New K1 subforums?

[no name 1]

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...sult_type=posts

that is the search results from Consolemaster's latest posts.... yeah there are a couple of congrats in thier but he posts a lot of other stuff too....

revisit that link now....

especially this one:

GOOD LUCK!!!

Hey, what happened to the HUGE pink words you usually post?

Unfortunately, we have members who have a problem with me giving others congratulatory messages and good luck messages to people. I feel very sorry for them. They seem to lack souls, and respect.

Edited March 30, 2007 by devilette

[Marilyn. 340]

I would rather see congrats posts then all the name calling etc that is going on in Off Topic right now

At least he/she got rid of the big font and colour... give the person that much credit....

[no name 1]

I would rather see congrats posts then all the name calling etc that is going on in Off Topic right now

At least he/she got rid of the big font and colour... give the person that much credit....

I hear you. But we have no mod to close that thread!

Thing is with console, he was asked not to spam the site with congrats, yet he persists, throwing it in the Cap'n's face. Not cool.

[Marilyn. 340]

I would rather see congrats posts then all the name calling etc that is going on in Off Topic right now

At least he/she got rid of the big font and colour... give the person that much credit....

I hear you. But we have no mod to close that thread!

Thing is with console, he was asked not to spam the site with congrats, yet he persists, throwing it in the Cap'n's face. Not cool.

I still see only a few on there...

who says he is spamming maybe he genuinely wants to congratulate people

[payxibka 10,045]

At least he/she got rid of the big font and colour...

And had it not been for that "trademark" or the bright yellow avatar, it most likely would have flown below the radar and nobody would even have noticed it much...

[TracyTN 237]

If senior members of this board, who have otherwise proven themselves to be level headed and trustworthy, cannot be 'allowed' to be moderators without undergoing some kind of 'check' on their person - then this place is like no other I've ever been to. How many internet boards do you know whose members have to be 'checked' before they can be mods? Unreal.

We have a thread now in OT that has gone on for WAY too long and could really stand to have been closed rapidly. But no - sadly, no one here is trustworthy enough to have that 'power'.

It IS Captain's board - in the sense that he can run it , have it moderated (or NOT moderated, as it goes) as he sees fit. I agree with that, and I adhere to the TOS. I think the idea of him choosing mods (were we to have them) is a very solid one.

But it IS our board, too. For that matter - would it even BE a board without our sustained contributions and effort? Or would it simply be a shell of a place with some FAQs, guides and example forms?

If Joe Q Newbie joins here and sees that not even senior members are 'granted' the ability to manage the hen house when the fox is away - what does that say about us as a whole? That we are cowboys, and basically, anything goes - until Ewok can get here to handle it. I'm not slagging him for that, as he is one person and entitled to life away from this board. But the fact remains that the board could (in that sense at the very least) stand to have some hands on, and immediate attention when the needs arise.

I would do that if I were asked - I'd be happy to help. But to have my life off this board inspected first? No thank you.

I guess from now on, I'll just live up to my member title (as only I can move threads as needed and have a laugh with my VJ friends. And HOPE that things don't go from bad to worse.

[Marilyn. 340]

At least he/she got rid of the big font and colour...

And had it not been for that "trademark" or the bright yellow avatar, it most likely would have flown below the radar and nobody would even have noticed it much...

yup

[The Molinas 0]

what is wrong with him saying congratulations?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

May I asked what changed overnight to make everyone so determined for this? I would guess that the answer is not much changed overnight however people may feel that the site is not what they want it to be and has changed over time. That being said I am hoping that you can understand that I am indeed trying to make efforts to reign in trolls and other people that are off topic.

I previously noted that if things are so bad then I was not seing it via reported threads. I asked that you demonstrate it or at least let me know by reporting them yet today other than one members threads I have seen no reports on the type of problems you are describing. I hope you can understand that it is hard for me to want to make drastic changes unless I can see there is a drastic problem.

I would like to change things and I would hope that instead of fighting me on this so hard that there is a way for some brain storming on things that can be done to help other than that. I can not believe that is the only possible way to do things. Like in life changes can happen a small step at a time and there are always many ways to make those changes happen.

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

**Btw.... no more congrats related posts in here. Sorry but we need to keep this of all threads on topic.

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

I just re-read the entire thread. May I ask, disregarding the "title" moderator (it is just a word and does not define much really), what features are you thinking that adding to a few members account might lead to added "smoothness and happiness" on the site? From this thread that was actually never raised and I am just curious.... (example: open/closing threads seems like 80% of what was implied would be nice to have on some members accounts since it was noted that I am not around every minute of the day to respond to reported threads).

I just want everyone to know that while I may appear to be digginf my feet in on certain issues it does not mean I am inflexible and honestly I really do want to make this site the best it can be.

[Mags 112]

Judging from suggestions in this thread, the ability to temporarily lock a thread might be useful. Probably wouldn't be needed often, but if there was a major OTT thread at least it could be "nipped in the bud", so to speak. The Captain could then look it over and reopen it if he disagrees.

But you would need someone who wasn't "trigger happy", otherwise there would be tons of locked threads and no real reason for them.

[Jenn! 918]

I just re-read the entire thread. May I ask people, disregarding the "title" moderator, what features are you looking to add to a few members that allow them to help keep the site chugging along smoother? Can you be very specific if possible?

- Ability to rename threads. There are too many threads titled things like, "Need help plz". That's not helpful to others.

- Ability to lock threads with clear TOS violations. May I suggest that if you are worried about abuse that locking a thread require more than one "deputy" to confirm the lock?

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

I just re-read the entire thread. May I ask people, disregarding the "title" moderator, what features are you looking to add to a few members that allow them to help keep the site chugging along smoother? Can you be very specific if possible?

- Ability to rename threads. There are too many threads titled things like, "Need help plz". That's not helpful to others.

- Ability to lock threads with clear TOS violations. May I suggest that if you are worried about abuse that locking a thread require more than one "deputy" to confirm the lock?

I would actually rather give the Original Poster the capability to rename their thread as they should be the only person that can "edit" their content. I hope that makes sense. I think then they could be asked to change the title and then do so. I am totally ok with this.

[Mags 112]

- Ability to lock threads with clear TOS violations. May I suggest that if you are worried about abuse that locking a thread require more than one "deputy" to confirm the lock?

Good in theory...however, what if you are asked, you say no and then that person asks someone else and it gets locked? If that route was followed you would have to have clear defining rules.

My suggestion is perhaps there should be some people who only have one "job". A couple of people lock threads, a couple of people do the "requesting to change thread titles to the members" and then the movers. That way no one does more than another, no one gets too big for their boots and everyone is pretty equal. And, more importantly, no one could be defined as a moderator at all, which I know we are trying to get away from.

Does that make sense to anyone but me? Or is that just far too complicated?

Edited March 30, 2007 by mags