Why are so many folk having problems registering?

[jar]

Have we decided to limit membership?

[Jeph]

Yes. I like that the spammers have been greatly reduced and we have no ads, but I have been seeing several comments in the chat box about waiting to post, including one today that has been waiting a week. :(

[Wile E Coyote]

Has anyone tried contacting the Admin?

[reprieve]

Has anyone tried contacting the Admin?

I have heard from someone backchannel who says that several people have tried to contact him recently about various issues and have not yet received any response.

[Jon Szanto]

This board is apparently on auto-pilot. No one answers the phones. No one, apparently, is attending to issues, items, or new members. We are adrift, and nothing can be done.

[Crazyorange]

This board is apparently on auto-pilot. No one answers the phones. No one, apparently, is attending to issues, items, or new members. We are adrift, and nothing can be done.

It's so sad. We're a shadow of what we use to be. We're like Gillian's island.

[Wile E Coyote]

This board is apparently on auto-pilot. No one answers the phones. No one, apparently, is attending to issues, items, or new members. We are adrift, and nothing can be done.

Nevermind...

[migo984]

This board is apparently on auto-pilot. No one answers the phones. No one, apparently, is attending to issues, items, or new members. We are adrift, and nothing can be done.

To re-iterate what I said recently, this is the issue of most concern & will result in the death of this forum. Eric is unlikely to want to continue funding the site. Without new members the forum will shrink to a small core group, trying desperately to keep the place afloat, but ultimately failing. That happens because the core group becomes like an exclusive clique, with all good intentions and without meaning to, but it puts others off.

Without minimum moderation and posting discipline threads will drift and become less relevant to fountain pen users, & subject matter of less interest. This is already happening; the site is getting to be just a chat room and people don't want to wade through lots of 'noise' to find info of interest. I've seem it happen to other, much larger, forums.

I hope I'm wrong, I really do.

[tandaina]

Funding doesn't seem to be the issue, so long as Eric doesn't pull hte plug on his server (he hosts us, so there is zero funding necessary unless he decides to stop hosting us.)

The lack of Admin is problematic, if anyone here knows Eric personally and could please ask him to make a couple trusted people admin so that issues like spam, or registration problems, can be taken care fo that would solve the issue.

[Jon Szanto]

Funding doesn't seem to be the issue, so long as Eric doesn't pull hte plug on his server (he hosts us, so there is zero funding necessary unless he decides to stop hosting us.)

We were gone in the blink of an eye for a period just a few months ago. There is nothing to prevent that from happening in precisely the same manner, at any point.


The lack of Admin is problematic, if anyone here knows Eric personally and could please ask him to make a couple trusted people admin so that issues like spam, or registration problems, can be taken care fo that would solve the issue.

People have been attempting contact. He is not responding.

[tandaina]

We were gone in the blink of an eye for a period just a few months ago. There is nothing to prevent that from happening in precisely the same manner, at any point.


The lack of Admin is problematic, if anyone here knows Eric personally and could please ask him to make a couple trusted people admin so that issues like spam, or registration problems, can be taken care fo that would solve the issue.

People have been attempting contact. He is not responding.

Then maybe it is time to research into rebuilding the forum elsewhere. We'd need a new name as Eric owns FPGeeks, but we're a creative sort. And we'd need a bit of money a year for hosting costs, but it would remove the uncertainty.

[Laura N]

I love the friendly atmosphere here and the relaxed feeling. It's enjoyable. That said there has been one troll of gigantic proportion recently, and one long thread that is a horror show of gigantic proportions IMO. As Quantum Sailor said, " I'm not really big on censoring people, but at the same time I'm not really big on train wrecks either." Too much moderation, and this place will lose what makes it special. Absolutely no moderation, and this place will lose what makes it special. We can all see that.

I personally don't need an all-business forum about fountain pens, because I already have one of those, and it's a well-run place that already does things perfectly well, and I like it there just fine. JMHO. No place is perfect, but I like this place. I personally want FPG back. The one where trolls were actually warned and given time outs if necessary, and new people could join, and some people were politely asked to stop when their repeated posting of the same contentious material added nothing new (and then did stop, to be fair). Or add an "ignore thread." There are lots of options.

It seems that Eric hasn't been responding to his emails here, or to messages through "report post." Perhaps he's on vacation. Perhaps he's busy. Maybe if enough of us tried to contact him nicely, he'd take some action. You'll remember his post here (http://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/10861-Future-of-the-FP-Geeks-Forum?p=119323&viewfull=1#post119323), where he seemed to ask for feedback and posted his email, which is eric@fpgeeks.com. Maybe we could reach out to him (and I know some of us have tried, but let's try again). Maybe he's just missed what's going on.

He also posted his cellphone number there, but I'm not calling someone I don't know that well. Maybe someone who does know him will call?

Even if you love things just as they are right now, it's still a problem if new people sign up but can't post, and are left in limbo because no one seems to be responding to them.

[Susan3141]

As I recall, when everything blew up, the Andersons were in contact with Eric. Could someone contact them? Maybe they have some pull with Eric. I think maybe they were the ones that got him to at least put the forum back up.

But maybe he's just hoping the forum will die if he ignores it. It'll all just go away.

Susan

[Farmboy]

How do we know there are throngs of would be members waiting in the wings?

[gbryal]

How do we know there are throngs of would be members waiting in the wings?

Because they get access to the chatbox upon registration and tell us; apparently that access is automatically granted before the OK to post is given. I don't know if it's throngs, but probably every one of them doesn't tell us in the chatbox anyway.

[Jon Szanto]

How do we know there are throngs of would be members waiting in the wings?

As mentioned, there have been a number of people active in the chatbox that have alerted regular members to the fact that they signed up but have yet to get any approval, hence are unable to post. This has never been an issue in the past. I have a hunch Trump thought they were trying to sneak across the border to cause mayhem.

[reprieve]

I'd rather see some spammers get through than have new members being prevented from posting. I also didn't realize that there was a probationary period in place. When did that change?

[Susan3141]

I don't think there is a probationary period. The problem is that a moderator has to approve their request and there is no moderator, as far as I can tell.

[reprieve]

I don't think there is a probationary period. The problem is that a moderator has to approve their request and there is no moderator, as far as I can tell.

Yes, that's what I meant. Sorry to be unclear. When I registered a couple of years ago, there was an automatically generated e-mail confirmation--I clicked a link that was sent to my e-mail address to confirm my registration. But there was no other approval process that I can remember, and, as far as I know, no human being had to approve my membership. Is this something that has changed? Or was I just unaware?

[Sailor Kenshin]

We were gone in the blink of an eye for a period just a few months ago. There is nothing to prevent that from happening in precisely the same manner, at any point.


The lack of Admin is problematic, if anyone here knows Eric personally and could please ask him to make a couple trusted people admin so that issues like spam, or registration problems, can be taken care fo that would solve the issue.

People have been attempting contact. He is not responding.

Then maybe it is time to research into rebuilding the forum elsewhere. We'd need a new name as Eric owns FPGeeks, but we're a creative sort. And we'd need a bit of money a year for hosting costs, but it would remove the uncertainty.


Something like that is already in place.

[Chrissy]

I love the friendly atmosphere here and the relaxed feeling. It's enjoyable. That said there has been one troll of gigantic proportion recently, and one long thread that is a horror show of gigantic proportions IMO. As Quantum Sailor said, " I'm not really big on censoring people, but at the same time I'm not really big on train wrecks either." Too much moderation, and this place will lose what makes it special. Absolutely no moderation, and this place will lose what makes it special. We can all see that.

I personally don't need an all-business forum about fountain pens, because I already have one of those, and it's a well-run place that already does things perfectly well, and I like it there just fine. JMHO. No place is perfect, but I like this place. I personally want FPG back. The one where trolls were actually warned and given time outs if necessary, and new people could join, and some people were politely asked to stop when their repeated posting of the same contentious material added nothing new (and then did stop, to be fair). Or add an "ignore thread." There are lots of options.

It seems that Eric hasn't been responding to his emails here, or to messages through "report post." Perhaps he's on vacation. Perhaps he's busy. Maybe if enough of us tried to contact him nicely, he'd take some action. You'll remember his post here (http://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/10861-Future-of-the-FP-Geeks-Forum?p=119323&viewfull=1#post119323), where he seemed to ask for feedback and posted his email, which is eric@fpgeeks.com. Maybe we could reach out to him (and I know some of us have tried, but let's try again). Maybe he's just missed what's going on.

He also posted his cellphone number there, but I'm not calling someone I don't know that well. Maybe someone who does know him will call?

Even if you love things just as they are right now, it's still a problem if new people sign up but can't post, and are left in limbo because no one seems to be responding to them.

Well said and +1 for this.

I don't remember having a probationary period on FPG. although there was one on another FP forum where Jon was able to help me out. :)

[carlc]

Then maybe it is time to research into rebuilding the forum elsewhere. We'd need a new name as Eric owns FPGeeks, but we're a creative sort. And we'd need a bit of money a year for hosting costs, but it would remove the uncertainty.





Something like that is already in place.


Which is why several people are here.

[pengeezer]

Is it possible that Eric just wants one of us to do his job(whether moderating or finding someone to do it) so
he doesn't have to(and if it doesn't work out,we get the blame)?


John

[Sailor Kenshin]

Then maybe it is time to research into rebuilding the forum elsewhere. We'd need a new name as Eric owns FPGeeks, but we're a creative sort. And we'd need a bit of money a year for hosting costs, but it would remove the uncertainty.





Something like that is already in place.


Which is why several people are here.


I meant that I went and did it while no one was looking. So that's always an option.

[carlc]

Then maybe it is time to research into rebuilding the forum elsewhere. We'd need a new name as Eric owns FPGeeks, but we're a creative sort. And we'd need a bit of money a year for hosting costs, but it would remove the uncertainty.











Something like that is already in place.





Which is why several people are here.





I meant that I went and did it while no one was looking. So that's always an option.


My apologies - I misread your intention. Don't ban me before I've even joined!

By the way I already know which username I want!

[Sailor Kenshin]

Then maybe it is time to research into rebuilding the forum elsewhere. We'd need a new name as Eric owns FPGeeks, but we're a creative sort. And we'd need a bit of money a year for hosting costs, but it would remove the uncertainty.











Something like that is already in place.





Which is why several people are here.





I meant that I went and did it while no one was looking. So that's always an option.


My apologies - I misread your intention. Don't ban me before I've even joined!

By the way I already know which username I want!

You can always pay me off with ink. ;)

[carlc]

I could get some of that MB demonstrator ink for you. I have a new delivery method using the public utilities system. Alternatively airmail - put a bucket in your backyard and it'll be delivered even if you're out!

[Chrissy]

Is it possible that Eric just wants one of us to do his job(whether moderating or finding someone to do it) so
he doesn't have to(and if it doesn't work out,we get the blame)?
John

If Eric did want someone to do his job (whether moderating or finding someone to do it) why would he not just ask?

[carlc]

BTW: Sailor Kenshin. If I'd engaged my brain before posting I wouldn't have misinterpreted the post as what I thought you meant is definitely not like you.

[sgtstretch]

Is it possible that Eric just wants one of us to do his job(whether moderating or finding someone to do it) so
he doesn't have to(and if it doesn't work out,we get the blame)?
John

If Eric did want someone to do his job (whether moderating or finding someone to do it) why would he not just ask?

Just did a quick search and all of Eric's social media accounts have been dormant for the past several months. I have no idea what's going on, but this kind of neglect isn't good for the community as a whole.

[Sailor Kenshin]

BTW: Sailor Kenshin. If I'd engaged my brain before posting I wouldn't have misinterpreted the post as what I thought you meant is definitely not like you.

The fault was undoubtedly mine for being unclear....hadn't had my first shot of whiskey yet.

[jar]

BTW: Sailor Kenshin. If I'd engaged my brain before posting I wouldn't have misinterpreted the post as what I thought you meant is definitely not like you.

The fault was undoubtedly mine for being unclear....hadn't had my first shot of whiskey yet.

Do the shots hurt? Where do you get them?

[carlc]

BTW: Sailor Kenshin. If I'd engaged my brain before posting I wouldn't have misinterpreted the post as what I thought you meant is definitely not like you.

The fault was undoubtedly mine for being unclear....hadn't had my first shot of whiskey yet.

Do the shots hurt? Where do you get them?


😃😃😃

[mhosea]

Just did a quick search and all of Eric's social media accounts have been dormant for the past several months.

He has a life, I suppose. Good for him. But why give birth to an internet site like FPG, fire the babysitter for eating the food in the fridge (I'm guessing), and then abandon it?

[Sailor Kenshin]

BTW: Sailor Kenshin. If I'd engaged my brain before posting I wouldn't have misinterpreted the post as what I thought you meant is definitely not like you.

The fault was undoubtedly mine for being unclear....hadn't had my first shot of whiskey yet.

Do the shots hurt? Where do you get them?


In a place I can't tell you about.

[reprieve]

When the forum was disappeared and then returned to us, Eric said that he wanted to allow the community to continue as it had been and to remain largely self-directed. I believe that's what most of us wanted and still want. But we cannot be a healthy, organic community if we are plagued by spammers and trolls, and if new members cannot join and post in a timely fashion. It seems to me that Eric does not have the time or the desire to reliably address these issues on a daily basis.

So why not allow us to elect our own moderators? A team of perhaps two people who would have limited powers--they would have the power to remove spam, warn people who continue to post inappropriately (and suspend their posting privileges if necessary), and approve new members? Perhaps the moderators should not have the power to ban members--perhaps that could be left up to Eric, who could decide impartially and judiciously whether someone has become an intolerable problem and needs to be removed permanently? The moderators could have fixed terms (a year?) in order to hold them accountable to the community? It seems to me that this would be a rather straightforward solution to the issues that have been plaguing us recently and it would be in line with the spirit of the FP Geeks Forum. The problem, of course, would be how to go about voting, but I think we could figure something out.

Of course, anything like that would still require Eric to respond once in a while.

[carlc]

I'd prefer a constitutional monarchy with a first past the post system and an unelected second chamber filled with people who either are cronies or had ancestors who were cronies of whoever the ruling power was at the time.

[Wile E Coyote]

I'd prefer a constitutional monarchy with a first past the post system and an unelected second chamber filled with people who either are cronies or had ancestors who were cronies of whoever the ruling power was at the time.


Hear, hear!

[Hawk]

Is it possible that Eric just wants one of us to do his job(whether moderating or finding someone to do it) so
he doesn't have to(and if it doesn't work out,we get the blame)?
John

If Eric did want someone to do his job (whether moderating or finding someone to do it) why would he not just ask?

I agree.

[Morgaine]

We were gone in the blink of an eye for a period just a few months ago. There is nothing to prevent that from happening in precisely the same manner, at any point.


The lack of Admin is problematic, if anyone here knows Eric personally and could please ask him to make a couple trusted people admin so that issues like spam, or registration problems, can be taken care fo that would solve the issue.

People have been attempting contact. He is not responding.

Then maybe it is time to research into rebuilding the forum elsewhere. We'd need a new name as Eric owns FPGeeks, but we're a creative sort. And we'd need a bit of money a year for hosting costs, but it would remove the uncertainty.

I have sort of been thinking of a forum predominantly for correspondence/letter matters (would like something more than the InCoWriMo board) for a while now because I haven't found one I like but haven't done anything about it. I'd have sections for letters, pens (not just fountain pens) and ink, paper, fun... etc.. School holidays are imminent here, and I will find myself away from the computer at times so may not have the time to manage one fully at present. I have discussed this in letters with at least a couple of people...

[Morgaine]

I'd rather see some spammers get through than have new members being prevented from posting. I also didn't realize that there was a probationary period in place. When did that change?

Are you sure? One of the forums I used to frequent was "forgotten" about outside the months of January to March and was spammed like crazy.

[reprieve]

I'd rather see some spammers get through than have new members being prevented from posting. I also didn't realize that there was a probationary period in place. When did that change?

Are you sure? One of the forums I used to frequent was "forgotten" about outside the months of January to March and was spammed like crazy.

No. But if there's no one actually standing behind the curtain to press the "approve" button, then there shouldn't be that particular barrier in place. I don't like spam and I'd rather not see it. At the same time, if new members cannot get approval to post in a timely fashion, this forum will become stagnant and will die; that seems to be slowly happening now.

[Susan3141]

So, I sent an email to the Andersons. I don't know if it will do any good. I feel kind of presumptuous doing this. But I don't want FPG to wither away. Here's the email:

Hi,

I'm writing on behalf of my beloved forum, Fountain Pen Geeks. No one has asked me to do this, but we need help. When things went kaboom earlier this year, I recall that you were able to talk to Eric when no one else was.

Here's the problem. With Dan gone, there's no moderator. New members aren't getting approved. We've had a serious troll problem. And no one can get Eric to respond. We don't want FPG to die. People are willing to vote to approve a couple of moderators if Eric is unwilling or unable to do this job.

If you have any sway with him, any way to contact him, could you? People on the forum really want it to continue, but if he isn't going to provide some sort of guidance, it will die. Maybe that's what he wants. I don't know.

We want to hear from him. We want to know if he's willing to let the forum members run the forum (that means he will have to give admin rights to a few). If not, does he want to just shut down the forum? We really need to know.

I'm sorry to bother you with this. I would rather be ordering ink. But you're the only ones I thought of who might be able to intervene.

Thanks,

Susan

[carlc]

I have my fingers crossed - Eric's online right now.

[tandaina]

Thank you Susan.

[eriquito]

I have my fingers crossed - Eric's online right now.

Please tell me more about this constitutional monarchy idea =)

--

Friends, I've not gone anywhere and we are definitely not adrift.

I'm open to any and all suggestions as to how the community would like to steer this ship.

Perhaps we can start by clarifying the most urgent issue or issues?

Should there be no moderation for new members? We get ten to twenty new registrations per day. The vast majority of those new registrants never post. A certain number are, assuredly, spammers. Some are, naturally, users that would like to join the conversation. But are there truly "throngs" in the chat wing voicing (typing) complaint?

Or is the main issue that some user(s) are not being taken behind the woodshed and/or banned? If we want to start banning people (and believe me, I'd love to ban some) we'd have to come up with criteria. We're supposed to be the non-banning forum.

Or is something else responsible for giving us the feeling that the sky is falling?

Let's make the FPGeeks forum exactly what you'd like it to be. Can we come to a consensus? I'm all ears (well, eyes, actually).

While we work all of this out I'm going to turn off "new member moderation" so that new registrants we be able to post immediately. Whether that turns out to be, in hindsight, a good idea or a bad idea, no worries. We'll make a course correction and survive.

It's 3:00pm in California. I want to play with ink.

=) Eric

[jar]

Thanks. And spammers can be taken out ad shot.

[carlc]

If we're going to have a constitutional monarchy then I demand a hereditary peerage: Earl of Watford!



Woodshed sounds good.



Personally I would say that there have been a few threads recently that if I was new and just dipping a toe into the Geeks world would have made me log off never to return.



There is plenty of good stuff on here but those few threads have really dominated the tapatalk timeline with yuck.



(yuck being a technical term meaning ugh/nasty/unpleasant and so on).

ETA: The Earl of Watford is traditionally presented with a Visconti Ragtime Anniversary edition fountain pen on being raised to the peerage.

[carlc]

By the way - before this thread gets heavy.

Thank you for hosting the forum.

As they say where I grew up 'Top Man'.

[rdcalhoon]

Thanks for entering the conversation.

I don't want to have to deal with spam. Neither do I want to deal with never-ending arguments that seem to me to be more about beating other folks into submission than about any pen-related information sharing.

If I were king, here are some folks I would ban (not all of these are taken from this forum, so don't you go thinking I am pointing a finger at you in particular):

Anyone who excuses bad behavior by saying "I was just messing with you..."
Anyone who says "I just like to get in there and stir things up to see how people respond. I don't really believe what I said."
Name callers and anyone who habitually belittles other folks.


More difficult areas to police, but which degrade the forum experience for others and scare away new members:
Anyone who cannot carry on a civil discussion, who insist on getting upset at minute detail or (seemingly to disinterested parties) who repeatedly picks away at an argument just to prolong the thread until everyone else goes away so he or she can declare victory.
People who cannot understand that the whole point of a forum is sharing and not scoring debate points or proving one's expertise is universally superior to all others.

There are probably more, but that is a start.

We should expect disagreements and even arguments at times. We should also expect that the disputants state their case and then shut up and get on to other topics.

We cannot expect perfection, even from fountain pen lovers. I know that I offended another forum member by making a comment I thought funny in the heat of the moment, but which was taken as disparaging. I did what I hope other folks would do and apologized.

On the topic of new member applicants left hanging, If it takes some time to approve new applicants, they should be told so. Give a statement that it may take up to XX days for approval and then stick to it. OF course shorter is better, but uncertainty is distressing.

[tandaina]

Hey Eric!

I'm all for new member moderation if we've got enough trusted people doing the approval to make sure folks don't sit in the "to be approved" que for long.

I'd hate to see this become a banning forum, though I believe in teh past "cool off" periods have been used for folks who just wouldn't listen to requests to stand down and those can be helpful.

It would also be helpful to have a mod or two on hand to say "that's enough now folks" and shut down a thread that has turned into just bludgeoning of one another or to give us a nudge to stay on topic perhaps.

Other than that, really just someone who has the time to be active and involved and sort of keep a light but present hand on the tiller!

[gbryal]

Friends, I've not gone anywhere and we are definitely not adrift.


Good to know. Knowing someone is on the case is what most of this is about anyway.



I'm open to any and all suggestions as to how the community would like to steer this ship.

In some movies I have seen where the captain has lashed himself to the wheel if there is a big storm. This is a bad idea if there are vampires. Are you sure you are open to ALL suggestions? :)



Should there be no moderation for new members? We get ten to twenty new registrations per day. The vast majority of those new registrants never post. A certain number are, assuredly, spammers. Some are, naturally, users that would like to join the conversation. But are there truly "throngs" in the chat wing voicing (typing) complaint?

It doesn't really matter how many there are, does it? There are a handful, but only recently have I seen any at all. They seem like pen lovers to me, so we should let them in or let them know why we won't, right?


Or is the main issue that some user(s) are not being taken behind the woodshed and/or banned? If we want to start banning people (and believe me, I'd love to ban some) we'd have to come up with criteria. We're supposed to be the non-banning forum.


Well, it's a separate issue. My vote is we don't ban anyone who isn't outright ripping people off, because I like being part of the non-banning forum, and these issues tend to come in waves. The vast majority of people here can usually figure out how to interact with one another.



While we work all of this out I'm going to turn off "new member moderation" so that new registrants we be able to post immediately. Whether that turns out to be, in hindsight, a good idea or a bad idea, no worries. We'll make a course correction and survive.


I'm curious what the issue was. Is it a manual process, or an automatic process that changed, or was there a recent flood of new registrations that looked suspicious? There have been several reports of people who have been informed that someone tried to log in as them, so I don't doubt some new registrations went hand in hand with that, but we don't see the logs and no one tells us anything, so we don't know. And when we don't know, we get all riled up and demanding like we are now.

Anyway, good to see you, nice to meet you, and I'm sure you're doing your best. It must be a pain to run a forum, especially one that lots of people care about.

[Sailor Kenshin]

Just so everyone understands all Sheaffers with Triumph nibs are to be sent to me immediately for hoarding. I mean, safekeeping.

[Laura N]

Friends, I've not gone anywhere and we are definitely not adrift.

I'm open to any and all suggestions as to how the community would like to steer this ship.

Perhaps we can start by clarifying the most urgent issue or issues?



Thanks, Eric.

What I'm hearing is that we need more moderation at this point. I believe you've received some emails explaining these things in more detail, and indeed that kind of thing can be shared more candidly by email.

Given the difficulty for any one person to have eyes on everything all the time, I think the most urgent issue is that it's time to add some moderators. At least two or three, in addition to yourself.

In addition, I think it's time you consider some basic rules, like most forums. This one has grown large enough that it's a very diverse community, and everyone isn't rowing the same way any more. For the good of the forum as a whole, I would suggest the usual rule requiring ordinary civility and the absence of personal attacks. Perhaps no questioning a member's price on the classifieds. I would suggest that you explicitly not allow members to have more than one identity. Most forums do this. There seems no legitimate reason to have sock puppets. The two instances I can remember here involved an alleged scammer (Renpei) who used his sock puppet here and on FPN to try to disguise his alleged scamming, and a fellow who has been using many names to attack others. One identity seems like enough for legitimate users; any more seems to raise the possibility of fraud or abuse.

I think most of us love the looser approach of FPG. But it's good to have balance in everything, and I think FPG might need to move from "no moderation" to "loose and very light and fair moderation, with light and fair rules."




Should there be no moderation for new members? We get ten to twenty new registrations per day. The vast majority of those new registrants never post. A certain number are, assuredly, spammers. Some are, naturally, users that would like to join the conversation. But are there truly "throngs" in the chat wing voicing (typing) complaint?



I think rdcalhoon has hit the nail on the head. Put in a reasonable check or time delay against spammers, and state that. An email response, or 48 hours, or whatever seems to best balance the competing interests of welcoming new members and discouraging spammers. Just let new members know that, and have moderators stick to it.

[sharmon202]

I agree with all said previously. I think we just need to know someone is minimally watching the critical things others have mentioned, trolls, spammers, things getting out of hand. This community is is very good at mostly self policing. Thanks Eric.

[Farmboy]

All these claims of no moderator are false...I moderate the Lamy forum.

[reprieve]

Should there be no moderation for new members? We get ten to twenty new registrations per day. The vast majority of those new registrants never post. A certain number are, assuredly, spammers. Some are, naturally, users that would like to join the conversation. But are there truly "throngs" in the chat wing voicing (typing) complaint?

Eric, first of all, I'm glad to see that you're alive and well.

There were at least two members who inquired about not being able to post despite having joined several days ago. That may not qualify as "throngs" of people, no, but it is very, very discouraging to new members who want to participate and it was discouraging to old members who discovered that there were barriers in place beyond their control that prevented that from happening.


While we work all of this out I'm going to turn off "new member moderation" so that new registrants we be able to post immediately. Whether that turns out to be, in hindsight, a good idea or a bad idea, no worries. We'll make a course correction and survive.

I'm not necessarily opposed to "new member moderation," as long as it is moderated in a timely fashion. It seems to me--and to many other members here--that there ought to be more than one person bearing the burden of moderation (in case one person decides to suddenly go AWOL or go rogue, etc.). We generally do an excellent job of directing ourselves, but occasionally we need people who have some real power to change things around here. For example, the recent delay with approving new members. Not to mention the ability to warn or temporarily suspend people who insist on aggressively attacking other members.

Also, I'm concerned about when and why the "new member moderation" was put into place. No one wants spammers around here. However, you asked about this very issue in this thread (http://fpgeeks.com/forum/showthread.php/10861-Future-of-the-FP-Geeks-Forum?p=119323&viewfull=1#post119323), and I was under the impression that the community's consensus was to not have that barrier in place. Yet it was enacted. Again, I'm not necessarily against the idea, as long as someone can approve new members' first posts in a timely manner, but I am worried about the lack of transparency.

Lastly, I'd like to say that I don't think these issues ought to be taken lightly. Yes, we'd all like to go play with our pens and inks. Believe me, I'd much rather be talking about ink right now. It is a legitimate concern that you have not responded to members' e-mails, and it is a legitimate concern that you might disappear again at any moment. I agree with the others who have requested that the community be allowed to run itself. That doesn't mean arbitrarily banning members we don't like. And it doesn't mean total, anything-goes anarchy. You need to find some kind of balance here if you want to preserve the integrity and the future of this community.

[tamiya]

I have my fingers crossed - Eric's online right now.

hey hey, I can post now!! :crazy_pilot:

Many thanks @ Eric & all the chatboxers active online :help:

[Jon Szanto]

Ahem.

Well, it's a bit late, so I've just gotten in to find all this. Once I clear the decks I might be able to post cogently tonight, otherwise I will respond tomorrow. These are important matters to me.

Eric, I am gladdened to know you are well, and I am happy that you, at least nominally, are still concerned with the present and future of the FPG forums. There are certainly substantive issues to discuss and move forward with. I look forward to your engagement with the community at this time.

Til... soon,
Jon

[Empty_of_Clouds]

So, how does one get to be a moderator? Is there a special hat? Because if there is no special hat then I am not going to be interested.

Examples of special hats - just so you know the standards I expect on my inauguration.

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/339/19058287674_12502d5743_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/v37GWN)

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/468/19492882620_f6ba0b2ee5_o.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/vGw7T7)

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/446/19654679696_3620ce6091_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/vWPnvS)

[Cob]

By the way - before this thread gets heavy.

Thank you for hosting the forum.

As they say where I grew up 'Top Man'.

+1

Cob

[MY63]

I would also like to add my thanks to Eric.

When I first arrived here I was a little shocked by the lack of moderation after some time I became accustomed to the looser feel of this forum and I appreciated the way in which senior members spoke out against those who were "out of line". This worked fine until a more persistent character came along who appeared to take pleasure in challenging those members.

If we are going to have any sort of vote then first we must establish some ground rules.
Who will be granted a vote?
If every member is to vote then it is important that each member only has one I D and therefore only one vote.
Personnel abuse is unacceptable.

If I was going to set up a management structure for a forum like this one this is my outline.
A Chair person ie Eric or his representative,
Then a committee of senior members either elected or appointed who would in turn appoint moderators.
This structure would allow the forum to continue in much the same way as it does now with the senior members taking responsibility for the day to day stuff but with the authority to deal with issues as they arise.
The level above the Moderators is intended to give some protection against over zealous moderation, but also to spread the load in both responsibility and time.

Michael

[Empty_of_Clouds]

What about the hat? I mean if push comes to shove I could make do with a knotted hankie.

[carlc]

The more I think about this the more I can't see the way forward that leads to the perfect place.

I have been on forums where moderation is a dictatorship and even questioning a moderator results in suspension. I have been on forums where members are free to question the decisions of moderators and the moderators spent half their time justifying their decisions against a vocal minority, to the extent that these 'fights' dominated the board. Rules help but then comes the interpretation of those rules and, let's face it, there are people on the Geeks who will argue about the interpretation of the rules to the point of despair to the rest of us. Then we end up with the sort of threads that dominate the forum and leave a bad smell, potentially putting off new members.

At the same time a lack of moderation has proven to be (for me anyway) something of a car crash. Yes we can exercise restraint and 'not look' but one particular member seems to be determined to leave his spoor all over the forum. As I noted in another thread - the way feelings have been running on the board recently any comment that may be taken as a personal comment has to be justified with a rider to the effect that it is said with respect and is not intended to flame. It seems that the board 'hive mind' has become tainted recently and many of us feel uncomfortable.

It would seem that moderation is (sadly) a necessity but the way that moderation is carried out and the respect shown to the moderators must be proportionate to the values of the Geeks as a more 'freewheeling' board.

TL;DR to my mind anarchy is not an option if the board is to survive as a friendly place to be. Limited moderation is going to be necessary.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

I agree... and you know, I could probably, maybe be satisfied with a picture of a hat. Just sayin'


Something like this?


Don't make posts that are inflammatory just to get people riled up.

Attack the message, not the messenger. Criticize ideas, not people. Flaming will not be tolerated.

No member is allowed to engage in public personal attacks on any other member.

Personal attacks are defined as Personal, Racial, Ethnic, and/or Gender based insults, slurs, or derisive comments.

All complaints to be communicated privately. The offending post will be edited or removed, and the offending party shall receive no more than two (2) private warnings via PM and/or EMail, and one final Administration warning.

If the behavior continues, the member will be banished for a week, and upon a repeat incident, banned permanently.

A single identity per member. Offenders cautioned. Repeat offenders banned.




I think the current problems are mainly:

1. People who want to 'win' and don't care how they do it. These are the 'ends justify the means' group.

2. People who employ sockpuppets.

The other minor niggles can be dealt with within threads by members, as it has been done for a while anyway.

[carlc]

The other minor niggles can be dealt with within threads by members, as it has been done for a while anyway.

This is true - there have been some stupendous examples of thread derailing by members - such as the bow tie/kilt thread. Superb.

As for rules - sorry but I can see huge holes in those you have posted but I'm not going to comment as I can't come up with better and I don't criticise for the sake of it (well I do but only politicians). Kudos to you for beginning the discussion though.

Regarding hats: Murfie knits a mean woolly hat - there are photos in the London Geek meet thread.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

As for rules - sorry but I can see huge holes in those you have posted but I'm not going to comment as I can't come up with better and I don't criticise for the sake of it (well I do but only politicians). Kudos to you for beginning the discussion though.

I understand this - especially the bit about the snakes politicians - but we have to start somewhere, and if a set of rules is brought into play, even if it is only a limited set, there will always exist an element of arbitrariness about it. I guess we just need to decide which bits we would prefer to be arbitrary. If you see what I mean.

[carlc]

but we have to start somewhere, and if a set of rules is brought into play, even if it is only a limited set, there will always exist an element of arbitrariness about it. I guess we just need to decide which bits we would prefer to be arbitrary. If you see what I mean.

I totally see what you mean and what I said stands - I have nothing better to offer and am glad that wiser souls than I are willing to enter the debate but I will not heckle from the sidelines. I merely wanted to respond to you to show my support for your attempt to generate a rules system, not to attack you or what you have posted.

My stance may be seen as an abrogation of my responsibilities but mentally I mostly characterise the 'fuzzy' part of 'fuzzy logic' and whilst I will participate if I have something useful to say I am not going to post unless it can be constructively.

Now where's that teddy bear emoticon? Never mind this will have to do :hug:

P.S. For those who find this post too saccharine - be grateful that it's non fattening.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Oh, I thought we were having a conversation. In no way did I think you were attacking me or the idea.

ps: I could probably rock a wooly hat (it's winter here and perishing cold).

[carlc]

Oh, I thought we were having a conversation. In no way did I think you were attacking me or the idea.

.

See! I got it wrong again!

Okay I'll add a rule (see how they multiply!): once a thread is closed opening a new thread regarding the same substantive content is a breach of the rules.

That said - locking a thread should be an exceptional incident.

If we wish to use examples I would refer to the subforum regarding a certain British pen maker over on the other place (before it was rebuilt). Threads criticising the pens would often mysteriously disappear and threads noting the fact the moderator was hardly impartial not only disappeared but earned the poster a punishment. Personally think criticising a pen maker is fine. The MB forum did have it's fair share of trolls regarding status, precious resin etc which had no substantive content beyond picking a fight and those threads could be closed but I suspect the members here would probably derail those threads quite effectively without the need for moderation.

Sock puppetry should be a two strike issue - whether it is for financial gain or for sheer devilment.

Personal attacks should not be allowed. They add nothing to a debate/discussion.

So as a baseline - yes your rules make sense and can be tweaked. I think what I did is mix up the rules as posted and the exemplars of the current problems.

[Chrissy]

Hi Eric

I'm a Brit and here we say I'm pleased to meet you. :wave: I'm also pleased to see that you're alive and well and reading this thread.:) To be honest many of us may have wondered if we were 'a ship that was cast afloat without a captain', but I'm relieved to see that we are not. :amen:

Regarding scammers and new members, I can see all of the potential problems that there might be with differentiating, at first glance, between the two. Of course, scammers can't be allowed to pass through the 'moderation net', but it seems that 'new members' are being accidentally caught in that same net. So there has to be some way of confirming 'authentic new members' and I'm sure everyone can see that. New members should be encouraged, while scammers should be given their marching orders and told to 'jog on'.

I agree with LauraN that FPG needs some sort of moderation without reverting to the 'heavy handedness' of our 'friends' over at FPN. We really need something that is in-between the two. I don't think that anyone likes the idea that trolls can 'run amok' flaming and aggressively attacking members just because they believe that they can, because there is no moderation, and no consequence to their actions. While banning such members would be extreme and unwarranted, there could be possible 'time out' suspensions for such behaviour, just to remind them that such actions won't be tolerated. It's like a happy medium. If some members believe that they can do what they like without consequence, then they will go ahead and do what they like. If they are made aware that there are consequences, then they might think about things a bit and be more careful in case they are accused of rule breaches.

I'm sure almost all of us love the way FPG is a 'looser' forum. Members don't get banned or suspended for the slightest infringement, and that's one of the things we like about it. However I really think that if you need extra eyes and ears to help to keep it like it has always been kept, you should ask for it. There are some really excellent, long term, members on here who could assist you if you don't wish to be a one man forum.

[carlc]

Has anyone noticed that since Eric posted the forum has started to return to normality? New threads are being started on pen and ink related topics and the spam piccies are back!

To return to my previous idea about a constitutional monarchy do you think the forum had scrofula?

[reprieve]

Well said, Chrissy. Hear, hear! :)

I think we need a couple of people who are active in the community on a daily basis to gently steer the ship so to speak. We only want them to prevent us from running aground. A couple of people who are long-term members, judicious, even-tempered, open to input (and even constructive criticism!) from the community, and who could maintain a good sense of humor about it all. I would nominate Laura N and Jon Szanto for example.

[migo984]

There are all sorts of problems with setting moderation rules. Not least, agreeing exactly what the limits/rules should be. For example, passive aggression is notoriously difficult to moderate.


Unfortunately some people are far too sensitive, & are unable to distinguish between disagreement with the message, as opposed to disagreement with the messenger. They espouse freedom of speech, but in reality can't deal with some of the resultant conflicts. Sometimes there can be too many sensibilities & an unrealistic expectation, in a minimal moderation environment, that we must all get along famously & agree about everything, in a mutually happy-dappy, smiley way. It is just as tiresome to read love-ins that oh-so-nicely quash opposing views, as it is to read untoward disagreements. In online forums, generally, pals 'gang up' & the pack mentality predominates.


As someone who expresses honest disagreement, but who is never rude or personal, I'm against overly rigorous moderation (of course lol). I'm ambivalent about having any existing members appointed as moderators. They are unlikely to act neutrality. On the other hand, maybe it's better the devil you know.........

[Neo]

I would nominate Laura N and Jon Szanto for example.


+1, but we need to think about coverage during the night hours in the States.
Then perhaps we should ask for volunteers? Only senior members with a history of meaningful posts should be allowed a vote to weed out malcontents?

[carlc]

I think that the issue of moderation rules is going to be influenced by recent events.

I suspect that no one on the forum wants heavy moderation but for me 'personal attacks' are easily represented by the following from a well known member:


Mhuckypuck tried to resist. You didn't directly address me, you should have. Doing it indirectly makes you look bad. You don't need any help, there. You do a pretty good job of making yourself look like an ignorant suck up.


Wow, you little girls really must feel threatened by me. You don't need to be, just stop being ignorant geekiziods that have nothing better to do then to convince others that I'm a bad guy.

There are other examples.

Robust argument and straight talking can often walk the line but I do think that there is a case for light touch moderation. I agree who does the moderation is going to be an issue as it will be a tricky job.

And you all know that this quote had to appear at some point:


“The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.
To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem.”
Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe.


By the way - I'm not advocating Tellytubby land but I don't want to see the forum turn into a troll's paradise either.

[carlc]

Unfortunately some people are far too sensitive, & are unable to distinguish between disagreement with the message, as opposed to disagreement with the messenger.

Almost certainly this is true of some but there is also the issue that text based discussions are notoriously open to misinterpretation due to the lack of non verbal and paraverbal cues.

To be honest I think a related but different issue is often at play. Some people are sensitive to disagreement with the message and treat it as disagreement with the messenger.

I have no problem with 'robust discussion' for those that wish to engage, the rest of us can steer clear, but we have to be aware that some threads do seem to have dominated the tone of the forum recently and that may put new members off.

I really want that teddy bear emoticon now - just to make you puke!

[Deb]

I'm aware that setting up a set of ground rules can initially lead to difficult situations but I don't think we want to overthink this and make it complicated and restrictive. Considering that there was no one at the tiller for quite some time, we had few problems. There has been a troll with sock-puppets and David Isaacson's irritating and unending vendetta. These are abuses that are easily recognised and rules against such behaviour can be easily set up. If they prove flawed in the first instance, they can be changed and should it prove necessary, other rules can be set up. Nothing is set in stone. Not that we want a huge rule book nor do we want hair-trigger admins – I think we've seen enough of that elsewhere.

There are many long-serving and active members here who would make excellent administrators.

Above all, we don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Among the many charms of this board, the fact that one need not constantly tread with care, and, in a civil manner, one can speak their mind on any pen-related issue, stands out as it's greatest attraction. It would be good to keep it that way.

[writingrav]

I am loath to get involved in this conversation, but will venture forth anyway. I see very little reason for much moderation beyond making sure that new members are quickly vetted and admitted. Trolls and span come and go and can be simply ignored. Comments that are deemed to be argumentative can and should be ignored rather than answered, which only inflames the situation. Capturing and diverting forum topics is a pain and I might look with favor on someone having the ability to separate discussions of bow ties (which I happen to wear and have not objection to in its own place) and pens. Beyond that, let's all act like adults and not fix what ain't broke.

[Cob]

I am loath to get involved in this conversation, but will venture forth anyway. I see very little reason for much moderation beyond making sure that new members are quickly vetted and admitted. Trolls and span come and go and can be simply ignored. Comments that are deemed to be argumentative can and should be ignored rather than answered, which only inflames the situation. Capturing and diverting forum topics is a pain and I might look with favor on someone having the ability to separate discussions of bow ties (which I happen to wear and have not objection to in its own place) and pens. Beyond that, let's all act like adults and not fix what ain't broke.

Of course (mea culpa) I was involved in the bow-tie affair, but I suppose I should remind you that that began because someone wrote an appalling post criticising Eric's mode of dress; I was so annoyed (not that I know Eric or have ever communicated with him) that I felt obliged to respond.

The fact that I was able to do so here, to my way of thinking, is a big plus-point for this forum.

Cob

[carlc]

As Cob states the 'bow tie' thread was never anything to do with pens. It was pure trolling that everyone responded to.

[writingrav]

I agree. And the initial post in context is precisely not capturing the thread. The continuing conversation moving on to kilts etc was also fun and appropriate but for someone looking at the thread topic and wanting to enter that conversation it can be off putting. A moderator might be able to make that point or separate the two topics. No offense meant.

[Susan3141]

I have my fingers crossed - Eric's online right now.

Please tell me more about this constitutional monarchy idea =)

--

Friends, I've not gone anywhere and we are definitely not adrift.


=) Eric

My main concern is how difficult it has been to get any communication from Eric. He has posted twice (as far as I know) over the last several months: once after the blow up and once here, and only after numerous people begged and pleaded for him to show some concern. Why should we be thanking him for finally gracing us with his presence after no communication for months? It's like he drops in occasionally but is absent otherwise. How do we know if he's paying any attention to this thread now that he's made his appearance? I realize he owns the forum, but I don't see any real sense of concern or obligation to keep FPG going. In fact his statement above seems a wee bit patronizing to me, like we're all a bunch of Henny Pennys thinking the sky is falling. Silly us. "Everything's fine! Trust me!" No matter that no one heard from Eric for months. No matter that new people weren't getting approved. No matter that trolls (or a troll) was causing havoc. No matter that the forum disappeared once and, for all we know, could disappear again (yes, I know that was said to be a "mistake" but it still leaves me with a sense of distrust, because, once again, it took intervention from Eric's friends to get it reinstated).

Lack of communication from Eric seems to me to be a major issue. If he doesn't want to be integrally involved in running the forum, then admit it. Either shut the thing down or sell the domain to people who want to keep it up.

Susan

[Cob]

I agree. And the initial post in context is precisely not capturing the thread. The continuing conversation moving on to kilts etc was also fun and appropriate but for someone looking at the thread topic and wanting to enter that conversation it can be off putting. A moderator might be able to make that point or separate the two topics. No offense meant.

No offence taken.

It's probably a good thing that I am not a moderator; had I been, I would have removed the initial childish and discourteous post immediately - and warned the poster that further infractions would not be tolerated.

Cob

[mhosea]

Strangely, when I look back over the last month or two, I remember being most bothered at the claim that a bright pink Pelikan was emetic, with apparent negative implications arising to the character and enlightenment of any woman who might dare to like it, or so it seemed to me. But this was not a matter for moderation, anyway, and I know full well what has been bothering everybody else.

I would argue for a little moderation, little things like closing a thread that has gone off the rails or giving a time-out to a person who has gone off the rails. I think moderation works best when it is in plain view and is interactive. Getting a time-out should never come as a surprise, and outright banning of people who have but one identity on the forum and are generally here to discuss pens, ink, and such should be vanishingly rare.

[migo984]

Unfortunately some people are far too sensitive, & are unable to distinguish between disagreement with the message, as opposed to disagreement with the messenger.


To be honest I think a related but different issue is often at play. Some people are sensitive to disagreement with the message and treat it as disagreement with the messenger.

I really want that teddy bear emoticon now - just to make you puke!

Carl - I think we're both saying more or less the same thing but coming at it from a slightly different angle. Errrrmm *possibly* ......... Goes away, scratching head in befuddled manner, as usual 😊

[carlc]

Unfortunately some people are far too sensitive, & are unable to distinguish between disagreement with the message, as opposed to disagreement with the messenger.


To be honest I think a related but different issue is often at play. Some people are sensitive to disagreement with the message and treat it as disagreement with the messenger.

I really want that teddy bear emoticon now - just to make you puke!

Carl - I think we're both saying more or less the same thing but coming at it from a slightly different angle. Errrrmm *possibly* ......... Goes away, scratching head in befuddled manner, as usual 😊


More than likely!

[Flounder]

I'm pretty much happy to go with the flow whatever is decided.

My own take is that I don't like a lot of complicated rules... I don't really even mind a bit of trolling. I suppose maybe automatically send their posts to an "dysfunction" style subforum so everyone who wants to spend eternity in the nth circle of hell repeating themselves can do so out of earshot of the rest of us. So everyone has their say ad infinatum, and not everyone has to see it in the 'normalos' forums.

Scammers: named, shamed, banned.

[Crazyorange]

I have my fingers crossed - Eric's online right now.

Please tell me more about this constitutional monarchy idea =)

--

Friends, I've not gone anywhere and we are definitely not adrift.


=) Eric

My main concern is how difficult it has been to get any communication from Eric. He has posted twice (as far as I know) over the last several months: once after the blow up and once here, and only after numerous people begged and pleaded for him to show some concern. Why should we be thanking him for finally gracing us with his presence after no communication for months? It's like he drops in occasionally but is absent otherwise. How do we know if he's paying any attention to this thread now that he's made his appearance? I realize he owns the forum, but I don't see any real sense of concern or obligation to keep FPG going. In fact his statement above seems a wee bit patronizing to me, like we're all a bunch of Henny Pennys thinking the sky is falling. Silly us. "Everything's fine! Trust me!" No matter that no one heard from Eric for months. No matter that new people weren't getting approved. No matter that trolls (or a troll) was causing havoc. No matter that the forum disappeared once and, for all we know, could disappear again (yes, I know that was said to be a "mistake" but it still leaves me with a sense of distrust, because, once again, it took intervention from Eric's friends to get it reinstated).

Lack of communication from Eric seems to me to be a major issue. If he doesn't want to be integrally involved in running the forum, then admit it. Either shut the thing down or sell the domain to people who want to keep it up.

Susan

Thank you thank you! Well said. To me actions speak louder than words. Here we are having this conversation.....with ourselves. No feedback. No nothing.

[Morgaine]

...

I have sort of been thinking of a forum predominantly for correspondence/letter matters (would like something more than the InCoWriMo board) for a while now because I haven't found one I like but haven't done anything about it. I'd have sections for letters, pens (not just fountain pens) and ink, paper, fun... etc.. School holidays are imminent here, and I will find myself away from the computer at times so may not have the time to manage one fully at present. I have discussed this in letters with at least a couple of people...

I have actually started to work on this, but it isn't ready for release.

[Flounder]

Eric, If I may be so bold; You are the caretaker here. You have always been the caretaker here.

I very much fear that some members - very wilful members - need a good talking to, if you don't mind my saying so. Not everyone takes to the Fpgeeks forum at first. You must correct them, sir. And whosoever should undertake to interfere with your duties here... you must correct them, too - if I may be so bold.

http://i773.photobucket.com/albums/yy19/flounder2009/Caretaker.gif

[sharmon202]

I have my fingers crossed - Eric's online right now.

Please tell me more about this constitutional monarchy idea =)

--

Friends, I've not gone anywhere and we are definitely not adrift.


=) Eric

My main concern is how difficult it has been to get any communication from Eric. He has posted twice (as far as I know) over the last several months: once after the blow up and once here, and only after numerous people begged and pleaded for him to show some concern. Why should we be thanking him for finally gracing us with his presence after no communication for months? It's like he drops in occasionally but is absent otherwise. How do we know if he's paying any attention to this thread now that he's made his appearance? I realize he owns the forum, but I don't see any real sense of concern or obligation to keep FPG going. In fact his statement above seems a wee bit patronizing to me, like we're all a bunch of Henny Pennys thinking the sky is falling. Silly us. "Everything's fine! Trust me!" No matter that no one heard from Eric for months. No matter that new people weren't getting approved. No matter that trolls (or a troll) was causing havoc. No matter that the forum disappeared once and, for all we know, could disappear again (yes, I know that was said to be a "mistake" but it still leaves me with a sense of distrust, because, once again, it took intervention from Eric's friends to get it reinstated).

Lack of communication from Eric seems to me to be a major issue. If he doesn't want to be integrally involved in running the forum, then admit it. Either shut the thing down or sell the domain to people who want to keep it up.

Susan

Susan, I want to thank you for all the involvement, concern, and positivity you have shown in the last several months. Really helpful. Really, you have done enough, thanks.

[eriquito]

Dear Geeks,

My thanks go out to everyone who provided feedback, thoughts, suggestions, critiques - even hat recommendations.

I've read. I've digested. I've cogitated.

I believe the best course of action - for the moment at least - is to follow sound medical advice and administer the minimum effective dose of what should hopefully be beneficial medicine. If the dose proves to be insufficiently effective, the dosage can be increased or the medicine can be changed.

But for the moment, let's take small steps...

Banning:

I never wanted the FPG forum to be a "banning" forum. Thankfully, I think we are all nearly in agreement that banning should be (aside from spammers and scammers) a very rare event and a last resort.

New Memberships:

New membership registrations will not be moderated. For each new registration, I receive an email. I look at each new registration and give it the smell test. If it's clearly and obviously a spammer, I ban the user immediately. Obvious spammer registrations are rare. If the registration appears to be a likely spammer, I set that user to be moderated and I see what happens.

The vast majority of new registrations look somewhere between ok and perfectly fine. I take no action on those registrations, which means that a few spammers do and will get through. We can live with that because we have an excellent Spammer Safari team in place. As soon as a post is reported as spam, I receive an email and I delete the spam and ban the user.

Rules:

I am not yet convinced that we need to write specific rules, with the exception of making it clear that multiple accounts are not permitted.

The current rules, which must be agreed to during the registration process, state:


By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.

The owners of FPGeeks Forum reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any content item for any reason.

The current rules cast a very wide net and I'm confident that any lack of civility within the forum can be combatted using them as they stand.

I may be wrong... but let's prove me wrong before venturing down the precarious path of rule writing.

Moderation:

From the relatively small number of abuse reports that I receive, I wonder if members are aware of the "Report Post" icon/link at the bottom of each post. It is an exclamation point enclosed in a small dark triangle.

A post can be reported for any reason, be it spam, trolling, suspected sockpuppetry, incorrect location, rudeness, personal attack or insult, etc.

When a post is reported, I receive an email and I look into the situation. I do not promise to agree with all reports. I do not promise to take immediate action. I don't even promise to take any action when I don't believe action is necessary. But I do look into each reported situation - most of which are reports of spam (which are dealt with immediately).

I am not - yet - convinced that we need moderators. I suggest we all make use of the Report Post icon/link for items that need attention. In very short order we should know whether I am overwhelmed. If I am, we'll find some helpers.

Sock Puppets:

I will change the rules presented during the registration process to make it clear that multiple accounts are forbidden.

If you suspect an account of being a sock puppet, please use the Report Post icon/link.

Trolls:

The number one, most effective tool for dealing with trolls is:
DO NOT engage them. Ever. At all. Period.

Feel free to report trollish behavior via the Report Post icon/link. I'll be happy to look at the situation. But keep in mind that trolls live off any and all types of attention, good or bad. Without attention, they wither. Ignore them.

In Conclusion:

I realize that for those advocating chemotherapy as a cure-all, the above will seem more like "take two aspirins and call me in the morning." And honestly, that's exactly what it is. I am advocating small steps rather than huge change and a "let's see what happens" outlook.

I'm willing to be proven wrong, that stronger medicine really is necessary, but for the moment I believe I'm correct. The people who participate in the FPG forum are a uniquely talented, socially adept, and amazingly witty group which, for the most part, efficiently self-moderates. I can think of no other on-line body of this size that "forums" as well and as nicely as this community.

Eric

[pengeezer]

Dear Geeks,

My thanks go out to everyone who provided feedback, thoughts, suggestions, critiques - even hat recommendations.

I've read. I've digested. I've cogitated.

I believe the best course of action - for the moment at least - is to follow sound medical advice and administer the minimum effective dose of what should hopefully be beneficial medicine. If the dose proves to be insufficiently effective, the dosage can be increased or the medicine can be changed.

But for the moment, let's take small steps...

Banning:

I never wanted the FPG forum to be a "banning" forum. Thankfully, I think we are all nearly in agreement that banning should be (aside from spammers and scammers) a very rare event and a last resort.

New Memberships:

New membership registrations will not be moderated. For each new registration, I receive an email. I look at each new registration and give it the smell test. If it's clearly and obviously a spammer, I ban the user immediately. Obvious spammer registrations are rare. If the registration appears to be a likely spammer, I set that user to be moderated and I see what happens.

The vast majority of new registrations look somewhere between ok and perfectly fine. I take no action on those registrations, which means that a few spammers do and will get through. We can live with that because we have an excellent Spammer Safari team in place. As soon as a post is reported as spam, I receive an email and I delete the spam and ban the user.

Rules:

I am not yet convinced that we need to write specific rules, with the exception of making it clear that multiple accounts are not permitted.

The current rules, which must be agreed to during the registration process, state:


By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.

The owners of FPGeeks Forum reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any content item for any reason.

The current rules cast a very wide net and I'm confident that any lack of civility within the forum can be combatted using them as they stand.

I may be wrong... but let's prove me wrong before venturing down the precarious path of rule writing.

Moderation:

From the relatively small number of abuse reports that I receive, I wonder if members are aware of the "Report Post" icon/link at the bottom of each post. It is an exclamation point enclosed in a small dark triangle.

A post can be reported for any reason, be it spam, trolling, suspected sockpuppetry, incorrect location, rudeness, personal attack or insult, etc.

When a post is reported, I receive an email and I look into the situation. I do not promise to agree with all reports. I do not promise to take immediate action. I don't even promise to take any action when I don't believe action is necessary. But I do look into each reported situation - most of which are reports of spam (which are dealt with immediately).

I am not - yet - convinced that we need moderators. I suggest we all make use of the Report Post icon/link for items that need attention. In very short order we should know whether I am overwhelmed. If I am, we'll find some helpers.

Sock Puppets:

I will change the rules presented during the registration process to make it clear that multiple accounts are forbidden.

If you suspect an account of being a sock puppet, please use the Report Post icon/link.

Trolls:

The number one, most effective tool for dealing with trolls is:
DO NOT engage them. Ever. At all. Period.

Feel free to report trollish behavior via the Report Post icon/link. I'll be happy to look at the situation. But keep in mind that trolls live off any and all types of attention, good or bad. Without attention, they wither. Ignore them.

In Conclusion:

I realize that for those advocating chemotherapy as a cure-all, the above will seem more like "take two aspirins and call me in the morning." And honestly, that's exactly what it is. I am advocating small steps rather than huge change and a "let's see what happens" outlook.

I'm willing to be proven wrong, that stronger medicine really is necessary, but for the moment I believe I'm correct. The people who participate in the FPG forum are a uniquely talented, socially adept, and amazingly witty group which, for the most part, efficiently self-moderates. I can think of no other on-line body of this size that "forums" as well and as nicely as this community.

Eric


Eric,all of what you have suggested is well and good,but what we as members need to know is that whenever a problem
occurs that is out of our hands,we need to know that you or someone else is there to handle it immediately. Not
knowing if the problem is/was handled puts us in the dark. While I'm not asking for Dan to be back,it was comfor-
ting to know and see him step up to fix the problem as well as interact with us on a regular basis. The is-
sue of moderating isn't just about fixing a problem,but the comfort of knowing that the person/moderator(?) will
be there faithfully each time a situation occurs, That comfort is what makes us work together as a group to main-
tain an enjoyable forum to come to.

I have been thinking about changing my moniker lately but would only have the same account. What do I need to
do to change it?



John

[Jon Szanto]

http://33.media.tumblr.com/a74b5b9bfe3c351efbd9301ea5bffb13/tumblr_npac4uAhum1qe0eclo1_r5_500.gif

I will wait to see what happens, for the moment.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Dear Geeks,

My thanks go out to everyone who provided feedback, thoughts, suggestions, critiques - even hat recommendations.

I've read. I've digested. I've cogitated.

...

...


I believe the best course of action - for the moment at least - is to follow sound medical advice and administer the minimum effective dose of what should hopefully be beneficial medicine. If the dose proves to be insufficiently effective, the dosage can be increased or the medicine can be changed.

Eric

So... no hat then? :cry:

[eriquito]

I have been thinking about changing my moniker lately but would only have the same account. What do I need to
do to change it?

John

Hi John,

If you'd like to change your username, send me an email, which is easily find-able and/or easily guessed, or use the Contact Us link at the bottom of any forum page.

Cheers,

Eric

[eriquito]

Special K,

Please take a week off.

After that week, if you'd like to rejoin the FPG conversations, please contact me personally.

Thanks much,

Eric

[Hawk]

Eriquito, thanks for the reply and giving us you guidelines. I can live with them. There was a comment above, that wants some sort of interaction. I agree with that. Many of us like that periodic 'warm and fuzzy feeling'.... That will help us to know you are around and care about the forum.

Thanks again, Hawk

[sharmon202]

Eric, my support 100%.

[Cob]

Eric, my support 100%.


+1
C.

[writingrav]

Dear Geeks,

My thanks go out to everyone who provided feedback, thoughts, suggestions, critiques - even hat recommendations.

I've read. I've digested. I've cogitated.

I believe the best course of action - for the moment at least - is to follow sound medical advice and administer the minimum effective dose of what should hopefully be beneficial medicine. If the dose proves to be insufficiently effective, the dosage can be increased or the medicine can be changed.

But for the moment, let's take small steps...

Banning:

I never wanted the FPG forum to be a "banning" forum. Thankfully, I think we are all nearly in agreement that banning should be (aside from spammers and scammers) a very rare event and a last resort.

New Memberships:

New membership registrations will not be moderated. For each new registration, I receive an email. I look at each new registration and give it the smell test. If it's clearly and obviously a spammer, I ban the user immediately. Obvious spammer registrations are rare. If the registration appears to be a likely spammer, I set that user to be moderated and I see what happens.

The vast majority of new registrations look somewhere between ok and perfectly fine. I take no action on those registrations, which means that a few spammers do and will get through. We can live with that because we have an excellent Spammer Safari team in place. As soon as a post is reported as spam, I receive an email and I delete the spam and ban the user.

Rules:

I am not yet convinced that we need to write specific rules, with the exception of making it clear that multiple accounts are not permitted.

The current rules, which must be agreed to during the registration process, state:


By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.

The owners of FPGeeks Forum reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any content item for any reason.

The current rules cast a very wide net and I'm confident that any lack of civility within the forum can be combatted using them as they stand.

I may be wrong... but let's prove me wrong before venturing down the precarious path of rule writing.

Moderation:

From the relatively small number of abuse reports that I receive, I wonder if members are aware of the "Report Post" icon/link at the bottom of each post. It is an exclamation point enclosed in a small dark triangle.

A post can be reported for any reason, be it spam, trolling, suspected sockpuppetry, incorrect location, rudeness, personal attack or insult, etc.

When a post is reported, I receive an email and I look into the situation. I do not promise to agree with all reports. I do not promise to take immediate action. I don't even promise to take any action when I don't believe action is necessary. But I do look into each reported situation - most of which are reports of spam (which are dealt with immediately).

I am not - yet - convinced that we need moderators. I suggest we all make use of the Report Post icon/link for items that need attention. In very short order we should know whether I am overwhelmed. If I am, we'll find some helpers.

Sock Puppets:

I will change the rules presented during the registration process to make it clear that multiple accounts are forbidden.

If you suspect an account of being a sock puppet, please use the Report Post icon/link.

Trolls:

The number one, most effective tool for dealing with trolls is:
DO NOT engage them. Ever. At all. Period.

Feel free to report trollish behavior via the Report Post icon/link. I'll be happy to look at the situation. But keep in mind that trolls live off any and all types of attention, good or bad. Without attention, they wither. Ignore them.

In Conclusion:

I realize that for those advocating chemotherapy as a cure-all, the above will seem more like "take two aspirins and call me in the morning." And honestly, that's exactly what it is. I am advocating small steps rather than huge change and a "let's see what happens" outlook.

I'm willing to be proven wrong, that stronger medicine really is necessary, but for the moment I believe I'm correct. The people who participate in the FPG forum are a uniquely talented, socially adept, and amazingly witty group which, for the most part, efficiently self-moderates. I can think of no other on-line body of this size that "forums" as well and as nicely as this community.

Eric

Well done. Now, on to the question of the main site and, perhaps, some version of FPGTV?

[Jon Szanto]

Hello everyone, and especially hello to Eric,

While this is general in nature, the thread has mainly evolved into a good call-and-response with Eric, and this reply is in that vein. I am glad to see that there is movement regarding returning the operation of the forums to some sense of normalcy, and want to address just a bit of that to our owner and current moderator-in-chief.

Eric, one of the recurring themes, both contained within this thread, as well as other threads you must certainly have read over the past couple weeks, is that of a visible presence in regards to the day-to-day environment of the forum. With weeks, months of radio silence, it should have been easy to understand why those of us who use the forums regularly but have no control over it felt uneasy. There were definitely times where, as things began to spin out of control, well-meaning people were often at wit's end as to what to do. Posts reported, emails sent, etc. When all one hears back is crickets, one begins to wonder, hard. Even with the best of intentions and promises, you get a very bad feeling.

It appears, from what you say, that you've paid attention and have been in the loop. As your actions of the past two days show, you are concerned with activities here and are more than capable of taking reasonable steps to maintain an open, yet non-threatening, forum environment. All any of us would ask, and a small ask it is, would be that the clarity and even minimal interaction you've shown in the last couple of days continues into the future. If there are times that your business or life will take you away from that, I am certain you are fully capable of asking others to step in.

The majority of our community are mindful of the good things that have come from the open setting here on FPG; many have come from other, more restrictive environments. Having said that, one simply can't avoid the fact that all cultures change (I can't, in this instance, say evolve), and general internet discourse is no exception. In recent days, major sites have been dealing with the issues of online harassment and attacks. Recently removed CEO of Reddit, Ellen Pao, addressed the matter just today in the article "The trolls are winning the battle for the Internet" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/we-cannot-let-the-internet-trolls-win/2015/07/16/91b1a2d2-2b17-11e5-bd33-395c05608059_story.html). A quote from this story rings very true with our recent experiences:


"The foundations of the Internet were laid on free expression, but the founders just did not understand how effective their creation would be for the coordination and amplification of harassing behavior. Or that the users who were the biggest bullies would be rewarded with attention for their behavior. "

It is clear, and something we have discussed among ourselves and you have reiterated: we all must be pro-active in seeing that the environment works for the best of reasons, and do our part to not facilitate the ill use of the discussion forums. I believe that with even mild consensus among the users here, self-policing as best as possible, along with a light hand on your part, we can once again have a flourishing of pen and pen-centric topics, with people sharing those aspects of their lives in a pleasant and mutually supportive environment.

In closing, I offer something personally towards yourself: I can be very vocal, and obviously I am very passionate. I do care about this little atoll on the net, because it has become my preferred home for these discussions. As events of the last month hit hard, I have been blunt in my postings, and while I made good effort to not make anything personal, I do want to make certain that is understood, and if I have put anything forward towards you that was personally hurtful, you have my apology. I am always open to communication, and PMs or emails always accepted. I am heartened by the movement of the past day or two, and sincerely hope we are now back on track for a fine, fun, and vibrant community of like-interested people.

As has been said: "I want to believe". I'm just not as good-looking as Mulder. ;)

With respect, and apologies for the length,
Jon

[Empty_of_Clouds]

+ at least 1 zillion

[Hawk]

Jon, well said.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

I am leaving the FPGeeks forum.

[Farmboy]

I am leaving the FPGeeks forum.
I'm confused.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

I'm sorry, but my hat related needs are not being satisfied by the forum. I may have to look elsewhere for cranial comfort.

[Jon Szanto]

I'm sorry, but my hat related needs are not being satisfied by the forum. I may have to look elsewhere for cranial comfort.

Hang in there, we're expecting new inventory on Monday...

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rnNw-Vrp-1A/VVELivc708I/AAAAAAAAD8A/t96YOs0SWlg/s1600/Optimo%2BHats.jpg

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Oh my, that's a lot of hats. I may have to hang around a bit longer. :)