I haven't seen you lately. I hope all is well with you.

Looks like you got yourself quite a bit of discussion here.

Major home projects are keeping me from my MIRT and GD hosting duties. But there are a lot of good people on board so all is good. I hope to wrap things up by the end of July, beginning of August.

Hope everything is good with you.

Thanks, BB!

Enjoy those home projects.

Why would I do that? GD is Meta and that's the host's doing. Blech.

Truly! While I have this opportunity I'd like to say I read you quite a bit. You've taught me alot and I appreciate you for that.

Yes, GD is one of the most contentious of the forums and groups. And, one of the largest. I've almost quit a couple of times myself because sometimes it is like hitting my head on a brick wall. But, overall the experience is great. Some may have a different agenda than I do but that's okay, too in my book.

Good to see you!

SOP that does not do so is redundant. The SOP is clear. It would be easy to enforce it if that was the objective, but it isn't.

Admin. has made it pretty clear (not) that we should take exceptions into account up until we shouldn't take exceptions into account. Meta should be locked unless its meta meta, discussing the discussion, etc. until it shouldn't. They've made it clear that if people want to talk about something outside the SOP we should let them, until we're not suppose to let them. Guns are not allowed according to Admin. unless their is a big news exception, or until someone wants to talk about children dying, or unless national news is covering it, or sometimes they are allowed.

See what I mean? Clear as mud.

That little animal is almost as elusive as a unicorn.

We have a deer that comes to our backyard daily (or did last fall) that was deformed and only had one antler so I know what I'm talking about.

sometimes it ugly and frustrating and sometimes it's rewarding.

Thanks, Autumn!

Forum Hosting, as it exists at DU right now, is completely dysfunctional. The Statement of Purpose for General Discussion is essentially ignored, or is only selectively enforced, depending upon what Das Komitee thinks of the alerter or alertee.

DU would be better off without Forum Hosts. Let juries decide if a post deserves to stay or not.

Sid

Now we are on the exact same page with that whole thing.

Sid

Put me on that page.

Some of the biggest proponents of doing away with hosting were up to their eyeballs with the Locozollo types shutting down ANY criticism of The President of being off topic "on a Democratic board". And that included the President's position pre-marriage equality.

Any discussion of the usage of "poutrage" and "pony" was deemed meta and shut down. So much so that Skinner had to step in and say knock it off.

Lozocollo was banned for his super partisan shenanigans. So was grahm4anything. We just had another host thrown out of hosting for the same shenanigans - I won't mention his name because he is still technically a member. Though he hasn't posted since he was tossed. My suspicion is he moved on to his next zombie/sock... Every one of those disruptors had the same MO. - they shut down or tried to shut down ANY discussion critical of The President or the party. They made threats of retaliatory locks, horse traded via threat to leave truly disruptive posts if they didn't get their way and locked, unilaterally, posts when they couldn't get consensus. And some of the more vocal in these threads were right there skating around the edges having a laugh encouraging the disruptors.

If you hold a minority opinion on DU you may not like your "controversial" opinion getting shut down by the majority.

I have been in favor of leaving SOP alerts to the jury since, well, since I became a host and saw what's going on in there.. As long as it is the whole pool of eligible juries. If left up to the same 'pro lock' duers that have been camping out in hosts since du3 went live, I guarantee we won't be happy.

and I'm glad we all have one. I'm glad you tried it though and appreciate your efforts now to help keep GD within SOP. But, you also know that everything I said up above to Bluenorthwest is true, if you would admit it, don't you?

I also agree with the juries deciding on a post or thread. That may be the direction it is going in since EarlG told us they were working on changes. We shall see. I'm just not sure some (not you) of the ones complaining that we don't lock enough are going to like that at all. One shot, one verdict. I'm not sure they've thought about that. I have and I'm good with that.

Good to see you. I haven't seen you since MIRT.

where the discussions are much more cordial, and everyone seems to be working toward the same goal. There's very little acrimony or argument, and MIRTers treat each other with respect.

Generally, the only dumbasses you have to deal with in MIRT are the ones being PPR'd.

Sid

And then when you leave your term, you look for LG and dtg behind every thread.

First you clumsily figure your way into a system, and for a while, it seems to work. Then suddenly you're like Chicken Little.

LOL! Maybe it's a good thing I stepped out for a while.

sometimes I can't help myself and address her when I see her. MIRT is quick though and she's never around long.

I'm just a small group host and don't go into the Host forum very often. Sounds like folks should give hosting a try though if they have strong feelings about what is going on. It may change their perspective.

We don't have the details yet, we just know it changing.

1. Forum Host turnover needs to be much higher. A 90 day term is much too long. 30 days would be better.

2. Get a hidden post, you get kicked out of Forum Hosting for 7 days. You can go back onto the waiting list after 7 days.

3. Have an SOP alert automatically create a Poll Thread in the Host Forum, with the only 2 choices being Lock or Leave. After an appropriate amount of time - I'd suggest no longer than an hour - close the poll and the MAJORITY vote decides whether the thread is left open or automatically locked. Have an automated reply sent to alerters to let them know their alert has been considered and the thread has been locked or left. Enforce the no double jeopardy rule like with jury alerts,

4. Break the Host group into 2 separate boards, one for Forum Hosts only, one for Group Hosts only.

5. Make the Forum Host Board read-only for all DUers, so they can see how the sausage is made, and Hosts will be accountable for their decisions. DU3 is all about transparency.


Sid

I'm sure they appreciate your input.

yes, it is the "gd" part that at times is appropriate.

But would you say the majority of the time?

Das Komitee - GD hosts on their 59th term.

If admin is going to keep the original format intact, they seriously need to take a look at some sort of term limits. As of now, there are 20+ DU'ers on the waiting list. Let's give someone who hasn't served a chance to jump ahead of some of the permanent fixtures. IMO, etc...

I'm with you as far as throwing them all to a jury, that might actually be the best solution.

Especially giving them to a jury.

Hosts in GD have the least well defined SOP of any forum and it shows in the host discussions. Most of the hosts play fair, some do not.
When there's a problem that the hosts can not resolve amongst themselves it goes unsolved unless and until admin decides to weigh in. Sometimes that takes days. In the meantime, nothing happens to threads that should be nuked or a host acts without seeking consensus (and the recent example is not the first time this has happened.) At times the hosts squabble amongst themselves, but I see that as a frustration born from what I wrote at the top: there is no clear vision of what hosting GD should look like.

Admin is planning to make changes. Here's hoping a better definition of the GD SOP is on the list.

And FWIW, I won't host a Forum again because I'm not a star member. As a group host I can see what's going on in the host forum and am allowed to post but I do so very rarely because I don't want to interfere.

because of the very strict and clear forum posting rules.

I'd leave LBN alone and let it go the way it's going now.

Sid

I volunteered way back at the beginning of DU3. It was drama filled then and it appears that it's become worse.

No thanks. I'll donate and serve on Jury Duty and try not to make DU suck with my posts. You couldn't PAY me to serve as a host.

I just want everyone to know that it doesn't have to be a "secret" behind-the-scenes place, for one thing. I've read quite a bit about it should be read only. Well, it can be. It's everyone's choice. Just sign on up anywhere.

Hope you're doing well, Texasgal!

Creating this loosey goosey do what you think is best based on vague instructions system and then keeping it semi-private was a terrible mistake. It's the perfect breeding ground for fighting, resentment and accusations of bias. No way I'd jump into that unless serious changes were made.

Looks like, according to EarlG, drastic changes are going to be made. He said it will be awhile because they do have a business to run. I just don't think everyone wanting to host or open discussions are going to be as happy as they seem to think. I may be surprised myself, though.

I don't see how a couple of little steps (click here, click here, leave Skinner an ATS if it's a group) constitutes keeping it semi-private. The only ones excluded are members with less than 1000 post (I think).

However, if someone just wants to complain and moan about not being able to read the host forum, they can wait for a host to post all the conversations in GD. If it was private, or semi-private, we wouldn't be able to do that.

When do the hosts post copies? When the poo starts flying. I don't think more DUers joining the poo flinging parties will make the problem go away. I don't think making it read only will either, especially if that's the only change, because there will still be the same poo flinging over alleged biases, misdeeds, and lies. But everyone would be able to see for themselves what goes on. I think the better option is making it completely private and ban hosts from posting copies of the forum, and then make the rules of hosting much clearer.

you can only see the host threads if a host post copies.

You could then say: Host post copies when the poo starts flying. I've seen three occasions (I'm sure there are a few more) when a host posted a thread in GD for all to see. Not one instance of the 1000s and 1000s of threads that are professional and carrying on the business of DU. So the charge of contstant shit throwing, alleged biases, misdeeds, and lies (?how can you tell someone is lieing by reading a host thread?) Very few.

Everyone would know that if they took those very easy steps to become a host. It really is more rewarding than bad. And most of the time, the bad just gets blow way out of proportion because we are human after all.

I don't know that Admin. are going to ask for our recommendations; but if they do, I'll throw in your suggestions.

It's hard to fight the impression that it really isn't all that bad.

Yeah, it would be wonderful if everyone on DU hosted. But that's not going to happen. Not everyone spends enough time on DU or has the time to spend. And now, because hosts were allowed to post the poo, it will be hard to fight the impression that it would be nothing but trouble. So, a system that only works well if everyone does it isn't going to work.

It's not hard to fight the impression that it really isn't all that bad. This thread includes the good with the bad. Maybe it will cause someone that has only seen the bad, and wants to take a further look, sign up somewhere to host. Then they can read all the good on their own.

Again, I don't see these few posting of shit flinging within the host group to be of a major concern. They've been posted and the transparancy is there for all to see. Where we fall short as host is that not enough of us steps up to ask them why they feel that way. Or to resolve a minor conflict. Or, to post the good. We should do more of that.

No one is telling everyone they have to host. That's one of the good things about it. If you don't care about hosting, and your DU experience is just fine without it, don't do it. It's more to the handful of members that keep saying it's secret, or semi-private, or is hurt over it. Those members can better their experience. That's all I'm trying to say.

Even if they are as uncommon as you say, and I believe you're right, it still happens and I'd rather avoid it. It's clear that the resentment caused by the discord lingers.

I hope I'm doing something here to help that. Maybe a smidgeon.

Thanks for the conversation, kcr! I enjoyed it.

post here under those more stringent conditions? I thought DU3 was suppose to be the "new" DU that was community driven. Mods were not a community driven thing, IMO.

It's hard enough being a host and having to keep hearing things like:
"Well, when I was a mod we didn't fight and get personal" Yeah, right.
"Well, the mods would have shut that down immediately and no one would have complained". Yeah, right.
"When we were mods......."

I normally stop reading because guess what. We don't have mods. I understand some want to go back to the power and control they think they had (I'm not saying that's a bad thing), but come on! I really don't care what happened on a message board before I was ever a member as far as moderating goes. When I joined, we have open and free discussions, good or bad. That's the way I'm sure it will stay if Admin. still feels the way they did way back then.

Plus, have you read all the discussions on DU3 that link to discussions on DU2 putting down the mods and accusing them of everything in the book? Who would want to be one and take that abuse?? lol!

Hmm...

Dare we hope your busy and incoherent objections suggest the Admins are planning to deep-six the host business?

I've read it from a couple of mods. There are a couple that talk about their time as mods alot (in the host forum). I'm not going to name names or post links because it's not necessarily a bad thing anyway.

Power given by Admin to delete something against the SOP is not a bad thing. Controlling what gets deleted without any other interference is not a bad thing. I'm talking about DU2 here.

I don't claim to know how they thought. I read their words. Maybe this is what I wrote that was so incoherant to you?

I said you 'thought' it

I have the same skills!

I don't think, or did I then, that mods were power freaks. I hope my explanation up above clears that up.

I apologize for the misunderstanding.

" I understand some want to go back to the power and control they think they had." Now you are back peddling. Really as a relative newb you might want to tone it down. Thanks.

where I explained what I meant.

I apologize for being incoherent in my first post.

Sorry not buying your argument.

Last edited Thu Jul 10, 2014, 05:28 PM - Edit history (1)

Juries are supposed to clean up that mess but that requires drawing a jury of people who understand dog whistles and from what I've seen most don't. Moderation was good at cutting out that bull and also at tamping down flamefests by locking threads.

The complaints about mods mirror the complaints about GD hosts. Surely you've noticed that. As a GD host you also know that not all of those complaints are true.

I don't think they belong here at all and it would be my wish that juries would do their jobs and hide that shit. And, yes; I've seen it left numerous times.

If the Admin. choose to go back to that moderation I'm sure they will. I am just basing my opinion of no they will not based on what I've heard them say.

And, yes. The complaints mirror the host complaints. I guess my point was, I've read just as much bad about the mod system (here, since I don't think it was allowed to discuss it on DU2?) as the host system. Neither one of them all bad.

However, the problems of hosting would be greatly reduced if they gave GD hosts a clearer SOP to work with and if they gave all Forum hosts the ability to lock train wreck threads (not lock them proactively, but lock them when the consensus is that the thread has devolved into a food fight.) As a group host I can and have locked threads for that reason. It helps.

And juries missing so much bigotry, as well as the unevenness of jury results, suggests to me that some other mechanism is needed here.

the more active DU members participate the better.

I think so, too.

MIRT, too. I must say of all the friends I've made here, the majority I worked with on MIRT or hosting. The good far outweighs the bad.

backatcha

May that be good or bad.

I may see you in MIRT next term. It's going to depend on my work load for the next 4 months of the construction season. That work thang sometimes gets in the way of LG and dtg.

I think we served together on MIRT for one term. I need to sign up for MIRT again.

Now, my comment: I'm a host of two groups. Both groups are extremely easy to host, because 1) people get along ; 2) both are low traffic and 3) the SOP for both groups are very clear. Hosting for GD, imho, is a nightmare. It's by far the most contentious of the large forums (GD is not a group, of course. Some of the groups are very contentious). To add to the workload is the fact that, as you mentioned, the de facto SOP is pretty muddled. Hopefully Earl and Skinner will be making it much more clear.

Yes, I remember you. Look forward to working with you again soon.

It is by far the most contentious, and I hope you're right about them making it more clear.

Volunteering some time to help make this place function better is a good thing, as is learning how to work together with others with that goal in mind.

It can decrease worries and paranoia, seeing and participating, though to be fair there is too much Drama at times.

That's a good point. Some people just don't want to see that, or be involved with that. They enjoy their DU time just as it is. That's okay too!

I would never volunteer to be a host for this forum.

Am happy to serve as host for Appalachia Group but as it stands, hosting for GD is subject to an ever-changing, subjective set of guidelines that no one in their right mind could follow. It will remain that way as long as the SOP is treated as a joke.

I do tip my hat to the hosts of LBN for their efficient and timely work for that forum. The SOP works very well there.

If folks want to try hosting, I'd suggest one of the many groups here at DU would be a good introduction.

exceptions put on the SOP of GD. We get those answers everytime host can't agree on something and another host goes to ATA and ask questions about it. Most of the time, that makes the SOP even more meaningless. lol!

May I ask you a question? Haven't you been helping out with the hosting of GD? I've seen you in a lot of the recent threads and thought you may have signed up on the long waiting list to be a host.

And, LBN is a good forum to host in. However, they run a very tight ship and very rarely move away from the LBN SOP. It's a lot less disruptive but go read some of the long threads concerning LBN. They have some of the same problems GD Host do. They seem to concern new LBN host most of all.

Yes, any group would be great to host.

I just recently became a host myself when Appalachia Group was created.

It was my impression that all hosts were welcome to voice their opinions during discussions as long as they indicated they were not GDH. Mostly I was posting because I was trying to figure out exactly what the rules are for hosts and by what criteria decisions are made. To be quite honest, I'm now more confused than ever. However, if my presence is a problem I can stop posting in F&GH and go back to my little corner of DU. I don't feel I have anything to contribute.

I was just curious and had not looked at the waiting list for GD. I don't blame you though, it does take major effort and I've almost quite a few times myself.

I can understand the more confused part. Especially the last few weeks. It may help you to read some of the threads down a page or two in the host group. That's what I did in hosting and MIRT. It helped me see how the flow worked when it worked. You've probably already done that though, so it was just a suggestion.

GD needs good host until Admin. changes things and I think you would be a good one.

I truly believe in the SOP and any exceptions to that would have to be, well, truly exceptional. Friends and foe alike in my book. I'm much too much of a hardliner in that regard, too opinionated, authoritarian in the opinion of some, and GD is a monumentally intense forum to host -- not to mention incredibly time consuming. I think some folks really enjoy administrative duties and if that's what draws them, I'd suggest they start with one of the smaller groups and work their way up to GD hosting, if that's their goal. GD hosting is not for beginners, IMHO. Perhaps some prior hosting experience should be a requirement for being a host of GD. Just a thought.

I'm only hosting because I felt there was a real need for the Appalachia group. I've been looking for a co-host but now that I've laid out all of my considerable hosting faults, I doubt if I'll get any takers.

The rest I understand completely.

Take care, theHandpuppet!

It's desperately needed.

This may come as a shock, but every single post from the admins on "how to host gd', with one exception, and that was later recanted, has been along the lines of "please don't think that you have to lock posts up just because they don't meet the SOP, please find reasons not to lock, please consider the feelings of the person who posted the op, only act on the op, not replies within the thread, please act on consensus, etc.". The one exception was that after meta was abolished they asked hosts to be ruthless about meta posts in gd, and later recanted and said, well only lock meta posts if they were not "furthering the discussion" but instead attacking DU, and explicitly said that meta posts "discussing the discussion" even if they did so by expressing strong opinions about various factions, were ok.

... I certainly don't envy anyone volunteering to host for GD.

It is an eye opening experience.

I'd recommend everyone think about volunteering for MIRT, also.

It will likely be a busy term. It won't include election day but much of the election season.

That's a good thing, as you don't always have to hide a post or ban a user. Sometimes talking it out works.

And sometimes talking it out shows you just how entrenched troublemakers can be with their intent to disrupt


My only "complaint" is the lumping of all hosts into one big forum for all groups and forum issues. I'd much prefer it if each group/forum had its own hosts-forum, where only the hosts of that particular place can see it or participate. That way, for those forums/groups that attract the worst in some people, even some hosts, then they couldn't make their own comments on an issue that isn't truly any of their business. Not to mention the fact that the person being discussed could very well be a host in another group.

Maybe Admin. will ask for suggestions.

I hadn't considered such an idea until I posted it here

It's early, though.

When I say I miss Meta, I'm (almost always) kidding.

That's about as much controversy as I'm prepared to deal with.