The Times, They Are A-Changin'

[Blue Ghost]

Me, when the "New Virus" hits;

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...ZAQ&esq=7&page=7&ndsp=36&ved=1t:429,r:2,s:222

 

[Finarvyn]

I would like to see a serious change in attitude and approach here: less insularity, less hostility, less bitterness, less intimidation, less thuggery, less "grognardism", more open-mindedness, more politeness, and more tolerance for others' opinions.

As a suggestion, maybe consider reducing the number of boards here and consolidating them. I'm not sure why this board needs 40+ different forums, particularly given that some aren't even doing anything (Starship Design 101? Wiki? Does there really need to be five different forums for T20 anymore?)

I do not believe that a realworld political board should have any place on an RPG forum.

I'd like to echo Blix' sentiments. I lurk here sometimes, post here sometimes. It's a nice board but maybe could be better. I'd like to see more tolerence of other folks' games and campaigns, and I certainly agree that realworld politics is best kept away from game boards because all they do is cause more turmoil.

Some thought should happen about reorganization, but it needs to be done carefully. I know that there are many different editons of Traveller, and that each editon would like its own board, but it would be nice to see which ones are most similar and maybe combine some boards together. I own several editions and many of my thoughts and questions are more global and less edition-specific, but I don't know if everyone is in that situation. I suppose that the edition wars will exist any time any game goes through so many different versions, but I like to think that underneath some of the glitz they're all Traveller and I hope folks would support each other more than tear each other down because of this!

Anyway, this is a nice board and I suspect that the moderator change will go smoothly enough that no one really notices.

 

[spinwardpirate]

To be fair, only a handful of regulars seem to be responsible for the negativity, but it's enough to drive people away. If the mods and admins are genuinely interested in encouraging people to return then I think this would go a long way to that end.

Bing! The sound of the nail being hit on the head. I came to this place hoping to find solidarity and camaraderie. There was some of that, but the negativity drove me away. Hopefully that will all change now.

 

[Border Reiver]

Cool, I'm back. Now are we keeping moot memberships? As it seems mine hasn't renewed.

 

[far-trader]

A hearty welcome back BR

Not sure about your Moot renewel, mine went through automatically again just recently. As for the future of The Moot, it's being discussed, with rejuvenation in mind, to make it more valued for those who want to support the site I'm hoping.

 

[spinwardpirate]

For those who are discussing changes, I'd like to propose that we the people be given the freedom to choose our own avatars.

 

[Gray Lensman]

for those who are discussing changes, i'd like to propose that we the people be given the freedom to choose our own avatars.

multiple mega ditto

 

[far-trader]

...I'd have to put a lot of thought into it.

I'd much appreciate it if you did and got back to me when you have. I (and I'd dare say others) are looking for ideas to improve the site.

...off the top of my head, why not open a forum where someone who feels like he's been wronged can post his complaint. Then have his complaint reviewed fairly. Out in the open--not one mod scratching another's back.

It's a thought to consider.

Pretty much my own suggestion, turned down on the basis of it being public would just get messy (or sentiments to that effect, iirc). I will state quite clearly that there is no back room mod back scratching going on when issues are raised though and the review is done fairly. It would be improved with more moderators though, which I anticipate happening at some point.

It's hard to argue that public airing of charges and responses would be a good thing given the private "discussions" I've had with some over issues that make our own worst disagreements look downright cordial S4.

Which raises another point on moderation and history raised by some I'd like to address.

Some posters with history here may appear to be given more range in their posts. It's an illusion though. Warnings and Infractions are hidden from all but mods and admins, so you don't see them happening but they do. The difference is largely that they correct themselves. Sometimes even before being warned.

While some newer members with little or no history to go on for us as moderators to know if they're just starting a long list of troublesome posts or if it's a simple one time error that they'll correct appear to get slammed quickly. And again it's another illusion, enhanced because they often don't correct their error (which means we have to, and that should lead to an Infraction, and that generates more complaining... ) but complain publicly about being picked on and go off pointing fingers at everyone else. And not all new members have been that way either. Many do understand they crossed the line and correct their post and never cause trouble again.

It's not about the quantity of posts. It's about the quality. Always has been.

 

[far-trader]

For those who are discussing changes, I'd like to propose that we the people be given the freedom to choose our own avatars.

multiple mega ditto

Doable within reason imo. I think it's currently a Moot perk, and even then with limitations. Once things are more squared away in the general housekeeping chores this may change. I for one do not want to see the kind of garbage that passes for avatars on far too many sites. Huge screen eating, resource hogging, giant flashing animated banners advertising all kinds of garbage.

At one time the site was accepting avatar contributions to the file of avatars. Permitting submissions of original or proven public domain images that passed reasonable guidelines for taste and fit the modest restrictions for size. I'd like to see that resurrected. I think unique avatars should remain the domain of The Moot if it's kept. Possibly even allowing reasonable animations, like Andrew's spinning Sol.

 

[Supplement Four]

It's hard to argue that public airing of charges and responses would be a good thing given the private "discussions" I've had with some over issues that make our own worst disagreements look downright cordial S4.

I can see that point.

That brings us back to square one, though. I know I've used the system in place before--a couple of times. I typically got a "we're looking into it" response" and a "we'll get back to you".

And...I'm still waiting--so long that I've forgotten what the issue was. I remember when the last time this happened was around the time Dave Chase left the boards.

That doesn't make me have a lot of faith in the "we're looking into it" and "we'll get back to you" system that we currently have.

Which raises another point on moderation and history raised by some I'd like to address.

What we need is a judge of judges--a policeman for the mods--someone to go to when a CotI members feels like he's victim and being punished for an "unfair" reason.

This person shouldn't be a regular mod.

If Andrew, now that he's in charge of the site, is going to back away from regular mod duties, I'd feel like I was fairly treated if he looked into any complaint I had and got back with me.

If not Andrew, then someone should be appointed for this "mod policing" duty. We need someone to act as the Supreme Court--someone to hear appeals.

 

[Blue Ghost]

On alleged "grognardy".

It really doesn't bother me. Not a whole lot anyway. And when the grognard rams lock horns on either the "Fleet" or one of the various "weapons'" threads, I just shrug and read it until I get bored, or until they reach a point of rules' mastery that my eyes glaze over.

To me Traveller is a role-playing-game best enjoyed with friends who want to share their imaginations with other friends. When that basic 7+ to hit throw has armor, terrain and loca conditions tossed in its way, I'm cool with it. When someone brings up the fact that the combatants are on moving vehicles, I still nod. When the two combatants describe possible variations on outcomes because said moving vehicles are in a dust storm during a stampede of some exotic eight legged brontosaur sized herd animal, and gizmo-A truncates protection-B in this instance because the rules for gizmo-A clearly state advantage-C, then the momentum of fun is lost for me.

I've seen that happen a few times here, but not to the point where I'm personally offended. The closest I ever came to a "flame war" with another Traveller was when I got all Fan-boyish about "The Phantom Menace" or S4's mercenary contest some years back.

Even in the midst of my personal throes I had a hard time understanding why anyone would get all ornery on the COTI BBS. Truly the rules, that is the basic character interaction in the game itself, are pretty malleable and flexible. There's a plasticity that I think extends to the personalities, but alas not everyone wants to have a fun time. Ergo the "I'll only feel good if I'm proven right!" people come to the fore, but, to repeat myself, I don't see that happening here too much.

Oh sure, it does, but the escalation on this BBS seems to be rather tame compared to the some of the old SJ Games, or SFB or even D&D forums I'd occasionally skim.

So, in short, Grognard away

 

[aramis]

The Pulpit took about 70% of the mod time for about 10% of the active board membership, and 90% of the non-spam infractions, and 75% of the posts had nothing at all to do with Traveller.

 

[far-trader]

But we were a very prolific bunch of banting rastards :devil:

Witness the one statistic you didn't include, the post count. It's still number 4 in the top 5 forums list, despite being mostly shut down over the life of the board

I still think it served as a magnet for off-topic hot issues, keeping the board that much saner. And for a large part was an interesting forum. Some had problems keeping The Pit separate from CotI and such which was a shame.

Still, given your numbers, Colin's experience, and sensing I'd be volunteered to run herd on the place if it were reopened I suppose the sane thing to do would be agree to let it lie in peace... Yep, made my sanity check

...but a part of me still misses it

p.s. I'll trust you numbers but that 25% Traveller content seems a might high to my recollection, I was thinking closer to 1%, maybe.

 

[Blix]

I for one do not want to see the kind of garbage that passes for avatars on far too many sites. Huge screen eating, resource hogging, giant flashing animated banners advertising all kinds of garbage.

Surely you can just limit it to 100x100 pixel avatars like most other boards do?

 

[RossWinn]

As I said elsewhere, I would like to see a serious change in attitude and approach here: less insularity, less hostility, less bitterness, less intimidation, less thuggery, less "grognardism", more open-mindedness, more politeness, and more tolerance for others' opinions. To be fair, only a handful of regulars seem to be responsible for the negativity, but it's enough to drive people away. If the mods and admins are genuinely interested in encouraging people to return then I think this would go a long way to that end.

Less insularity? Less hostility? Less bitterness?

Not on your life buddy. You can't make me. You can have my biting sarcasm and contempt when you pry them from my cold, dead, fingers.

 

[Icosahedron]

Oops, sorry about that. I shouldn't have joked about a w******t in front of the children.

Still, no doubt you would have been asking for input at some point...

I'd love a personal avatar myself, but I can see that moot membership needs some desirable privileges. KISS should be the order of the day with avatars. And they need to be something you can show your kids and granny, of course.

 

[Spinward Scout]

F**k No! That place was a sewer, and gave me more trouble than any other area of CotI.

I echo that comment. It also took away from people posting about Traveller. The best boards I've ever been on disallowed any political or religious discussions.

 

[Jame]

On behalf of a large number of members who, undoubtedly, are also harbouring this question: what prompted the honourable Mr. Miller to "acquire" CotI, if I may be so bold.

Yours, for some reason always in the dark,

William/Shapeshifter.

Actually, I think this is a good question. And so I shall echo it.

 

[Andrew Boulton]

The Pulpit *may* return, but not yet.

On behalf of a large number of members who, undoubtedly, are also harbouring this question: what prompted the honourable Mr. Miller to "acquire" CotI, if I may be so bold.

I suppose it seemed like the best solution.

(I may have suggested it - he probably gave me the job to shut me up...)

 

[Andrew Boulton]

If Andrew, now that he's in charge of the site, is going to back away from regular mod duties, I'd feel like I was fairly treated if he looked into any complaint I had and got back with me.

Sounds good to me.