Note: ADISC does NOT allow personal ads. This includes "looking for ____" or "anyone in ____" type introduction posts. To write a good introduction, focus on explaining who you are, NOT what you are looking for. The goal should be to help other people get to know you a bit.
I feel that newbies greeting newbies is not only to be commended, but very strongly encouraged; it makes the greeted feel extra welcome, with the extra attention; it is a good way for greeters to make inroads in terms of posting, without worry about being ignored, criticized or laughed at for not making posts of the style or quality of veterans. If they read the forum before joining they no doubt see some people's heads jumped all over for their grammar, attitudes to diaper punishment, complaints about their neg rep, their suggestions of ADISC 2, intros with too much bodily funtion detail, intros with insufficient detail, and run-on sentences. That last category is especially egregious.
So they may be afraid to post, some of them. Greeting other newbies with a cheery
Welcome! Hey!! I am ALSO into Naruto or Romanian AK 47's or Modded ECU's to up mah boost 2 PSI
is a safe venue to join the fray. Especially if they can think of nothing to say, having nothing new (as yet) to add to Popular Culture diaper scenes and references, how to make a diaper from two paperclips and a newspaper, or Obama's failings, such as having done nowhere near as much for acceptance of AB/DL's as he has for acceptance of Black politicians.
Besides, the largest problem bedeviling ADISC is the lowered feeling of being a tight-knit community; this comes with getting bigger and growing faster. Newbies greeting newbies makes them feel part of their own little sub-community - but is not divisive, as the process of being an active newbie propels one into the community of regulars, and on to VIP - and thence, maybe - to staff. And in fact hastens this by upping post count, increasing their chances to get +rep, and generally interact more on the forums; interacting, participating, is a much more effective way to learn the ropes than merely reading other peoples' posts.
So I have decided to +rep newbies greeting newbies, as long as the post is more than a mere "Hi - I am also a newbie!!" and is more than halfways deserving of a rep point - I enjoy giving people their first rep, and and therefore eagerly await them giving me reason for it. I am merely declaring a personal policy which is already pretty much standard practise for me. I rep newbies more easily than regulars or VIP's, anyway; as I think should most people.
This post is an indirect plug for my already proposed Newbies' Forum http://www.adisc.org/forum/administrative-stuff/11747-forum-newbies.html I realize this post will likely end up in Admin Stuff, but I reiterate that newbies not only deserve their own forum to air and discuss their own issues (stuff gets un-noticed in the very huge Regulars' forum) but would be a good place for perma-threads on How Do I Get To Be A Regular? Ditto For VIP? How Do I Set Up IRC? How come that guy's pooping post got less -rep than my own? How come it got more? How come all this neato stuff is in Admin stuff with all the other Admin Stuff (or the wiki) when we newbies who need to know this stuff could have it all in one place, right under our noses where we start posting anyway, instead of having to go off and poke around in places we do not even know exists or how to find it? How can we know to look for stuff we have no idea exists, until people get mad at us for our ignorance and yell READ THE FAQ; AND GO FIND IT YOURSELF, AND COME BACK WHEN YOU HAVE FOUND IT, READ IT, AND KNOW HOW TO BEHAVE!!
Basically, I think being a tight-knit community depends on two basic things: commonality, say of outlook, attitude and interests; at least on a broad level. DL's, age players, babyfurs, incons, their carers and so on all have an interest in diapers. I may be Republican and you Liberal, but we both care about politics, and what is best for the country.
The other thing is the degree to which we know each other; this depends on the degree of communication between us, the number and density of links, if you will. There is one-way communication: from one to another, say, where you read my stuff but we don't talk. In two-way, we interact: directly, as in chat, or by your posting a kitty macro in resonse to my raccoon macro, or refining Adaffme's pacifier creation technique http://www.adisc.org/forum/teenbaby/13660-create-your-own-pacifier.html with your own results and ideas, or supplying links for me travel by: to places where I will find YOU
With a large site, we can not talk to everyone else, or read their stuff, or even read every forum; nor do we bother to do so when all the good diaper-hiding places, best brands of the last 10 years, and ideas for the rep system have been proposed, withdrawn, tested, mentioned, re-mentioned and the place has become boring. (Another reason why some veterans may have left.) What we can do is encourage member-to-member interaction, right from the outset, between people who identify with each other, even if it is on the basis of being newbies. Plus this is like making childhood friends and hanging onto them. My best friends here are the ones I know best, and many of them are ones I have known longest.
Oh - and as to the ADISC 2 fiasco http://www.adisc.org/forum/administrative-stuff/11538-modest-proposal.html while I did not care much for the degree of disapproval of the idea, I welcomed the responses for their honesty and sincerity; I am by no means complaining about any of it. I bring it up here to say that while I took no offence from the responses I got, a newbie in the same position might well be put off the forum, not realizing that while one is free to propose things here, that freedom of speech entails sometimes getting criticism for things, Right, "D" or "Y" ? But being roundly criticized over one thing does not mean one is unwelcome or disliked in the long run.
A sticky in greetings forum directing new members to the newbie-applicable parts of the wiki is to be applauded; but using the rep system to incentivise reading and following the suggestions and information in the wiki or elsewhere is also a good idea, methinks.
[font="Calibri,Arial"]If you scroll back through the VIP forum, you will see a post about the same topic. The general consensus is that it was good to give newbies +rep easier.
However, (and this is my thought), the newbies shouldn't know this beforehand. What's to stop an unsavory person joining, reading your post, then greeting loads of newbies until they're halfway to VIP by people who agree with you?[/font]
[font="Calibri,Arial"]However, (and this is my thought), the newbies shouldn't know this beforehand. What's to stop an unsavory person joining, reading your post, then greeting loads of newbies until they're halfway to VIP by people who agree with you?[/font]
I WANT to have people read my post and greet other newbies.
But how to prevent abuse?
1. I do not rep any post unless it deserves it; I just relax my standards a bit; the check and balance here is the review of rep by the mods; they will remove unwarranted rep.
2. Cap the amount of rep (+ or -) a member can get while a newbie. This means - yes - there may be a furious trip to, say, +5, and a sudden slowdown in rate of attainment thereafter. What is wrong with that? It is an encouragement to hit the ground running, and grab all you can for one week. It encourages people to be active AND make quality posts, without unbalancing anything. It sends the message talking to people - new people - is good, for them and for you.
As to capping the rep a person can get while still blue, people could go back and +rep them more as soon as the poster turned green.
It would also mean that there is less initial rep-difference; giving the forums a less elitist us-and-them feel; the guy with +4 (and an initial cap of +5) will FEEL he is closer to the guy with +6 than his having +0 and the other guy having +2. +30 is still +30; by the time you get past say 10 the initial boost is not that big an advantage. By earning rep easily at first it makes a person think they can keep earning rep, which of course they can; the guy stuck at +0 forever may get discouraged. Not to mention the guy with -0, who is even worse off
I would sooner see all of our one-month-olds have +5 than +0. And I do not feel it would devalue my rep. Think of it like minimum wage.
[edit] I just realized this reflects my politics, that I think poor people can be richened [sic] without empooring [sic] the rich (significantly.)
Oh yeah. I WANT newbies to see this post and respond to it with their own views.
[font="Calibri,Arial"]If you scroll back through the VIP forum, you will see a post about the same topic. The general consensus is that it was good to give newbies +rep easier.
This makes my point: I am reasonably active on this forum, and VIP is one of the forums I read, after Greetings, Mature, Admin, and Regulars', in that order; and if I am not full by that point, I can have the rest for dessert. If I have to scroll back through VIP to find this, what hope has a newbie? If I am active and missed it what hope has an occasional visitor - VIP or not - ?
People are supposed to "stumble upon" rep, to do their best to make good posts without guidance?
As I have said before, I think rep-chasing by making good posts - is to be commended and encouraged; that is what the rep system is supposed to do. (Not, I point out, cheating by club-repping or sucking up to someone by restating their opinions. I would rather be disgreed with well than agreed with weakly.)
Was that a statement, or a question? [I'm serious, I don't get whether you were saying that's how it SHOULD happen, or whether you were asking if that's how it should be.]
If that was a question, that's the general idea of rep... It's kinda like college. You're smart and a good student, you get through. You're a creep, and do bad things, and are a bad student, you don't get through, you get held back untill you change. Sure, the filter doesn't catch everyone, but most of the bad students don't get a degree... Same with rep. You're a good member, you make good posts, do good things? You get good rep. You act creepy, make creepy posts, do bad things [or lately, disagree with other opinionated members]? You get neg rep. Thus, you only get VIP if you /deserve/ it. Rep isn't a feel-good everyone's-a-winner system. It's there for a reason: to show how contributive you are to the community [or lately, how much you agree with others' opinions]. It's not a perfect filter, the rep system can still be cheated, but its' general purpose is to be both a positive and negative reinforcement learning system... You do good, you get rewarded. You do bad, you get punished. If we start letting new guys rep each other up to VIP, you see a problem? Let's say seven to ten trolls/troublemakers sign up. They all act normal, make good posts, 'meet each other', and get repped up by people who want rep to be a hand-out system. Now, they wait a week or two, and rep eacher up all at once. Now, they're a VIP, boom. Now they can do anything a VIP can! Look at that! We just handed them the status because they all 'met each other'. See the fallacy behind the idea? Not that it wasn't a good impulse thought, but you've gotta analyze it. Thanks for trying, but I'll pass. =)
And, I can attest to be relatively new. When I had +0, I didn't feel like i was ENTITLED to be handed rep, just to make me feel better/more adequate. I knew that I'd have to work my way up into the community, just like, say, Darkfinn, and H3g3l, and others with a shit-ton and a half of rep. Did anyone hand THEM reputation, for example? No. They earned it. How did they do that? By proving themselves and proving that they are a positive and helpful member of the group, and earning their way up. And did I feel that I should be handed points? No. That wouldn't be right, it's essentially 'sympathy points'. Obviously you gotta start somewhere, so instead of giving these 'sympathy points', as I feel, wouldn't it be better for them to start by helping out someone else, and getting reputation for their positive contributions? Did I feel/do I still feel inferior to those that have +1,000,000? Nope, it just means they've been here longer than me, and contributed more than me. Rep is a matter of time and effort, not superiority. And, if they feel that since someone's been here 2 years and has +200 or something, that they're not as great, then they need to be considerate and understanding of the fact that reputation is earned through hard work and good deeds here, and they, too, can earn that much rep, if they work just as hard and do just as good. Rep is there to show how positively contributing of a member you are. Please don't suggest we water it down. I feel that the shards of integrity that the rep system still has would thank you for it.
Bottom line, I commend you for trying, but I feel, no.
What you are proposing is far too convoluted for most people to follow and sounds like an overbearing procedure that'll require quite a bit of work from the programmers. Why can't we just go straight from point A to point B, without hitting every town in between?
I too 'lax my standards when it comes to repping newbies, but I do it on a case-by-case basis. More often than not, I only rep newbies if I want them to stick around, and that only usually happens when they write a brilliant introduction. I'm not in the business of repping just because they're being warm and welcoming, otherwise any person could get a number of rep-points with nothing more than superficial "Hello!" posts to their name. I loath that and it makes me a little more distasteful about this place every time I see it occur.
Rep newbies for the same reasons you'd rep a regular or VIP here.
Ummm, maybe I have not read the right FAQ's or whatever, but I have no idea what you are all talking about? What is rep? what is -rep +rep etc? I thought the "status" thing - Newbie, Lurker, Regular, VIP thing was based on post counts/log in ratio or something.... Perhaps Ive missed a memo.
Ummm, maybe I have not read the right FAQ's or whatever, but I have no idea what you are all talking about? What is rep? what is -rep +rep etc? I thought the "status" thing - Newbie, Lurker, Regular, VIP thing was based on post counts/log in ratio or something.... Perhaps Ive missed a memo.
Reputation "Rep" points are things other users of this site can give you for either great contributions or very poor ones. Although they're often the focus of much dispute. I personally wouldn't worry too much about it. If you stick around and make some genuinely good posts on here, it becomes irrelevant.
Well, first let me say that while I disagree with the conclusions and (many of) the arguments of the preceding two posts, they were well written, well-argued from their point of view, and said in moderate language. Well maybe not so well-argued when we look carefully, but certainly there was effort, sincerity, passion, and I judge, good enough intent.
Before we go on, please make sure you have done your required background reading:
What you are proposing is far too convoluted for most people to follow and sounds like an overbearing procedure that'll require quite a bit of work from the programmers. Why can't we just go straight from point A to point B, without hitting every town in between?
Okay, there were two points here: 1. The idea of the newbie forum, and 2. the notion of encouraging newbies to greet each other. The newbie forum idea was discussed in another thread http://www.adisc.org/forum/administrative-stuff/11747-forum-newbies.html; - but that was during the time of upheaval when no radical ideas could be entertained, good or bad, as there was so much going on. I think the idea still has merit: after all we got new forums like Roleplay, Babyfur, and subforums in off-topic, so the work in merely creating a new forum is not the main issue with that. But let us leave that idea alone for now; it deserves its own thread if it deserves to be discussed at all.
What part of anything I described is overbearing? I said I will go out of my way to rep newbies for welcoming other newbies in their greetings threads, so long as
the post is more than a mere "Hi - I am also a newbie!!" and is more than halfways deserving of a rep point <ME>
. Now in case everybody did this, there would be a cap on the max-rep/post for posts in greetings threads. Let us assume that this would not be onerous for the programmers; would it be a good idea?
More often than not, I only rep newbies if I want them to stick around, and that only usually happens when they write a brilliant introduction.<LUKIE>
I rep any post that deserves a rep according to my opinion, whether they are an evil person, nasty to me, if they are my friend, or whether (or not) I want them to stick around. I rep the post not the person. Otherwise there would be no way for a heavily neg repped person to dig themselves out of a hole. And neg-repping to gang up on people would be a more effective tool of the dark side. Yes, the rep I give a post attaches to the poster; it is like if I shop at Safeway I get airmiles per $ spent: but those airmiles are credited to the card I carry. (the airmiles being the rep, the card's account belonging the person who benefits from the reward: which happens to be the poster.) I have posted before about how being "in the hole" (meaning having large -rep" carries a stigma: sometimes brilliant work will be ignored because the person is at like -5 or worse. People don't want to shake the hand of the guy with aids. They do not like him or his religion or his right-wing politics and will not rep him however beneficial to the forum or however well-written his post is.
We have had a member or two who climbed out of a hole - that is - having a large minus rep score - by dint of persistence and no longer behaving badly and improving their behaviour - and not being pre-judged that they weren't wanted around the place. This repping the post not the person keeps things more objective and less - even if slightly less - of a popularity contest. Also consider that good posts improve the forum: the repping of people via their posts is an incentive to make good posts, no matter who a person is. The rep system is for the forum's ultimate benefit, and this benefit accords to the whole memberbase; it is only secondarily for the benefit of any individual. It is better I think to see 10 great posts get +2 each than one post get +20, assuming the one great one is not ten times better than each of the other 10 ones.
Let us ponder for a second the idea of redemption, the idea that one can become a better person, or atone for misdeeds. (I am not dragging Christianity into this, btw; this is bigger than that.) Some members start out of the gate poorly, making lousy posts, in terms of English and morals, and , yelling and screaming insults and pifffle; some propose poor raccoons may think of people as mere statistics, wounding them to their very core. But we allow people to shape up and "Go sin no more." We allow people to improve as members: we allow them to apologise, to improve their diction, and become good members according to the site's own definition. Sometimes previously well-behaved members, some senior and [possibly] no longer with us lose their tempers, or just become unstable, and make posts deserving of -rep; but we let those prodigal sons return to the fold, and atone by making stellar kitteh macroes or other worthy contributions. (I said I would not drag Christianity into this: I said nothing about the Bible.)
The members are supposed to benefit the forum more than the forum is meant to benefit any one member, the way the rep system is devised, and the way I believe it is meant to work. The benefit to a member is the forum itself and its quality; not the amount of rep they get; it is a measure of their contribution, it is not their reward, though there is overlap between the two. This is a fine point, I know, and if you wish you may stay after class to discuss it. Coffee and light snacks will be provided.
Positive reputation should be given only for especially good contributions to the site, irrespective of your own personal opinion on the matter discussed and of whether or not you consider the member a friend or an enemy. Examples include posts which:
1. demonstrate great kindness
2. explain something in great detail and contain a lot of wisdom or valuable insights (even if you disagree with the points put forward)
3. contain content that is very helpful to other members, or to people new to the site.
4. are exceptionally funny
As to #4 above: the only way to make a funny post is to try to make one; and if you fire many arrows, chances improve one will hit the mark. No offence to Mark intended, dude.
I'm not in the business of repping just because they're being warm and welcoming,
Positive reputation should be given only for especially good contributions to the site, irrespective of your own personal opinion on the matter discussed and of whether or not you consider the member a friend or an enemy. Examples include posts which:
otherwise any person could get a number of rep-points with nothing more than superficial "Hello!" posts to their name. I loath that and it makes me a little more distasteful about this place every time I see it occur.
Yes, quite. The standards for repping, like in college get more stringent as you progress, and take higher level courses; else Moo would have meaninglessly huge amounts of rep.
Rep newbies for the same reasons you'd rep a regular or VIP here.
That is what you and I both believe; they all get rep for the same reasons, and the same kind of reasons; just with different standards. If you prefer, think of it as holding everyone to the same standards, but newbies get 1 point, regs 1/2 point, VIP's 1/4 point for the same work. (see note at bottom)
That's the general IDEA of rep... It's kinda like college. You're smart and a good student, you get through. You're a creep, and do bad things, and are a bad student, you don't get through, you get held back untill you change. Sure, the filter doesn't catch everyone, but most of the bad students don't get a degree... Same with rep. You're a good member, you make good posts, do good things? You get good rep. You act creepy, make creepy posts, do bad things [or lately, disagree with other opinionated members]? You get neg rep.
No. Nope nope nope. No reward for being smart: rewards are for good work. I think you are confusing smart and ethical for a start, as you compare marks and rep. See, what defines creepy or good, for a member here? Pure subjectivity? This is why we have a rep system, because it is a reasonably objective way to measure subjective things. Otherwise I could be considered
act(ing) creepy, make creepy posts, do bad things [or lately, disagree with other opinionated members]
I get to pick my own God, so do you. See Mormon article of faith #11 above. Any sincere worship is good worship; sincere atheism is just as valid. Look, if your kinship with white foxes is God-instilled, or at least God-approved, then His messengers to you would be as white foxes.
Now here I must point out: that there is an ethical dimension to what constitutes a "good post" - that is to say while "ethically good" is neither here nor there, "Not ethically bad" is part of what constitutes a good post.
Example: a well-thought out, well-written post promoting capitalism or socialism may equally be called good; but a post exorting, encouraging, enabling or exacerbating BAD behaviour - such as hurting persons or sites or doing anything illegal - is considered a "bad post." from http://www.adisc.org/forum/announcements-news/697-rules.html
Valid reasons to give negative reputation:
1. Insulting, attacking, ridiculing other members of ADISC.
2. Spamming the forum with messages that are against the rules.
3. Disrupting serious discussions/threads with silly or spam messages.
4. Posting obvious lies. Please think carefully before doing this because not everything that seems unbelievable to you must be a lie. Sometimes, things which seem completely crazy are, actually, the truth! Some people lead lives that most of us wouldn't believe...
5. Causing drama by purposely posting offensive or controversial messages. Remember that everyone has the right to present their own opinion in a mature manner. Doing so is not a valid reason for neg rep!
Forum Content:
1. Do not promote self-destructive things, like self harm or drug use.
This includes discussing:
1. Unhealthy or dangerous methods used to 'go' in diapers.
2. Taking drugs, or self harm. If you are currently doing these things, and want to stop, consult a qualified medical professional. If you are doing them, and don't want to stop, then don't bring it up here. If you are not doing them, then don't start, because if you do, you will regret it eventually.
2. Do not promote illegal activities, like drugs, downloading copyrighted material, etc.
3. Do not post porn, or links to adult-only websites.
4. Do not spam the forum with useless or silly messages.
1. No random posts in serious topics or generally anywhere outside of the Thread Games/Fun forum.
2. No posts that consist of only meaningless pictures!
3. Do not post links to sites that contain malicious software, or content designed to shock or anger the viewer.
4. No "I'm Leaving!" threads.
No, you get to VIP if your posts deserve it; you only get credit for making those posts, I should say posting those posts.
We can and do reply to things with posts of our own creation, quoting others, simple emoticons, kitty macroes, or anything else; if I replied with nothing but others' quotes, but made their meaning my own by putting them in a context, ie following the post they are in reply to, I might get +repped for POSTING a good post, not CREATING a good post; "MAKING" a good post is generally taken to include both meanings; but clearly there is no requirement to create original content - the originality is in the USE of the content, which may or may not include its creation. The medium is the message.
see, note my use of the laughy emoticon: not original content but imbued with meaning by my contextualizing it. Anyone pick up on that? Now don't be shy, raise your hands...
Rep isn't a feel-good everyone's-a-winner system. It's there for a reason: to show how contributive you are to the community
Yes. Yup, yup, yup. I do not propose arbitrary handing out of rep. Nope, nope, nope. That would devalue it. But if there is a way that is easy to contribute to the community, why should it not be repped as much as the harder ways? The value of the contribution is the important thing: so what if everybody is a winner? Is that not a good, nay, great thing to achieve? I do not mean that everybody be simply be labelled a winner, but that everybody really BE a winner,by being given the opportunity and using it? Yes!! Let us have one way that is easy - even automatic - for everybody to do something good and worthwhile!!! High standards are NOT the same as difficulty!! You get as many marks on a multiple choice test for the easy question as the hard one!! (It must be thus because the question you find easy I may find hard and vice versa; the equal weight of the marks averages out the relative ease of the questions.)
I repeat: I propose repping NEWBIES - AS AND WHEN THEY GREET OTHER NEWBIES - with a cap on how many rep they may earn WHILE they are newbies: to encourage them to do so, but cap the reward for doing so, as to not devalue rep as a whole, including the rep people have already.
[or lately, how much you agree with others' opinions]
No, no, no. I can and do +rep people who make great posts disagreeing with me. Or great posts agreeing with me. This is for the greatness of the post not how strongly they agree or disagree with me. Note http://www.adisc.org/forum/announcements-news/697-rules.html
Positive reputation should be given only for especially good contributions to the site, irrespective of your own personal opinion on the matter discussed and of whether or not you consider the member a friend or an enemy
It's not a perfect filter, the rep system can still be cheated, but its' general purpose is to be both a positive and negative reinforcement learning system... You do good, you get rewarded. You do bad, you get punished.
Yes. As long as "doing good' is defined as making good contributions, per the quality of the post (which includes "not doing bad, in a moral or ethical sense": it is not the rightness of the post, the but the helpfulness, truth, hilarity, and detail of the information, and any other virtuous characteristic mentioned in http://www.adisc.org/forum/announcements-news/697-rules.html
If we start letting new guys rep each other up to VIP, you see a problem? Let's say seven to ten trolls/troublemakers sign up. They all act normal, make good posts, 'meet each other', and get repped up by people who want rep to be a hand-out system. Now, they wait a week or two, and rep eacher up all at once. Now, they're a VIP, boom. Now they can do anything a VIP can! Look at that! And we just handed them the status because they all 'met each other'. See the fallacy behind the idea? Not that it wasn't a good impulse thought, but you've gotta analyze it. Thanks for trying, but I'll pass. =)
And, I can attest to be relatively new. When I had +0, I didn't feel like i was ENTITLED to be handed rep, just to make me feel better/more adequate. I knew that I'd have to work my way up into the community, just like, say, Darkfinn, and H3g3l, and others with a shit-ton and a half of rep.
Entitled to be handed rep? No. Entitled to be given the opportunity to earn rep easily, for making the forum a better place: Yes. After you hit regular status, greeting newbies is no longer rep-worthy by itself. Then you earn rep any which way you can, within http://www.adisc.org/forum/announcements-news/697-rules.html - which btw I have elevated to the status of ADISC Scripture.
Nice irony. While H3g3l has been well and truly repped (properly and correctly and according to http://www.adisc.org/forum/announcements-news/697-rules.html and uncontroversially, Darkfinn has had many pos and neg rep: many of his rep were indeed controversial. And this was the cause for close examination of whether his rep were indeed for great posts or his particular opinions; whatever he has, has been thoroughly gone over by the staff, and I trust their judgement.
Did anyone hand THEM reputation, for example? No. They earned it. How did they do that? By proving themselves and proving that they are a positive and helpful member of the group,
as such but for their posts' actual positivity and their posts' helpfulness; not for proving that they are a helpful and positive person.
To make this fine point a bit clearer: If I made a post (call it "P", say a poorly written one, detailing which ways I had been helpful, witty, and so on, that is to say deserving of rep for my previous good posts, "P" itself would prove how helpful and positive I had been, but would not itself merit rep. :it would not DEMONSTRATE how helpful and positive I am. But take "Q" - a life-saving, time-saving, informative and witty post: "Q" would warrant rep because it DEMONSTRATES I was positive and helpful. (sorry, link to "Q" unavailable: the search function neither will locate one-letter objects, nor will it locate hypothetical posts. I will complain in admin stuff about the latter failing. (Let us call that admin forum post "R.") (Oh, oh, I hear that if creating new forums is onerous to programmers, then creating search functions for hypothetical posts is doubly onerous.)
How did they do that? By proving themselves and proving that they are a positive and helpful member of the group
by some other nebulous and undefined standard of being good. Making good posts is the ONLY standard; not some vague and wooly thing about how good a person you are; because the DEFINITION of a "good person" with respect to rep is - and only is - the quality of your posts, as defined by Moo in http://www.adisc.org/forum/announcements-news/697-rules.html
...and earning their way up. And did I feel that I should be handed points? No. That wouldn't be right, it's essentially 'sympathy points'. Obviously you gotta start somewhere, so instead of giving these 'sympathy points', as I feel,
What sympathy points?? At what point did I say people should get free rep? I did not. I said there should be a way to earn rep for doing genuine good that happened not to be difficult; you still have to do something to earn those points. And that something is: If you are a newbie, greet another newbie.
wouldn't it be better for them to start by helping out someone else, and getting reputation for their positive contributions?
No. Postcount does not corellate closely with repcount, other than upon registration, or prior. (Uh-oh, venturing now into metaphysics, as to what peoples' repcount/postcount was prior to registration.) Kaishen zoomed past 10 if memory serves me right within 2 weeks; Mysika/Nozomi has been around, here and TBDL, since way before my time there, and has 14 as of now, and
Rep is a matter of time and effort, not superiority. And, if they feel that since someone's been here 2 years and has +200 or something, that they're not as great, then they need to be considerate and understanding of the fact that reputation is earned through hard work and good deeds here
No, it is earned through making good posts. Now good posts are in themselves good deeds: or at least the act of posting them. Some posts may be considered to be clearly bad deeds: like advising people of the tallest building with easy roof access (and on their bus route) from which they may jump. (Though the jumper may consider the post a good deed and +rep it for being helpful, detailed and kind, before jumping.) http://www.adisc.org/forum/announcements-news/697-rules.html say
Do not promote self-destructive things, like self harm or drug use.
This includes discussing:
1. Unhealthy or dangerous methods used to 'go' in diapers.
2. Taking drugs, or self harm.
The rep system is full of integrity, and is not nearly abused as much as some make out. Notice they only ever complain about the unfair NEGATIVE rep THEY got, not what anybody else got? And hardly ever does anybody point out the POSITIVE rep they did not deserve? I know of only one, and that person shall remain nameless.
No to encouraging newbies to greet each other? Or to repping them for doing so?
So please, in detail, suggest your ideas on how to either make ADISC a tighter-knit community, or else feel like it is a tighter-knit community?
Oh. Right. The note. I said above that you may think of lax repping standards for the lower ranks being roughly equivalent to having the same standards for each rank (new, reg, VIP) but with successively lower amounts of rep per repping as you go up in rank: 1 point for newbies, 1/2 for regs, 1/4 for VIP's and so on. So if Moo were an infinite number of ranks above we mortals he would get infintesimal rep each time; his repcount does in fact go up non-trivially, though slowly: ergo Moo is a finite number of ranks above the rest of us. He is repped but only according to very very high standards indeed. So Moo is a finite God.
These rep threads are becoming ludicrous! I don't even know what's going on anymore.
I'm sorry Raccoon, but you're really ruining the good vibe I get from this site with persistent threads like this. Perhaps I should just avoid them in the future?
Was that a statement, or a question? [I'm serious, I don't get whether you were saying that's how it SHOULD happen, or whether you were asking if that's how it should be.]
Obviously it was a sarcastic question. People should not stumble around in the dark; they should know exactly how to garner rep points: by following http://www.adisc.org/forum/announcements-news/697-rules.html And my suggestion in this thread was that: in addition to the guidance Moo gave us for earning rep, that opportunities for newbies to EASILY earn A FEW +rep - not too many -before they make it to 'regular' - by being nice to other newbies - is to the forum's benefit.
See the fallacy behind the idea? You've gotta analyze it.
Thank-you very much for that quote: that is my very next sig quote when I tire of the present one. - any time I am blue I only have to see that quote and I will perk right up. You made a positive and helpful contribution right there Your +1 rep is in the mail. This quote is not only wholly on point as a statement, but in context, is hilarious.
These rep threads are becoming ludicrous! I don't even know what's going on anymore.
I'm sorry Raccoon, but you're really ruining the good vibe I get from this site with persistent threads like this. Perhaps I should just avoid them in the future?
Positive reputation should be given... for... posts which:
2. explain something in great detail and contain a lot of wisdom or valuable insights (even if you disagree with the points put forward)
4. are exceptionally funny
I think you mean the persistent discussion of the rep system in all its splendor. Which you might - please confirm or deny - confuse with complaining about that system: which I was not doing. I happen to enjoy the rep system and think it is very good; my idea in this thread was not to modify the rep system but to put it to good use. Those are quite different things.
Now if you would, please explain what it is that wrecks the vibe. If my post in any way broke the rules, you might neg-rep me - with a detailed explanation of why the post deserved neg rep. Which I shall not challenge: on the contrary, I shall frame it and admire it, and repost it (repeatedly)
If you would please be explicit about the nature of threads you wish not to read, I shall be happy to put an advisory at the top for you. And also anyone else making posts that wreck the vibe for you; my pleasure should not come at the expense of yours.
So that would be posts in any way shape or form to do with the rep system? Long posts? Philosophical posts? Preachy posts? Posts involving theology? Posts with jokes along the lines of
"I am not dragging Christianity into this... this is bigger than that?"
Or simply in situations where I have had things recklessly misattributed to me, and I have been generally misunderstood (Free rep: pffft) and set the record straight?
Frankly I come to ADISC to have fun. Which includes helping people and trying to improve the site, in this case by increasing its feeling like a tight-knit community, by having more people get to know more people, and sooner, specifically by encouraging newbies to be kind to other newbies, and earning a few rep in the process quickly and easily (but not without merit) thereby increasing THEIR fun. This is an anti-elitist use of the rep system.
I have said before that to evaluate how, if at all the rep system should function, and how if at all it can be improved, we must know what it is supposed to do; I believe I have described a way to have it fulfill its purpose: to incentivise good posting.
My fun also includes making posts of the nature of those I put in this thread. I am regretful (not sorry ) if my fun spoilt your fun. If we work together on this matter I am sure we can come up with ways not to diminish your fun.
Perhaps you could make a thread in administrative stuff detailing the nature of threads designed not to ruin your vibe; and I shall follow your admonishments to the letter or put in place the advisory already described. You have but to say the word.
I applaud effort, really! You're obviously trying to make this a friendly and hearty place. That's great! All this effort is amazing to read.
Unfortunately though, the rep system really shouldn't be taken this seriously. Reputation should be taken and given on a case by case, user-privileged basis. There shouldn't be guidelines and rules (besides the obvious ones) about it, repuation afterall is what the *community* thinks of you, am I right?
I applaud effort, really! You're obviously trying to make this a friendly and hearty place. That's great! All this effort is amazing to read.
Unfortunately though, the rep system really shouldn't be taken this seriously. Reputation should be taken and given on a case by case, user-privileged basis. There shouldn't be guidelines and rules (besides the obvious ones) about it, repuation afterall is what the *community* thinks of you, am I right?
Um, I take anything "seriously" if I care about it at all: it is in my nature. Yes, I am flippant and irreverent; but I care about this site very much, and feel compelled to address problems that crop up; and while the hysteria went away (as Moo said it would) people still complain about the site not feeling close-knit, the way it used to, and the way they would prefer. So I think it important to consider why that is and what might be done about it; I am not one to fiddle while Rome smoulders.
There seems to be an air of assuming I was making yet another thread complaining about the rep system: not true. Or that I was suggesting ways to modify the system: also not true. I suggested a way to use the system - as it stands - to encourage a desirable behaviour: newbies greeting each other.
Um, excuse me.
There shouldn't be guidelines and rules (besides the obvious ones) about it, reputation afterall is what the *community* thinks of you, am I right?
That would depend on what the "obvious ones" were. But without guidelines and rules rep as number would be meaningless. Reputation is an indication of what the community thinks about the quality of your posts: not quite the same thing as what they think of you. You might be the funniest asshole and prick around: and highly-rpped; or a weak poster but a great guy.
I have heard people put down things I never actually said; and I discussed each one, point by point. And nobody had anything negative to say about what I had actually proposed, but lots to say over what they thought I meant. So here is the summary:
1. The existence of the rep system is to encourage the volume and standard of good posts,and acknowledge the OP; it is not to reward people, though that is a happy side effect.
2. The more we get to know each other, including people who might otherwise be ignored, the better; so using rerp to incentivise this is good.
3. Newbies have a hard time of it: not knowing any one, or not being sure how to act out of fear of dong something wrong; I offer a way they can feel more confidant and happier about jumping in about posting
i agree with lukie and mm3. you care about all of this way too much, raccoon. you could help the site a lot more by just being a kind, helpful person than by trying to create new forums, new policies, new alterations of the forum software, and new threads to discuss the rep system.
you've got a huge amount of enthusiasm for ADISC -- almost a scary amount of enthusiasm. that's great, i guess, but it would probably be best to concentrate that enthusiasm on participating in the community and enjoying it. it's cool that you want to help solve problems, and i'm sure it would be fun to get the credit for some new innovation, but your schemes for the forum are getting wilder and more breathlessly complex with each new thread. chill out, my friend!
I'm not going to rep anyone for making an average post or for following the rules.
I give out positive rep to people who make me laugh... to people that make a good, honest, and valid point with their posts... to people who say what needs to be said, whether it was right, wrong, or otherwise.
I give negative rep for personal attacks, spam, pedo/perv-ish behavior, or other general lameness (OMG the Invisible Army is out to get me! etc.).
That's pretty easy... and relatively straight forward. I'd say we could all operate that way and be doing fine.
[font="Calibri,Arial"]To me it's sounding like a point against blanket rules like "User with <5 rep greets newbie, User gets rep". Which is a good point, as we don't want any free rep for any user to get the deeker-ites to VIP. (Which it is if there's a defined rule on how to get it)[/font]
Yes. Yup, yup, yup. I do not propose arbitrary handing out of rep. Nope, nope, nope. That would devalue it. But if there is a way that is easy to contribute to the community, why should it not be repped as much as the harder ways? The value of the contribution is the important thing: so what if everybody is a winner? Is that not a good, nay, great thing to achieve? I do not mean that everybody be simply be labelled a winner, but that everybody really BE a winner,by being given the opportunity and using it? Yes!! Let us have one way that is easy - even automatic - for everybody to do something good and worthwhile!!! High standards are NOT the same as difficulty!! You get as many marks on a multiple choice test for the easy question as the hard one!! (It must be thus because the question you find easy I may find hard and vice versa; the equal weight of the marks averages out the relative ease of the questions.)
It's like saying, "Going to an online community college and skidding your ass all the way through, barely making it, should obtain the same weight as going to Harvard and finishing with a 3.9.", in my opinion. And, that's why there are +1 an +2 options. You do a good job, you get +1. You do an even more awesome job, +2! But, I don't believe that if you appear to be doing a half-ass job, you still should get rep. I mean, if you REALLLY tried, but it's not as cool or as 'good', absolutely, as +100000 rep member's post is, I am not saying you don't deserve rep. I believe that it should work both on absolute and relative axes, such as, "If you tried your best, and did an exceptional job for you personally, even if it's not the greatest, you deserve rep.", but also include the stipulation, "But if it is not helpful, rep should be more carefully considered, or neutral rep given with advice as to how to better oneself and make a helpful post next time.". It all depends on the effort given.
I will give you one point you made, it does indeed, not matter if you are smart, but it matters whether you are hard-working, and put in a lot of effort. You are very correct there, and I was wrong in what I had said. Good catch.
I repeat: I propose repping NEWBIES - AS AND WHEN THEY GREET OTHER NEWBIES - with a cap on how many rep they may earn WHILE they are newbies: to encourage them to do so, but cap the reward for doing so, as to not devalue rep as a whole, including the rep people have already.
Entitled to be handed rep? No. Entitled to be given the opportunity to earn rep easily, for making the forum a better place: Yes. After you hit regular status, greeting newbies is no longer rep-worthy by itself. Then you earn rep any which way you can, within http://www.adisc.org/forum/announcements-news/697-rules.html - which btw I have elevated to the status of ADISC Scripture.
I propose a compromise here. We give newbies these "meeting points", with a cap of +2. But, we move the VIP status requirement up two. Or, if you really want to drive a hard compromise, +1. Sound good? It allows newbies to have a bit of rep, while not getting the start of a "free ride" to VIP. It sounds like the best of both worlds.
What sympathy points?? At what point did I say people should get free rep? I did not. I said there should be a way to earn rep for doing genuine good that happened not to be difficult; you still have to do something to earn those points. And that something is: If you are a newbie, greet another newbie.
If it's giving out points for something anyone can fake, I consider it 'free rep/sympathy points'. I could theoretically walk up to some guy and say, "Hi, I'm adaffme, nice to meet you!", but then agan, ANYONE can. Not that your idea is all bad, I kinda like it. It's okay, with your further ideas on it, and I think this is an interesting topic. I just feel that easing a standard in order for someone to reach that standard is in a way handing them the achievement.
Who has that many? Was that rhetorical? Is this question rhetorical?
Yeah, nobody REALLY has that many... It's just an example.
The rep system is full of integrity, and is not nearly abused as much as some make out. Notice they only ever complain about the unfair NEGATIVE rep THEY got, not what anybody else got? And hardly ever does anybody point out the POSITIVE rep they did not deserve? I know of only one, and that person shall remain nameless.
I would like to point out that, I have in recent posts, pointed out neg-rep others have taken that they did not deserve. I have also pointed out other +rep points I have gotten for wrong reasons in the same post. As in, ALL rep given for the wrong reason is bad. I have also brought it to light when appealing neg-rep. But, you did have a good thought here.
So if Moo were an infinite number of ranks above we mortals he would get infintesimal rep each time; his repcount does in fact go up non-trivially, though slowly: ergo Moo is a finite number of ranks above the rest of us. He is repped but only according to very very high standards indeed. So Moo is a finite God.
In conclusion, I would like to say this. You, sir, have won me over. I went from thoroughly opposing your idea, when I first read about it, to actually finding some of the suggestions of your idea to be quite good. You have used logic and words in a way I have seen very few around here do, and you have put up a rock-solid convincing argument. I respect your conviction to this idea, and it truly is quite a good idea. Through your logic and rationality, and mature handling of disagreement, you have shown me quite a bit of good in your idea.
I believe your arguments are most worthy of a great deal of praise. You have handled this in a manner that other ADISC members should strive to achieve, and in a way that should be a role model to us all. You had good, strong reasons and logic, and you explained your ideas quite well. You had very convincing reasons why your idea was good. You were quite the intellectual in this debate, and while I still do not fully agree with your idea, I am much more for it than when I first read this. Good job, fine sir, and enjoy your extremely deserved +rep. May you be an example to us all, and continue to conduct yourself in such an amazing way.
Thank you for bringing to me one of the greatest and most intellectual debates I have seen in a long time. It restores some of my lost hope for ADISC as a whole.
Edit: I cannot give you reputation again so soon, apparently. Well, please accept these truthful words of kindness as a token of my appreciation. I am sorry I cannot give you the proper reward for such a truly awe-inspiring post and thoughts. But, then again, +1 still would not be a fitting reward for something of this nature. I think there is a chance I would give you the first +5 ever given for this, if I could.
[font="Calibri,Arial"]To me it's sounding like a point against blanket rules like "User with <5 rep greets newbie, User gets rep". Which is a good point, as we don't want any free rep for any user to get the deeker-ites to VIP. (Which it is if there's a defined rule on how to get it)[/font]
I suggested that greeting a newbie gets repped for greeting another newbie IF AND ONLY IF he is also a newbie; when he greets the other newbie, his rep goes up, but only to a set maximum: 1. to a maximum predefined cap, and 2. this ends once he gets to regular status, which under this idea he will get to faster. Please read what I actually said before expressing opinions on it. Then feel free - no - feel urged - to criticize the idea ON ITS OWN MERITS.
I'm not going to rep anyone for making an average post or for following the rules.
I give out positive rep to people who make me laugh... to people that make a good, honest, and valid point with their posts... to people who say what needs to be said, whether it was right, wrong, or otherwise.
I give negative rep for personal attacks, spam, pedo/perv-ish behavior, or other general lameness (OMG the Invisible Army is out to get me! etc.).
That's pretty easy... and relatively straight forward. I'd say we could all operate that way and be doing fine.
: it is basically a restatement of http://www.adisc.org/forum/announcements-news/697-rules.html - basically rep people for being funny, truthful and informative, and without being down on any specific opinion; and Darkfinn's reasons to give negrep also accord with what Moo wrote. Darkfinn said it well and said it short.
Please read them carefully: they were carefully written; in particular please note Moo said +rep is not just for slightly or averagely nice, helpful, funny etc. posts - it is for ones which are or have:
1. GREAT kindness
2. GREAT detail and contain A LOT OF wisdom or VALUABLE insights
3. VERY helpful [content]
4. EXCEPTIONALLY funny
I think that nonsense about being down on people "rep-chasing" and non-repping for doing so is destructive to the site. A great post is a great post period: whether it was made because my voices told me to, I wished to explain a point of confusion to a newbie, I wished to promote an under-noticed and under-appreciated post by another member (like http://www.adisc.org/forum/teenbaby/13660-create-your-own-pacifier.html) or I know who gives rep and for what, and I am gaming them.
Let me ask you this: if you get a sense a post is made "just to get rep" - how can you tell? Is there a consistent way to tell? If so what is it? What if I make a great post, for its own sake: for some specific purpose, like archiving a rp-story by retelling it in verse, or to make people laugh - knowing it is likely to get +repped - is that rep-chasing? If there are criteria to say a post is rep-chasing, even though it fits in with the rules, Moo's rules, and these are purely subjective, how is a newbie (or anybody) supposed to make rep-worthy but non-rep-chasing posts? This arbitrariness undercuts the rep system, and the arbitrariness of that system, the inconsistency, is behind so many peoples complaints. I like solving complaints, more than simply banishing or ignoring them. An incisive complaint: highlighting an issue and suggesting a solution - under my interpretation of http://www.adisc.org/forum/announcements-news/697-rules.html - is rep-worthy. Which would include analysis of rep-chasing. (Here: a paradox. I do not think pointing out my post's rep-worthiness should garner it rep; I shall refuse any so given; it is a form of liar's paradox. It would be one valid example of true rep-chasing, and so would not be rep-worthy.)
If the simple-minded people (like this raccoon) go ONLY by http://www.adisc.org/forum/announcements-news/697-rules.html and are not wise in the ways of deciding how a great post - made according to the rules - is nonetheless without rep-worthiness because it was rep-chasing, does that not accord special power and privilege to those who are wise in the ways of other peoples' rep-chasing - by their own estimation - and impose that judgement by their own arbitrary and mysterious methods? Are they then not a self-appointed bunch of elitists, who see beyond http://www.adisc.org/forum/announcements-news/697-rules.html and into a poster's intent?
If simple-minded raccoons are uninitiated into the repping criteria that exceed http://www.adisc.org/forum/announcements-news/697-rules.html then how is a newbie to be encouraged to make better posts according to those and our other rules, like good grammar and spelling? Without universal, fair and clear rules of conduct, the site is not egalitarian, and not fair to newbies or raccoons. We have those fair and clear and universal rules; Moo said so and listed them. So how come the wiki says
be your own person, give your own opinion (with justification, if possible) and truly mean what you say. This kind of behavior is well-accepted and respected.
Adding to that, some users make it very clear that they simply post in a particular way in order to gain rep. Do not worry about receiving reputation as, more than likely, if you are a good member, positive reputation will come in due time. No one looks down upon you for having a lower rep, so don't go out of your way to post purely for the purpose of gaining rep. More often than you probably think, users can differentiate between a "rep" post (or even a post simply made to boost your post count) and a "genuine" post. If you post what you truly mean and believe in, then you will be noticed as an individual, rather than "just another user".
, with one example - just one, though more is better - to show we muddled raccoons and the new members or lurkers the difference, when you say, Please follow the rules, do everything you can to GENUINELY earn rep, but do not post JUST to earn rep. Please.
With the caveat that if you know you will be repped for disproving the point this Raccoon is making, do not let that stop you.
Do any of you mods who review rep EVER take them away because while they were great posts and fit the rules, they were merely rep-chasing?
i agree with lukie and mm3. you care about all of this way too much, raccoon. you could help the site a lot more by just being a kind, helpful person than by trying to create new forums, new policies, new alterations of the forum software, and new threads to discuss the rep system.
you've got a huge amount of enthusiasm for ADISC -- almost a scary amount of enthusiasm. that's great, i guess, but it would probably be best to concentrate that enthusiasm on participating in the community and enjoying it. it's cool that you want to help solve problems, and i'm sure it would be fun to get the credit for some new innovation, but your schemes for the forum are getting wilder and more breathlessly complex with each new thread. chill out, my friend!
First, yes, I am an obsessive: and a tad hypomanic = hypermotivated of late. You are correct about everything you said about my personality, and to be applauded for saying it like it is: not saying these personality traits are bad in and of themselves, but excess can lead to problems, whether disinterest or obsession. I have known both.
That said, as to: i agree with lukie and mm3. you care about all of this way too much, raccoon.
Please define how much I should care about things less and which things. No really, please do list them specifically in terms of topic, character count, time, number of posts, post length and so on; or descriptively. With reasons and explanations; I am omnivorous but without enough reasons and explanations in my diet I get nutrient deficiency disorders, similar to scurvey, and rickets. And then I get grumpy and it upsets my digestion, and my blood pressure.
I do not devote time and effort to ADISC that interferes with other parts of life; au contraire, I am charging through all aspects of my life with equal fervour and success, of late.
but it would probably be best to concentrate that enthusiasm on participating in the community and enjoying it
Lots to say on this. I think you mean by it (please respond in the affirmative or negative with some examples and discussion) that the participation and enjoyment be more heavily weighted to "lighter" things: chatty posts in chatty threads. more quips and fewer elaborate jokes about complex and obscure things like the finiteness of Moo, theology jokes, or math jokes: stuff that is easier to get, funnier to a bigger audience, and does not require a long set-up for the punchline: like "I said I would not drag Christianity into this; I said nothing about the Bible." Do you mean I should make more funny macros like Kraiden used to, while still obeying
No posts that consist of only meaningless pictures!
If so then I am at a loss. I make jokes according to my sense of humor; I laugh at my own jokes; In chat I joke and like it when others laugh at some of my material. Clearly at least some people have a similar sense of humor at least some of the time. We have serious places to write serious things; is there some way to say if a person spends too much time in these places, makes too many or too big a proportion of the posts there, or ones that are too lengthy? Please do tell.
Is there some way I do not participate in the community? I do not blog, amend the wiki, upload many pix to the gallery, or post (much) in babyfur, computer, or thread games, it is true. Are you saying that is what I should do? No, of course not; I can quote mods who stated explicitly they ignore some forums and which ones; I am following their example. I have posted exactly no photos of my face or crotch to the gallery; yet many do. Is this now part of "participating?" - the kind you think I should do more of - jump on the bandwagon?
The wiki says
However, no one likes a copy-cat and individualism is greatly encouraged when posting on the forum. Don't be afraid to show some personality and don't feel disheartened if someone doesn't take to you too well. After all, if someone doesn't like something, then there's no way to forcibly change their opinion.
And I agree with it.
Onto enjoying the site... I do. I would not spend time and effort here if I did not. And because I enjoy the site I care deeply about it. So, yes, I post what I see are helpful ideas: either because my idea should be implemented or tried, or because in proving me wrong another person will prove their idea better, or because just discussing ideas might inspire those of us lucky enough to have a muse
to come up with a great idea out of left field.
It happens I also happen to enjoy writing essays, and what I deem funny things; I enjoy writing filk and other kinds of poetry; I enjoy actually helping a person or making them happy in rl, whether I mail them a diaper, buy them a drink, do their taxes, or my relationship advice helps. If I can aid or comfort those in real distress by saying something more constructive than "suck it up, buttercup" or "get over it" or "banned: go away and when you are allowed to come back, complain no more, about being suicidal (okay I agree with that) or the rep system or the sudden sea of new and clueless faces, or the elitist and arrogant VIP's or the failures of the admin, or the cancer eating ADISC - I will.
I aspire to be more like certain people, though seem stuck with obeying my own nature. These people include Avery, Peachy, H3g3l, Trevor... because they think very fast, write well and without hours of rereading and re-editing, manage to say a lot in a short space, say intelligent things, and yet are easy to understand by most. They spread themselves around, interacting with many, often briefly and cursorily, yet making those moments count; as did Ayanna and Kraiden, and very much, (to me) Mysi. These are the things for which they are role-models to me. Being human, they have other virtues too, each of them - and some have their features I would not emulate if I could. All of them have certain gifts not among my own. Avery's enjoyment of his solitude. Peachy's love of public transport, and knowledge of it. H3g3l's knack of never being offensive. Trevor's unwavering consistency, fair-mindedness, and lack of hesitation to use his powers.
I think though that this is all kind of moot, though correct and worth saying for the reason following. I do not think you really suppose I do not participate or have fun. Your statement implied I could participate more or I could have more fun. I am having fun and participating as we speak. The above discussion of in what manner I do those things was for not so much your benefit, Avery, as for the people who might accept your implication I do not have fun or participate.
So I am led to wonder what you really did mean or better what meaning was carried in your statement:
but it would probably be best to concentrate that enthusiasm on participating in the community and enjoying it
I can only imagine that you see me as having less fun than I could - no - ought to - because you would not enjoy my sort of interaction, posts, and so on, and imagine therefore I could not be enjoying myself. You appear to suppose that having fun in Avery-ways is more fun period, and would improve the site if I acted accordingly, basically assuming I would be happier being more Avery-like, and the site would be a better place if I were more Avery-like; that being Avery-like is the best way for one to be, for their sake and for the sake of everyone else.
Yes there are certain ways - described above - I would like to ACT more like that bunch of my appointed role-models; but neither can I nor do I wish to give up my ways of being me: enjoying what I enjoy, laughing at what tickles me (certain wolfine people... certain lapine people...,) jumping in feet-first without looking first, sometimes treading on peoples' toes in the process, going where angels fear to tread, and pouncing the mineral rights in those places; I would not give up my mixed-metaphors boiling on my stove for your straight talk, and I would be aghast if you gave up yours for mine. Happily there is no sign of either occurring.
you could help the site a lot more by just being a kind, helpful person
Okay. In what ways? Please list. Also please list where I am unkind or unhelpful; and I shall try to do likewise for you, though I think you have me at a disadvantage. We - after all - can only do according to our abilities, and according to what we perceive as peoples' or the sites' needs.
I think the site either needs to BE a tighter-knit community, or be THOUGHT to be one; therefore I see a need to have a policy of ENCOURAGING newbies to greet one another (NOT THE SAME as a policy or rule that they MUST greet one another.) People still complain about the tight-knittedness issue: their complaints are valid whether it is an issue of perception or a true apperception of the site's nature. So it is an issue worth looking at.
Remember: if it is an issue, then people are unhappy about it and the lowered morale is in itself an issue: it both makes the site less fun to be on, and makes people a bit unhappier in their own lives, and increases the likelihood of their leaving, or participating less.
If it is an issue then looking at solutions is in everyone's best interest
And my solutions may not be workable or the right ones, but there is a shortage of other suggestions from other people: and that is an issue; if any body jumps up and yells: THIS is the solution to the feel of the community problem" - and if they are right - then I have done my job.
,
Of course I would. But that is not a pressing concern: the idea wants to grow and flourish; whoever takes the credit is less of an issue, a trivial one. Contributing to the site's good functioning and well-being is my goal.
Moo, especially a while back when he could be more experimental, when he had more time and the site was less unweildy, tried some of my ideas; many failed; one or two stuck. I will not list any of those: the site got better - both for the good ideas, and for the bad ones, which were tried and crossed off the list of possibilities to try, leaving a remainder of few things to try: and bringing the site closer to optimal, if not ideal.
but your schemes for the forum are getting wilder and more breathlessly complex with each new thread. chill out, my friend
Now I understand what rep *is* but what does it *do* Some people in have been referring VIP status in the thread? I thought that those status things (lurker, newbie, regular, vip) were based on post count, are they somehow attached to rep? If so, what's the difference between them if not post count /log in etc? Is there some thing more to them then just showing who are active members of the community?
I would like to take this moment to point you to the "Search" button. Type in "Rep VIP Status" and such... You can do it! It'll be fun. But seriously, if you're not sure about the background of soemthing like this, either search and learn it, or, if you are ABSOLUTELY positive you can't find ANYTHING, start a new thread...
