New K1 subforums?

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

I must have misunderstood. My goal was for another thread on a different topic.

[ChasUK 0]

I must have misunderstood. My goal was for another thread on a different topic.

Fair enough. It kinda read clearly to me, but no worries.

From your last post in the locked thread, you mention non participant moderating. Simple question, who are the non participant mods? How are they available to effectively mod if they aren't participants without someone hitting a report button? Even if someone does hit a report button, isn't it you that gets the notification of that report? If this is the case then surely that means unless you are present on the site there is no moderation. If so, isn't this the very problem we are trying to solve?

Bottom line. It seems logical to me that there are needs for more constant, effective moderation. As it stands, I don't think we are very aware of the presence of the non participant mods, or really see them do any moderating on a level which would improve the site generally as I'm sure everybody wants. N'est-ce pas?

[Marilyn. 340]

......so much as focus purely on the need for better moderation, the parameters of moderating work, and the method and circumstances of selection........

Personally, I'd like to see an agreement on there being member-based moderators appointed and have their roles clarified before there was any suggestion as to who might be best suited. Different roles may warrant consideration of different people after all.

Which is why I suggested that we perhaps start a thread in which to have the discussion.

Sure thing. If am pretty pressed for time at the moment so if you want to start it I will chime in later. Mention the new forum and make sure to clearly define how the new idea mike augment or replace that purpose. Conversation is always good!

I know you may not want to hear this but I wanted to say it before things got further. At this point I am not considering member moderators. The moderation will continue to be run but non participating parties that act solely based on the Terms of Service.

Am I missing something here? I just spent ages reading through all this. From the above quotes it looks to me like Andy suggested moderation parameters, Tracy said that was what she was suggesting a separate thread for, Cap'n Ewok said "go for it", but then locked the very thread with that final post!!??!!??

I'm confused. Did something change or did Cap'n Ewok not understand what Andy and Tracy suggested.

he was referring to another post from someone else....

[Ladylethal 12]

The only not so nice comment I could have about the new subforum is that it's tiny and I could barely even see it was there. If people can't see it, they'll just keep posting in the main forum.

[Marilyn. 340]

these are the order of the post in the way they appeared... Captain Ewok was talking about the thing Yodrak mentioned....

Captain Ewok,

Make it a regular forum, and make it for any stage of the VJ process - anything that just says "I got it", no matter what 'it' is, to which all responses are likely to be "Congratulations".

Yodrak

Can anyone comment on how easy the new section is to find? Should we make it a regular forum and not a sub forum? etc... let me know .

Where would such a forum b e placed? I am certainly open to this if it makes sense and does not create a forum that is cluttered with unrelated information.

It may not be a good idea to put names forward at this point so much as focus purely on the need for better moderation, the parameters of moderating work, and the method and circumstances of selection. If, for example, it is felt that Captain Ewok ought to be the arbiter of choice in selection, it's unjust to push names forward here that could influence choice to the possible detriment of others who are busy in other areas and not mentioned here.

Personally, I'd like to see an agreement on there being member-based moderators appointed and have their roles clarified before there was any suggestion as to who might be best suited. Different roles may warrant consideration of different people after all.

Which is why I suggested that we perhaps start a thread in which to have the discussion.

Sure thing. If am pretty pressed for time at the moment so if you want to start it I will chime in later. Mention the new forum and make sure to clearly define how the new idea mike augment or replace that purpose. Conversation is always good!

[ChasUK 0]

he was referring to another post from someone else....

Umm, no actually he wasn't.

I quoted the posts in the exact order they were posted, what is more, the main ones were nested, so I couldn't get them out of context.

Besides, The Cap'n already answered by saying he did if fact misunderstand. See his post at the top of this very page.

[Marilyn. 340]

he was referring to another post from someone else....

Umm, no actually he wasn't.

I quoted the posts in the exact order they were posted, what is more, the main ones were nested, so I couldn't get them out of context.

Besides, The Cap'n already answered by saying he did if fact misunderstand. See his post at the top of this very page.

yeah , he thought TracyTn was talking about the new forum idea that Yordak was talking about....

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

I have moved the subforums down about 5 pixels from the text above it. I hope it makes the sub-forums stick out more (especially for the new one).

[TracyTN 237]

he was referring to another post from someone else....

Umm, no actually he wasn't.

I quoted the posts in the exact order they were posted, what is more, the main ones were nested, so I couldn't get them out of context.

Besides, The Cap'n already answered by saying he did if fact misunderstand. See his post at the top of this very page.

yeah , he thought TracyTn was talking about the new forum idea that Yordak was talking about....

Sorry, but I wasn't referring to Yodrak at all. His posts in this thread were something like 10 pages ago - my memory isn't that good.

My comment came directly from the post of Andy's.

[Marilyn. 340]

he was referring to another post from someone else....

Umm, no actually he wasn't.

I quoted the posts in the exact order they were posted, what is more, the main ones were nested, so I couldn't get them out of context.

Besides, The Cap'n already answered by saying he did if fact misunderstand. See his post at the top of this very page.

yeah , he thought TracyTn was talking about the new forum idea that Yordak was talking about....

Sorry, but I wasn't referring to Yodrak at all. His posts in this thread were something like 10 pages ago - my memory isn't that good.

My comment came directly from the post of Andy's.

yeah, I know that but Ewok thought that.... Yordak posted right before your discussion about the other thing....

anywho it isn't a big deal I guess...

Edited March 30, 2007 by MarilynP

[TracyTN 237]

What's bad is I didn't even remember Yodrak's more recent post!

[Jenn! 918]

Well, I'm just gonna say it. So many people have taken so much time to write out some really thoughtful suggestions and observations on the matter. The way I see it, they have been dismissed with what amounts to, "we're not gonna do it that way just 'cuz." All signs point to something fishy going on. Why all the secrecy? I'm reminded of the Debbie Schlussel blog fiasco when we were all just told to not talk about it but were not told why. Maybe it has something to do with the accusations about moderation here that were brought up on the blog.

Edited March 30, 2007 by jenn3539

[TracyTN 237]

I must agree that nothing will change, 'because'. I think its sad because I like this place, and it has helped NUMEROUS people navigate immigration territory. But it could be so much better with just a little work and trust in its long standing members.

Oh well. Can't say we didn't try.

[Yodrak 7]

Captain Ewok,

Place it right at the top of the list, where it will be hard to miss. My sense is that most people do not look very far down the list of forums when looking for a place to post, which is why the K1 and K3 forums in particular contain questions ranging from before the first meeting to after citizenship - they figure, 'I will be / I am / I was a K1, K1 forum is the place to post' no matter what their topic is.

Call the forum Successes-petition,visa,AOS,EAD, etc

Yodrak

Where would such a forum b e placed? I am certainly open to this if it makes sense and does not create a forum that is cluttered with unrelated information.

[Andy 2]

Well, I'm just gonna say it. So many people have taken so much time to write out some really thoughtful suggestions and observations on the matter. The way I see it, they have been dismissed with what amounts to, "we're not gonna do it that way just 'cuz." All signs point to something fishy going on. Why all the secrecy? I'm reminded of the Debbie Schlussel blog fiasco when we were all just told to not talk about it but were not told why. Maybe it has something to do with the accusations about moderation here that were brought up on the blog.

In reality, VJ took a nose-dive when users of the forum lost control of it a couple of years ago, and while there were good and valid reasons why that seemed the best course of action at the time, I don't think this site will ever see resolution to the significant underlying issues, whether structural, organisational or behavioural, unless and until members who have a vested interest in how well it functions have some of that control back.

I have the sense in this thread, and the odd twists it's taken in the second half, that it's like a conversation between two deaf people on the phone!

One thing is for sure, we haven't heard an explanation as to WHY we cannot have member moderators and WHY that idea is dismissed out of hand. What we have seen instead is our moderator picking up the ideas put forward that don't involve any control being passed to members and which, even if they are actually the HARD options to achieve, like rewriting the guides, are going to get actioned, while the EASY option of adding member moderators to bring better control and participation are dismissed as if we are naughty children. Without a reasonable explanation as to why this is happening, I can't but help feel rather insulted - that the time and effort taken to raise genuine issues of concern by myself and a number of others who care about the site and how well it works mean nothing at all and aren't taken seriously or with any respect.