Time for mutual respect

The really fun part is that this is likely ingrained into the board culture now and won't change unless we see a spike in new members who can influence and change the membership dynamic or a large shakeup in the staff that often brings about a fresh take on moderating policies.

I think we all know that taking the moderator position from a member is like taking a bottle away from a baby.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

People are horribly violent about some kinds of differences of opinion, and that is as policy, not just once in a while. That's how.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Sorry. I couldn't resist.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Grand:

Ain't that the truth! Or more accurately, it's like taking a library away from a librarian. That's all some of the mods are, dominating librarians with a huge chip on their shoulder for anyone who dares utter a big 'Fuck you' to their meddling.

 

WB Mountain ....

 

Thanks.

Oh, and I laughed at the thead's title. 'Mutual respect' never existed on sciforums, and is less likely to be conjured up than a talking dog.

 

Plasma,

It's a meme and a very contagious one by what you are describing. The site doesn't appear to have a realistic / visible goal nor are there any visible processes in place for achieving a goal. In the absence of this, we end up with an entropic social network where emotional pain, sensitivity, and retribution spin out of control and alot of attention is given to this... which only reinforces the problem.

My suggestion is to consider taking the following actions:

1) Identify whom the real contributors of the site are.

2) Privately let them know that because they have been great members and / or mods that you want to let them know ahead of time that research into constructive changes will soon be underway and that they are invited to participate. Also let them know that any current problem members will be identified and banned shortly as a demolition step.

3) Identify whom the pain-in-the-asses of the site are just outright ban them. The meme is too strong for these people and they are not worth any effort whatsoever.

4) Get all the invited members together and decide what the goal of this site is and what processes should be in place to achieve that goal. As the site owner you have to lead the discussion and have the power to veto majority trends if necessary. Spend as much time as needed (days / weeks).

5) Announce to the public that a goal has been set for the site and publicize the process for feedback (set a time limit). Incorporate any useful feedback.

6) Ensure the site Goal is clear and visible on the main page.

7) Announce the finished process to the public and thank everyone. Make sure that invitees and useful public contributors are recognized individually. Execute the process in 1 day from the announcement.

8) Let the process run for a year and decide if any minor changes are needed.

It's alot of work (especially for you) and the results may be very beneficial.

 

Heh... the irony...

Never been in this thread before... just realized who posted it.

 

Thank you for the post Crunchy!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

These are good suggestions.
I know that this requires a lot of time and energy, but as you said it may be worth of effort.

 

Oh? You're tempted to turn Sciforums into a suburban country club?

—Mutual respect indeed.

 

You're welcome

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

It's not respect or a country club thats needed Ripley. It's a sustainable goal + process that don't succumb to the tides of social entropy.

 

What kind of goals do you have in mind Crunchy Cat?

 

I think so too.

Those are good suggestions. Having an Official Forum Policy with the according Declaration of this Policy can help regulate things at a forum.
I've seen some forums have an entry page and there such a policy is layed out.

But for starters and for a milder transition, a simple guideline or even rule could be installed about thread goals.
Namely - In the beginning, each thread would have to set a goal. In regard to this goal the progress of the discussion could be assessed.
Simply trying to "stay on topic" is often too broad, still allowing for too many tangents.

 

Here are some examples of how some forums have designed their goals and entry pages -

http://running.about.com/mpboards.htm

http://ukaffiliategold.co.uk/html/forum.html

http://www.tank-net.org/

http://www.ozarkwarriors.com/memorial_field/guestbookmemorial_field.htm

http://knifemakersguildforums.com/

http://www.ianchadwick.com/forum/forum_index.html

 

I would propose the site only requires one goal:

To share and explore science.

 

Ooh, you did some good recon work there greenberg. Showing what other forums are doing is a good step towards understanding what might work and what might not work.

 

Policy is good and it comes at the cost of being contractual. My experience is that people will ignore any contract with more than 3 simple line items. For a policy declaration, "dont be a pain in the ass" might really be all that's needed.

Process on the other hand happens separately and without any work on the part of an end-user. While part of the process may enforce policy, most of it should be geared towards promoting the site goal.

Thread goals are a really neat idea and they could certainly work if the technology of the site can make it easy for a poster to communicate a goal (ex. a goal field in addition to a subject field).

In my opinion, that could be a best expressed as a process detail for supporting a single site goal.

 

We can use this as a new slogan.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

The goal could be simply stated in the OP, and then it's up to the participants to pay attention to that.

This would of course require stricter guidelines for OP's.