Why are so many folk having problems registering?

[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, 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!!

Many thanks @ Eric & all the chatboxers active online

[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.