has a TW themed one. If they want another, the URL avatar system is there, why not use it? Its on by default for new members, so its not as if they can't see it. (or it was under the old board software)

No, I'm not a moderator, and you're wrong, I'm not dying, or even trying, to be one. I can't know, but I can make a judgement off behaviour I've seen, and conversations with moderators. I can't comment on the backroom, I don't understand politics enough, nor do I spend enough time there. As for the awarding of that SM to that member, it raised quite a few eyebrows, but not as much as the open disgust of quite a few members when the honourific was placed upon me. We had people 'vomiting' in the thread it was announced. Didn't make me feel too good.

Calling an idea idiotic is mild and is not insulting CA staff.


Call a spade a spade. If an idea is idiotic, call it such. One of the problems with this forum is that over the years the staff have strived to create such a cushioned environment that everyone's senses are heightened. Some members know that even a slight snipe could warrant moderator action so they don't think twice about reporting the post or making a big song and dance about a perceived insult until it gets noticed.

Text can be read many ways. Who is to know what a person finds offensive? I've been offended by posts that wouldn't offend my grandmother.

Not sure what you're saying with that last sentence. Is it that people are hesitent to snipe because of moderator action, or hesitent to report a snipe?

Getting rid of the junior member system is an important point and shouldn't be too difficult to solve (I assume, what do I know...). Gameroom should be open for all, for those who like forum games, it's an excellent place to be, really. Maybe not a selling point for a TW fansite, but certainly something that convinces members to stay until the next TW game is released. Heck, I think many members joined this place exclusively for the GR. If the BR is openend for all, the GR should be as well.

Yes and yes. JM should go, not sure why Gameroom is join to post. That should go as well.

Edit: On the junior member note though, the restrictions have been greatly relaxed. Posting is opened up to most areas, more than 1 pm, dont have to wait 300 seconds between posts and 1500 between thread creations. Those are the restrictions I remember being under. It was annoying, I couldn't even replying to two threads in the space of 5 minutes.

It needs to go.

[Andres]

I'm well aware that I can retain my avatar, in the situation that custom ones are allowed. All I meant by the comment was, that in the case of another poll (like the 2 that I can remember) going up asking the general opinion of if the avatars should remain restricted to TW themed, I would vote yes. The members did both times before. That may very well have changed now.

The thing is, that it's not about what the current "oldtimers" think of the system, but what potential new members would like the most. Would you leave the .Org if the avatar rule would change? Will a new member decide not to post when confronted with restrictions as having to pick from a set number of avatars that are seen as "silly" on the majority of other fora? Those who are here and decided to stay, won't leave for something as trivial as avatars. New people however, might decide not to stay for it.

Think future and further than current situation and membership.

[pevergreen]

The thing is, that it's not about what the current "oldtimers" think of the system, but what potential new members would like the most. Would you leave the .Org if the avatar rule would change? Will a new member decide not to post when confronted with restrictions as having to pick from a set number of avatars that are seen as "silly" on the majority of other fora? Those who are here and decided to stay, won't leave for something as trivial as avatars. New people however, might decide not to stay for it.

Think future and further than current situation and membership.

I probably shouldnt even be involved in this conversation.

I've been through a number of forums, and avatars has never made me leave/stay. Only the people. But thats just me.

Would I leave? Not the right person to ask. I've been on the verge of leaving for good for a few months now.

[caravel]

I'm well aware that I can retain my avatar, in the situation that custom ones are allowed. All I meant by the comment was, that in the case of another poll (like the 2 that I can remember) going up asking the general opinion of if the avatars should remain restricted to TW themed, I would vote yes. The members did both times before. That may very well have changed now.

Polls are unreliable on this site especially - in such polls those that really want to preserve things as they are, are more likely to vote. Vote turn out is very low, so a large percentage don't vote. Also polls are made from the current userbase - not from the new blood and the people that may be put off by the restrictive avatar policy. If we'd always had personal avatars and then had a poll asking people if they wanted to remove this right and restrict themselves to only a gallery of TW images, what do you think the outcome would be?

I identify people by their avatars here. I often read the threads and don't pay attention to the names, but can tell who it is based off the avatar. I like that everyone has a TW themed one. If they want another, the URL avatar system is there, why not use it? Its on by default for new members, so its not as if they can't see it. (or it was under the old board software)

Identifying people by their avatars will be easier with personal avatars. I really don't understand the resistance. Effectively you're saying "deny those people these simple things, just to suit me".

No, I'm not a moderator, and you're wrong, I'm not dying, or even trying, to be one. I can't know, but I can make a judgement off behaviour I've seen, and conversations with moderators. I can't comment on the backroom, I don't understand politics enough, nor do I spend enough time there. As for the awarding of that SM to that member, it raised quite a few eyebrows, but not as much as the open disgust of quite a few members when the honourific was placed upon me. We had people 'vomiting' in the thread it was announced. Didn't make me feel too good.

I did not mean to offend, but that's how it comes across sometimes. In many of your posts you do come across as "playing staff". You've been awarded SM so you must have been seen as deserving it in the eyes of the staff at the time. I'll be frank with you in that I cannot see why you are a SM while some more longer term and arguably more deserving members aren't, but that's no reason for you to carry it uneasily nor does it mean that you don't deserve it. A member should be judged on his actions here not by a title.

Text can be read many ways. Who is to know what a person finds offensive? I've been offended by posts that wouldn't offend my grandmother.

Someone will always be offended - wrapping everyone up in cotton wool to counter this is not the answer. Misunderstandings will happen. The .org cannot possibly cover all bases in trying to avoid offence but trying to do so it jeopardises the basic freedoms that one would expect. Basically the .org will cease to be fun, for many this is already the case.

Not sure what you're saying with that last sentence. Is it that people are hesitent to snipe because of moderator action, or hesitent to report a snipe?

My point is that too much moderation intervention and enforced politeness means that individuals get trolling down to a fine art. Once member x knows that if member y calling his statement idiotic is a reportable offence, he will taken full advantage. You end up with silly reporting games, trolling and playing the moderators, plus a stifling, overly false and oppressive atmosphere. Etiquette can be part of guidelines but not enforced.

Yes and yes. JM should go, not sure why Gameroom is join to post. That should go as well.

Edit: On the junior member note though, the restrictions have been greatly relaxed. Posting is opened up to most areas, more than 1 pm, dont have to wait 300 seconds between posts and 1500 between thread creations. Those are the restrictions I remember being under. It was annoying, I couldn't even replying to two threads in the space of 5 minutes.

It needs to go.

I have no idea why the gameroom is members only?

I'm familiar with how the restrictions have changed. It's got the stage now where the JM is a member that cannot edit their posts. That is offputting for many new members - and not needed. It treats every new member as a potential troublemaker, bot, spammer or alt account to a banned member. This kind of paranoia is simply not needed and not present elsewhere and it gives a bad impression of the .org. This has been debated endlessly in the staff section and most staff came around to the idea that the JM should just go. Not sure what has happened since then though.

[pevergreen]

I'm familiar with how the restrictions have changed. It's got the stage now where the JM is a member that cannot edit their posts. That is offputting for many new members - and not needed. It treats every new member as a potential troublemaker, bot, spammer or alt account to a banned member. This kind of paranoia is simply not needed and not present elsewhere and it gives a bad impression of the .org. This has been debated endlessly in the staff section and most staff came around to the idea that the JM should just go. Not sure what has happened since then though.

Busy, so only repsonding to this.
For at least 4 years, JM's couldnt edit, so its hardly new.

[caravel]

Busy, so only repsonding to this.
For at least 4 years, JM's couldnt edit, so its hardly new.

Ok you misunderstood me. A JM started off as a member that could not edit his post and could only post in the Entrance Hall. Much of this has changed and now only the restriction on post editing, posting in offtopic and smaller PM inbox size remains. With the EH system gone, JMs have been fully redundant for quite some time. Make sense now?

Later.

[pevergreen]

Ah yes, it does.