Project

General

Profile

Actions

Beschluss / Décision #6118

closed

Forum

Added by Simon Rupf almost 11 years ago. Updated over 10 years ago.

Status:
Abgelehnt / Refusée
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Start date:
10 February 2014
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Estimated time:
Beschlussart / Forme:
Mumblesitzung / Réunion mumble
Umsetzung / Réalisation:
Antragsteller/Demandeur:
Stimme/Vote Jorgo:
Stimme/Vote Pipo:
Stimme/Vote SteffG:
Stimme/Vote niggi:
Stimme/Vote Jonas:
Stimme/Vote Vipa:
Stimme/Vote Pascal:

Description

Again we have issues with the behavior of members in the forum. Instead of treating this as a technical or legal issue, we could instead treat it as a political challenge. What should we do with the forum?

1. Don't change anything

That did work so well the last time around (sarcasm). Even I have to agree, that we have to do something.

Pros: not a lot of work in the short term
Cons: not a solution, we will have the same argument again

2. Shut down the forum

The proven Hosni Mubarak solution! Those fools continue to bicker and troll in the forum? Lets just turn it off.

Except that the members will start to find other outlets. Already I see a lot of noise on twitter (even though I don't even use it that actively) and also Facebook, Google+, Reddit, and many more establish themselves quickly as the alternative to the forums. But there we have no easy way of moderating troll posts.

Pros: Frees up resources in the AG DI and for the moderation
Cons: We loose a unified platform for communication, the trolling will move to other communication systems that we cannot so easily moderate

3. Treat it as a social problem

This takes a lot of discipline to pull off and I am not sure if this works for every community. In the newsgroups users that disturbed were labeled with a derogative (troll is the most known) and every user was disciplined by other users, simply not to answer these posts (don't feed them, feed them red herrings, banning of flamewars, invoking Godwin's law, posting pony pictures), so they quickly fall to the bottom of the list.

Pros: No special technical resources needed
Cons: Takes a lot of dedicated users

4. Treat it as a technical problem

There are different takes on this. Maybe we just want the users to use certain features more often. We could enforce the option to hide unliked content (but this could lead to widespread sock puppet use to hide unliked opinions of others). We could add a link to put people to the ignore list next to the users profiles so that the newsgroup style "plonking" is used more often (but this only works for existing members, newcomers are still flooded with all kinds of posts).

We could also switch from a classic webforum to some other community system that has completely different mechanisms build in. If for example such a software enforced personal and public spaces, every user could write with great liberty in the personal pages (similar to facebook), but on public spaces there is moderation enforced by that spaces owner (the board, a workgroup, a section, etc.). New users in such systems usually only see the most popular posts by default and can add contacts or become members of groups to get additional content for their newsfeeds.

Pros: Could lead to completely new mechanisms and less difficulties for the moderation
Cons: A technical challenge more for AG DI, depending on the new solution it could be very difficult to migrate the existing content exept as a static archive.

Do we want to change anything regarding the forum?

  • Yes ()
  • No ()
  • Abstention ()

If yes, which solution should we go for?

  • 2. ()
  • 3. ()
  • 4. ()
Actions #1

Updated by Simon Rupf almost 11 years ago

  • Description updated (diff)
Actions #2

Updated by mrw almost 11 years ago

Please specify the posts or the cites that are a problem in your opinion; If possible without mentioning the authors.

Why not simply complaining misbehaving posts to the moderation?

Actions #3

Updated by Monzambano almost 11 years ago

Simon, I think you forgot an important aspect. In my point of view as a moderator I have the impression that a lot of the forum user wish more or even absolute transparency about the forum's moderation. Nonetheless the actual system isn't a very transparent one. It works as a system of anonym denunciation (a forum user complains at a higher instance about the behaviour of another forum user). So, my question is: Is there any technical possible way to transform the moderation's system into a more transparent and more democratic way?

Actions #4

Updated by Atropos over 10 years ago

  • Status changed from New to Tabled
Actions #5

Updated by Atropos over 10 years ago

  • Assignee set to mrw
  • Target version changed from nächste Gemeinsame Vorstandssitzung to vorstandsitzung 2014 03 04
Actions #6

Updated by Atropos over 10 years ago

  • Target version changed from vorstandsitzung 2014 03 04 to Vorstandsitzung 2014 03 11
Actions #7

Updated by Atropos over 10 years ago

  • Target version changed from Vorstandsitzung 2014 03 11 to Vorstandsitzung 2014 03 18
Actions #8

Updated by Atropos over 10 years ago

  • Target version deleted (Vorstandsitzung 2014 03 18)
Actions #9

Updated by Atropos over 10 years ago

  • Tracker changed from Motion to Beschluss / Décision
  • Target version set to Vorstandsitzung 2014 03 18
  • Beschlussart / Forme set to Mumblesitzung / Réunion mumble
Actions #10

Updated by Atropos over 10 years ago

  • Umsetzung / Réalisation set to mrw
Actions #11

Updated by mrw over 10 years ago

Wie bereits letzte Woche und bei meiner Wahl erwähnt, biete ich an, einen Prozess in die Wege zu leiten, um die Parteiinterne Kommunikation zu überarbeiten und Wege zu finden, wie wir innerhalb der Partei besser diskutieren und Entscheidungen erarbeiten können.

Eigentlich haben wir das bereits in der letzten Sitzung so beschlossen:

Aufteilung Aufgaben Vize.

Guillaume Policy und Refenden, Programmarbeit
Marc: 1. Working new Homepage, 2. Working communication (i.e. on the homepage), 3. Useful Discussion Tool (Forum/rules or other, e.g. Liquid Democracy) (Webseite und interne Kommunikation und Pressearbeit und PR) Marc ist STV von Alexis in der Deutschweiz. Und auch als STV an den Sitzungen/Versammlungen.

Daher Antrag auf Nichteintreten und Schliessen des Tickets als «Considered».

Actions #12

Updated by Atropos over 10 years ago

  • Target version changed from Vorstandsitzung 2014 03 18 to Vorstandsitzung 2014 03 24
Actions #13

Updated by Atropos over 10 years ago

  • Status changed from Tabled to Abgelehnt / Refusée
Actions

Also available in: Atom PDF