Suggestion thread (plus a heads up and a question for you all). (1 Viewer)

[Andrus]

Seems we've gotten this thing pretty stable, the addons are all in place and all of the server tweaks are in, so we plan to officially launch this site next Tuesday, November 12th (EDIT to Wednesday, November 13th). In the meantime, I am open to any suggestions that you might have regarding features. If the suggestions make sense, are do-able and not overly complex I can see what I can do.

StudioSaint suggested on the other site that we add a board for those that decline to declare affiliation (conservative/moderate/liberal) and I would like to hear your thoughts on that. If you like the idea... any suggestions on what we should name that board?

My initial reaction to his suggestion was that the MCB should cover that, but then I remembered that not everyone will be suited for this MCB board due to the rather strict behavioral rules on this board... and the Mud Pit will obviously not be moderated enough. I thought that most of those that declined to commit as either conservatives or liberals would declare as moderates, but that doesn't seem to be the case, so I am open to the idea.

-Andrus

 

[MT15]

I suppose an Independent board might be the way to look at it.

 

[Intensesaint]

What is the difference between a Moderate/Independent. I think 3 is just fine. If you add another then you may have people asking for another board down the road like a Green board or even more.

 

[GMRfellowtraveller]

What is the difference between a Moderate/Independent. I think 3 is just fine. If you add another then you may have people asking for another board down the road like a Green board or even more.

Moderates would be a mix of D&R (or liberal and conservative more precisely)
Independents could argue the party system is the problem
Theoretically libertarians should be independents but we know in practice that’s not the case

 

[Lazybones]

Let’s do it by gender. We can have 112 boards.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

If you wanted independent boards, would it be too much to add two: independent/leans left and independent/leans right?

Or is that too many?

 

[Dadsdream]

What is the difference between a Moderate/Independent. I think 3 is just fine. If you add another then you may have people asking for another board down the road like a Green board or even more.

I agree with this.

Just change the name of "Moderate" to "Undeclared" and be done with it.

 

[Lazybones]

If you wanted independent boards, would it be too much to add two: independent/leans left and independent/leans right?

Or is that too many?

see my post above.

 

[Lazybones]

I agree with this.

Just change the name of "Moderate" to "Undeclared" and be done with it.

btw, I like the conservative board. Very stress free from having to provide an index page, a table of contents and at least 2 peer reviewed articles before we post.

I’m just kidding guys. Hope everyone has an amazing day.

 

[SystemShock]

Too many boards already.

What would be the delta between an independent/undeclared board and the MCB?

 

[wardorican]

Seems we've gotten this thing pretty stable, the addons are all in place and all of the server tweaks are in, so we plan to officially launch this site next Tuesday, November 12th. In the meantime, I am open to any suggestions that you might have regarding features. If the suggestions make sense, are do-able and not overly complex I can see what I can do.

StudioSaint suggested on the other site that we add a board for those that decline to declare affiliation (conservative/moderate/liberal) and I would like to hear your thoughts on that. If you like the idea... any suggestions on what we should name that board?

My initial reaction to his suggestion was that the MCB should cover that, but then I remembered that not everyone will be suited for this MCB board due to the rather strict behavioral rules on this board... and the Mud Pit will obviously not be moderated enough. I thought that most of those that declined to commit as either conservatives or liberals would declare as moderates, but that doesn't seem to be the case, so I am open to the idea.

-Andrus

The Island of Misfit Toys.

Or the boring "Undeclared" or "Actually Independent"

 

[wardorican]

Let’s do it by gender. We can have 112 boards.

Just think of it as going back to analog.

But... please don't sully Andrus' thread.

 

[crosswatt]

I agree with this.

Just change the name of "Moderate" to "Undeclared" and be done with it.

But not all moderates are undeclared.

 

[Dadsdream]

But not all moderates are undeclared.

Pending. Yeah, change it to Pending.

 

[Ayo]

dark mode? Too much?

 

[LonghornSaint]

I like the idea, maybe call it Non-Affiliated?

 

[BobE]

Island of the misfits would be a good sub forum name

 

[Andrus]

Too many boards already.

What would be the delta between an independent/undeclared board and the MCB?

The delta is the behavioral requirements between the two. You all have been doing an admiral job of trying to avoid triggering one another, for the most part, and you are setting the tone for the expected influx of new members (hopefully), however we all know that once the doors open to the general public and traffic increases, there are going to some that cannot resist causing problems resulting in their losing access to the MCB. Some just won't make the cut.

As of now, in the event that any member that is already declared acts up and gets booted from the MCB, those members can still retreat to their respective affiliate boards and participate. Undeclared members that get booted from the MCB really have no other place to go to continue discussing domestic politics other than the Mud Pit. This proposed undeclared/non-affiliate board is a remedy for that, among other issues.

But not all moderates are undeclared.

I thought of using Independent as the board name but your point above crossed my mind.

I like the idea, maybe call it Non-Affiliated?

I think that yours and Wardorican's "undeclared" would probably be the least confusing options suggested thus far.

dark mode? Too much?

I can create a dark theme if enough of you want one. It might not be ready by launch time. Not sure how I would incorporate Red, White & Blue into a dark theme, however. Right off hand I am thinking a dark blue background with red bordering, buttons, etc. with grayish hovers in leiu of white might work. What do you think?

Let’s do it by gender. We can have 112 boards.

I found this to be quite funny. I also understand that others won't. Such are the times that we live in.

I said that, and quoted lazybones' post specifically to discuss nuance in moderation. Hypothetically speaking, let's say that lazy's post is reported. I look at it and I am like "Meh, I don't find that it crosses any lines and somebody is either overly sensitive or lacks sense of humor". Another staffer looks at it, disagrees and states that he/she doesn't approve of it, finds it to be a trigger to a certain group and feels that it should be moderated. I then invite other staffers opinions. Some agree with him/her, some agree with me. There are times where such debate will end up at an impasse and an executive decision has to be made. Consideration is given to the impact of the moderation action and both what is best for the community, and the impression that the resulting action will leave on the community. What then would you do with this reported post if you have to make that executive decision?

The point is that there are a lot of gray areas in politics, and differences in opinion by both members and staffers alike on what is and isn't acceptable and in adherence to the rules being put in place. Political discussions are complicated enough without the expectation of fair moderation concerning comments that straddle a fine line of what is considered acceptable when not everyone can agree on whether or not certain posts cross that line. You simply cannot clearly define a clear and solid line of acceptability when there is such nuance requiring either a staffer or the staff to make a hard judgment call. We can only do our best and use our better judgment on a case by case basis. We won't always get it right in the minds of every member, but we will do our best.

Moderating political discussion is much tougher than a typical fan board as many such instances of moderation can be debated, and subsequently railed upon as motivated by political bias when action is taken. I can say that individual political bias will eventually manifest itself through pattern, not just here but within the staff. Before long that will draw attention. My job here is where the staff is concerned, to shut it down if and when it does. Otherwise, we will check one another.

It is more important to us to ensure as fair an environment as possible than to further any political agenda. As I have stated before the goal is to have that one board on the internet where opposing parties can hold meaningful discussions without the behavioral issues that cause the discussions to devolve. It's a niche that we want to fill.

Hopefully this site will grow and possibly seed meaningful dialogue between partisans everywhere. That is the crux of my own agenda! Well... of course, making the site profitable in the process would be a big plus.