Josh and Shryke have both made posts to the effect that nothing should change
i don't think moderation practices and community standards would be included in either of their lists
if we're solely talking about the structure of the forum then i'm not having the same conversation sammich is
Allegedly a voice of reason.
+2
QuetziHere we may reign secure, and in my choice,To reign is worth ambition though in HellRegistered User, Moderatormod
I assumed that we were talking structure of the forum given the thread we're in, perhaps that's my bad.
That said, I do think that stuff like moderation practices does kind of tie in to forum structure - part of the oft-cited difference between SE and D&D has been the moderation policies and enforcement of rules there and how they have set tone in those areas. Continuing those subforums into Coin Return feels, to me at least, like a tacit continuation of those moderation styles, as that's part of the forum culture that people like in each place.
+8
TraceGNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam WeRegistered Userregular
We need to seriously entertain the possibility of changing the forum structure, because the status quo has been demonstrated to be untenable. If the status quo was viable, we wouldn't be looking for a new place to post.
Pedantic: the forum structure, subcultures, etc have nothing to do with why we're looking for a new place to post - that was a business decision made by others, over which we have no influence or control whatsoever.
Somebody explicitly went out of their way to contact Jerry about the use of anti-genocide slogans on the boards.
I can't imagine calling attention to an increasingly fractious cultural divide really improved PA's view of the forum as a business asset, and that's even before we get into the various State of the Forums threads from last summer, which temperature-wise started at a low boil, and only escalated from there.
Hold on fucking seriously?
0
FishmanPut your goddamned hand in the goddamned Box of Pain.Registered Userregular
edited January 8
Honestly, even in regards to the Status Quo there are still things that should be discussed.
Like, I understand that there are some who wish to maintain the separate vibes and posting style - but that does that also extend to privacy, which is a new metric for Xenforo that is being introduced and that hasn't been discussed in regards to how that applies to the current forum/subforum layout yet?
Arguments have been made that politics threads and the [Chat] thread - both of which are present within DnD in the current format - should be moved to private/protected. To date, as far as I can recall, there hasn't been anyone who has strongly voiced an opinion against this - but it's unclear to me whether 'leave the status quo as it is' means that the Status Quo proponents feel DnD (and indeed, the board in general) should remain public.
I think that given how non-politics D&D threads can go off topic without issue for a while, having both D&D and SE++ is redudant and it only encourages the state of peak treehousing that was agreed to be a bad thing.
So I'm for any topic-based structure that avoids duplicate threads, the details can be sorted out, but that's the very basis I would start with and if people really want another poll, then they could put those two options (D&D/SE++ vs Fully topical) and then decide based on that decision.
+6
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered User, Moderatormod
I assumed that we were talking structure of the forum given the thread we're in, perhaps that's my bad.
That said, I do think that stuff like moderation practices does kind of tie in to forum structure - part of the oft-cited difference between SE and D&D has been the moderation policies and enforcement of rules there and how they have set tone in those areas. Continuing those subforums into Coin Return feels, to me at least, like a tacit continuation of those moderation styles, as that's part of the forum culture that people like in each place.
i specifically want to recognize there are distinct conversation cultures here, which individually are not problems either way, but clash when they are occupying the same space
i want that to be respected through a community that agrees to abide by a code of conduct we've created together and moderation that addresses the bad actors before they antagonize others into anger and disruption
i very much do not want to see a continued tradition of mods just being the ones who are allowed to be assholes because they have the hammers
and i don't want to see community members seeking out revenge for grudges or airing of grievances aimed at other members of the community
i think these goals will be accomplished through moderation and the community
i think trying to tear down the separate spaces and forcing then to abide by a single culture will only continue the kinds of problems we already see. nobody needs to be pushed together and made to kiss, they just need to feel sure they can enjoy their spaces without undue antagonism because someone else doesn't agree with the way they phrase things
mobbing people out of threads and subforums because they don't understand how things work is one of the behaviors we need to change if this is going to work at all
I agree, which is why I find it hard to understand having one subforum that describes itself as "not the other one" and the other one which describes itself as "be careful and make sure you understand what's going on here before you post"
I'm not even sure where you are getting these descriptions from or who you think they apply to.
I assumed that we were talking structure of the forum given the thread we're in, perhaps that's my bad.
That said, I do think that stuff like moderation practices does kind of tie in to forum structure - part of the oft-cited difference between SE and D&D has been the moderation policies and enforcement of rules there and how they have set tone in those areas. Continuing those subforums into Coin Return feels, to me at least, like a tacit continuation of those moderation styles, as that's part of the forum culture that people like in each place.
i specifically want to recognize there are distinct conversation cultures here, which individually are not problems either way, but clash when they are occupying the same space
i want that to be respected through a community that agrees to abide by a code of conduct we've created together and moderation that addresses the bad actors before they antagonize others into anger and disruption
i very much do not want to see a continued tradition of mods just being the ones who are allowed to be assholes because they have the hammers
and i don't want to see community members seeking out revenge for grudges or airing of grievances aimed at other members of the community
i think these goals will be accomplished through moderation and the community
i think trying to tear down the separate spaces and forcing then to abide by a single culture will only continue the kinds of problems we already see. nobody needs to be pushed together and made to kiss, they just need to feel sure they can enjoy their spaces without undue antagonism because someone else doesn't agree with the way they phrase things
If people want to be so separate why are we sticking together? When this place was a PA attached project trying to give a home to whomever wandered in it maybe made sense, but I am not sure. If we are creating a space why are we duplicating efforts like this? We can just split and be done. It gets past all of the drama because it will be truly separate spaces so we no longer have to worry about people wandering into the "wrong" area and starting shit. Double everything is just two separate forums pretending to be one which is not a stable situation.
mobbing people out of threads and subforums because they don't understand how things work is one of the behaviors we need to change if this is going to work at all
I agree, which is why I find it hard to understand having one subforum that describes itself as "not the other one" and the other one which describes itself as "be careful and make sure you understand what's going on here before you post"
I'm not even sure where you are getting these descriptions from or who you think they apply to.
From the blurbs under each subforum on the desktop version of the site.
0
ToxI kill threadsDilige, et quod vis facRegistered Userregular
edited January 8
Tox on
maybe the real panopticon was the friends we made along the way
+3
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
There seems to be some kind of assumption that the schism "must be solved" or "the forums will die".
I'm not sure I agree with that assertion, and we have no proof that this is the case. The closest thing we might have to evidence would come from the survey, and I can say point blank with absolutely no reservations that the survey doesn't support such an argument.
If anything, the only affirmative thing you can take away from the survey is that there is enough support for Coin Return to be a broadly viable thing. That's pretty much it.
mobbing people out of threads and subforums because they don't understand how things work is one of the behaviors we need to change if this is going to work at all
I agree, which is why I find it hard to understand having one subforum that describes itself as "not the other one" and the other one which describes itself as "be careful and make sure you understand what's going on here before you post"
I'm not even sure where you are getting these descriptions from or who you think they apply to.
From the blurbs under each subforum on the desktop version of the site.
I think those blurbs are like 20+ years old at this point and I'm not sure anyone has cared what they've said for almost that long.
mobbing people out of threads and subforums because they don't understand how things work is one of the behaviors we need to change if this is going to work at all
I agree, which is why I find it hard to understand having one subforum that describes itself as "not the other one" and the other one which describes itself as "be careful and make sure you understand what's going on here before you post"
I'm not even sure where you are getting these descriptions from or who you think they apply to.
edit: goddamnit, that's what I get for not refreshing before posting
I assumed that we were talking structure of the forum given the thread we're in, perhaps that's my bad.
That said, I do think that stuff like moderation practices does kind of tie in to forum structure - part of the oft-cited difference between SE and D&D has been the moderation policies and enforcement of rules there and how they have set tone in those areas. Continuing those subforums into Coin Return feels, to me at least, like a tacit continuation of those moderation styles, as that's part of the forum culture that people like in each place.
i specifically want to recognize there are distinct conversation cultures here, which individually are not problems either way, but clash when they are occupying the same space
i want that to be respected through a community that agrees to abide by a code of conduct we've created together and moderation that addresses the bad actors before they antagonize others into anger and disruption
i very much do not want to see a continued tradition of mods just being the ones who are allowed to be assholes because they have the hammers
and i don't want to see community members seeking out revenge for grudges or airing of grievances aimed at other members of the community
i think these goals will be accomplished through moderation and the community
i think trying to tear down the separate spaces and forcing then to abide by a single culture will only continue the kinds of problems we already see. nobody needs to be pushed together and made to kiss, they just need to feel sure they can enjoy their spaces without undue antagonism because someone else doesn't agree with the way they phrase things
If people want to be so separate why are we sticking together? When this place was a PA attached project trying to give a home to whomever wandered in it maybe made sense, but I am not sure. If we are creating a space why are we duplicating efforts like this? We can just split and be done. It gets past all of the drama because it will be truly separate spaces so we no longer have to worry about people wandering into the "wrong" area and starting shit. Double everything is just two separate forums pretending to be one which is not a stable situation.
Because there's still overlap and cross-talk and mutual spaces and such?
And also parts of the forum that aren't D&D or SE++?
I assumed that we were talking structure of the forum given the thread we're in, perhaps that's my bad.
That said, I do think that stuff like moderation practices does kind of tie in to forum structure - part of the oft-cited difference between SE and D&D has been the moderation policies and enforcement of rules there and how they have set tone in those areas. Continuing those subforums into Coin Return feels, to me at least, like a tacit continuation of those moderation styles, as that's part of the forum culture that people like in each place.
i specifically want to recognize there are distinct conversation cultures here, which individually are not problems either way, but clash when they are occupying the same space
i want that to be respected through a community that agrees to abide by a code of conduct we've created together and moderation that addresses the bad actors before they antagonize others into anger and disruption
i very much do not want to see a continued tradition of mods just being the ones who are allowed to be assholes because they have the hammers
and i don't want to see community members seeking out revenge for grudges or airing of grievances aimed at other members of the community
i think these goals will be accomplished through moderation and the community
i think trying to tear down the separate spaces and forcing then to abide by a single culture will only continue the kinds of problems we already see. nobody needs to be pushed together and made to kiss, they just need to feel sure they can enjoy their spaces without undue antagonism because someone else doesn't agree with the way they phrase things
If people want to be so separate why are we sticking together? When this place was a PA attached project trying to give a home to whomever wandered in it maybe made sense, but I am not sure. If we are creating a space why are we duplicating efforts like this? We can just split and be done. It gets past all of the drama because it will be truly separate spaces so we no longer have to worry about people wandering into the "wrong" area and starting shit. Double everything is just two separate forums pretending to be one which is not a stable situation.
It's not really 'duplicating efforts' to go into Xenforo's admin tools to add two Category nodes with a Forum node beneath instead of just one Category node with a Forum beneath.
Or one Category node with two Forum nodes.
or I guess it technically is duplicating efforts but it's such a low barrier to do that it's not a meaningful increase. Whole tens of seconds are being debated on effort duplication saving. It will have taken more time for me to look up how to do it in Xenforo and then type this post than it would have for me to simply go into Xenforo and just... make the extra categories.
+1
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
I assumed that we were talking structure of the forum given the thread we're in, perhaps that's my bad.
That said, I do think that stuff like moderation practices does kind of tie in to forum structure - part of the oft-cited difference between SE and D&D has been the moderation policies and enforcement of rules there and how they have set tone in those areas. Continuing those subforums into Coin Return feels, to me at least, like a tacit continuation of those moderation styles, as that's part of the forum culture that people like in each place.
i specifically want to recognize there are distinct conversation cultures here, which individually are not problems either way, but clash when they are occupying the same space
i want that to be respected through a community that agrees to abide by a code of conduct we've created together and moderation that addresses the bad actors before they antagonize others into anger and disruption
i very much do not want to see a continued tradition of mods just being the ones who are allowed to be assholes because they have the hammers
and i don't want to see community members seeking out revenge for grudges or airing of grievances aimed at other members of the community
i think these goals will be accomplished through moderation and the community
i think trying to tear down the separate spaces and forcing then to abide by a single culture will only continue the kinds of problems we already see. nobody needs to be pushed together and made to kiss, they just need to feel sure they can enjoy their spaces without undue antagonism because someone else doesn't agree with the way they phrase things
If people want to be so separate why are we sticking together? When this place was a PA attached project trying to give a home to whomever wandered in it maybe made sense, but I am not sure. If we are creating a space why are we duplicating efforts like this? We can just split and be done. It gets past all of the drama because it will be truly separate spaces so we no longer have to worry about people wandering into the "wrong" area and starting shit. Double everything is just two separate forums pretending to be one which is not a stable situation.
The current PA forums are "split" and they were fine until financial support was pulled. I don't think anyone was arguing for a Great Unification to happen prior to that. This makes me think that things were, to use your word, stable.
There seems to be some kind of assumption that the schism "must be solved" or "the forums will die".
I'm not sure I agree with that assertion, and we have no proof that this is the case. The closest thing we might have to evidence would come from the survey, and I can say point blank with absolutely no reservations that the survey doesn't support such an argument.
If anything, the only affirmative thing you can take away from the survey is that there is enough support for Coin Return to be a broadly viable thing. That's pretty much it.
The forums are dying. That much we know. Not in the PA is killing it way either. It has continuously slowed down when we had a name attached. It is only going to get worse without one. There is not a small amount of users concerned about how the forums are going. I don't think we have any idea of what a silver bullet to fix them would be. We can know as is things aren't going great based on the multiple threads where people have spoken directly about how they are not happy with how things are going.
+6
QuetziHere we may reign secure, and in my choice,To reign is worth ambition though in HellRegistered User, Moderatormod
mobbing people out of threads and subforums because they don't understand how things work is one of the behaviors we need to change if this is going to work at all
I agree, which is why I find it hard to understand having one subforum that describes itself as "not the other one" and the other one which describes itself as "be careful and make sure you understand what's going on here before you post"
I'm not even sure where you are getting these descriptions from or who you think they apply to.
From the blurbs under each subforum on the desktop version of the site.
I think those blurbs are like 20+ years old at this point and I'm not sure anyone has cared what they've said for almost that long.
So do you agree that they should be changed?
+3
ToxI kill threadsDilige, et quod vis facRegistered Userregular
edited January 8
The forums are not fine people have been getting chased out of threads on both sides for years.
Y'all are not living in reality and it's infuriating.
The reason everything is so quiet is because everyone got chased off so many times they stopped bothering to try.
Tox on
maybe the real panopticon was the friends we made along the way
mobbing people out of threads and subforums because they don't understand how things work is one of the behaviors we need to change if this is going to work at all
I agree, which is why I find it hard to understand having one subforum that describes itself as "not the other one" and the other one which describes itself as "be careful and make sure you understand what's going on here before you post"
I'm not even sure where you are getting these descriptions from or who you think they apply to.
From the blurbs under each subforum on the desktop version of the site.
I think those blurbs are like 20+ years old at this point and I'm not sure anyone has cared what they've said for almost that long.
They are the closest thing I have to go on to describe what the difference between the forums is, because going in and reading threads isn't illustrating that for me.
I'm just getting such mixed signals about the purpose of the separation. It's not about moderation because that will be consistent across the forum. It's not about on topic vs off topic because both forums are chill about that. It's about two groups of users who shouldn't be made to kiss, but also people cross post which is why we're not making two websites, so clearly people are fine with kissing? And mobbing people out of a group won't be allowed, but also the point of keeping it separate is so people don't have to get along with people they don't want to? Well if I'm one of those people and I don't realize it, won't I get mobbed out?
Part of it is having (to bring up an admittedly inexact analogy I used previously in the Guiding Principles thread) a solid way to delineate the difference between high street coffeehouse and comfy neighborhood dive bar, with D&D being the coffee house and SE++ being the dive bar.
You know what to expect when you walk through the door of one or the other (or click on the D&D or SE++ link) and can calibrate yourself accordingly.
uh... 124 new posts, you say? well, I'll catch up eventually, but for now, with much help from @Morninglord here is my revised proposal, ready to go onto the next survey. sorry @Delzhand I know you asked for a short paragraph, but there was much confusion initially, so I hope you understand the need to go a bit long.
This proposed structure is intended as a transitional compromise that combines some parts of both the full structure rework and the current structure. There are two competing issues: people feel that there is a need to encourage cross sub-forum interaction, while others feel that they still want places to discuss certain important topics in what they perceive as their preferred "posting style."
In order to encourage people to be more comfortable interacting with each other via exposure, Video Games and Technology threads will only be allowed in Games & Technology, while Media and Sports threads will only be allowed in the Media & Sports sub-forum. (Incidental discussion inside other threads on the forum is fine as long it isn't the main topic of the thread, i.e. was created for that purpose.) Tabletop threads are strongly encouraged to go into Tabletop & Analogue Games, but there's less concern that this sub-forum will be underutilised based on current usage rates.
These topics have been chosen as being less contentious, while still resulting in a large amount of unified discussion. Thread tags to enable op thread tone and topicality expectations (and other uses if applicable, cough Star Wars cough) will be enabled on all sub-forums including the above explicitly mentioned, to test how effective this is at handling different posting preferences, and/or if there is a major need for them. The impact of these changes will be evaluated after six months.
We can adjust back towards the current structure or towards a more unified structure as needed, based on community feedback, sub-forum usage, and moderation metrics. A committee will be elected to collect this data and make recommendations, which will then be put to a binding referendum vote.
Over the past 20 years we have created comfortable sanctuaries that are worth holding on to. In that same time conflict has grown that we wish to try to resolve by attempting more unified discussion. Lets all try this compromised structure to test out how well we can get along with each other, as well as the impact of our new guidelines, democratic process, and community-chosen moderation team on the problems we all face as a community. Hopefully, if things go well, we can transition to a more unified community as a result. I think we'll be surprised how well things will go!
-Forum Rules/Policies
PUBLIC CHAT FORUMS
-Games & Technology (All digital games topics go here, including game mega-threads and game chat threads. PC build threads and other technology topics go here. There are no longer sub-sub-forums in here: Moe's and MMO topics go here, as well.)
-Media & Sports Discussions (All Media and Sports topics go here. Media includes print media.)
-Help & Advice
-Tabletop & Analogue Games (For all non digital games, such as TTRPGs, Board games, etc)
PRIVATE CHAT FORUMS
-Debate and/or Discourse* (A more managed discussion sub-forum where threads attempt to keep on topic, with systems in place to enable that. "GDST" will be renamed "Offshoot Discussion Thread (ODT)” and can be politely requested, but not demanded, if a topic is going too far off topic. Posting here is under the opt-in understanding that natural conversational flow can be interfered with.)
-Social Entropy++* (The chat sub-forum, where you can chat freely in a casual manner, with no explicit rules or pathway for keeping a conversation on topic, other than bringing up the idea nonconfrontationally. Talk about your job, your day, your triumphs, your sorrows, draw a horse with perfect accuracy, and post random nonsense. Crucially, politics or other contentious topics will be allowed here, as well as in DnD, initially, to be reviewed at six months.)
-Arts, Crafts & Creative Hobbies (This is a sub-forum to post your creative works in a positive, supportive environment, made private to protect it from web crawling)
-Archives
COIN RETURN ADMINISTRATION
-Bug Reports & User Issues
-Feature Requests
*Given that there is some negative response to keeping these two names, they are not considered set in stone but can be changed based on feedback and review. Ideally, each sub-forum can compromise and choose their own name before or after the CoRe forums are created.
+3
TraceGNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam WeRegistered Userregular
I think it's somewhat telling that this conversation blew up once again in a fairly contentious way after the Christmas merger.
Just saying.
0
minor incidentpublicly subsidized!privately profitable!Registered User, Transition Teamregular
I think it's somewhat telling that this conversation blew up once again in a fairly contentious way after the Christmas merger.
Just saying.
It primarily blew up because pinning down the forum structure came up on the to-do list, so we prompted everyone for more input.
Hell, New Jersey, it said on the letter. Delivered without comment. So be it!
+12
TraceGNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam WeRegistered Userregular
edited January 8
Missed that, my bad.
Merging seems like a bad idea, some people legit don't like other people and honestly, that's okay. You're allowed to not like everyone and I think trying to smash the communities together in an attempt to create some sort of forced camaraderie will be looked upon negatively.
edit: Also if that was like a "hey last call for mentioning anything about forum structure" why wasn't that pinned/announced for the entire forum to see? Not everyone has the time to check this stuff all day everyday.
Trace on
0
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
There seems to be some kind of assumption that the schism "must be solved" or "the forums will die".
I'm not sure I agree with that assertion, and we have no proof that this is the case. The closest thing we might have to evidence would come from the survey, and I can say point blank with absolutely no reservations that the survey doesn't support such an argument.
If anything, the only affirmative thing you can take away from the survey is that there is enough support for Coin Return to be a broadly viable thing. That's pretty much it.
The forums are dying. That much we know. Not in the PA is killing it way either. It has continuously slowed down when we had a name attached. It is only going to get worse without one. There is not a small amount of users concerned about how the forums are going. I don't think we have any idea of what a silver bullet to fix them would be. We can know as is things aren't going great based on the multiple threads where people have spoken directly about how they are not happy with how things are going.
The forums have been "dying" in that sense for years. If we want to solve that problem, then a restructure is probably not going to move the needle, if at all... It's a bit like arguing for the car seats to be brown because you expect to go off-roading but not knowing whether you can even afford a 4x4 or if you need to settle for a used Honda Fit.
This goes back to my earlier point about folks assuming that a restructure is: (a) necessary, and (b) a viable, categorical solution to certain problems. We haven't even clearly identified the problems that are trying to be solved here. Folks have said everything from wanting to fix "the great schism" to "well it's changing anyway so we might as well do stuff we want" to "no one visits the PA Club or chat threads so we should just kill those" to "stopping the forums from dying".
It'd be nice if we could identify specific things that we are aiming to resolve, align somewhat on whether they even need to be addressed in the first place, and then assess whether a restructure is even the most appropriate solution to those problems. And if so, then we'll at least know what we're trying to do with the restructuring, rather than having a giant free-for-all where dozens of proposals are being levied for completely different reasons.
I am going to echo a point I made a while back which bears repeating - the discussion we have in these threads is not representative of the whole. It's not even representative of the majority. It's just the most vocal users. Taking what we read here as some kind of driving insight into the larger population is like reading the Youtube comments for a video and assuming they are indicative of everyone who watched it.
I'm in favor of a restructure, but I also think it's totally fine to have a "loose and unstructured chat threads" forum alongside an assortment of on-topic forums, which I think is what people are referring to when they talk about "different posting styles". Nobody is talking about shutting that down. The main thing I object to is having persistent megathreads in SE++ that belong in their dedicated subforum (games/media/politics/etc), and are kept separate only because the posters in those threads don't like each other. In most of these cases that isn't even true and the threads are divided for no reason. I acknowledge there are a few contentious exceptions, and that's where moderation policies become critical - I think we can almost all agree that moderation policies should change in a variety of ways.
Merging seems like a bad idea, some people legit don't like other people and honestly, that's okay. You're allowed to not like everyone and I think trying to smash the communities together in an attempt to create some sort of forced camaraderie will be looked upon negatively.
edit: Also if that was like a "hey last call for mentioning anything about forum structure" why wasn't that pinned/announced for the entire forum to see? Not everyone has the time to check this stuff all day everyday.
People don't like each other and that's what the ignore function is for. Don't like somebody, put them on ignore and you don't have to see them.
But the more that the forums lose active members it's smarter to consolidate the forums to keep stuff more active.
People mentioned that the movie threads in D&D and SE have different vibes which aren't really wrong, but it's also something that wouldn't really matter in the media thread, because it wouldn't be two different threads about movies. You could split up movies a lot of different ways. Beyond just starting a new thread for movies individually. Like my example about tv earlier now we could have a movie thread that is for new releases, and then divide them up by genre beyond that. Horror thread, action thread, drama thread, comedy, or go by what streaming service stuff is on or when it was released.
As for the last point about checking this sub forum for updates, it's been around for like three months and there have been constant updates you can check in like once a month and you'll be fine, plus there's going to be another poll about what structure people would prefer that will have an announcement.
I don't think the restructure is going to fix the schism, I think the improved moderation and Code of Conduct will so we might as well move everybody together into one forum. Twenty years ago, maybe even still ten years ago, there was more difference in SE and D&D, but there isn't really a difference in how the forums work anymore, there's no need for the division.
I think it's also pretty important to realize that the forums are going to shrink during the migration, at least at first. We're not going to get every user to jump over, either because they don't agree with some decision, or because they were already getting bored and took this opportunity to move on, or any number of reasons. Even if we preserve the subforum structure, I expect we'll lose people because of that. For that and many other reasons, this new community is not going to feel the same as the current one, no matter how hard we try. IMO bridging these divides is very important for allowing a new, smaller community to thrive.
Zek on
+9
minor incidentpublicly subsidized!privately profitable!Registered User, Transition Teamregular
edit: Also if that was like a "hey last call for mentioning anything about forum structure" why wasn't that pinned/announced for the entire forum to see? Not everyone has the time to check this stuff all day everyday.
Just had this discussion earlier today, actually. At a certain point, I think we have to just accept that anyone who cares enough to be involved is aware this place exists, and they're checking in on it. If not, they don't care (enough to bother). For every "why wasn't this pinned/announced?" I hear, there are just as many "there are too many pinned threads/announcements so I'm numb to them." (Literally just addressed one of those in another thread a few minutes ago!)
There is such a thing as announcement fatigue, and it's a tricky balance to strike, but obviously any actual polls or votes would definitely be announced forum-wide.
Hell, New Jersey, it said on the letter. Delivered without comment. So be it!
People don't like each other and that's what the ignore function is for. Don't like somebody, put them on ignore and you don't have to see them.
But the more that the forums lose active members it's smarter to consolidate the forums to keep stuff more active.
People mentioned that the movie threads in D&D and SE have different vibes which aren't really wrong, but it's also something that wouldn't really matter in the media thread, because it wouldn't be two different threads about movies. You could split up movies a lot of different ways. Beyond just starting a new thread for movies individually. Like my example about tv earlier now we could have a movie thread that is for new releases, and then divide them up by genre beyond that. Horror thread, action thread, drama thread, comedy, or go by what streaming service stuff is on or when it was released.
That's the point though, if we smash everyone together in one glorious media thread then either one style dominates which sucks for the people who liked how the other one was or we have two largely independent threads happening in the same thread which isn't solving anything. There's nothing stopping anyone from bookmarking both right if they like, the other one is literally three clicks away
"Split everything up into even more threads / subforums" can't be the answer when the original complaint was duplication of threads. If you split by genre instead of two general purpose movie threads we now have what 5+? And in the D&D thread some people often go back and do themed rewatches and write reviews, eg noirvember which are interesting to read but their threads would be just an OP and soon forgotten if you do thread-per-movie.
I think it's also pretty important to realize that the forums are going to shrink during the migration, at least at first. We're not going to get every user to jump over, either because they don't agree with some decision, or because they were already getting bored and took this opportunity to move on, or any number of reasons. Even if we preserve the subforum structure, I expect we'll lose people because of that. For that and many other reasons, this new community is not going to feel the same as the current one, no matter how hard we try. IMO bridging these divides is very important for allowing a new, smaller community to thrive.
I agree that people will leave regardless. But that's a separate issue. That will happen by virtue of the PA forums closing.
But regarding the specific question of restructuring, there are people who have said point blank that if we do merge, they are out. So you would be in effect trading those people for the ones who would theoretically leave if a restructure (to their liking) doesn't happen.
We are very much in the realm of conjecture and speculation at this point, which is why I have been a proponent of doing actual testing now or, in the more distant past, proposing that we should iterate on the Coin Return structure after the migration has happened so that people are in the right frame of mind to work things out and try new things. To be frank I think the Transition Team has unnecessarily expanded the scope of work in taking on a significant restructuring as part of the initial migration. Trimming unneeded/unused subforums is an incremental adjustment - forcing a merger of two clearly disparate cultures and communities is a major shift, and the justification for doing so appears to boil down to "Coin Return will eventually die if this doesn't happen".
This feels like a situation where we are perhaps missing the forest for the trees. Or trying to change the wings of the airplane while mid flight. Or some other pithy metaphor.
People don't like each other and that's what the ignore function is for. Don't like somebody, put them on ignore and you don't have to see them.
But the more that the forums lose active members it's smarter to consolidate the forums to keep stuff more active.
People mentioned that the movie threads in D&D and SE have different vibes which aren't really wrong, but it's also something that wouldn't really matter in the media thread, because it wouldn't be two different threads about movies. You could split up movies a lot of different ways. Beyond just starting a new thread for movies individually. Like my example about tv earlier now we could have a movie thread that is for new releases, and then divide them up by genre beyond that. Horror thread, action thread, drama thread, comedy, or go by what streaming service stuff is on or when it was released.
That's the point though, if we smash everyone together in one glorious media thread then either one style dominates which sucks for the people who liked how the other one was or we have two largely independent threads happening in the same thread which isn't solving anything. There's nothing stopping anyone from bookmarking both right if they like, the other one is literally three clicks away
"Split everything up into even more threads / subforums" can't be the answer when the original complaint was duplication of threads. If you split by genre instead of two general purpose movie threads we now have what 5+? And in the D&D thread some people often go back and do themed rewatches and write reviews, eg noirvember which are interesting to read but their threads would be just an OP and soon forgotten if you do thread-per-movie.
Nobody said more subforums, and more forked threads would only be needed if the existing thread is too crowded and frequently has multiple topics conflicting with each other. In which case you can choose precisely the terms on which to split it on a case-by-case basis, rather than relying on a division that is essentially arbitrary. It's not by any intentional design that SE++ threads have one sort of movie discussion and D&D threads have another - that's purely a fluke of different people being involved. I don't see that as a positive.
+1
smof[Growling historic on the fury road]Registered Userregular
The forums are not fine people have been getting chased out of threads on both sides for years.
Y'all are not living in reality and it's infuriating.
The reason everything is so quiet is because everyone got chased off so many times they stopped bothering to try.
Do you not think better moderation will address the 'chasing people off' issue?
0
smof[Growling historic on the fury road]Registered Userregular
Speaking of infuriating, it is frustrating to try and express that you want to preserve a space that's important to you and have it constantly framed as delusional, childish, antisocial, all of which have been done repeatedly over the course of this thread. People keep stating "the forum is dying so the structure must change" like it's a goddamn natural law without ever explaining why beyond vibes, which is exactly the same basis for people who support keeping things familiar.
This argument feels really circular and like people aren't actually listening to each other, everyone's made up their minds already and nobody's going to be swayed.
Personally I've been on the side of keeping things familiar (not exactly the same, if anyone gives a shit about that nuance), but my reason has always been because I want the most people possible to make the jump and I feel lke that is more likely if the new space feels familiar. It's nothing about not liking any other people or not wanting to associate with them. I just want as many as possibe of the people I hang out and chat with on a daily basis to still be around in six months. I also want as many of the people I don't hang out with daily, and only see pop up every now and then, but who seem cool, to be around as well.
I have been encouraged by the idea of getting a more concrete idea from the community of what they want re: a structure, if it turns out that most people will be likely to come along to a new site even if it's restructured then great, I won't worry so much.
+8
MorninglordI'm tired of being Batman,so today I'll be Owl.Registered Userregular
edited January 8
My opinion is similar but I am more in favour of a hybrid stance, which is why I spent a lot of time with the Cheat on his proposal trying to strike a balance on the familiar and the new.
But honestly if we get a survey response and it's all in favour of status quo, or full change, and most people show they'd still join regardless, then so be it.
I want to clarify that I don't think bringing everyone together will solve the schism. I think the schism is overblown and already has mostly been solved by time, and what remains will be solved by the Code of Conduct and consistent moderation of it. What I do think is that the schism being addressed negates the need for separate forums. Less "if we put everyone together they will get along" and more "if we are requiring that people get along anyway, why can't they be together?"
If we have two movie threads that generate 2 posts a day, one movie thread might generate four or likely even more posts a day, because there are more ideas to bounce off of. If Movies 1 is a conversation between Poster A and Poster B, and Movies 2 is a conversation between Poster B and Poster C, I don't see how keeping them separate is anything but Posters A and C refusing to get along and making the experience worse for Poster B as a result. And the more likely scenario, based on my observation, is that Posters A, B, and C all get along just fine, but Poster D, who doesn't post in either movie thread, has a problem with Poster A and doesn't want them in any thread with a 2 in it.
Take the Holiday Forums. Every time they get brought up here, people are saying how terrible they were and what a disaster they were and how they'd never join a forum that was anything like that. I am not saying the HF should be the standard, but what I saw last month was a lively active forum with an absolute minimum of drama. The main complaint I have about it is that it was busy enough that good threads got sent to page 2, a problem which would not be there if we divided by rough topics, and a problem that shows we do have the activity levels to keep things moving! And the fact that things moved faster tells me that people from the three main areas did come together and did get along just fine.
Now who knows what happened in PMs and reports because it seems like that's where all the shit seems to go down anyway. Whatever. But I can't help but feel a little bit like the people saying "the holiday forum was terrible and I logged off for that month" is due to them seeing some Poster Y and their stupid face and it just ruined their whole day. And the block function is there, no one has to be anyone else's friend, but making your personal hatred of another human who might not even know about it, into everyone else's problem and making people who would otherwise get along stay split into two groups to accommodate this, does not seem in line with the values we are aiming to establish.
Speaking of infuriating, it is frustrating to try and express that you want to preserve a space that's important to you and have it constantly framed as delusional, childish, antisocial, all of which have been done repeatedly over the course of this thread. People keep stating "the forum is dying so the structure must change" like it's a goddamn natural law without ever explaining why beyond vibes, which is exactly the same basis for people who support keeping things familiar.
I have explained why many times in many places. When you divide into two separate communities that appear to not co-mingke resentment builds. This is what has brought us to this current level of tension in no small part. Further as each area slows down there will be less activity which further pushes people out of interacting since there is less to interact with and hastens the death again. This is not a vibes thing so much as a very real phenomenon that you can observe now. Plenty of people have talked about how much the forums of slowed down recently which is a problem that is amplified with two split communities.
The forums are not fine people have been getting chased out of threads on both sides for years.
Y'all are not living in reality and it's infuriating.
The reason everything is so quiet is because everyone got chased off so many times they stopped bothering to try.
Do you not think better moderation will address the 'chasing people off' issue?
No not at all. I don't see what better moderation can even do for that. I can think of no concrete way to implement it better. A large part of the problem is when someone dislikes a poster they have begun assigning them to the subforum they dislike the most. This a person becomes an SE++ or D&D poster based solely on the person's perceptions of the activity they have seen as has been noted many times. You can mod every dogpile that skirts the rules for someone being from the wrong side of the tracks.
I think it's also pretty important to realize that the forums are going to shrink during the migration, at least at first. We're not going to get every user to jump over, either because they don't agree with some decision, or because they were already getting bored and took this opportunity to move on, or any number of reasons. Even if we preserve the subforum structure, I expect we'll lose people because of that. For that and many other reasons, this new community is not going to feel the same as the current one, no matter how hard we try. IMO bridging these divides is very important for allowing a new, smaller community to thrive.
I agree that people will leave regardless. But that's a separate issue. That will happen by virtue of the PA forums closing.
But regarding the specific question of restructuring, there are people who have said point blank that if we do merge, they are out. So you would be in effect trading those people for the ones who would theoretically leave if a restructure (to their liking) doesn't happen.
We are very much in the realm of conjecture and speculation at this point, which is why I have been a proponent of doing actual testing now or, in the more distant past, proposing that we should iterate on the Coin Return structure after the migration has happened so that people are in the right frame of mind to work things out and try new things. To be frank I think the Transition Team has unnecessarily expanded the scope of work in taking on a significant restructuring as part of the initial migration. Trimming unneeded/unused subforums is an incremental adjustment - forcing a merger of two clearly disparate cultures and communities is a major shift, and the justification for doing so appears to boil down to "Coin Return will eventually die if this doesn't happen".
This feels like a situation where we are perhaps missing the forest for the trees. Or trying to change the wings of the airplane while mid flight. Or some other pithy metaphor.
I think porting over a system that has so many clear flaws that have driven animosity in the community is refusing to throw out the bath water because the baby was in it. It is not theoretical people who would leave. People have stated they will do so. The survey results indicate an equal number of people with strong opinions on both sides. It is extremely uncharitable to frame it like those that prefer to keep the current set-up are the only one we know we risk losing. That is why there has been so much interest in developing an alternate plan.
Posts
About the structure. Since we're in the structure thread.
The last couple posts seem to be implying it's a wider scope
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
i don't think moderation practices and community standards would be included in either of their lists
if we're solely talking about the structure of the forum then i'm not having the same conversation sammich is
That said, I do think that stuff like moderation practices does kind of tie in to forum structure - part of the oft-cited difference between SE and D&D has been the moderation policies and enforcement of rules there and how they have set tone in those areas. Continuing those subforums into Coin Return feels, to me at least, like a tacit continuation of those moderation styles, as that's part of the forum culture that people like in each place.
Hold on fucking seriously?
Like, I understand that there are some who wish to maintain the separate vibes and posting style - but that does that also extend to privacy, which is a new metric for Xenforo that is being introduced and that hasn't been discussed in regards to how that applies to the current forum/subforum layout yet?
Arguments have been made that politics threads and the [Chat] thread - both of which are present within DnD in the current format - should be moved to private/protected. To date, as far as I can recall, there hasn't been anyone who has strongly voiced an opinion against this - but it's unclear to me whether 'leave the status quo as it is' means that the Status Quo proponents feel DnD (and indeed, the board in general) should remain public.
So I'm for any topic-based structure that avoids duplicate threads, the details can be sorted out, but that's the very basis I would start with and if people really want another poll, then they could put those two options (D&D/SE++ vs Fully topical) and then decide based on that decision.
i specifically want to recognize there are distinct conversation cultures here, which individually are not problems either way, but clash when they are occupying the same space
i want that to be respected through a community that agrees to abide by a code of conduct we've created together and moderation that addresses the bad actors before they antagonize others into anger and disruption
i very much do not want to see a continued tradition of mods just being the ones who are allowed to be assholes because they have the hammers
and i don't want to see community members seeking out revenge for grudges or airing of grievances aimed at other members of the community
i think these goals will be accomplished through moderation and the community
i think trying to tear down the separate spaces and forcing then to abide by a single culture will only continue the kinds of problems we already see. nobody needs to be pushed together and made to kiss, they just need to feel sure they can enjoy their spaces without undue antagonism because someone else doesn't agree with the way they phrase things
I'm not even sure where you are getting these descriptions from or who you think they apply to.
If people want to be so separate why are we sticking together? When this place was a PA attached project trying to give a home to whomever wandered in it maybe made sense, but I am not sure. If we are creating a space why are we duplicating efforts like this? We can just split and be done. It gets past all of the drama because it will be truly separate spaces so we no longer have to worry about people wandering into the "wrong" area and starting shit. Double everything is just two separate forums pretending to be one which is not a stable situation.
From the blurbs under each subforum on the desktop version of the site.
I'm not sure I agree with that assertion, and we have no proof that this is the case. The closest thing we might have to evidence would come from the survey, and I can say point blank with absolutely no reservations that the survey doesn't support such an argument.
If anything, the only affirmative thing you can take away from the survey is that there is enough support for Coin Return to be a broadly viable thing. That's pretty much it.
I think those blurbs are like 20+ years old at this point and I'm not sure anyone has cared what they've said for almost that long.
edit: goddamnit, that's what I get for not refreshing before posting
Because there's still overlap and cross-talk and mutual spaces and such?
And also parts of the forum that aren't D&D or SE++?
It's not really 'duplicating efforts' to go into Xenforo's admin tools to add two Category nodes with a Forum node beneath instead of just one Category node with a Forum beneath.
Or one Category node with two Forum nodes.
or I guess it technically is duplicating efforts but it's such a low barrier to do that it's not a meaningful increase. Whole tens of seconds are being debated on effort duplication saving. It will have taken more time for me to look up how to do it in Xenforo and then type this post than it would have for me to simply go into Xenforo and just... make the extra categories.
The current PA forums are "split" and they were fine until financial support was pulled. I don't think anyone was arguing for a Great Unification to happen prior to that. This makes me think that things were, to use your word, stable.
The forums are dying. That much we know. Not in the PA is killing it way either. It has continuously slowed down when we had a name attached. It is only going to get worse without one. There is not a small amount of users concerned about how the forums are going. I don't think we have any idea of what a silver bullet to fix them would be. We can know as is things aren't going great based on the multiple threads where people have spoken directly about how they are not happy with how things are going.
So do you agree that they should be changed?
Y'all are not living in reality and it's infuriating.
The reason everything is so quiet is because everyone got chased off so many times they stopped bothering to try.
They are the closest thing I have to go on to describe what the difference between the forums is, because going in and reading threads isn't illustrating that for me.
I'm just getting such mixed signals about the purpose of the separation. It's not about moderation because that will be consistent across the forum. It's not about on topic vs off topic because both forums are chill about that. It's about two groups of users who shouldn't be made to kiss, but also people cross post which is why we're not making two websites, so clearly people are fine with kissing? And mobbing people out of a group won't be allowed, but also the point of keeping it separate is so people don't have to get along with people they don't want to? Well if I'm one of those people and I don't realize it, won't I get mobbed out?
You know what to expect when you walk through the door of one or the other (or click on the D&D or SE++ link) and can calibrate yourself accordingly.
This proposed structure is intended as a transitional compromise that combines some parts of both the full structure rework and the current structure. There are two competing issues: people feel that there is a need to encourage cross sub-forum interaction, while others feel that they still want places to discuss certain important topics in what they perceive as their preferred "posting style."
In order to encourage people to be more comfortable interacting with each other via exposure, Video Games and Technology threads will only be allowed in Games & Technology, while Media and Sports threads will only be allowed in the Media & Sports sub-forum. (Incidental discussion inside other threads on the forum is fine as long it isn't the main topic of the thread, i.e. was created for that purpose.) Tabletop threads are strongly encouraged to go into Tabletop & Analogue Games, but there's less concern that this sub-forum will be underutilised based on current usage rates.
These topics have been chosen as being less contentious, while still resulting in a large amount of unified discussion. Thread tags to enable op thread tone and topicality expectations (and other uses if applicable, cough Star Wars cough) will be enabled on all sub-forums including the above explicitly mentioned, to test how effective this is at handling different posting preferences, and/or if there is a major need for them. The impact of these changes will be evaluated after six months.
We can adjust back towards the current structure or towards a more unified structure as needed, based on community feedback, sub-forum usage, and moderation metrics. A committee will be elected to collect this data and make recommendations, which will then be put to a binding referendum vote.
Over the past 20 years we have created comfortable sanctuaries that are worth holding on to. In that same time conflict has grown that we wish to try to resolve by attempting more unified discussion. Lets all try this compromised structure to test out how well we can get along with each other, as well as the impact of our new guidelines, democratic process, and community-chosen moderation team on the problems we all face as a community. Hopefully, if things go well, we can transition to a more unified community as a result. I think we'll be surprised how well things will go!
-Forum Rules/Policies
PUBLIC CHAT FORUMS
-Games & Technology (All digital games topics go here, including game mega-threads and game chat threads. PC build threads and other technology topics go here. There are no longer sub-sub-forums in here: Moe's and MMO topics go here, as well.)
-Media & Sports Discussions (All Media and Sports topics go here. Media includes print media.)
-Help & Advice
-Tabletop & Analogue Games (For all non digital games, such as TTRPGs, Board games, etc)
PRIVATE CHAT FORUMS
-Debate and/or Discourse* (A more managed discussion sub-forum where threads attempt to keep on topic, with systems in place to enable that. "GDST" will be renamed "Offshoot Discussion Thread (ODT)” and can be politely requested, but not demanded, if a topic is going too far off topic. Posting here is under the opt-in understanding that natural conversational flow can be interfered with.)
-Social Entropy++* (The chat sub-forum, where you can chat freely in a casual manner, with no explicit rules or pathway for keeping a conversation on topic, other than bringing up the idea nonconfrontationally. Talk about your job, your day, your triumphs, your sorrows, draw a horse with perfect accuracy, and post random nonsense. Crucially, politics or other contentious topics will be allowed here, as well as in DnD, initially, to be reviewed at six months.)
-Arts, Crafts & Creative Hobbies (This is a sub-forum to post your creative works in a positive, supportive environment, made private to protect it from web crawling)
-Archives
COIN RETURN ADMINISTRATION
-Bug Reports & User Issues
-Feature Requests
*Given that there is some negative response to keeping these two names, they are not considered set in stone but can be changed based on feedback and review. Ideally, each sub-forum can compromise and choose their own name before or after the CoRe forums are created.
Just saying.
It primarily blew up because pinning down the forum structure came up on the to-do list, so we prompted everyone for more input.
Merging seems like a bad idea, some people legit don't like other people and honestly, that's okay. You're allowed to not like everyone and I think trying to smash the communities together in an attempt to create some sort of forced camaraderie will be looked upon negatively.
edit: Also if that was like a "hey last call for mentioning anything about forum structure" why wasn't that pinned/announced for the entire forum to see? Not everyone has the time to check this stuff all day everyday.
The forums have been "dying" in that sense for years. If we want to solve that problem, then a restructure is probably not going to move the needle, if at all... It's a bit like arguing for the car seats to be brown because you expect to go off-roading but not knowing whether you can even afford a 4x4 or if you need to settle for a used Honda Fit.
This goes back to my earlier point about folks assuming that a restructure is: (a) necessary, and (b) a viable, categorical solution to certain problems. We haven't even clearly identified the problems that are trying to be solved here. Folks have said everything from wanting to fix "the great schism" to "well it's changing anyway so we might as well do stuff we want" to "no one visits the PA Club or chat threads so we should just kill those" to "stopping the forums from dying".
It'd be nice if we could identify specific things that we are aiming to resolve, align somewhat on whether they even need to be addressed in the first place, and then assess whether a restructure is even the most appropriate solution to those problems. And if so, then we'll at least know what we're trying to do with the restructuring, rather than having a giant free-for-all where dozens of proposals are being levied for completely different reasons.
I am going to echo a point I made a while back which bears repeating - the discussion we have in these threads is not representative of the whole. It's not even representative of the majority. It's just the most vocal users. Taking what we read here as some kind of driving insight into the larger population is like reading the Youtube comments for a video and assuming they are indicative of everyone who watched it.
People don't like each other and that's what the ignore function is for. Don't like somebody, put them on ignore and you don't have to see them.
But the more that the forums lose active members it's smarter to consolidate the forums to keep stuff more active.
People mentioned that the movie threads in D&D and SE have different vibes which aren't really wrong, but it's also something that wouldn't really matter in the media thread, because it wouldn't be two different threads about movies. You could split up movies a lot of different ways. Beyond just starting a new thread for movies individually. Like my example about tv earlier now we could have a movie thread that is for new releases, and then divide them up by genre beyond that. Horror thread, action thread, drama thread, comedy, or go by what streaming service stuff is on or when it was released.
As for the last point about checking this sub forum for updates, it's been around for like three months and there have been constant updates you can check in like once a month and you'll be fine, plus there's going to be another poll about what structure people would prefer that will have an announcement.
I don't think the restructure is going to fix the schism, I think the improved moderation and Code of Conduct will so we might as well move everybody together into one forum. Twenty years ago, maybe even still ten years ago, there was more difference in SE and D&D, but there isn't really a difference in how the forums work anymore, there's no need for the division.
{Bluesky Account }{Writing and Story Blog}
Just had this discussion earlier today, actually. At a certain point, I think we have to just accept that anyone who cares enough to be involved is aware this place exists, and they're checking in on it. If not, they don't care (enough to bother). For every "why wasn't this pinned/announced?" I hear, there are just as many "there are too many pinned threads/announcements so I'm numb to them." (Literally just addressed one of those in another thread a few minutes ago!)
There is such a thing as announcement fatigue, and it's a tricky balance to strike, but obviously any actual polls or votes would definitely be announced forum-wide.
That's the point though, if we smash everyone together in one glorious media thread then either one style dominates which sucks for the people who liked how the other one was or we have two largely independent threads happening in the same thread which isn't solving anything. There's nothing stopping anyone from bookmarking both right if they like, the other one is literally three clicks away
"Split everything up into even more threads / subforums" can't be the answer when the original complaint was duplication of threads. If you split by genre instead of two general purpose movie threads we now have what 5+? And in the D&D thread some people often go back and do themed rewatches and write reviews, eg noirvember which are interesting to read but their threads would be just an OP and soon forgotten if you do thread-per-movie.
I agree that people will leave regardless. But that's a separate issue. That will happen by virtue of the PA forums closing.
But regarding the specific question of restructuring, there are people who have said point blank that if we do merge, they are out. So you would be in effect trading those people for the ones who would theoretically leave if a restructure (to their liking) doesn't happen.
We are very much in the realm of conjecture and speculation at this point, which is why I have been a proponent of doing actual testing now or, in the more distant past, proposing that we should iterate on the Coin Return structure after the migration has happened so that people are in the right frame of mind to work things out and try new things. To be frank I think the Transition Team has unnecessarily expanded the scope of work in taking on a significant restructuring as part of the initial migration. Trimming unneeded/unused subforums is an incremental adjustment - forcing a merger of two clearly disparate cultures and communities is a major shift, and the justification for doing so appears to boil down to "Coin Return will eventually die if this doesn't happen".
This feels like a situation where we are perhaps missing the forest for the trees. Or trying to change the wings of the airplane while mid flight. Or some other pithy metaphor.
Nobody said more subforums, and more forked threads would only be needed if the existing thread is too crowded and frequently has multiple topics conflicting with each other. In which case you can choose precisely the terms on which to split it on a case-by-case basis, rather than relying on a division that is essentially arbitrary. It's not by any intentional design that SE++ threads have one sort of movie discussion and D&D threads have another - that's purely a fluke of different people being involved. I don't see that as a positive.
Do you not think better moderation will address the 'chasing people off' issue?
This argument feels really circular and like people aren't actually listening to each other, everyone's made up their minds already and nobody's going to be swayed.
Personally I've been on the side of keeping things familiar (not exactly the same, if anyone gives a shit about that nuance), but my reason has always been because I want the most people possible to make the jump and I feel lke that is more likely if the new space feels familiar. It's nothing about not liking any other people or not wanting to associate with them. I just want as many as possibe of the people I hang out and chat with on a daily basis to still be around in six months. I also want as many of the people I don't hang out with daily, and only see pop up every now and then, but who seem cool, to be around as well.
I have been encouraged by the idea of getting a more concrete idea from the community of what they want re: a structure, if it turns out that most people will be likely to come along to a new site even if it's restructured then great, I won't worry so much.
But honestly if we get a survey response and it's all in favour of status quo, or full change, and most people show they'd still join regardless, then so be it.
If we have two movie threads that generate 2 posts a day, one movie thread might generate four or likely even more posts a day, because there are more ideas to bounce off of. If Movies 1 is a conversation between Poster A and Poster B, and Movies 2 is a conversation between Poster B and Poster C, I don't see how keeping them separate is anything but Posters A and C refusing to get along and making the experience worse for Poster B as a result. And the more likely scenario, based on my observation, is that Posters A, B, and C all get along just fine, but Poster D, who doesn't post in either movie thread, has a problem with Poster A and doesn't want them in any thread with a 2 in it.
Take the Holiday Forums. Every time they get brought up here, people are saying how terrible they were and what a disaster they were and how they'd never join a forum that was anything like that. I am not saying the HF should be the standard, but what I saw last month was a lively active forum with an absolute minimum of drama. The main complaint I have about it is that it was busy enough that good threads got sent to page 2, a problem which would not be there if we divided by rough topics, and a problem that shows we do have the activity levels to keep things moving! And the fact that things moved faster tells me that people from the three main areas did come together and did get along just fine.
Now who knows what happened in PMs and reports because it seems like that's where all the shit seems to go down anyway. Whatever. But I can't help but feel a little bit like the people saying "the holiday forum was terrible and I logged off for that month" is due to them seeing some Poster Y and their stupid face and it just ruined their whole day. And the block function is there, no one has to be anyone else's friend, but making your personal hatred of another human who might not even know about it, into everyone else's problem and making people who would otherwise get along stay split into two groups to accommodate this, does not seem in line with the values we are aiming to establish.
I have explained why many times in many places. When you divide into two separate communities that appear to not co-mingke resentment builds. This is what has brought us to this current level of tension in no small part. Further as each area slows down there will be less activity which further pushes people out of interacting since there is less to interact with and hastens the death again. This is not a vibes thing so much as a very real phenomenon that you can observe now. Plenty of people have talked about how much the forums of slowed down recently which is a problem that is amplified with two split communities.
No not at all. I don't see what better moderation can even do for that. I can think of no concrete way to implement it better. A large part of the problem is when someone dislikes a poster they have begun assigning them to the subforum they dislike the most. This a person becomes an SE++ or D&D poster based solely on the person's perceptions of the activity they have seen as has been noted many times. You can mod every dogpile that skirts the rules for someone being from the wrong side of the tracks.
I think porting over a system that has so many clear flaws that have driven animosity in the community is refusing to throw out the bath water because the baby was in it. It is not theoretical people who would leave. People have stated they will do so. The survey results indicate an equal number of people with strong opinions on both sides. It is extremely uncharitable to frame it like those that prefer to keep the current set-up are the only one we know we risk losing. That is why there has been so much interest in developing an alternate plan.