Over the past couple of months the forum has changed - alas not for the better.  

Before, we could enjoy watching threads unfolding gradually as a number of different people contributed contrasting viewpoints.  It was possible to keep up with the current status, and reading new posts was a pleasurable experience.  
Now, it is commonplace to see multiple posts from the same member, successively following each other, taking up screen-space, wasting time reading a jumbled flood of often contradictory comments, and making it very difficult to follow any sort of meaningful debate.  

A couple of recent members in particular are at fault, posting so prolifically it's become really hard work to find any sort of intelligent life out there, covered up as it is with a flood of often self-congratulatory.  I SINCERELY HOPE that by requiring posters to restrict themselves to one post at a time, they would be forced to do some work and think about what it is they actually need to say, instead of using this forum as a sort of a mental toilet for pissing out whatever is on their mind.  I've not done the math, but my impression is it's getting worse not better.  

In my mind the whole point of a forum is to encourage exchange of views, from multiple contributors.  It is NOT intended for any one person to broadcast a monologue like a radio DJ.  

Frankly, monologuing is
  abusive
  selfish
  downright boring
  getting on my nerves

What do YOU think?  

Is everything OK as it is?  
Or would you prefer to see multiple posts stopped?  

I suggest one of three alternatives ... shall we:-
   Identify and discipline the worst offenders, and hope they get the message?  
   Institute a new rule (to be enforced by Seniors and Moderators) with an on-the-spot penalty of -2K for any and every successive post by the same member?  
   Allow chaos to reign supreme, and allow individual members to monologue without restraint?  

What would you do?

what if the successive posts are answering questions or giving opinions to different members responses. Would that count as sequential posting and liable for neg K's and A's. Also how many times do we need to discipline them before we act on doing something.

i like a temporary ban or time out... just bar them for a week and then let them come back as they please.

i know these donkeys can open a new account, but would it be worth wild for them to do so? if so, they REALLY have no life!

goodluck

Yes, agree with you  

Mods have taken note of all recent events starting from last December and will be acting shortly

It is possible to do that all in one post using the quote function since most responses don't require that much space.

since it is quite easy to edit one's post I am not sure why there is any need to make a new post for any additional comments when "you" were the last person to post... of course if someone else posts then obviously a new post is better than an edit so people's comments are not taken out of context.

The Statistics Page will provide some help in addressing the problem appropriately.  For those who haven't used this before, it's a pull down menu in the upper right corner of the page.  Pulling down the Statistics menu and clicking on "Post Ranking" brings up a page with the most active posters over the last 30 days, among other stats.

Most of the active posters seem to run around 200 posts per 30 days, but outliers can be 3 times that or more.

I also post on a Thai based forum, which has a small number of members who post a ridiculous amount of consecutive replies to other posts. That forum has the option of allowing multiple previous replies to be quoted in one single reply, though that will get abused as well by someone splitting a previous reply into 10 or more segments and then responding to each point in turn. I'm not sure which is worse, to be honest.

That forum also has one individual who must be close to being banned more times than the number hot dinners most people have had. It's a game to him but full credit to the mods there who are usually pretty quick in identifying his latest ID and banning him.

Alan

I find the moderators, twiceaweek especially, are doing a great job here. No system like this can be perfect, and I don't always agree with them, but generally the forum works very well. And it's thanks to them.

I have however a new idea that might make things easier for them. No more points and acceptance etc,... Just do a very general monthly evaluation of the members and just upgrade some that seem to deserve it.

Also, for me, silly empty posts, could be deleted by moderators.

Just an idea.

that idea will never fly with the forum. First of all, whose going to evaluate the thousands of members every month, the mods. Yeah, give me a break. They're just volunteers and will never dedicate their time to evaluate every member every month. Secondly if they do evaluate the members, whose to say they wont be bias against some and not others. If a member pisses one mod off, that member is pretty much screwed. Third, will the members who have high credit rating be willing to have his status cleared and even with the newbie who just started on the forum. No way in hell will that happen.

Bloody hell!! I'd quit if I had to do that!

Seriously, there's far too much subjectivity in such a system as you described.
And as VG mentions, it's too open to bias, corruption, ganging, etc.

the bias, corruption and ganging is the one that scares me the most. Although I dont have any biases or preferences for any member over another, that is not the case for every member. I already know or have an idea of which members like which members or hate which members just by reading the comments and arguments on this forum. So yeah, the idea of equality among members and mods having complete power to evaluate will never ever work.

I believe moderators are capable of being objective judges. They should even give credit to bros they don't like.

I'm also not suggesting a full review of all members every month. Just make a threath for moderators only, and list members that come to mind. Also, moderators could each check 10 different members that posted regularly.

I know this system is not perfect, but it will stop the credit tactics. And therefor will be easier for the moderators.

The Mods should feel free to police the rare outlier.  The general population in here seems to take care of itself just fine and needs no new rules.  It's the rare exception that requires attention.

As to the rating system: perhaps it's best to only have 2 levels, Mod and everyone else.  Guys making it to King occasionally exhibit a sense of invincibility that's unhealthy.  Everyone short of a Mod should have enough points to contribute with, but not enough to destroy with.

corruption ?   you mean with Ks and As ???   

everyone including you has biases, so you shouldn't think you're immune to this !
everyone in this forum can loose their head given the right circumstances
its so easy to see forum rage when someone knows how to push the right buttons
you just went through this yourself and subsequent to that you posted a lot of mostly
irrelevant posts to elevate yourself to your present status. If there were that much bias
you would have been knocked back already ! So in short, bias will always exist but its
important to keep it at a manageable level.

No one is capable of being objective all the time so I would not even contemplate that idea.

This forum works on the basis of free speach - as much as possible !  
Only when something gets really out of hand, then mods, after a collective decision will act.

[ Last edited by  twiceAweek at 13-2-2010 14:10 ]

Actually Robman, your idea is not so far off the wall.  The reality is that the mods DO evaluate the posters, not just once per month, but constantly.  And, they do act.  

  Fortunately they don't have to do it often
  And when they do act it is usually behind the scenes
  but review, they do, and act, they do

And if you haven't noticed, that's just a sign that they're doing it very well.  

What they don't do is single people out for promotion: that's up to the wider readership and the talent of the individual contributor.  Nor do they slap people down except in extreme situations, and only after trying several other much nicer approaches first.  

-------------(following my own advice here, instead of making a new post!)-----------------

The focus of my question is what can or should WE agree BETWEEN US, as the wider membership?  Including Newbies and Seniors, not just "The Authorities".  

A Big thank-you to fifelad55 for sharing his experience on another forum.  The darn thing is that all rules can be broken, and no system is perfect.  

The question is what should we do to REGULATE OURSELVES?

   ... Because the choice is simple: show restraint, or be restrained by others.  

So ... before someone makes a decision and imposes it on us ... can you come up with any new suggestions how we can make sure everyone has a voice, and how we should handle (the very few people) who over-post?

in the spirit of cooperation, perhaps a 3 step process:
(1) consolidate the posts for them and send them a PM explaining what happened.
then if they persist...
(2) delete their posts in that thread altogether and send them a PM explaining what happened.
and finally...
(3) suspend them for an agreed period of time.
and if all else fails...
(4) 4 strikes and you're OUT!

actually suspension in this forum potentially works well because even if members try and sign up as a different user, they lose their status and go back to square 1.

[ Last edited by  TonyToro at 13-2-2010 16:55 ]

yeah, you're right I guess I'm not immune to being biased either. I knowingly or unknowingly will favor one member over another maybe because his posts are entertaining or funny to me or his reactions to a thread are similar to mine. And I'll also get pissed off when rubbed the wrong way or being pushed the wrong way same as you so again that's why letting you mods evaluate us members wont work cause everyone is biased.

I'm personally in agreement with a gentle and progressive escalation.  Nobody likes an unexpected rocket out of the blue ... I know I hate surprises ... so respect and tolerance trumps any form of strict discipline in my view.  

I also have to admit that in spite of my first post I am TOTALLY AGAINST the creation of any new rule ... I subscribe to twice's view that the forum works best on free speech.  

The reality is all of us do make multiple posts on occasion - I know I do, any time I feel it increases clarity.  I would hate to have a rule that I myself have to abide by ... obeying arbitrary rules does nothing to turn me on ... Rules suck.  

And another (rather obvious) reality is that the more rules we have the harder it becomes for newbies to join in and fit in.  So the more we can self-regulate, and watch out for each other, the easier it becomes for everyone.  

I'm personally also against anything that creates more work for appointed representatives - the mods don't want nor should they need to act as a volunteer police-force.  

I think what works better for our community is for the community consensus to be visible.  That way we can all watch what works, and adjust our own style, without feeling we're subjects to any sort of external authority.  

... so if you have a view on how we should conduct ourselves on this forum ... with the goal of maximising the visible contribution from as many members as possible ... add it below, so this thread can stand as your vote!!