The TK Plan - Solution the Two Kingdoms Question

[Tee Kay]

I am TK, and I shall now present my solution to the split of Off-Topic and I'd like you all to vote on it.

If you believe yes, vote yes.

===========================================

Recognising that:
- CFC-OT is a living community, and the OT forum is both a place for serious discussion as well as a place for socialising.
- the split of OT and the creation of Forum Taberna and Forum Civilium was carried out by the Moderators as an experiment in a well-meaning effort to remedy the long-standing issues of OT with the best interests of the OT community in mind.
- the split of OT has so far resulted in a significant level of dissatisfaction within the OT community.
- the issues of OT cannot be remedied by returning to the status quo ante.

We, the CFC-OT Community, humbly proposes and petitions for:

- the recreation of the Off-Topic forum, and the subsumption of Forum Taberna and Forum Civilium back into Off-Topic.
- the moderation of the recreated Off-Topic forum consistent with (or similar to) the moderation of Forum Taberna.
- a wider and encouraged application of the Red Diamond thread in place of a separate forum for "serious discussions" (eg Forum Civilium), including:
-- a provision for the Moderators to impose a Red Diamond status on a thread on request from either the OP or a significant number of participants.
-- a provision for the Moderators to impose a Red Diamond status on a thread where it is otherwise deemed appropriate, similar to moving a thread from Taberna to Civilium.
- the restoration of postcount for the Off-Topic forum, with further discussions to take place on the role of postcount in the CFC Forums.
-- the restoration of the practice prior to April 1 of archiving the so-called "serial threads" in a postcount-less forum.

 

[Mr. Dictator]

Since Civilium is above Taberna on the index, does that make Civilium like North Korea, where everyone must follow strict rules, and Taberna like South Korea, where things are generally more strange and we wear nicer clothes?

 

[Tee Kay]

 

[Mr. Dictator]

If you squint just right, it looks like a wizard right before the cops showed up.

 

[Leoreth]

I'd prefer the status quo ante, but recognizing that the moderators want to lessen their workload I find your suggestions superior to the current situation.

 

[downtown]

Yeah that's actually pretty reasonable.

 

[Tee Kay]

I'd just like to say that, personally, the OT split to me is not the disaster some of us are making it out to be. I kinda agree with the rationale behind it; two forums for two styles of posting and two styles of moderation. However, I do think this plan is better, would give us the best of both worlds and would be more acceptable to the community as a whole (which is why I'm trying to get as many votes as possible to see if I'm right).

 

[sophie]

Yeah that's actually pretty reasonable.

This. I like this idea.

 

[Joecoolyo]

This is what I wanted even before the switch was made.

Now that the switch was made this is obviously the better, and more reasonable solution.

Signed.

 

[Mark1031]

I thought that is what was supposed to happen and is a better solution IMO but somehow some of the mods just couldn't bear to lighten up. I think a legitimate fear is that the RDs would drop like rocks off the 1st page. That wouldn't bother me but it would bother the srs people who want everyone to see and participate in their srs discussion but in a very srs manner that is strictly enforced.

But why is everyone so concerned about the split. What difference does it make to you? All that matters is who comes to a discussion group. Just treat FT as the new OT if that is what you want or go to FC. One will probably die (FC) or become a speciality topics forum. Why force a shotgum marriage with people who don't want to talk to you.

 

[azzaman333]

The only issues I have with the split is the lack of post count here, and the slowness to combine the other colosseum subforums into the two new OTs. Especially post count. (my iPod auto corrected post count to OTs <vagina>, true story)

 

[Camikaze]

Thanks for setting this out thoughtfully. It sounds quite reasonable to me.

One thing; a 'wider and encouraged' use of the RD designation was kinda what we were going for last year, but people (at least the vocal ones) seemed to be adamant that the OP should decide without interference by others. How would this be reconciled with 'encouraged' use?

Also, just so you know, there were various ideas in staff as to what to do, but we could only go for one of them.

 

[Winner]

I don't have a problem with the split. I am not interested in reading tons of BS, which frankly the OT forum was mostly composed of, so having a separate forum for more serious topics is a good idea. At the same time, having another forum for a less serious discussions (with greater freedom from intrusive moderation) is also good.

I don't really think it is that hard to open two tabs for two forums and follow both The nonsense about "OT community" just makes me smile.

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

I can't find a problem with this. At least it'll stop all the whining about post count. Signed.

 

[Tee Kay]

One thing; a 'wider and encouraged' use of the RD designation was kinda what we were going for last year, but people (at least the vocal ones) seemed to be adamant that the OP should decide without interference by others. How would this be reconciled with 'encouraged' use?

What I'm proposing is for the contributors, rather than just the OP, to have more of a say on if and when a Red Diamond is placed on a thread (there's precedence in the closure of threads at the request of the contributors but not the OP). Also for the Moderators to have the powers to put a Red Diamond on a thread themselves if they deemed fit with appropriate reasons given to the OP (and the OP can appeal the decision if he wants to).

Compromise.

 

[Camikaze]

How would the contributors go about exercising that say?

 

[Tee Kay]

How would the contributors go about exercising that say?

As I understand it, there's precedence in the way a thread gets closed. If enough people request it, it happens, even if the OT does not specifically requests it.

So, one way would be for a certain number of people (twenty, say) to petition the mods. One way they can do this without spamming the thread is to report the OP and write in the comment "request Red Diamond" or something along those lines.

 

[Camikaze]

I don't believe we've ever had more than like 5 people report anything (including reports saying a thread should be closed, which is judged on the basis of the thread itself, not the number of reports). 20 would be impossible to get for an RD thread (there aren't usually that many people in a topic, anyway). There's a problem in that people are unlikely to report it unless others signal that they've done the same. Reports don't do that. People saying so in a thread would be a way to signal that they want the designation changed, but then you'd have a bunch of posts about the designation of the thread, and not the topic.

So I'm not entirely sure how you'd go about accurately gauging what people want done with a particular thread, in a manner that's efficient enough for a change to occur people the discussion's run dry.

 

[mayor]

The RD request could be combined with a post related to the discussion at hand

 

[Tee Kay]

Well we can drop it if it's not feasible to implement. It's not like there's something like it in the way Forum Civilium the Debating Forum is supposed to work anyway.