two weeks after, do you like the forum split?

[holy king]

now that things have settled in a bit, what do you think about the split?

 

[azzaman333]

Still think it's an improvement.

 

[rugbyLEAGUEfan]

I honestly struggle to see why certain threads are deemed chamber worthy and others tavern worthy . And probably even more , I don't see different moderation standards .

I do however notice that I'm pressing my i pad more .

 

[Heretic_Cata]

And probably even more , I don't see different moderation standards .

I think they forgot to send a memo to the trigger-happy mods to stay out of the tavern.

 

[Camikaze]

I honestly struggle to see why certain threads are deemed chamber worthy and others tavern worthy . And probably even more , I don't see different moderation standards .

Is this because moderation has been non-invasive in both?

I think they forgot to send a memo to the trigger-happy mods to stay out of the tavern.

So far in the Tavern there has been:
1 (Minor) Inappropriate Language infraction
1 Inappropriate Content infraction
1 Flaming infraction
2 (Major) Flaming infractions
1 (Minor) Inappropriate Language warning

In the Chamber there has been:
1 Spam infraction
1 Trolling infraction
2 Spam warnings
1 Trolling warning
1 (Minor) Trolling warning

So there's been the exact same number of cards given in each forum. The Tavern has had far more posts, however (I think about 6000 new since the split, giving a ratio of 1 card per 1000 posts or 1 card every 2 days; hardly 'trigger-happy'). You'll also notice that the infractions in the Tavern have been for inappropriate language/content (which we stated pretty much did not have changed standards in the new forum) and for flaming (which have been situations in which people have been jerks by actually going 'friendly banter' to actually being nasty). The two major flaming infractions are indicative of the approach; we aren't stepping in for minor instances, only when it gets reasonably major. Also worth noting that if people are going to flock to the greatly relaxed boundaries of being a jerk (as some seem to be doing), then we're going to have to act on some of that.

Interestingly, we've received far more reports from the Tavern than from the Chamber as well, which struck us as kinda odd. A fair few of them seem to reflect an attitude of "I like this new freedom as it applies to my side of the argument, but I don't like it when someone pushes back" in their selectivity, and almost all of them have been met with an NAT.

There are many many many posts currently in the Tavern that would be infracted or earn a ban if placed in the Chamber. If you seek out the posts in the Chamber that have been warned or infracted, you'll notice that there's no way they'd be treated the same in the Tavern. So it's certainly not a case of applying the same standard to the two different forums. I think a reading of the posts in each of the forums amply demonstrates that.

 

[Mise]

I honestly struggle to see why certain threads are deemed chamber worthy and others tavern worthy

Do you mean when the mods initially moved them from Old OT? Or new ones that have either been moved or started since the split?

The ones that were moved by user request, or started since the split, weren't "deemed" "worthy" or not. It's just a reflection of the moderation / formality standards that the thread starter wanted in their thread. So Jolly Roger for example would almost never start a thread in OT-SRS, because he'd never be able to post in it

 

[rugbyLEAGUEfan]

Is this because moderation has been non-invasive in both?

Definitely . And I've been cool with the moderation both before and after the split . But I wouldn't consider myself controversial and have only ever visited this forum on the Internet and no others , so really , my judgement means very little and it effects me even less .

I guess I was just expecting to see the hammer come down more often ,and often I forget which forum I've posted in and think after a chamber post "oh hell that was flippant , here come the mods . Well heh , I was warned" , but it never comes . "That's nice of them" .

Overall though , I like how I can check out the chamber when my mind is clear and I feel like reading some serious stuff . I just thought it would be more serious .
I also maybe secretly was hoping to see some more ass whippin' , so get to work.


EDIT....well Mise's post shows the depth of my attention span , pretty much rendering the majority of the above moot .

 

[Camikaze]

RE: initial thread move- it's not really a matter of whether the threads moved over to the Tavern were 'worthy' or not, but that we didn't want to confuse the standard of this forum. Virtually all the threads and OPs were certainly 'worthy' of being in the Chamber (it's meant to be able to host the pretty much the same topics, after all). But some posts in them may not have been. On the other hand, everything that was acceptable in the old OT would certainly be fine in the Tavern too.

Say post #5 in a thread was made when it was in the old OT, and was fine (or at least passable). Then if a virtually identical post #55 was made in the Chamber, under a changed standard it might suddenly be against the rules. It'd confuse the issue and appear inconsistent if we infracted #55 but not #5, even though that's what we'd have to do. It'd give rise to complaint (and it's be reasonable complaint, too).

 

[Monsterzuma]

I dislike the fact that the Chamber forum gets very little traffic (judging by the "currently active users"), meaning that posting a thread there makes it get read by only a handful people. This is especially much a shame because most high quality threads end up there.

Hence why my "Cool Stories" thread and any thread I'll be making in the future will go in the Tavern no matter how high-brow their content.

General opinion of the split: pointless and inconvenient from my PoV. I wouldn't have minded if the moderators just generally cut back on moderation to deal with any convenience issues on their part. I've been on plenty of forums with very light moderation where having quality discussions was never a big deal.

 

[Cutlass]

Don't mind it. Don't love it either. Kinda lukewarm at this point.

 

[Algeroth]

No, I don't like it because I barely see a difference between the two forums. Needless and unnecessary .

 

[warpus]

I find it a bit annoying, to be honest, to check both subforums. That's purely from a "I'm lazy, I want things to be more efficient" standpoint though

 

[trader/warrior]

Was neutral to it to start with, then was put off a bit by the bad initial implementation, and now it's grown on me again. So slightly positive to it.

I think a clearer divide is necessary though. IMO threads like "Islam and womens rights" should be only allowed in the Chamber.

I'm still for merging some of the other forums into the new ones, but seeing the general mood about this I guess it would raise all hell once again. So I'd at least like the already implicit tolerance for topics belonging in other colloseum forums being posted in the new ones to be made official in an announcement.

 

[Leoreth]

Interestingly, we've received far more reports from the Tavern than from the Chamber as well, which struck us as kinda odd. A fair few of them seem to reflect an attitude of "I like this new freedom as it applies to my side of the argument, but I don't like it when someone pushes back" in their selectivity, and almost all of them have been met with an NAT.

I don't think this is very surprising, because the Tavern simply has a lot more divisive and confrontational topics at the moment.

That said, in general I'm quite happy with the current situation. It wouldn't mind going back to the old one forum OT, but this works too.

 

[JollyRoger]

So far, so good. For those posting in the Tavern, I hope there is some backbone and less hitting the report button. No use burdening the mods except in extreme situations. Personally, I like the opportunity to hit back a bit, so the report button is not necessary.

 

[Leonel]

It's a little confusing but I'll learn to live with it. I assume it'd be easier for mods to keep wary eyes over us this way.

 

[Kozmos]

I like that not everything has to be SRZ BZNS and discussion mandatory but that could have been achieved by the Red Diamond. Now I have to have two separate bookmarks which is really annoying.

 

[Ice_Tyrant]

lol. The second I take a break from the forum this happens. A bit confusing. Maybe not so bad though.

 

[schlaufuchs]

Meh, it's not gone as well as I thought it would. I wish the Tavern moderation would be a bit lighter, there were a couple instances of infraction I saw which I definitely didn't think deserved it (or the particular harshness of it) given the parameters of what OTJR is supposed to be.

Also was JR said re: people needing to grow a backbone in OTJR.

 

[Silurian]

Interestingly, we've received far more reports from the Tavern than from the Chamber as well, which struck us as kinda odd. A fair few of them seem to reflect an attitude of "I like this new freedom as it applies to my side of the argument, but I don't like it when someone pushes back" in their selectivity, and almost all of them have been met with an NAT.

Because of the way the change has been implemented with many contradictory posts by staff and moderators I am not surprised that there are far more reports from the Tavern. Because of the contradictory posts I believe that many people are unsure of the rules in The Chamber Pot and the other section. So if someone believes that the rules are stricter, in the other section, than they actually are then they will report.

Also some people have stated that they will treat the other section as Off Topic. So they could just be reporting stuff they would have reported in the pre fools day Off Topic.

Others may be reporting knowing the rules have changed but want the rules of pre fools day Off Topic and so are reporting as such as a form of protest.