Sure that is a fear. Give it time and see what happens. The alternative is to force people to converse in a style they don't care for and that could just generally drive people away. This type of thing has been tried before. There was once a move to sticky "serious" discussion threads at the top of OT. It did not get much action and died a natural death. RD as well was a nice try. look at least they are being responsive. Everyone should just calm down and give it a chance.
do you like the forum split?
- Thread starter holy king
- Start date
- Status
Sure that is a fear. Give it time and see what happens. The alternative is to force people to converse in a style they don't care for and that could just generally drive people away. This type of thing has been tried before. There was once a move to sticky "serious" discussion threads at the top of OT. It did not get much action and died a natural death. RD as well was a nice try. look at least they are being responsive. Everyone should just calm down and give it a chance.
LucyDuke
staring at the clock
Please don't misunderstand any of my howling. I don't yet have a judgment on the change except that the roll-out was unbelievably bad.
How did you think we'd vote?
Nobody in staff was opposed? Remember that poll next time you don't like being called a borg.
Resistance is futile.... you will be assimilated. 
Quackers
The Frog
The moderators shouldn't be allowed to vote 
Tecknojock
Keeping the world running
As it is, I'm indifferent to the split. I already have 10 tabs open at any one time, what's one more. If they go through with the plan to unify the other subforums into these two, I can see how this might have been necessary. I would love to see that happen.
kramerfan86
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2008
- Messages
- 3,572
The red diamond idea made a lot more sense then this does iMO. I dont see why they didnt just strictly enforce the concept of a red diamond. Basically have red diamond threads run by FC rules and have the moderators spend effort on them and have non-red diamond threads run by FT rules and have moderators ignore everything but major infractions. I dont see why this required new forums.
Sorry, I realize not every criticism or question is a howl. Especially not in your case!
Hmmm... I think it would be more like, wanting to change, but not everyone would've picked this method, but there was a good consensus. There was definitely no one arguing to "leave as is".
Tecknojock
Keeping the world running
As far as I can tell, the majority of the howling is not about the split itself, but rather the lack of PC on the other forum
yeah, that may be.
MjM
Deity
No. It was un-needed.
I do not care about post count, for what it's worth. Join dates are a much more fun way of determining elitism, anyway.
I do not care about post count, for what it's worth. Join dates are a much more fun way of determining elitism, anyway.
Mise
isle of lucy
So far I like the split per se, but there are a LOT of things about the way it was done that I dislike. I think the experiment should run for at least a month, and I think that moderators should be constantly tweaking it during that month, with regular, public reviews.
In no particular order (i.e. in the order they pop into my head):
1) The names are ********, pretentious, and completely nondescript. They don't give me any information about whether I'm in a serious forum or a frivolous forum. Just... Ugh...
2) There should be a warning on the OT-SR forum, at the top of each thread, to warn people that moderation will be harsher here
3) OT should have been left alone, not locked or archived. I cannot see any valid reason for locking it and moving threads one by one to a new forum, instead of just renaming OT to "OT-JR" and adding a new "OT-SR" forum, with the dozen or so "srsbzns" threads moved into there.
4) OT-JR should have post counts. I cannot see any valid reason for not having post counts on any part of the forum. Post count measures how many posts you have made, simple as that.
5) It should not have been done on April Fool's Day... My god, who's stupid idea was that?! You couldn't have waited until 2nd April to announce it?! What the hell were you thinking! More fool me for assuming a level of common sense that was clearly absent.
There are probably more things that I will think about later.
In no particular order (i.e. in the order they pop into my head):
1) The names are ********, pretentious, and completely nondescript. They don't give me any information about whether I'm in a serious forum or a frivolous forum. Just... Ugh...
2) There should be a warning on the OT-SR forum, at the top of each thread, to warn people that moderation will be harsher here
3) OT should have been left alone, not locked or archived. I cannot see any valid reason for locking it and moving threads one by one to a new forum, instead of just renaming OT to "OT-JR" and adding a new "OT-SR" forum, with the dozen or so "srsbzns" threads moved into there.
4) OT-JR should have post counts. I cannot see any valid reason for not having post counts on any part of the forum. Post count measures how many posts you have made, simple as that.
5) It should not have been done on April Fool's Day... My god, who's stupid idea was that?! You couldn't have waited until 2nd April to announce it?! What the hell were you thinking! More fool me for assuming a level of common sense that was clearly absent.
There are probably more things that I will think about later.
I was not really for it, but I don't care enough to vote in this poll ^^.
LucyDuke
staring at the clock
I was going to make basically this post but I got frustrated by the reception I expect.
I don't think it's unreasonable to concede postcount in OT:SPAM if OT:SRSBZNS stays the same as OT:OG. OT:SRSBZNS should be merged back into OT:OG so they can just dump pc from the new forum. (Which shouldn't've had threads other than serial chat type threads moved to it.) I have a huge problem with locking 60k threads.
The April 1 thing was a goddamn horrible idea and whoever pulled the trigger on it should apologize to the community for the unfunny jerking around. Seriously.
rugbyLEAGUEfan
Deity
I'm going to adopt the controversial and extreme position of giving it a try, reserving judgement and seeing how I like it after a few weeks . Obviously I will have to endure great pain in the coming weeks as I face this trial .
Quackers
The Frog
GenMarshall
High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent
Personally, the way that it should have gone was simply create a subforum in Off-Topic that is like FC and leave OT the way it is instead of going through the hassle of closing the main OT forum and creating two separate forums and moving threads around. I'd think the controversial aspect of a post-countless forum in FT has riffled the majority of posters.
Perhaps the intention was to not give the impression that FT was the old OT, something which would have happened in that case.
Personally i do not care, but i can understand the site administration being careful with such things.
Lets not forget the OT is not the main part of this site. It is just an averagely busy subforum. It hardly has 5/3 times the traffic the civIII C&C subforum has, and that is a 10+year old game.
Personally i do not care, but i can understand the site administration being careful with such things.
Lets not forget the OT is not the main part of this site. It is just an averagely busy subforum. It hardly has 5/3 times the traffic the civIII C&C subforum has, and that is a 10+year old game.
LucyDuke
staring at the clock
Hey mods (&/admins), isn't it possible to set the permissions such that old OT is open to post in existing threads but not post new threads? We could do that, then when a thread gets bumped just move it over to a "live" forum. That means less fuss for us getting a mod to move a thread in order to bump it, and no particular mod has to worry about opening a particular thread on request. Just keep an eye out for bumps (easy) and pick the appropriate new forum. (I'd suggest defaulting to OT:SRSBZNS unless it's a super crappy thread, to minimize postcount loss.)
This would solve my biggest ongoing grievance with the new system. Please do it.
Yeah, Lucy, I think we should've left the original OT and renamed it as one of the new OT and then made a 2nd OT.
Unfortunately, my time/availability is a bit spotty and limited atm, so I was more on the periphery of the change.
Unfortunately, my time/availability is a bit spotty and limited atm, so I was more on the periphery of the change.
JohnRM
Don't make me destroy you
I will wait and see, but my initial reaction is negative.
- Status
