That New Forum Smell

[Caretaker]

So we have a shiny new forum to play with, I've added in a number of forums and I'm still tweaking or changing things as I go but we'll get something that works sorted and I'm opening the floor here to suggestions.

So far I have:

• Adding a topic for discussing cars.
• Adding an area for topics discussing our furry art community sites.
• A request for a dark theme.

I am aware of a few little hiccups, initially I was not able to view newly added posts while viewing a post without refreshing but it is now working for me. These might possibly be cache related (both browser and server settings) so clearing cache might help.

 

I have also promoted some of the former forum staff, to moderator positions so that there are some available to handle issues.

We also need to write up a set of forum rules, in plain english that covers what would be reasonably fair restrictions.

Update: Edit timer has been adjusted to 20 minutes from five. Likes have been doubled to 20.

Edited September 25, 2015 by Carenath

[Sidewalk Surfboard]

Sounds good to me. Thanks for making this place great.

[Summercat]

Make certain you codify Rule 0.

Also, excuse me while I rub my scent glands over EVERYTHING.

Edit:

 

Also, allow us to edit posts beyond the tiny window.

Edited September 25, 2015 by Summercat
Asking for edit window extension

[ChaosCalix]

Make certain you codify Rule 0.

Also, excuse me while I rub my scent glands over EVERYTHING.

Edit:

 

Also, allow us to edit posts beyond the tiny window.

I agree. Having something like two to five minutes to silently edit a post (unless someone posts before we do) is kinda handy.
Especially if you're like me and edit 60% of your posts right after sending them because of a typo, oversight, missing thought, or what have you.

Edited September 25, 2015 by ChaosCalix

[Summercat]

I agree. Having something like two to five minutes to silently edit a post (unless someone posts before we do) is kinda handy.Especially if you're me and edit 60% of your posts right after sending them because of a typo, oversight, missing thought, or what have you.

Well, my issue is if I wanted to edit the starting post in, say, a Megathread, to include links or new updates. I can't do that, beyond the short window - so if I wanted to update a project...

[SirRob]

A dark theme would be awesome. Furry art site discussion seems a little specific... but maybe that could be our niche. We don't really have one at the moment, do we? On a similar note, contact information on the user/poster sidebar, including icons for various art sites would be very useful.

Also, I know I've brought this up twice already, but would it be possible for regular users to be able to edit their opening posts?

[ChaosCalix]

Well, my issue is if I wanted to edit the starting post in, say, a Megathread, to include links or new updates. I can't do that, beyond the short window - so if I wanted to update a project...

I wasn't aware that editing literally got disabled after a certain amount of time. That's a huge problem for me.

Edit: So it does, I see my post above can't be edited now. That's... really bad. Definitely voting for that to be fixed.

Edited September 25, 2015 by ChaosCalix

[Kinare]

It already smells like wet dog in here. 3:

Only thing I'm really missing now is the ability to brag to the world that I identify with panthers underneath my avatar.

Also prefer if editing had more time like the above peeps are saying, as well as gave a brief maybe 1 minute period where you could edit your post without the "edited by" line appearing mandatory. Sometimes I just make a silly typo because my keyboard is an ass, not because I changed pertinent info.

And is having us log in again every few minutes intended or is it just me experiencing this or wut? Kinda irritating, especially since the login pop-up doesn't work, it makes you go to another page to login. Edit: apparently every time I click on the "forums" button at the top, that's when it logs me out. Huh.

Edited September 25, 2015 by Kinare

[Ginpanther]

Carenath, thank you for doing everything you've done. I know this has been anything but fun - this has probably been stressful, upsetting and downright uncivil. But through it all you've done the forum right, and I appreciate you for it.

The phoenix was burned down but has risen from the ashes again - and this time I think is going to fly just fine. Can't wait to see where it takes us.

[ChaosCalix]

Ah, found another thing. Having an option to disable automatic emoticons. I HATE using them, and because some are tied to generic combos like "x D", I have to avoid doing some faces that I usually might to punctuate a post, because I can't tell it to not parse it as an emoticon.

[yell0wf0x]

I kinda agree with the others regard editing posts. I'm sure there will be topics that would require someone to edit first posts more than a dozen times.

[Umbra.Exe]

I think it would be nice to have little icons under our avatars again, to link to our art galleries, Skype, etc.

Thank you for everything that you've done so far, though! I admire your tenacity despite the setbacks you've had.

[Canis]

Ah, found another thing. Having an option to disable automatic emoticons. I HATE using them, and because some are tied to generic combos like "x D", I have to avoid doing some faces that I usually might to punctuate a post, because I can't tell it to not parse it as an emoticon.

Yes! This I agree, but for me, I don't like using the emotes i.e. , so I just use Japanese emoticons (^_^ )

http://japaneseemoticons.me/all-japanese-emoticons/

[Spot]

This new forum is to new and unfamiliar and makes me scared and uneasy, WHO ARE YOU PEOPLE?!?! DX

Also, hi!

Edited September 25, 2015 by Mr. Fox

[PheagleAdler]

Oh, hello! This is new

So, no attachment to Furaffinity whatsoever, no old posts, and it doesn't even LOOK like FAF. Guess if we have to start over this is a good decision.

[PheagleAdler]

This new forum is to new and unfamiliar and makes me scared and uneasy, WHO ARE YOU PEOPLE?!?! DX

Also, hi!

Who are you? You have no profile image!

[Ginpanther]

This new forum is to new and unfamiliar and makes me scared and uneasy, WHO ARE YOU PEOPLE?!?! DX

Also, hi!

Relevant image is possibly relevant ^{oh man I love this ATTACH OTHER MEDIA feature too.}

[Clove Darkwave]

You can't get rid of a Bean-sídhe that easily! I would sing for the old forum but you know it already died so I suppose I'm a bit late on that.

I've got a couple requests:

1. Can we get something akin to The Black Hole made, if it wasn't already?
2. How about a section for other subculture and lifestyle interests? Some of us like myself aren't into Furry as much, but are hip deep in others.

I've got a few suggestions for forum rules that are reasonable and should make us all happier in the long run:

1. No obnoxious font as a posting habit. This includes gigantic/unreasonably small text and any type of colored fonts or styles that would make up the entire body of a post.
2. Keep the forums SFW, if you have to ask you should reconsider posting it.
3. No extreme insults directed at users. Discussions can get heated, this is natural and one should take the good with the bad for a healthy means of communication, but they should stay within reasonable civility (For an internet community).
4. Don't post links to anything illegal, obviously.

I mean you could go on but a lot of it would be the typical common rules in most places. The rules here should be reasonable but not overtly heavy-handed like a couple of other places most of us know. It quashes discussion, and frankly a forum filled with drama is active and alive. It's what separated FAF from Wzl Forums.

Edited September 25, 2015 by Clove Darkwave

[Spot]

Relevant image is possibly relevant ^{oh man I love this ATTACH OTHER MEDIA feature too.}

Perfect!

 

Edited September 25, 2015 by Mr. Fox

[PheagleAdler]

How do we view users whom we are following? There's no list. There IS a list of followers though.

[Ginpanther]

perfect!

There should be a dark theme too. Just a thought.

Yeah, I agree on the dark theme -- I'm just used to browsing in the eternal midnight that is my life. Or, more probably, I grew up with green-on-black (or on the extremely lucky days, orange-on-black) terminals and all these bright backgrounds against dark text make my eyes ache.

PS to Mr Fox: Please fix your avatar, I cannot condone these triggering acts of anonymity.

[Wolflich]

Which one is 'members' under followed content? I don't have any of either.

[PheagleAdler]

So, correct me if I'm wrong, but the titles right below your username are based solely on post count?

[Kinare]

wtb 1x post timestamps for all. Offering happies directed at screen, estimated to be worth $0 to 99.9% of persons.

[Clove Darkwave]

I insist my title be edited to "Spooky Banshee" in honor of reasons.

[Spot]

PS to Mr Fox: Please fix your avatar, I cannot condone these triggering acts of anonymity.

Don't lie, you just like my bedroom eyes. :3c

[ChaosCalix]

 

I've got a few suggestions for forum rules that are reasonable and should make us all happier in the long run:

1. No obnoxious font as a posting habit. This includes gigantic/unreasonably small text and any type of colored fonts or styles that would make up the entire body of a post.
2. Keep the forums SFW, if you have to ask you should reconsider posting it.
3. No extreme insults directed at users. Discussions can get heated, this is natural and one should take the good with the bad for a healthy means of communication, but they should stay within reasonable civility (For an internet community).
4. Don't post links to anything illegal, obviously.

I mean you could go on but a lot of it would be the typical common rules in most places. The rules here should be reasonable but not overtly heavy-handed like a couple of other places most of us know. It quashes discussion, and frankly a forum filled with drama is active and alive. It's what separated FAF from Wzl Forums.

I've been waiting to see official rules before suggesting anything, but I agree with these four.

1: This is obvious to me. If you consider the fact that there will most certainly be a dark theme later, people who use font colours excessively may be making their post completely unreadable for people using a theme they aren't. This is a bad thing for obvious reasons.
2: Shouldn't even need saying, really. While I don't think NSFW is bad, threads with it should be clearly marked as such so they can be avoided. And this also means "don't be a dick and post NSFW stuff in threads that aren't marked as such".
3: Yes, yes, YES. It's kinda surprising what kind of shit people get away with sometimes. I'm sorry if people don't agree with this, but I don't tolerate this stuff, and any forum that does has lost my membership.
4: Duh.

[Clove Darkwave]

3 is kind of a difficult line to work with when it comes to rules. Context and intent play a huge part in whether or not they're just part of the conversation or are needless abuse. For example, it's one thing to say "You're being an idiot/pinhead/moron" etc. to someone in a discussion and another thing entirely to quote a user and be like "Yeah well you're an idiot." with no provocation or reasonable cause.

I don't support abusive discourse, but neither do I support heavy-handedness and light pollution. Discussions aren't all happy smiles all the time, and it's really not that uncommon to say "yeah that's fucking stupid" in face to face conversations. This sort of thing kind of requires moderation that understands a balance.

[Ginpanther]

Don't lie, you just like my bedroom eyes. :3c

They are incredibly fantastic. You had best take me to bed or lose me forever!

[Kinare]

For example, it's one thing to say "You're being an idiot/pinhead/moron" etc. to someone in a discussion and another thing entirely to quote a user and be like "Yeah well you're an idiot." with no provocation or reasonable cause.

If you're having an adult discussion and not being a moron yourself, then there should be no reason to insult someone ever, regardless of how apart of the conversation you are. Being apart of it doesn't automatically mean you can insult someone with the opposite opinion. If they are being a moron, be a not moron and ignore/report them, then done. Will be a tough one to enforce in a fandom like this where insults are common and even used as ways to tell someone you love them, though. =p Someone who doesn't know the two people seemingly bickering would be inclined to punish when unnecessary. To cover that issue, I would propose copying a policy from a website I moderated for previously: for an insult to be acted upon the report must come from the person being insulted, not people who read it and might take something to mean what it doesn't. The only possible exceptions might be extremely racist or sexists comments directed to an entire group, rather than one person.

[Spot]

They are incredibly fantastic. You had best take me to bed or lose me forever!

Sorry but I'm taken, Minty is my waifu. :v

[Clove Darkwave]

I don't disagree with you entirely, although I would tell you the counter-point that one may naively think adults do not do this. Adults are just as much of insensitive, mean, and everything else as their younger counterparts. They merely find another way of saying it, ways that are subtle and indirect.
 My primary concern is active, healthy discussion in the forum. You cannot achieve this by threatening users, and the clever ones will just get away with it anyway. Like every boss at every job does to staff they don't like.

[Ginpanther]

3 is kind of a difficult line to work with when it comes to rules. Context and intent play a huge part in whether or not they're just part of the conversation or are needless abuse. For example, it's one thing to say "You're being an idiot/pinhead/moron" etc. to someone in a discussion and another thing entirely to quote a user and be like "Yeah well you're an idiot." with no provocation or reasonable cause.

I don't support abusive discourse, but neither do I support heavy-handedness and light pollution. Discussions aren't all happy smiles all the time, and it's really not that uncommon to say "yeah that's fucking stupid" in face to face conversations. This sort of thing kind of requires moderation that understands a balance.

These forums had a reputation for not being a hugbox, which is something I continue to believe in and, further, I do endorse the mentality. In contrast, I think a majority of us can tell when a member of the community has gone beyond "tough love" and moved into egregious abuse. The problem I have seen is that ultimately what is perceived as dispensing tough love to one person is seen as an attack on/by another - and the moderators are asked to play a role as a judge on where that line is crossed. I understand it is easier and more digestible to some if there is a clear-drawn line rule for mods to fall back on ("you used a mean name so you're wrong and have earned an infraction" would be a good example), which could be reduced to "no ad-hominem attacks") but since we're reinventing ourselves we have an opportunity to strike that approach in a new way. I don't have a good answer on how that could be done, so I'm curious what others think. My first approach would be to say "let the mod evaluate the discussion and decide if things got out of hand." The downside of that is there have been blatant abuses in the past with letting the mod decide what construed an attack and what did not, because they would make the definition plastic and expand or contract it to suit their needs.

The community has asked for clear criteria to ensure equal enforcement. Is that possible? I think so, but it seems to me that there will be a need for a few revisions as the moderation team strives to achieve the reasonable balance.

If we give it a few iterations, I think it'll work out fine.

[ChaosCalix]

If you're having an adult discussion and not being a moron yourself, then there should be no reason to insult someone ever, regardless of how apart of the conversation you are. Being apart of it doesn't automatically mean you can insult someone with the opposite opinion. If they are being a moron, be a not moron and ignore/report them, then done. Will be a tough one to enforce in a fandom like this where insults are common and even used as ways to tell someone you love them, though. =p Someone who doesn't know the two people seemingly bickering would be inclined to punish when unnecessary. To cover that issue, I would propose copying a policy from a website I moderated for previously: for an insult to be acted upon the report must come from the person being insulted, not people who read it and might take something to mean what it doesn't. The only possible exceptions might be extremely racist or sexists comments directed to an entire group, rather than one person.

Neither of you are wrong, in my opinion. However, it's not that simple.

If a report comes from a notable amount of other users, then not acting on it is irresponsible. If that's the case, their behaviour is clearly disrupting things for other users, and even if no actual punishment is given.. A warning is still warranted. Otherwise you're allowing people to disrupt your forum. It is better to ask that person to tone it down and risk upsetting ONE person, than to let them continue and risk upsetting everyone who sees their messages.

(just as a slight addition: I don't believe in hugboxes, in case anyone thinks so. I just don't believe in letting people act like assholes all day out of fear of MAKING a website a hugbox)

Edited September 25, 2015 by ChaosCalix

[Clove Darkwave]

See that's the problem. What's construed as "plastic" to some is recognized as "context" to others. Granted there's an obvious line where it is definitely not context. I'm sure moderation will be able to work it out.

[Dr. Doggo]

How about drawing/sketchbook subforums?

One for good artists, and one for shitters like me.

[Ginpanther]

If a report comes from a notable amount of other users, then not acting on it is irresponsible. If that's the case, their behaviour is clearly disrupting things for other users, and even if no actual punishment is given.. A warning is still warranted. (just as a slight addition: I don't believe in hugboxes, in case anyone thinks so. I just don't believe in letting people act like assholes all day out of fear of MAKING a website a hugbox)

I think this deserves highlighting: reports should absolutely factor into the equation. If enough folks call a post out, there is most likely a problem with it (or so the 80/20 rule tells us).

[Kinare]

I don't disagree with you entirely, although I would tell you the counter-point that one may naively think adults do not do this. Adults are just as much of insensitive, mean, and everything else as their younger counterparts. They merely find another way of saying it, ways that are subtle and indirect.
 My primary concern is active, healthy discussion in the forum. You cannot achieve this by threatening users, and the clever ones will just get away with it anyway. Like every boss at every job does to staff they don't like.

My "adults" reference merely refers to what adults are supposed to act like (all mature 'n' stuff), not what most seem to. That's why we have mods and rules though, to help keep discussions civil, even among immature adults. Saying "I don't think you know what you're talking about, so go away plz" is a much nicer way of saying "you're a moron, fuck off". Now I don't see the latter as so bad tbh, but there are worse derogatory things a person could say instead of that and, from what I gathered from your suggestion earlier, you'd be perfectly fine with the most derogatory of statements as long as the person sending one was previously involved in the discussion and isn't jumping in just to say it. Biggest issue with that is if you allow it at all, it's going to happen the way you don't want it to a lot more than if you tried to get people to not do it.

I also would not suggest banning someone for a once or twice offense here as it's pretty minor, but just a stern holler from a mod telling them to cool off their beans before throwing them at people might stomp out any newbie jerks. The more seasoned jerks would be harder to tame, of course.

Edited September 25, 2015 by Kinare

[Clove Darkwave]

I motion for an auto world filter to be put in place that automatically replaces the word "Shit" with "Piche".

(Yes I am being facetious, though I'd still laugh hard if it happened. Perhaps as an April Fool's thing haha)

[Dr. Doggo]

Can we get the site a little tiny red phoenix icon instead of that awful paw sign?

[Kinare]

If a report comes from a notable amount of other users, then not acting on it is irresponsible.

I'm simply speaking in regards to arguments where insults are thrown out. All it should take in that case is one report, that of the one being insulted. If a mod agrees that the person is justified in their feeling of being attacked, then they act. If that person never feels attacked and they are literally the only one being attacked, regardless of how many people report it, why should someone act? Again, the exception would be comments directed at an entire group (to be more specific, if someone started raving about KKK being awesome and insulting entire ethnicities), even when a conversation is between just two people.

It is all a bunch of fine lines, but you need to also have standards for moderating in place and I truly believe this would be the best way to go with that because it just makes sense if you stop and think about it from a mod's perspective. Of course this is just my opinion and the current staff of this forum may disagree. As long as it doesn't become a horrible environment to post in, I'm happy.

[ChaosCalix]

My first approach would be to say "let the mod evaluate the discussion and decide if things got out of hand." The downside of that is there have been blatant abuses in the past with letting the mod decide what construed an attack and what did not, because they would make the definition plastic and expand or contract it to suit their needs.

For what it's worth, on forums I've moderated in the past, we tend to never jump to action unless absolutely warranted (i.e. clear violation of rules, such as posting pornography or sharing someone's personal information). For those situations, we always discussed it between at least two or three moderators in an open chat group. Moderator actions were also generally logged and reported in a staff-only section for book keeping. Not doing either of those things could result in your status being terminated for not following procedure. It kept things clean, and the users (generally) happy.

I'm simply speaking in regards to arguments where insults are thrown out. All it should take in that case is one report, that of the one being insulted. If a mod agrees that the person is justified in their feeling of being attacked, then they act. If that person never feels attacked and they are literally the only one being attacked, regardless of how many people report it, why should someone act?

-snip-

As long as it doesn't become a horrible environment to post in, I'm happy.

For your first part, I agree, partially. First half? Of course. If the only person to report it is the person it is directed at, then that may as well be a 100% report rate, as it is meant FOR that person. If they feel personally attacked, it is worth investigating. Sometimes it's nothing and should be ignored. Sometimes it might cross a line, and might be worth being dealt with.

For the second half of it.... I disagree, and it also ties in to the last part of your message. Not dealing with things like that can create a toxic environment, even if the person it is directed at is not bothered by it. If it is a very common thing, or a common behaviour from a specific user, then that is problematic. As you said, there's a lot of fine lines. Many of these lines can intersect, or even contradict, one another. But it's worth remembering that a forum is bigger than the two people talking in a thread at any given time, and you can't ignore the rest of your users if they have an issue with the way people are acting somewhere.

Meh, it's complicated. I can expand that by another five paragraphs explaining it, but it'd ultimately still boil down to "It's complicated"

[Hendikins]

For what it's worth, on forums I've moderated in the past, we tend to never jump to action unless absolutely warranted (i.e. clear violation of rules, such as posting pornography or sharing someone's personal information). For those situations, we always discussed it between at least two or three moderators in an open chat group. Moderator actions were also generally logged and reported in a staff-only section for book keeping. Not doing either of those things could result in your status being terminated for not following procedure. It kept things clean, and the users (generally) happy.

The main problem with red tape is that it doesn't scale well. Within reason moderators need to be empowered to act on their own, cross-checking with other staff if something is borderline or large scale.

It is, however, of critical importance that moderator actions be able to be audited if required, and if reasonably possible the actions should be reversible. I've only ever moderated forums using phpBB, VBulletin or custom software, so I don't know what this particular forum software does in that respect.

Screening and training new mods along with auditing existing mods is a very effective way to manage the "rogue moderator" risk.

[ChaosCalix]

The main problem with red tape is that it doesn't scale well. Within reason moderators need to be empowered to act on their own, cross-checking with other staff if something is borderline or large scale.

It is, however, of critical importance that moderator actions be able to be audited if required, and if reasonably possible the actions should be reversible. I've only ever moderated forums using phpBB, VBulletin or custom software, so I don't know what this particular forum software does in that respect.

Screening and training new mods along with auditing existing mods is a very effective way to manage the "rogue moderator" risk.

Oh, I agree. That's why we had the exceptions for clear rule breaking.

Usually if something had to be discussed, it wasn't exactly important enough that it had to be dealt with the moment it was detected. When it comes to people acting needlessly dickish, you kinda have a few days to talk it over and agree on a course of action, because it's not the end of the world if you don't act immediately.

Also, yeah. Usually, reversible actions are the best ones. Things like being able to restore deleted comments, for example, are GREAT tools to reverse erroneous decisions. I'm not sure what tools this forum software has or supports, but I do hope for the sake of the moderators, that they're diverse.

[Wolflich]

I vote that insults = fine, harassment = bad. I like that grey area between socially acceptable and legally acceptable that allows societies to self-police to some extent.

[Kinare]

even if the person it is directed at is not bothered by it

The main problem with the fandom that we would run into though is someone, even multiple people, getting butthurt over something that has nothing to do with them, they just assume it must offend someone because it sounds offensive. Example: say a group of newbies joins, unfamiliar with the lovely nicknames we all have for each other, and sees someone calling someone else or furs in general "furfag" (which is a shockingly common term for some reason). First time I saw that it was like... "wat? Why is that not being dealt with?" But then as I got into this shiz some more I saw that's just how it is, people love each other by being huge dicks around here.

Point being, the mods don't need to go through a ton of reports on something that isn't even a violation and just a dumb pet name someone has for someone else. Assuming this forum gets big like the last, that would undoubtedly lead to many stupid nonsense reports. I guess though if they have enough help then it doesn't matter much.

And yeah, I'm not saying to hard code exact rules, but some bare basics should be set so that there are definite rules for the people who make posts follow as well as moderator guidelines, not just hoping whoever deals with a report agrees with you on your opinion of what is ok and not. Leaving too much open to personal interpretation leaves too much room for inconsistency.

On the topic of being able to reverse things and keep track of data: the last big forum I moderated for and the one I currently admin for both have a good way of handling deleted posts that could be considered an option here. When a post is deleted, it doesn't vanish for good, it instead goes into a "null" forum only viewable by people of a certain rank. My current community also has an option to hide a specific user's posts after deletion, which we do for any spam bots or severe posts when we go to ban the account because we don't want any ol' admin seeing those in the null forum and getting curious. The posts are always recoverable by un-doing the "hide posts" option if we really needed to. We don't have a fancy ticket system like my last site had (yet), we instead use a Google doc to keep track of all reports and actions taken. Might be a good way to go for this site too.

[FlynnCoyote]

Just find some other forum that's doing alright and copy paste their rules.

You can edit them as you go and we figure new shit out.

[Kalmor]

The main problem with red tape is that it doesn't scale well. Within reason moderators need to be empowered to act on their own, cross-checking with other staff if something is borderline or large scale.

It is, however, of critical importance that moderator actions be able to be audited if required, and if reasonably possible the actions should be reversible. I've only ever moderated forums using phpBB, VBulletin or custom software, so I don't know what this particular forum software does in that respect.

Screening and training new mods along with auditing existing mods is a very effective way to manage the "rogue moderator" risk.

Indeed. 

When things are less clear cut, we pretty much always do a sanity check with fellow mods to judge whether or not action should be taken against something. There is discretion involved but it's more the discretion of the whole team rather than just one mod the vast majority of the time. The only times where it isn't is when there is only one mod online/available and they need to stop things getting out of hand.

[Lizard King]

It's great, it barely smells like cum and sweat yet.

[Gryphoneer]

Give it some time to get the old flair back.