http://wordforge.net/index.php?threads/suggestion-get-rid-of-some-forums.108848/ @gul is about nine months late.
Yeah, well, we don't listen to Canadians. Also, yours was hardly the first time the suggestion has cone up, nor will Dinner's be the last.
As much as I make fun of mobile users for having to squint their eyes and fumble around websites handicapped by such a garbage platform. I'd label this as a rather important bug from a usability standpoint. From a primarily lurker perspective. Activity is low enough that The Workshop and Camp Wordforge can be merged into a single creative/hobby board. Techforge can be left separate since it has it's own subject niche and is sort of a memorial to Techman. Media Central and Press Start can be merged into a general media board. TK Sanctuary has served out it's purpose and can be folded into The Red Room. I'm assuming Starscape lounge has as well. It doesn't appear to be particularly active, but I'm not all that familiar with the story on that one. Introduce Yourself can go. It's better to have new members jump right into discussions rather than get their toes wet with an ignored thread in a board that regular members don't give a shit about. I like tafkats idea of bringing back the Gold Room. It could pair nicely with the hobby board I suggested above. Also kill The Violet Room. That idea should have suffered a meathook abortion during the Eliteforge politburo session. Lastly keep the colour names for the boards since it's a WF tradition. Forums could be expanded again of course if activity picks back up. But I suspect we'll see the typical post election/winter lull instead.
All excellent suggestions. Now will the mods execute or will John keep crying about how he needs an exile subforum to punish his enemies?
Why would the mods automatically "execute" suggestions made by a poster in a Help Desk thread? Who the hell do you think you are? We don't do your bitch work, sweetie.
Heaven forbid the vote forum members took should be carried out. Also, I and many others have already explained why having lots of dead subforums is bad for the board. You, as always, will keep pushing your personal revenge plans rather than doing what is good for the board.
So if we held a vote to ban you and the majority voted to ban you, would you push the staff to act on that?
Who said the vote results would mean the Violet Room would be removed? You realize @El Chup started that poll, right? It wasn't endorsed by any Admin as being official in any way. Not that it should need to be said, but I'll say it anyway, this isn't a democracy, and it has never been a democracy. The four people who own this board decide what is done to it, and then I carry it out in whatever way it needs to be done. If you don't like it, talk to them. Expecting them to honor an unofficial, impromptu poll that wasn't even remotely unanimous, though, that's just arrogant presumption on your part.
Um, this is meant to be a discussion, one that may or may not produce changes, and almost certainly will not result in every change requested. And that has nothing to do with whether the request is made in a pleasant manner or in a dick manner. We aren't going to just do everything regardless. There are some conflicting ideas that have been expressed, so no, we won't simply do the ones that you happen to demand.
I'm still trying to figure out how he manages to post so much here, on this obscure internet BBS, when he's got a million better things to do!
It may not have been an "official" poll, and saying "it's not a democracy" might be factually true - but it's just plain arrogance to ignore the thoughts of a significant majority of members (65%). Why? Because without members the board dies, and I find it curious that in that very thread you were babbling about unrealistic plans to attract new members, and yet the cost of that seems to be existing members with an attitude that amounts to "fuck 'em, they'll keep coming back anyway". Pretty poor attitude to have IMO.
Like I said, poor ownership is largely responsible for the board's decline. They are not interested in much of anything other than pursuing petty vendettas.
You both seem to think the best step is to respond to the demands of the people who make the most noise. Yeah, that's pretty much never a good idea.
The more than twenty people who voted anonymously were the people that "make the most noise"? Idiotic nonsense. You've come up with an idea that more people dislike than like - but your answer is nobody should say anything about any choices you make just because you think we should all be grateful to post here. Terrible attitude. The WF community is more than whoever happens to be owner at the time. It's the community that kept this forum alive long enough for you to become an owner of it in the first place. Now you want to stick your fingers up at those people. Very sad.
People should say what they think. That doesn't mean we are compelled to act. I'm not sure why you think it would work that way.
I think your usual pride driven stubbornness means you're deliberately choosing not to acknowledge the point of what I am saying (again). I do not think you are obtuse to the point of not grasping my argument.
Your point seems to be "we don't like this, change it back." The owners are under no obligation to listen to you. Plus, you seem to forget 1/3 of the total number of voters were in favor of the Violet Room. There was also no threshold of votes set, no window in which to vote, so the poll could have lasted anywhere from a day to a year for you to get the numbers you wanted, and no oversight. You don't want the Violet Room, he gets it. That doesn't mean you have the right to demand it be removed and have that demand heeded for any reason whatsoever.
This isn't the Violet Room thread, so I'm not going to address this too much here, but nobody has been able to articulate an argument that the room causes harm. There are at least two decent arguments in favor of it, though: no Google indexing; less spam in the Red Room.
No, that isn't my argument. My argument is that that the majority of regular members do not agree with this step, so simply belligerently dismissing their concerns - which is what you're both doing - in favour of thinking your idea is perfect and beyond criticism shows disdain for the membership, when this membership is the only asset you guys have and are ever likely to have. It is about the message that arrogant dismissal sends to the community. Oh, and @gul is flat out lying when he says nobody has been able to articulate their concerns. Many have, and the general thrust of that has been that it will be used as a stealth modding tool to undermine posters like gturner by picking and choosing which content of members gets cut out and thrown elsewhere. Given your previous acts in this regard, and given your and John own stated dislike of gturner for one, not everyone is convinced that it will be used in good faith, by Gul in particular. Others have said that they simply don't see the purpose of it - and I have to say that I agree with it as trying to decide what should and shouldn't remain in the Red Room will likely become a modding nightmare. Finally, moving content from one thread to the Violet Room will inevitably disrupt the flow of threads. We have already had two multiple page threads discussing this so for there to be a suggestion that nobody has articulated an objection is flat out nonsense.
Exactly. "No", with a refusal to respond to the articulated concerns. I think that's what makes people worry this will be abused.
Because 3 threads with me, @gul, @shootER, and @Anna involved is clearly refusal to respond to concerns. Just because the answer is no doesn't mean you were ignored.
There you go, refusing to respond to El Chup again by directly quoting what he posted and responding to it. Fascist.
