Summing up the results took longer than expected. It was partly due to the questions not always being easily quantifiable, but also partly due to the lack of time and even laziness from me. Sorry for that. 
As a general impression, what people see unsatisfactory in the OT are (in no specific order):
1. Lack of active moderators and inability to tell them apart from those who aren't active.
2. Problem posters who ruin it for everyone.
The problem 1, we are trying to do something to it, but don't expect fast results, since paradoxically enough, due to the lack of staff most of our efforts have recently gone into keeping the place up.
On the problem 2, that is something we have tried to do something in the past, and keep trying to do in the future. These things aren't easy, really. If someone posts Nazi propaganda, porn or advertisement here, there's not much difficulty to ban him. Most of the posters that were named problematic aren't like that however: They do the same things as the other people, but with much bigger volume, or they are a bit jerk, but in so many posts it begins to count as being a lot jerk. Or they put forward views that aren't so clearly offensive, but not quite inoffensive either.
These considerations were also present in the replies to the survey, as some people wished for more consistency, neutrality etc. Dealing with less obviously problematic posters means in practice that we set separate rules for them.
Another noteworthy thing here is the reunification of the OT. Many people did support it, but about as many supported the new system, didn't find it worse, or simply didn't say anything about it, which in this kind of survey can be read as that they don't support the unification.
Here's some breakdown of specific questions. There was about 40 replies to each of the questions. Here the percentages aren't that exact, since they are based on my reading of the replies. On some questions people's replies have been counted to several groups ("I come to the OT out of habit and to meet friends"). Don't knows and obscure answers are sometimes omitted, but included in the poll-type things (Like "Do you prefer the current moderation to the before split").
1. Why do you come to the Colosseum?
Habit ~30 %
Variety of discussions, smart, fun and diverse people ~30 %
Community and friends ~20 %
To kill time ~13%
To keep up on what's happening in the world ~8 %
Individual answers give more colour to this: people mentioned diversity of opinions, of geographical origins etc, and that people still know each others here, like in a local pub. Most people didn't emphasize serious discussions as their reasons, although some seemed to enjoy the possibility to have those too.
2. What do you see as the goal for those who participate in or moderate the Colosseum? What kind of place should it be? How will we know if we achieve such a goal?
Most people said the discussion and the feeling of the community, and just to have fun.
Moderators were expected mostly to just keep things civil.
Aside from that a lot of things were mentioned: that discussion quality shouldn't be enforced, that the quality should be enforced in some threads depending on topic, that mods should keep topics from drifting, that the interventions should be rare but firm... More than one said something equivalent to "keep the funny trolls, ban the stupid trolls".
3. How would you organize the Colosseum? Which sub forums should be grouped together, which kept separate?
The most hot topic here is of course the reunification of the OT. Please note that this isn't referendum on the issue, and the exact numbers are open to the reading of the replies:
Reunite the OTs ~50 %
Now is good ~13%
Now explicit mention on the split issue : ~37 %.
Maybe some of those who didn't comment on the issue would vote in a strict yes/no voting for the reunification, but I'd think they would have said something on the issue to this question too. Since this reading of the result will probably be called biased, I'd like to mention that I am actually for the reunification.
However, CFC is not a democracy, but a malevolent dictatorship, so the exact numbers here don't matter. I'll expand on this point in a later post.
Little more than third of the reuniters wished the united OT to have red diamond threads for stricter moderator, but this might've been higher if it was specifically asked.
About 30-40 % of people wanted the Arts and Entertainment and Science and Technology to be merged with the OT (or chamber, or some other place).
Then there were many rare mentions, like merging Humour into the Tavern, Sci & Tech with Computer talk, history and science to the Chamber, NOT to merge World History anywhere...
It was also mentioned that the description of Arts and Entertainment subforum doesn't end with full stop unlike all the other subforums, and this has been an ongoing issue.
4. What is the single most annoying aspect of the Colosseum?
To this most popular answer was the single problem posters (25-30%).
The second most popular was a tie between "nothing" and cliques & circlejerk, with three mentions.
Others were single mentions: rudeness, nutjobs, low traffic, lack of good posters, inability to quote the old OT, it's difficult to spell, inconsistent moderation, conservatives get dogpiled, no swearing...
5. Do you feel the split of OT into the Tavern and the Chamber has made the Colosseum more enjoyable? Why?
Was better ~38 %
Equal ~15 %
Marginally better/worse 13 %
Now better ~13 %
The lax moderation is better ~13 %
Don't know / other ~8 %
This of course isn't an easy question, since most people probably think some things have become better, and others worse. That's why the marginally better or worse are in a single category. Since a major complaint before the split was the level of moderation, I have split into a separate group those who lauded the more lax moderation. That was what many posters said too: that it's the (only) good thing in the split.
Most complaints were about traffic being low and that the split drove good posters away. Some people said they don't visit the Chamber at all, that it's rules aren't enforced good enough, or that they don't see any difference between the two OTs.
As a general impression, what people see unsatisfactory in the OT are (in no specific order):
1. Lack of active moderators and inability to tell them apart from those who aren't active.
2. Problem posters who ruin it for everyone.
The problem 1, we are trying to do something to it, but don't expect fast results, since paradoxically enough, due to the lack of staff most of our efforts have recently gone into keeping the place up.
On the problem 2, that is something we have tried to do something in the past, and keep trying to do in the future. These things aren't easy, really. If someone posts Nazi propaganda, porn or advertisement here, there's not much difficulty to ban him. Most of the posters that were named problematic aren't like that however: They do the same things as the other people, but with much bigger volume, or they are a bit jerk, but in so many posts it begins to count as being a lot jerk. Or they put forward views that aren't so clearly offensive, but not quite inoffensive either.
These considerations were also present in the replies to the survey, as some people wished for more consistency, neutrality etc. Dealing with less obviously problematic posters means in practice that we set separate rules for them.
Another noteworthy thing here is the reunification of the OT. Many people did support it, but about as many supported the new system, didn't find it worse, or simply didn't say anything about it, which in this kind of survey can be read as that they don't support the unification.
Here's some breakdown of specific questions. There was about 40 replies to each of the questions. Here the percentages aren't that exact, since they are based on my reading of the replies. On some questions people's replies have been counted to several groups ("I come to the OT out of habit and to meet friends"). Don't knows and obscure answers are sometimes omitted, but included in the poll-type things (Like "Do you prefer the current moderation to the before split").
1. Why do you come to the Colosseum?
Habit ~30 %
Variety of discussions, smart, fun and diverse people ~30 %
Community and friends ~20 %
To kill time ~13%
To keep up on what's happening in the world ~8 %
Individual answers give more colour to this: people mentioned diversity of opinions, of geographical origins etc, and that people still know each others here, like in a local pub. Most people didn't emphasize serious discussions as their reasons, although some seemed to enjoy the possibility to have those too.
2. What do you see as the goal for those who participate in or moderate the Colosseum? What kind of place should it be? How will we know if we achieve such a goal?
Most people said the discussion and the feeling of the community, and just to have fun.
Moderators were expected mostly to just keep things civil.
Aside from that a lot of things were mentioned: that discussion quality shouldn't be enforced, that the quality should be enforced in some threads depending on topic, that mods should keep topics from drifting, that the interventions should be rare but firm... More than one said something equivalent to "keep the funny trolls, ban the stupid trolls".
3. How would you organize the Colosseum? Which sub forums should be grouped together, which kept separate?
The most hot topic here is of course the reunification of the OT. Please note that this isn't referendum on the issue, and the exact numbers are open to the reading of the replies:
Reunite the OTs ~50 %
Now is good ~13%
Now explicit mention on the split issue : ~37 %.
Maybe some of those who didn't comment on the issue would vote in a strict yes/no voting for the reunification, but I'd think they would have said something on the issue to this question too. Since this reading of the result will probably be called biased, I'd like to mention that I am actually for the reunification.
However, CFC is not a democracy, but a malevolent dictatorship, so the exact numbers here don't matter. I'll expand on this point in a later post.
Little more than third of the reuniters wished the united OT to have red diamond threads for stricter moderator, but this might've been higher if it was specifically asked.
About 30-40 % of people wanted the Arts and Entertainment and Science and Technology to be merged with the OT (or chamber, or some other place).
Then there were many rare mentions, like merging Humour into the Tavern, Sci & Tech with Computer talk, history and science to the Chamber, NOT to merge World History anywhere...
It was also mentioned that the description of Arts and Entertainment subforum doesn't end with full stop unlike all the other subforums, and this has been an ongoing issue.
4. What is the single most annoying aspect of the Colosseum?
To this most popular answer was the single problem posters (25-30%).
The second most popular was a tie between "nothing" and cliques & circlejerk, with three mentions.
Others were single mentions: rudeness, nutjobs, low traffic, lack of good posters, inability to quote the old OT, it's difficult to spell, inconsistent moderation, conservatives get dogpiled, no swearing...
5. Do you feel the split of OT into the Tavern and the Chamber has made the Colosseum more enjoyable? Why?
Was better ~38 %
Equal ~15 %
Marginally better/worse 13 %
Now better ~13 %
The lax moderation is better ~13 %
Don't know / other ~8 %
This of course isn't an easy question, since most people probably think some things have become better, and others worse. That's why the marginally better or worse are in a single category. Since a major complaint before the split was the level of moderation, I have split into a separate group those who lauded the more lax moderation. That was what many posters said too: that it's the (only) good thing in the split.
Most complaints were about traffic being low and that the split drove good posters away. Some people said they don't visit the Chamber at all, that it's rules aren't enforced good enough, or that they don't see any difference between the two OTs.
