A couple of proposals for consideration

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2006-09-05 10:56pm

Noble senators;

Recently, Starship Titanic has approached me with a couple of ideas which he wished me to put up for consideration before this body. My new work schedule in addition to a broken-down home computer has curbed my internet activities to a greater degree than usual, so much so that if I keep putting this on the list of "things to do" it will never get posted here. I think these are worth examination.

The first of Titanic's suggestions is the creation of a Senate Lobby. To put it in his own words:

"A new forum called the "Senate Lobby" or somesuch for the purposes of exactly what I'm doing. A fully-open forum (keep reading!) where non-senators can defend their ideas without the need for PMing a Senate member as a middleman. However, the first rule would be that only the person suggesting idea is allowed to post, and naturally only in the discussion thread for his suggestion. An example for a thread title:

[StarshipTitanic] Senate Lobby

That makes it clear who should be in that thread. The second rule is that only a Senate member can start the discussion thread. The suggestion still needs to pass the senator litmus test but after that a normal discussion can take place. Anyone breaking the rules can be punished with a severe penalty, because isn't that part of the fun?

The third rule is that a discussion in the lobby should eventually conclude after a set period of time (a week?) where the discussion is then brought to the Senate for a vote. This rule further contributes to the refining process without making the process excessive.

Obviously, if you know the volume of user input doesn't warrant so much attention, please disregard this suggestion. "

Given how many weeks have passed since Titanic first broached these suggestions to me before I got around to placing the matter on the floor, this might be worth considering. The second idea is an even better one which I'd be prepared to immediately support; a new forum called "Articles". To again allow Titanic's words to speak on the matter:

"where well-researched, article-style posts can be preserved for future reference. It seems bizarre that we preserve the last gasp of brainless idiots in its own forum, yet we don't try to showcase intelligent and worthwhile contributions in our community. The moderator of whatever forum the post was made in can deem threads to be worthy of preservation and put them into the Articles forum for all to see. Reasons why my idea is the best ever:

Covered Already, Thread Locked: There are many cases where people bring up something covered on the main site, and so a thread doesn't need to be wasted covering what has already been covered. But since the main site is Star Wars and Star Trek exclusively, the problem still exists with other sci-fi universes. As evidence, I point out the two threads at the top of Other Sci-Fi on Master Chief and WH40k vs. Star Wars. Anyone who frequents that forum knows that the problem also extends to Stargate, Babylon 5, etc.

Report Card on the Fridge: If people know that their best ideas and critiques will be preserved prominantly for all time, they will be encouraged to post smarter and research smarter.

Practice makes Perfect: Posts would be subject more to peer review than peer evisceration. If corrections, suggestions, and ideas are incorporated into a proto-article, the finished product would be much more rewarding than sifting through a 10-page thread of contradiction and flames.

The Cup is Half Empty: We have our fill of the mockery of stupid people (Hall of Shame, Parting Shots), but do we of sci-fi or science. "

We could almost have a whole section devoted entirely to Kuroneko's scholarly contributions to the boards.

And there they are. I invite the members of this august body to comment and yield the floor.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2006-09-06 12:23am

Both ideas sound fundamentaly sound to me and I support them both.

Post by **Surlethe** » 2006-09-06 12:55am

I would also whole-heartedly approve of the second proposal, though I'm rather more reserved about the first. The PM system seems to be working just fine.

Post by **Rob Wilson** » 2006-09-06 02:06am

Surlethe wrote:I would also whole-heartedly approve of the second proposal, though I'm rather more reserved about the first. The PM system seems to be working just fine.

Starship also PMed me, and I like the sound of the second (to a degree), but can't really find any merit to the first as a seperate Forum, the Board members can post their replies in a PM to the Senate member sponsoring thier discussion.

It does however highlight a flaw, that a discussion point raised by a Board member cannot be considered closed until the board member has had a chance to rebut/clarify any points raised in the Senate.

Any thoughts?

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2006-09-08 12:51am

The 2nd part of the OP is certainly a good Idea and one that I would welcome as a means to improving the look and tone of the forums. We can flame idiots to our hearts content, but I think the worth of a thread, and a forum, is the information it imparts and the objectives it acheives.

Rob Wilson wrote:It does however highlight a flaw, that a discussion point raised by a Board member cannot be considered closed until the board member has had a chance to rebut/clarify any points raised in the Senate.

Any thoughts?

If a member wishes to rebut/clarify can they not appeal to a mod?.

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2006-09-08 03:30pm

Stuart Mackey wrote:The 2nd part of the OP is certainly a good Idea and one that I would welcome as a means to improving the look and tone of the forums. We can flame idiots to our hearts content, but I think the worth of a thread, and a forum, is the information it imparts and the objectives it acheives.

Rob Wilson wrote:It does however highlight a flaw, that a discussion point raised by a Board member cannot be considered closed until the board member has had a chance to rebut/clarify any points raised in the Senate.

Any thoughts?
If a member wishes to rebut/clarify can they not appeal to a mod?.

Agreed. We've got a large staff of moderators here and a similarly number of active Senators. If a member wishes to make a point, there are a lot of people he or she can PM.

Post by **LadyTevar** » 2006-09-08 03:34pm

I also like and support the second proposal, but think the first needs work.

Post by **Coyote** » 2006-09-08 06:03pm

Suggestion #2 is t3h uber, and if preservation of historical archives that showcase good behavior, it may well give a regular job to our resident Lorekeeper!!

(in other words, I have a moderator for said forum already in mind, and his initials are fgalkin.)

Post by **Surlethe** » 2006-09-11 08:29am

Is it possible (and practical) to implement a copy-and-paste function in the board's programming? I'd think it nice to be able to copy posts out of threads into a new one; this would enable the accumulation of essays, rebuttals to 9/11 conspiracy theories (e.g.) without destroying the integrity of the original threads.

Mad · Post by **Mad** » 2006-09-11 09:24am

Suggestion #2 is very nice, but implementing it effectively could be tricky. The section will be pretty massive and it will need to be organized such that its information is readily accessible despite the size.

That said, I support this and any efforts to have an effective implementation of it.

Post by **Surlethe** » 2006-09-11 10:23am

I received the following private message, which I thought raised an interesting point pertinent to the issue:

Rogue 9 wrote:I've been following the Senate discussion on the creation of a new forum for preserving scholarly posts with some interest, and when the discussion turned to implementing a copy-and-paste function on the board, it occurred to me that it might actually be easier to do such a function by copying the contents of the posts to an off-board webpage. It would be much easier to organize, and I don't know that there'd be too much occasion to post responses to such posts that didn't consist of a pointless attaboy or me-too, so it might be worth considering just skipping the forum headache and making an archive.

I've seen this done on EzBoard's software before, so I know it's possible. I don't know the specifics of how to code it, but since EzBoard dumps threads once a forum gets over twenty pages long, a couple guys at a gaming discussion forum I frequent cooked up some code that automatically copied the threads on page 20 over to an archive site. Mike wouldn't need anything remotely so complex, of course, because the project wouldn't involve archiving everything automatically.

If, of course, there is some overriding reason to keep it on the board so threads can still be posted to, disregard all of the above.

Since we already have an archive which is updated regularly, I don't know how difficult or easy it would be to simply move the posts deemed worthy of it to an external website, and I'm not sure how well this addresses the perceived need for a "good" version of the Hall of Shame.

Post by **Broomstick** » 2006-09-11 11:04am

The "good" version of the Hall of Shame would, of course, be the Hall of Honor.

I like the idea of showcasing the good as well as the bad.

Spyder · Post by **Spyder** » 2006-09-12 04:38am

Could the formation of a senate lobby possibly stimulate interest in SDN policy? While we do have off topic, there may be some benefit in a specific board for the discussion of SDN itself. This is a slightly broader scope then just to act as a lobby for the senate, which would be one of this board's functions. It would also allow a place for members to discuss policy amongst themselves and provide a means for them to comment on discussions within the senate without directly interfering with them.