DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Web Site Suggestions >> Site Council Expansion?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 21 of 21, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 11/19/2004 07:06:21 AM · #1
For the most part, over the past week or so, I have been an bserver of some pretty nasty threads and some things that have been shaking up the site quite a bit. I think that an expansion of the Site Council may be in order. I think if we bump it up to about twenty five (with the exclusion of the admins) then there will be better coverage of the Forums and the site. Or perhaps, maybe there should be a certain group of people that would just be Forum Moderators who would take care of the forums themselves.
That is my first thought and is just an idea to put out there.

I also believe that the Site Council should have an expanpansion of power -- to go about certain things that normally would need to approval of Drew and Langdon. Somehow, although I am not completely familiar with the Site Council's way of going about things since I have not been one, I feel that they are restricted somewhat; especialy when D&L are not around to have finilization.

So this is an idea, and you may post your more educated responses than the above. Othwerwise, I'd like to hear explainations as why it is better to keep the Site Council number small (complications, etc.).

Thanks for your time,
Lee
 11/19/2004 07:08:08 AM · #2
First one I can come up with to keep it smaller is the amount of time required to DQ an image.

Trying to get 25 SC members together to DQ would be interesting.

Clara
 11/19/2004 07:12:48 AM · #3
But I'm sure a quorum system could be enabled - where it simply requires a certain number of SC opinions/votes to enable a DQ. I have no idea how it is presently done however.

I don't know that the site hierarchy needs expanding any. These rashes of bitterness and objection in forums are an occasional thing, that happens in all forums, and most ofen passes. Any site with the strength of committed memebers that this one has will get over it quite easily.

e
 11/19/2004 07:17:09 AM · #4
I'm not too sure what 'expansion of power' would encompass - could you provide some examples of things that you feel the SC should be covering? As for an increase in SC members, we seem to have a fairly managable size currently, but I guess the forever-growing number of users should probably be reflected by a slight increase in SC members, to increase our forums coverage etc...
 11/19/2004 03:11:26 PM · #5
There are too many chiefs now. Howwever, a group of moderators to ensure a pleasant place to converse would not be out of line.

David
 11/19/2004 03:29:31 PM · #6
I agree that forum moderators would be good.
 11/19/2004 03:38:18 PM · #7
I'd be interested in hearing more specific ways that you feel the forums could be made more pleasant. If there are specific incidences that you don't want to post here, feel free to PM me.

I say this because for, at perhaps for some of the other SC, it's difficult to know just where to step in. Frequently when we do step in, we are accused of being too strict, of stunting conversation, of being nannies, etc. When we do not step in, there are other complaints.

So let's have a conversation about what exactly our role should be. What do you want to see from the SC in terms of forum moderation? If the majority of the people want more/stricter moderation, I'm willing to do that. But I also don't want to be the overbearing forum mommy. So let's hear it...
 11/19/2004 03:59:13 PM · #8
I'm sorry--- i wasn't really thinking about so many specifics, but I wanted to start this thread so that anyone with ideas could post. However tehre are some.

One of these is to try to limit what i call "personal threads" in which people just go back and forth between each other. Whether they are just talking about lunch or about to have a digital fistfight, I do not think that the forums are the right place for these happenings. I think that PM's should be encouraged for most personal stuff rather than the forums. The forums can surely be a way to start, but I do not think that two people should "conversate" in the forums.

This is just one idea, and when I come across more I will be glad to post it. But if anyone else shares my views feel free to butt in because I am not the best at articulating what goes on in the confusion of my brain.

Thanks for the concerns though,
Lee
 11/19/2004 03:59:14 PM · #9
In the particularly bitter forum threads, I have not seen a lack of SC to respond. In fact, in the present bitter thread, SC has been interacting with what I thought was frequency.

As a whole, I have not seen a lack of SC presence in any of the forum threads, it seems to me they are pretty active.

Moderators would be useful if the SC is overwhelmed and can't enjoy their time on the site because of the overload of duties/work.
 11/19/2004 04:02:14 PM · #10
Originally posted by tfaust:
Moderators would be useful if the SC is overwhelmed and can't enjoy their time on the site because of the overload of duties/work.


This is a good version of what i had somewhere in my head. It's not necessarily that the SC aren't doing a good job. It is that they are already pre-occupied with other SC-like activities that to spend time on trying to limit child-like tongue lashing should not be their top priority.

lEE
 11/19/2004 06:25:34 PM · #11
if the major reason to increase the number of site council members is for "better" or "more" moderation, it might be better to look into ways that other communities moderati their discussions. Slashdot for example has a self moderating system that lets users vote on the quality of the comment and then lets readers filter by score. The good thing about this is it is self controlling so no one spends a lot of time on the moderation. I'm sure that other sites have different methods to uphold the community standards, and perhaps one of these would be the fit for us
 11/19/2004 07:01:12 PM · #12
since the site is international, i think it would be very helpful to get more site council members who live in various time zones around the world so that someone is always "on duty" 24/7
 11/19/2004 09:11:59 PM · #13
I would like nothing more than to be a forum moderator. I wouldn't feel bad at all when people accused me of "going to far."
 11/19/2004 09:23:22 PM · #14
Originally posted by StevePax:
I would like nothing more than to be a forum moderator. I wouldn't feel bad at all when people accused me of "going to far."


I completely agree with what you are saying. If prominent members of the DPC community are announcing their resignations from the site just because of threads and people who have gone too far, then who cares about what other people think. I am not saying that any SC members take this kind of abuse from anyone --- as mk said, one way or the other they get criticised and accused. Having people dedicated to just cleaning up the Forums (even anonymously so when they post in the forums it goes under "Forum Moderator") then maybe there will be some improvement.

I am sure that there are many people who would be interested in taking this role.

Lee
 11/19/2004 11:15:18 PM · #15
When we step in, people call us 'sensors' and yell at us, when we dont step in, people think we can't handle our jobs. *sigh* I think I feel the same as MK. We can't please everyone.
 11/19/2004 11:20:15 PM · #16
Originally posted by mk:
I'd be interested in hearing more specific ways that you feel the forums could be made more pleasant. If there are specific incidences that you don't want to post here, feel free to PM me.

I say this because for, at perhaps for some of the other SC, it's difficult to know just where to step in. Frequently when we do step in, we are accused of being too strict, of stunting conversation, of being nannies, etc. When we do not step in, there are other complaints.

So let's have a conversation about what exactly our role should be. What do you want to see from the SC in terms of forum moderation? If the majority of the people want more/stricter moderation, I'm willing to do that. But I also don't want to be the overbearing forum mommy. So let's hear it...

IMO --

Forum moderators (or SC acting as such) should step in only when the TOS has been violated -- warnings are appropriate if the moderator feels the TOS is in danger of being violated.

The moderators should not enforce personal preference on the forums -- such as the recent over-eager thread locking.

... and, the moderators need to be schooled in handling a situation without resorting to violations of the TOS themselves (personal attacks, etc.) <-- no I don't have any specific instances to share, but from previous experience (mainly in other forums) this can become a big problem.

A group of moderators under the authority of a single SC sounds like a good idea.

David
 11/19/2004 11:35:10 PM · #17
This kind of seems like a blanket "the SC isn't doing a good job but we aren't really sure why and can't point out any examples or show them what we'd like to have done" and so instead you're suggesting bringing in a whole new group of people to do this. Now, I may seem biased, but this doesn't really seem like a good solution to me. If you want people to do a better job, whoever that group of people is, you're going to need to be more specific about exactly what the problem is.

Tranquil mentioned prominent members announcing resignation. ajschmidt (who I'm not sure I would consider prominent) announced his resignation because "This has become a community of one-upmanship. In the forums and in the comments on photos. Most people here like to hear themselves speak utter rejection for any idea that is not there own." In what manner should that have been solved? The implication here is that these people are leaving because the SC are not doing a good enough job in the forums, no? His reasons don't really seem like something that could have been prevented by any group other than the members as a whole, do they?

People are going to express their opinions. And some are going to do it vehemently. And some are going to argue. Not everyone enjoys arguing but opinions are allowed here, unless they involve personal attacks or other violations of the TOS, at which point we try to step in. ajschmidt seems to be resigning because he doesn't like general disagreeableness which isn't really something we can prohibit. Nor is he likely to find another active community without it.

Edited to say that I'm not being defensive, although it may seem like it. I'm just trying to get something more concrete out of all this vagueness.

Message edited by author 2004-11-19 23:44:38.
 11/20/2004 01:34:10 AM · #18
Originally posted by hbunch7187:
When we step in, people call us 'sensors' and yell at us, when we dont step in, people think we can't handle our jobs. *sigh* I think I feel the same as MK. We can't please everyone.


this is exactly the reason why site council shouldn't have actual people's personalities attached to their statements. it needs to be more of a totalitarian enforcement system where it doesn't say anything about "mk" or "hbunch". take the personality away from the moderation and their would be a lot less to complain about. call yourselves site council instead of your user names and things will start to have a less chaotic and biased moderation appearance.
 11/20/2004 01:50:10 AM · #19
Proposal:
- Have a set group of members who are FORUM MODERATERS as their only duty without being SC members.
OR
- Have some of the SC members also be forum moderaters, but not all.

The first idea would allow the SC to focus on the SC duties (DQs and whatever else you do ^^;;) and not be "bothered" with having to "police" the forums as well. It would also allow the people who were to moderate the forums be more well versed in EXACTLY what IS to be locked and how things are to be dealt with. Not to say that you guys don't, but it just seems that there might be confusion on this issue (maybe I'm just ignorant of what goes on, but I don't know).

When groups are more specialized they are able to do a better job. With a group of Forum Moderaters and then the Site Council (who would still be "above" the FMs), the SC could do it's duty and the FMs theirs.
 11/20/2004 01:53:40 AM · #20
From my limited time at this site I would say that SC are very active and do a great job.

If you want more SC Ok but why, the only thing I could see is to quicken the response time for DQ notification otherwise things seem to run smooth and as far as people leaving so what, people come and go all the time.
 11/20/2004 04:28:34 AM · #21
The idea behind the moderators was not to take anything away from the SC, but rather to free the SC to be able to do their primary job, "to keep us [D&L] aware of the needs of the community".

Originally posted by achiral:
Originally posted by hbunch7187:
When we step in, people call us 'sensors' and yell at us, when we dont step in, people think we can't handle our jobs. *sigh* I think I feel the same as MK. We can't please everyone.

this is exactly the reason why site council shouldn't have actual people's personalities attached to their statements. it needs to be more of a totalitarian enforcement system where it doesn't say anything about "mk" or "hbunch". take the personality away from the moderation and their would be a lot less to complain about. call yourselves site council instead of your user names and things will start to have a less chaotic and biased moderation appearance.

This is a sensible sugestion. Since D&L have apparently abandoned the day to day administration of the site to the care of the SC; create an account, 'Site Council' and paint it gold to let us know when you (the SC) are speaking with administrative authority, as opposed to just being individuals in the forums. It's not ideal, but it is better to at least appear as a single entity when acting than a divided group.

David
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/31/2025 07:31:00 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/31/2025 07:31:00 AM EDT.