I'm just going to point something out...

5 and 6 are two of the more important ones if you want new users.

I'm half with you on 5 (regarding new posters), but the Red Room is always going to primarily be a free speach board. As for 6, maybe some day, but you have to consider that the owners like Wordforge because it is what it is. I'm not interested in paying to keep open a playground if I can't play there with the rest of the group.

Well, that's up to you guys...but staff not having a standard of conduct will be the single biggest turnoff for new posters, far more than other regular posters acting up.

It's also why I knew the real changes needed to grow this place would not be accepted.

That's the conclusion you draw from me saying that I liked more than half of your suggestions? Can't please everybody I suppose.

Why would raw numbers matter at all?

Some are obviously more important than others.

Archangel you seem to have lots of criticisms of the board, but few suggestions on what you actually want Wordforge to be.

I pointed out some things you are going to have to change if you want more users. You can listen to them or ignore them. It's not about what I want the board to be.

I actually like these, it allows the members to see how situations are handled and then it also allows the members to respond or question the actions of the staff. And of course there's the why was that reported as entertainment. The whole thing with the Southpark thread was amusing.

Not everyone can be online all the time, people have different schedules and they also have lives. They cannot be always be on "duty", having a larger staff lets other mods/admins to take a break. I'm a mod and newly added admin on another board, a few years back when I was mod I had more time especially late at night when I could be online.

I really haven't seen this, the staff should be allowed to post as regulars as long as they don't abuse the privilege.

Same as above, but I do agree with this.

The Red Room has always been a free for all, to an extent. No personal info from the Blue Room, if you're careless like Dayton then you reap what you sow, and a non-no is involving family of the member unless the member brings it up but even them courtesy is expected. Perhaps not allowing new members to post in the Red Room until they have made 50 posts, but allowing them to view how the Red Room is could be a viable alternative. They can get a feel for it without being involved in it.

See 3 and 4.

Members have made friends on here, they're going to stick together, like Dayton and Poodle, or myself, El Chup, Faceman and a couple others on certain subjects or other members.

This would be constructive criticism, and since several are new they of course will take it personally to start. After getting their feet wet they would hopefully be able to separate constructive feedback/criticism from their WF persona.

As a long time member and not an admin:

1) Shelter stuff can be hilarious

2) This isn't a job; with a bunch of people at least someone will look at that stuff from time to time.

3) Agreed

4) One of the policies should be; we reserve judgement on whether a post fits a policy. In a community there will be motherfuckers who just try to stir the pot; as well as decent yet ignorant people who didn't realize there was a line (or what the hell the line meant)

5) No. You post in the Red Room without being able to handle it; you're a chump and deserve it. That is what the RR is you cat fucker.

6) Outside the RR sure; perhaps you can find a way to disable Mod tags (or any special tags) in the RR and highlight that? Perhaps RR mods should be people that have level heads and don't harass and flame others just as a matter of course.

7) People form cliques; how on earth do you expect a benefit to come from this? You'll drive some members off, have less members join, and cliques will still reform anyway. This is stupid and ill-thought out.

8) They seem to be acting reasonable in this thread...

I do, actually. Its one of the things that I've always liked about this place. Other boards I've been on don't have it, and when a controversial rule change is rolled out, it would be nice to be able to see the posts in the mods only forums discussing the matter, because folks have a hard time believing that the reasons for adopting the rule change could be as brain dead as they sound.

Even with various add-ons to block them, spammers still manage to get through to the registration process in large numbers. As the software to block them gets better, the spammers get more sophisticated (some might call it an "arms race" or "evolution"). I moderated one board where we frequently had accounts that would sit dormant for a year or more after they were originally created, and then suddenly spring to life and start spamming the board (no posts prior to the spam, so its not a case of a poster having their account hijacked because they opened an email with a virus in it). And not every one here on staff has the ability to go through and approve accounts. I don't. I can make changes to threads in Tech Forge and The Help Desk, that's it.

The only boards I've been on that have said the staff can't flame, harass, or insult posters have been ones where no one else is allowed to do that either. I don't have a problem with holding the staff to a higher standard, that's as it should be, I think.

Every message board I've been on, has this accusation of "cliques" thrown about, I've always found it somewhat amusing, especially when I'm counted as being a member of a clique, since I almost never interact with people I know from message boards outside of the public forums of the board. I don't know for certain, but I imagine its the same way for many of the other people accused of being in a clique.

FWIW, I think that Anc and I had exchanged maybe 4 PMs since I joined the boards before he sent me the one asking if I'd be a mod in Tech Forge. I accepted, even though news of the board changing hands was a surprise to me, because I like message boards. I know that Facebook is growing in popularity, but if it weren't for message boards, I wouldn't know so many folks from outside the US, as the Facebook groups I participate in tend to have a very low activity level and are dominated by Americans. Thanks to message boards, I interact with people from all parts of the world, and I love it.

Personally, I haven't seen a big change in this place since it changed hands. There's still people getting butthurt over stupid shit and cries that the board is dying, which is no different than any number of other boards. It takes time for change to happen in a place like this. You've got longtime posters who object to something simply because they've had years of dealing with folks here and they're disinclined to agree with anything that some people say, and even if they're willing to turn over a new leaf, they can't do it overnight.

I don't know if this will change your mind about any of this, but at least one of the new owners and a couple of the new mods are people who were on my "ignore" list. The fact that I can no longer easily avoid the dreck they spew out isn't enough to make me want to leave this place, though it does change how I read and react to threads.

Reasonable? Was that before or after one of the owners called me a "faggot" and said he should ban me?

Like I said, I knew none of my suggestions (with substance) would even be considered.

People say they want more posters...but no one wants to change anything to make it happen. Just advertising on other forums and trying to drag other people here has not been effective so far, and that;s not going to change.

If the owners just want to cater to current posters that's their call, but they can stop paying lip service to trying to get more members.

1) ture enough, but that was because of the DNR policy-the juicy stuff never saw daylight, at least for a while.

2) more hands make light work... at least there won't be a three day waiting period.

3) there isn't one? other than the rule cited in 4, which became kind of irrelevant since the troublemakers have had their keys taken away.

4) see above

5) Red room is red room for a reason, go back to big blue if you don't like it.

6) Yes, but only in the execution of their duties. So long as they're objective, which wasn't so much lacking in a few of the last group, but had certainly diminished.

7) Staff cliques? Easy, don't put a "clique" on staff. If you wanna avoid one, I suppose that'll mean a little more frequent rotations.

8) see 3 and 4. dealt with for now until it evolves differently

Sometimes you have to call a spade a spade, and sometimes you have to ban Packard. It's the red room you faggot, quit acting like such a little bitch.

This is an interesting idea. TNZ had this back in the day.

and it was annoying as shit...
people can lurk and choose whether they want to post.

As some of you know, I work for an organization where all of the employees except me are college students, and where we regularly rotate new students into executive-type leadership positions. One of the things I tell people who are newly appointed to the top position is that "you are no longer allowed to have a bad day."

Then, of course, I tell them that "you are no longer allowed to have a bad day" is a gross oversimplification ... but that it contains a good principle. Essentially: You are still human. You can still banter, you can still be friends with the people you work with, you can still have feelings, and you can still show them. But you also have to be constantly aware that because you are in a position of power over everyone else, there are some different standards that attach to you.

Obviously this isn't a workplace, but there are a few lines that should be drawn.

Trolling and flaming in the Red Room? Absolutely OK, as long as it's close enough to Wordforge's generally accepted community standards that it doesn't annoy everybody. However, anyone posting in the Help Desk should be treated with respect, and joking about the misuse of administrative powers is pretty dicey ... for the simple reason that when you actually have the power to do it, it's less funny and puts people on edge.

I squeeked into TNZ before they made that rule and had well over 50 posts by the time it was in place.

Fuck, if I had to post 50 times in a god-damned Star Trek board to talk politics I'd have just played more EQ instead.

That won't help. Anybody stumbling onto WF somehow found it in a google search and if they want to go through the trouble to sign up to post then are told sorry, you need to post 50 other times before you can speak on the topic that brought you here in the first place is just going to move on.

Tell me about it.

TNZ was clearly the cool board, where I could swear and everything, and be myself, but I had to be a good little boy in the ENT forum under their constipated rules until I could be let in.

Try saying 50 things about just "Broken Bow", and not snap at someone.
It's REALLY fucking hard, and REALLY fucking tedious.

I know I've mentioned this before, but the board I'm a mod/admin on uses staff only accounts. They can be named Admin-1, Admin-2, Mod-1, Mod-2 or even after characters from a TV show, movie, etc. hell name them after Marvel Superheroes if you want. So for example @John can be Tony Stark for a rotation or Tony Stark and then have one that can be used by any staff member like "Hulk" and member can use to hand out warnings. The idea is that only the staff knows who is who, and that can be discussed or assigned by he admins and owners. That way the staff members can post under their staff accounts, while being able to distance themselves by using their personal accounts when posting as a member. This also would help to keep anonymity between staff/member accounts.

But transparency - with this board OMFG would there be conspiracy theories about who was doing what with the "Kirk" account.

It doesn't have to be 50, it can be 20. @John advised his member from Starscape to avoid posting in the Red Room until they checked it out first.

Jesus... They really have made everyone a mod, haven't they?

I always thought that was an anti-spam/anti-dual policy. Either way, I don't think we need it, especially when it would block a new member from commenting on 90% of the content.

This is why you fail.

The board I'm an admin/mod on has that, but it's not a huge issue. Every once in a while it comes up and the members are given a friendly warning that while they can discuss any thread that begins to accuse members of being on staff is closed. It's really not an issue there.

Of course, the moderator using the KIRK account would have to be barred from using commas correctly.

What's the point of getting more users if you have to change what the place is?

You used the bar analogy, but that doesn't work here because Wordforge isn't being run to make money, it exists solely because there was a big group of members from another board who wanted to continue talking to each other and weren't happy with TNZ's restrictions on that.

Archangel's kind of a Crybaby.