Social groups feature

Discussion in 'Site Feedback' started by Thunderfall, Apr 21, 2009.

  1. Fifty

    Fifty !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Messages:
    10,649
    Location:
    an ecovillage in madagascar
    Deleting the fiftychat group would be silly. Like it or not, deny it or not, but its a major part of OT culture. We've had easily 100+ different people from CFC on fiftychat, including many highly regarded members (e.g. moderators). We've been significantly more active than the official CFC chat for years now. The social group currently has the most members of any social group, and thats with not even close to every fiftychatter represented. "All or nothing" style rules don't work, things just have to be decided on a case by case basis.

    Let me give an example. Fiftychat has some regular subdiscussions and groups of people who tend to chat at different times. However, I don't think I should be allowed to use CFC resources to create a "European Fiftychatter" group, and a "Fiftychat Uno Club" group, and a "Fiftychat Trivia Enthusiasts" group and a "Girls of Fiftychat" group. However, it makes sense that NESers should be allowed to have lots of different subgroups, because it makes a lot more sense for them given what NESing is, its purpose, and its connection to CFC. So a "no split groups and subgroups"! general rule would be silly, and it would not be a double standard to allow lots of NES subgroups but not Fiftychat subgroups.

    Similarly, allowing a billion "[user x fan club]" or "[cool people group]" doesn't make sense in the same way that allowing a major OT-offshoot does. And for what its worth, I think any other OT-offshoot should be allowed to make a group if they want, but the problem is that the other main ones (Secret Spam Kingdom and Speakeasy) want to remain private/secretive, whereas fiftychat welcomes pretty much everyone (our only current ban is for a user who tried to seriously mess up our server). Note that if mods decide that they will allow any group, then fine. I have no problem with azza's group existing (azza is a friend and fiftychatter!), I just think that if the line has to be drawn somewhere, frivolity may be a good place to draw it.

    As for the moderating of social groups, I saw ainwood say that the mod tools for groups only allows for mass deletion of discussions, not for selective modding. I think that that may be a good thing. Perhaps it would lessen the "stuff to keep an eye on" load of all the mods, plus promote the existence of groups that have an actual purpose, if moderating of groups took place at the group-creator level. If mods notice that a group's discussion tends to be against the rules (whatever rules we end up having for group discussion), perhaps a "group warning" could be given to the group creator... after a certain number of these the group gets forcibly deleted. That way group creators have an incentive to pay closer attention to the discussion that is going on in their group and make sure it stays in the rules, and mods won't have to babysit problem groups for very long. It would be nice though, if its possible, for there to be multiple group admins for a given group, but there is currently no way for me to appoint (say) Perfection as fellow group admin for the fiftychat group.
     
  2. Abaddon

    Abaddon Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2002
    Messages:
    31,182
    Location:
    NES/FG/SF Activity:Arguing the toss
    I personally can't see there being harm in having as many groups as we like.

    Silly groups do no harm. Those that serve no valid purpose will simply not be used and prove their own pointlessness!

    With time, I am certain these groups will fail. They serve no use beyond been a forum within a forum
     
  3. Narz

    Narz keeping it real

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2002
    Messages:
    28,346
    Location:
    St. Petersburg, Florida
    Yeah, what Abaddon said. Which is the best of the silly groups is irrelevant really.
     
  4. Fifty

    Fifty !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Messages:
    10,649
    Location:
    an ecovillage in madagascar
    What Perfy and I are saying is that if there is going to be some criterion by which to distinguish allowed vs not-allowed groups (which is what Thunderfall clearly expressed), it might be the case that "frivolity" is a good line to draw (or maybe something like interest-directedness versus person-directedness). I don't think anybody has a problem with silly groups if thats what TF and company want... we're just making suggestions based on the assumption (on the basis of TFs post) that the staff is going to exclude some group-types from being created.

    I too see no problem with silly groups, groups of 1, or anything else, so long as the staff doesn't mind them. There are already lots of silly groups, and even a couple groups created for the sole purpose of trying to eventually get the biggest group! Maybe its best just to let it flourish as-is, provided these sorts of things dont' take up lots of bandwidth or whatever (I'm not competent on those sorts of things).
     
  5. Padma

    Padma the Absent Admin Administrator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2001
    Messages:
    14,420
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Omaha, Nebraska USA
    As has already been expressed, we (the Staff) are still feeling our way through much of these new "social" features. Things that are not obviously "bad for the site" we're allowing everyone to play with, while we watch and determine the best way to handle them. If/when we see problems with some usage, we will try to redirect/refocus that. If something shows lack of usefulness, or is too disruptive to the forums, we will simply remove it.

    IMHO, if "silly" groups end up being the most used/popular, then we will probably let them be. (Subject to all existing Forum Rules, of course. ;))
     
  6. Narz

    Narz keeping it real

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2002
    Messages:
    28,346
    Location:
    St. Petersburg, Florida
    ! which ones would those be?
     
  7. Valka D'Ur

    Valka D'Ur Hosting Iron Pen in A&E Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    25,960
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
    I don't think the mods/admins should have to decide whether a group is too "silly" to be allowed. That would just lead to more arguing and hard feelings between members and staff because the definition of "silly" is so subjective.

    What's already been said is that the criteria for allowing a group to exist is if it follows the forum rules. I would amend that to mean the main forum rules, because I personally don't have a panic attack if somebody posts three times in a row (unless they're doing it on purpose to be annoying or are too lazy to edit a previous post). Sometimes peoples' browsers do have a hiccup and odd things happen when posting; that's not the member's fault and should not incur an infraction. And what if a few people want to have a French-speaking group, or another language-speaking group - would that be allowed?

    As long as the group runs with a minimum of fuss requiring a moderator's attention, fosters a sense of camaraderie among the members, is not elitist, or for the purpose of denigrating anybody or anything about the CivFanatics site, it should be allowed to exist for as long as it keeps its collective nose clean.

    I have a question to ask of the moderators/admins (and yes, this may possibly relate to social groups): How many smileys and/or graphics are we allowed in a single post? (I don't mean photos, just smileys and smaller graphics such as avatars).
     
  8. LucyDuke

    LucyDuke staring at the clock

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2007
    Messages:
    13,582
    Location:
    where mise
    Thirty. Images and smilies both count. The software won't let you post with more than that.
     
  9. Perfection

    Perfection The Great Head.

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    49,824
    Location:
    Salisbury Plain
    Well, I'm for mods letting silly groups have a chance, I just suspect that silly groups will result in some issues that will eventually doom them.

    I'm okay with letting them be tried out.
     
  10. Fifty

    Fifty !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Messages:
    10,649
    Location:
    an ecovillage in madagascar

    this one
    and this one (expressly so in the latter case, obviously so in the former case)
     
  11. Narz

    Narz keeping it real

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2002
    Messages:
    28,346
    Location:
    St. Petersburg, Florida
    heh, no more obvious than in your group's case.

    They is plenty of room for attention seekers of all kinds on CivFanatics, lets just live & let live. :)
     
  12. Fifty

    Fifty !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Messages:
    10,649
    Location:
    an ecovillage in madagascar
    Actually I'm betting that fiftychat's reign at the top will be quite short-lived. There are lots of potential groups on CFC that have a much bigger user pool to draw from (fan groups from some of the bigger civ4 mods, for instance).

    Also, its actually much more obvious if you'd just use common sense and not just be a predictable fifty-contrarian about everything just for the sake of it.

    When did I say those groups were bad or whatever? I was merely citing them as instances of the variety of groups that have already sprung up... not saying they were good or bad!
     
  13. Narz

    Narz keeping it real

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2002
    Messages:
    28,346
    Location:
    St. Petersburg, Florida
    Not sure what you're talking about here here. I don't think you are that predictable, just somewhat. Anyone this thread is about something larger than both of us so lets not get into petty squabbles, shall we? :)

    ! Me neither! :)
     
  14. Perfection

    Perfection The Great Head.

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    49,824
    Location:
    Salisbury Plain
    Well, Fifty is trying to find an explination why you were so obviously wrong about the intents of the Fiftychat group.
     
  15. Birdjaguar

    Birdjaguar Hanafubuki Super Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    43,708
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    More than likely it is the perception of (true or not) what fifty chat is all about. What it is now is not what it has been in the past (I hope). It has a reputation with some that is not very flattering.
     
  16. Perfection

    Perfection The Great Head.

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    49,824
    Location:
    Salisbury Plain
    I prefer Fifty's explanation.
     
  17. Narz

    Narz keeping it real

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2002
    Messages:
    28,346
    Location:
    St. Petersburg, Florida
    You guys use the word obvious alot, I don't think you know what it means.

    I'm not speculating on what you guys think it is or isn't I'm just judging by my experience with it. Also there's nothing inherently wrong with a person wanting attention & recognition purely for the sake of it, whether it be fifty or abaddon so no need to get defensive. And as long as your group is harmless & not actively malicious as it was in the past I see no problems.

    This discussion lacks redeeming value & I trust the mods to manage the social groups & have no vested interest in how the groups are governed so I'm out. Cheers all. :)
     
  18. Fifty

    Fifty !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Messages:
    10,649
    Location:
    an ecovillage in madagascar
    Even at its most unflattering level, fiftychat was never about being the "most" of anything. Its really just this weird habit narz has now of trying to show me at every turn how little I affect him or something... I'm not sure exactly how to describe it... its just kinda bizarre ... In any case I agree with him that there's no point in making this a discussion about what fiftychat is (unless doing so illuminates some larger issue pertinent to the thread).



    Also, I wonder what the mods think about my idea of making moderation of the social groups based more on expecting the group admins to babysit their own group, and then instituting warnings/punishments at the group admin level?
     
  19. Birdjaguar

    Birdjaguar Hanafubuki Super Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    43,708
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    Most people who are fifty-contrarians are so for reasons they may or may not make public. And I would link most of those reasons (whatever they are) back to specific fifty-chatter's behavior that the person remembers. One's "reputation" whether it be a person's or a group's, can be difficult to leave behind.
     
  20. ainwood

    ainwood Consultant. Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2001
    Messages:
    30,083
    Yep. Good reputations take years to create, and seconds to destroy.
     

Share This Page