ePlaya

by **Don Muerto** » Sun Nov 30, 2003 2:43 pm

Forgive me if this feature has been requested/discussed before. I found no trace of it, but that may be due to semantic differences.

The 3playa has a feature whose ramifications I would like to explore for deployment on the eplaya.

When you create a thread on the 3playa, you have the option of 'banning' contributions to it from particular posters. It strikes me as both a mechanism to prevent thread hijacking, and also a statement of the trust placed in thread creators on the 3playa.

Regardless of whether this mod exists, what do you think of the concept being applied to the eplaya?

On the plus side, I would love to create a thread that can't be sunk under a mountain of irrevelant ego-wanking such as current eplaya threads frequently are. I think it would actually enable discourse to return where it is absent today.

On the down-side, some of that ego-wanking involves lots of thread creation which has occasionally generated good discussion despite the inanity of the original post. Also, it could be used punitively at the sole-discretion of the thread creator, so a new conciousness of who created the thread would have to be in the mind of respondents before they post.

What do you peoples think of this? Does 'radical thread responsibility' jive more with the BM culture than 'ownership' of a discussion clash with it?

by **Bob** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 4:19 am

I suggest targeting content, not users -- ie moderate your thread via pre-approval or delete permission of posts wrt relevant content.

by **III** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 9:48 am

>you have the option of 'banning' contributions to it from particular posters.

the features on the 3playa were not developed in a vaccum, and that one in particular was implemented within a larger context.

in particular, vital to the useability of that function is also the ability to ignore threads. with that second option it really doesn't matter how many threads someone else creates, since you're free to make them invisible. the hope is that the conjuction of those two features allows people to create safe spaces, and continue their actual discussions, rather than focus on sniping at each other.

and if bob is willing to write heuristics for evaluating content, i'm wiling to check them out. that's beyond me at this point, though. the best i'm hoping for is prefiltering people from each other based on previous interactions...

by **Araceli** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 10:15 am

Ahh, you are giving in to the trolls? Your letting them push and prod you into stifling expression and turning your board into an electronic exclusion zone. It comes across as elitism. Granted the 3playa is a private endeavor where such conduct is tolerable. But on this board, the concept will kill creative expression. The only barrier at BRC is the perimeter fence and it works pretty well. If the eplaya is an extension of BRC, why are we putting up internal fences? There has to be a better way than what's being proposed.

by **Don Muerto** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 10:22 am

Bob wrote:I suggest targeting content, not users -- ie moderate your thread via pre-approval or delete permission of posts wrt relevant content.

I am not suggesting this as a solution, rather I would like to get opinions on the feature "as is."

I think being able to remove particular messages in a thread would be advantageous in many ways, but I think the original feature is already pushing the boundaries of granularity on the eplaya.

by **Don Muerto** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 10:27 am

Trey, I was more worried about an ego wanker creating a thread, a valid discussion springing up despite the barren soil, and then said ego wanker banning and deleting users on a purely spiteful or punitive basis.

I would hate to see good conversations, wherever their venue, fall under the control of someone irresponsible or petty. That is what I meant when people would have to be cognizant of where they reply, and judge whether the conversation may be destroyed at a later date for the wrong reasons.

by **Don Muerto** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 10:30 am

Araceli wrote:Ahh, you are giving in to the trolls? Your letting them push and prod you into stifling expression and turning your board into an electronic exclusion zone. It comes across as elitism. Granted the 3playa is a private endeavor where such conduct is tolerable. But on this board, the concept will kill creative expression. The only barrier at BRC is the perimeter fence and it works pretty well. If the eplaya is an extension of BRC, why are we putting up internal fences? There has to be a better way than what's being proposed.

Nothing is being proposed, I got to thinking about the 3playa feature and wondered how it would play here. I am seeking opinion, not change.

I disagree that the only barrier at BRC is the perimeter fence. There are many formal and informal regulations within the city, ranging from arrest by LEOs to public shaming for such nebulous misdeeds as 'spectating.' In BRC I can choose whether or not you participate in my theme camp's activities, and that strikes me as extremely relevant to this conversation.

by **TestesInSac** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 2:10 pm

Boundaries, in some form, are essential to everyday life and community here or in BRC. Any place where boundaries aren't respected and cannot be enforced is a place in deep trouble, as this BBS is. I believe that the combination of 'Thread ignore' and thread ownership could permit enforceable boundaries that the <u>users establish for themselves</u>, just as they do in BRC or anywhere else. One result of such boundaries could be conversations free of unwelcome dumping, and users might just find such threads more easily if they're allowed to ignore dump threads.

That wouldn't fix the visual clutter and "urban sprawl" of this board, but from where I sit, there's not much left for this board to lose in terms of community. Allusions to elitism or cliquishness aside, any change that could promote community should be pursued.

by **III** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 4:14 pm

> I was more worried about an ego wanker creating a thread, a valid discussion springing up despite the barren soil

while i'll admit that potential, i suspect that people would be inclined to ignore the thread up front, rather than actually have a discussion there. and should it happen that a thread owner interferes negatively with a particular conversation, the conversees are free to create a new thread owned by one of the to continue it.

>giving in to the trolls?

if providing the community a means to deal with them is giving in, then sure. to me it beats the hell out of just letting them run roughshod over every single thing.

(i like tom's answer, btw. i probably would have tried to say the same thing if he hadn't already.)

(and another note: my discussion of this here is not an endoresment for the 3playa. nor is it an advocacy for any of its features. i'm merely trying to provide a context for the design now that it's been brought up here.)

by **Don Muerto** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 5:26 pm

III wrote:while i'll admit that potential, i suspect that people would be inclined to ignore the thread up front, rather than actually have a discussion there. and should it happen that a thread owner interferes negatively with a particular conversation, the conversees are free to create a new thread owned by one of the to continue it.

I agree with this, and believe it would work for the 3playa as it is, but what do you think would happen if this feature were implemented here where you have a larger, less sophisticated user base?

by **precipitate** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 5:36 pm

On the old eplaya, you could ignore threads in your subscriptions page.
It'd show you new posts for every thread you were subscribed to. And if
you subbed at the top level, new threads automatically appeared until you
explicitly ignored them. It worked great. The 3playa is loosely modeled
around that.

That user base was about as sophisticated as this one, which is to say that
probably 20% of the users even figured out the subscriptions feature, but
maybe 85% of the regulars used it.

Honestly, the only downside I can see to thread ownership is fucktards
starting their own whining threads because they've been disallowed from
posting somewhere. And I could ignore those threads, right?

I can tell you what'll happen if it's implemented here: ego threads will be
created, some people will continue to feed the trolls, and I'll be able to
ignore the noise and concentrate on the signal.

I still want user plonking, though. And hopefully it'll get used only rarely,
for those special cases.

by **BlueBirdPoof** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 5:39 pm

Araceli wrote:Ahh, you are giving in to the trolls? Your letting them push and prod you into stifling expression and turning your board into an electronic exclusion zone. It comes across as elitism. Granted the 3playa is a private endeavor where such conduct is tolerable. But on this board, the concept will kill creative expression. The only barrier at BRC is the perimeter fence and it works pretty well. If the eplaya is an extension of BRC, why are we putting up internal fences? There has to be a better way than what's being proposed.

I have a lot of trouble with this. If someone cannot be bothered to follow basic rules of politeness (and they can be communally defined) then why should they be allowed to participate? Farting contests are not creative, IMHO.

Addition/Edit after a re-read. My experience is that when certain people start saying things like "you're stiffling free expresion" what they actually seem to mean is "You're not letting me get away with being a bully. Bad you!" I hate being bullied.

by **Bob** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 8:36 pm

This sort of thing works on III's board because it's III's board, on which he is the de facto moderator.

There are no de facto moderators on the eplaya.

I think a topic moderation feature such as any of us might have described here can only work with support from a strong, impartial uber-moderator and a board philosophy that backs it all up.

But there's no de facto board philosophy here either, or none that I can fathom.

Plenty of boards have moderators, but the only moderation features here are in the hands of users and whatever smidgens of influence and common respect they can muster among each other.

In a sense, filtering out certain eplaya users either by login identity or content is like trying to deal with suicide bombers simply by fencing them out -- a de facto scar on the landscape, at a minimum.

by **Bob** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 8:38 pm

Could someone still grep on his/her login name and retrieve posts from a gated topic, btw?

by **Don Muerto** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 8:39 pm

Bob wrote:There are no de facto moderators on the eplaya.

Ain't it the truth.

by **Kinetic II** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 8:58 pm

Well, if the PTB decide to implement moderators will the core group get behind them or will it turn into more bitching about perceived slights and petty stuff?

And why do we need moderators? If the core group got their collective asses back over here, DF and the games would be over and done in a week, maybe 2.

I've stayed here and tried to understand, to engage, to cajole, flame, any and everything in the arsenal I could think of I tried except for sock puppets...and failed. I could use some help. The last time I felt this alone was when I drove across Jungo Road and didn't see another soul for 90 miles.

I could see it now. Badger, Bob, Ivy, Trey, Precip, Foam, all the others could sweep back in here and kick ass. But with the all the different headstrong attitudes and mindsets...I have my doubts that it will happen. Maybe when we get closer to next year's event and a new group discovers this place, they can pick up the torch, wonder why it got so bad, and rebuild again.

Save your flames about me...if you wanna bitch, channel it elsewhere so it can do some good for a change.

by **DE FACTO** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 9:00 pm

And why do we need moderators? If the core group got their collective asses back over here, DF and the games would be over and done in a week, maybe 2.

Less!

by **Kinetic II** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 9:04 pm

Is that a promise?

When this is over I'm going to be very curious who you really are. I have my hunch that I already know....but I'll leave it at that.

by **DE FACTO** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 9:07 pm

They'll never come back. :cry:

by **Kinetic II** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 9:13 pm

I'm beginning to think your right.

And since the proverbial torch is laying there on the ground, why not pick it up and run with it?

They have their new home....and I'm not really a part of that circle despite my best efforts to try. When you go looking for acceptance and try to cover for low self-esteem and other problems it draws you into situations you have no business being in.

Maybe I need another beer, it's wearing off too fast.

Back to the thread, the core group is the ones that want thread ownership...if they're on another board, why are we catering to them instead of to the people still here? They made their choice to leave....let them live with their decision.

by **DE FACTO** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 9:18 pm

There's gonna be lots of new people and the OH's are gonna help them out. that's just the way it's gonna be.

It's still burningman. They'll get over it. And this still will be the best board on the planet.

Heck, they dont talk all that much about the board or the admins anymore. They just bitch about me.

still better than before.

:lol:

by **DE FACTO** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 9:20 pm

Heck, they dont even bitch about Alice.

by **Don Muerto** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 9:21 pm

K, you really are a drama queen sometimes, and I say that in all honesty and with the best of intentions.

The purpose of this thread is not for you or DF to turn it into a pissing match nor as a venue for some teary exchange about torches or made beds that need lying in.

I had an intellectual question I didn't feel I could answer without input from others. Please try to stay on topic.

by **DE FACTO** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 9:29 pm

Don Muerto wrote:K, you really are a drama queen sometimes, and I say that in all honesty and with the best of intentions.

The purpose of this thread is not for you or DF to turn it into a pissing match nor as a venue for some teary exchange about torches or made beds that need lying in.

I had an intellectual question I didn't feel I could answer without input from others. Please try to stay on topic.

So why are you pissing and bitching your drama. just ask the question already.

by **zanaru** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 9:34 pm

Allow me to gently direct you back to the beginning of the thread where said question resides.

by **DE FACTO** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 9:36 pm

and I'll be nice and leave you guys alone.

ok?

by **Kinetic II** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 9:45 pm

Thread drift for better or worse is an eplaya feature.
But I get your point and will shut up in here after this post.

by **Don Muerto** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 9:52 pm

Just post on topic. Not everything is about the larger issues.

and

Sorry for jumping on you, I need more beer and you need less. Cheers.

by **Kinetic II** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 10:00 pm

I can still type on 7. I'm also bored off my ass and between projects. It's not a good combination. Then after the mess I went through in Chicago today...sheesh, back to the thread..

by **drowned_saved** » Mon Dec 01, 2003 10:02 pm

PURE IGNORANCE leads me to ask this, and though i'm hesitant to reveal HOW SHALLOW my understanding of these issues is, i can't help but wonder:

isn't it possible (and easy) to implement an "ignore this user" feature like the one that some chat programs offer (e.g., yahoo). that way, everyone gets to broadcast to the board, but users get to "tune in" what they want.

is that what a PLONK feature would provide? i honestly don't know what the word means except that people like to do "it" when they're feeling annoyed.

and if this IS how the plonk feature might work, who exactly is opposed to it and on what grounds?

i'm asking for an education, so please, if you're able, point me in the right direction.

and be gentle, please...remember, i'm relatively new here.

ePlaya

Thread Ownership

Thread Ownership

Criminy

Re: Criminy

obThread Ownership

Who is online