Be polite. Explain.
Do not put stuff like this where everyone can see it (or anywhere):
"A whole lot of you are annoying. Some of you more than others. You know who you are."
Also, when you lock a thread for being in the wrong place, move it to where it belongs. Your behavior is opaque unless explained. Fran441 has good protocol, e.g., "Please discuss in another iPod thread. Thanks." since s/he generally includes an explanation (so at least there's some education going on).
However, the mysterious jonathan just goes off with religious epithets and fails to clarify where a thread belongs (if not in Future Hardware), e.g.,
<a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=003081"; target="_blank">http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=003081</a>;
If you want to bitch slap people for being active, that's your prerogative, but don't expect it to promote quality participation when it's poorly explained and inappropriately negative. Plus, if you do want a different location, *show* where the thread belongs.
I still prefer "Future Hardware" for that thread since that's the location where 970/980 are well understood and current. "Software" seems too general, "OS X" isn't really future or rumor oriented (though the Marklar half of the thread would *seem* to go there, it fits "Future Hardware" better due to hardware half and a better thematic match with "Future" speculation), and "General Discussion" is worse than "Software" (though perhaps it would fit for general discussion as well as anywhere else except a Future speculation forum).
How about moving the thread where *you* think it belongs?
Cheers.
[ 02-19-2003: Message edited by: occam ]</p>
"A whole lot of you are annoying. Some of you more than others. You know who you are."
Also, when you lock a thread for being in the wrong place, move it to where it belongs. Your behavior is opaque unless explained. Fran441 has good protocol, e.g., "Please discuss in another iPod thread. Thanks." since s/he generally includes an explanation (so at least there's some education going on).
However, the mysterious jonathan just goes off with religious epithets and fails to clarify where a thread belongs (if not in Future Hardware), e.g.,
<a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=003081"; target="_blank">http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=003081</a>;
If you want to bitch slap people for being active, that's your prerogative, but don't expect it to promote quality participation when it's poorly explained and inappropriately negative. Plus, if you do want a different location, *show* where the thread belongs.
I still prefer "Future Hardware" for that thread since that's the location where 970/980 are well understood and current. "Software" seems too general, "OS X" isn't really future or rumor oriented (though the Marklar half of the thread would *seem* to go there, it fits "Future Hardware" better due to hardware half and a better thematic match with "Future" speculation), and "General Discussion" is worse than "Software" (though perhaps it would fit for general discussion as well as anywhere else except a Future speculation forum).
How about moving the thread where *you* think it belongs?
Cheers.
[ 02-19-2003: Message edited by: occam ]</p>
Comments
<strong>Fran441 has good protocol, e.g., "Please discuss in another iPod thread. Thanks." since s/he generally includes an explanation (so at least there's some education going on).</strong><hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Francis a "he" (dont worry i thought he was a girl also)
as for the rest of the comments, no comment...
<strong>I still prefer "Future Hardware" for that thread since that's the location where 970/980 are well understood and current. "Software" seems too general, "OS X" isn't really future or rumor oriented (though the Marklar half of the thread would *seem* to go there, it fits "Future Hardware" better due to hardware half and a better thematic match with "Future" speculation), and "General Discussion" is worse than "Software" (though perhaps it would fit for general discussion as well as anywhere else except a Future speculation forum).</strong><hr></blockquote>What?
No, seriously. I don't get this part.
Here's a distilled version of what I was trying to say.
The original post covers three issues:
970/980 performance
Marklar (OS X on Intel)
Speculation about the two
9x0 is h/w, Marklar is s/w, and Speculation is Future.
What's the best fit: "Future Hardware", "Software", "General Discussion", or "OS X"?
Based on the 970/980 (hardware) + Speculation (future) as well as recent threads, I'd choose "Future Hardware", but that ignores the s/w side (Marklar) of the post. Other forums cover s/w w/o hardware, so other forums also seem inexact matches.
From another angle, "Future Hardware" is the only "Future" forum, so that's the best match for speculation. Finally, "Future Hardware" is arguably the only place where the impact of 970/980 class hardware is discussed daily, so discussing consequences of such hardware will best be understood in h/w Future. I suspect such a thread would be fringeworthy (or misunderstood) at best in any other forum.
OS X seems very detail oriented, not speculation oriented. General Discussion is a possibility but seems like a weak choice (to me).
What's the correct answer?
[ 02-19-2003: Message edited by: occam ]</p>
CONFIRMED.
[quote](dont worry i thought he was a girl also)<hr></blockquote>
Well that's just prime.
Isn´t it about time you changed your name to Fran(m)?
<strong>What's the best fit: "Future Hardware", "Software", "General Discussion", or "OS X"?</strong><hr></blockquote>
"Trash Bin". Marklar is pure speculation and has been discussed to death. If you want a UNIX on x86, there's lots of choice, including the increasingly popular Linux.
Obv. not me then....
I would not call Marklar pure speculation. In some sense, Marklar existed even before Apple bought NeXT, since NeXT hosted NextStep on Intel. I believe NextStep for Intel was even a commercial product for some time (in NextStep's twilight years). Far from speculation.
Given Apple's precarious hardware position (thank you Motorola) and the continuity of lead staff (hello Avi), I think it's safe to say Marklar is a no-brainer within Apple. Marklar (where did that name come from?) is simply sustaining maintenance on a lifeline Apple needs to maintain its business flexibility and survival.
The question posed in my thread
<a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=003081"; target="_blank">http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=003081</a>;
is whether circumstances (with the introduction of blazing 9x0 hardware) will dictate the release of Marklar commercially? I'd be curious to know what others have to say.
I hope AppleInsider finds a home for that thread (or just opens it up in Future Hardware where it originated).
<strong>Do not put stuff like this where everyone can see it (or anywhere):
"A whole lot of you are annoying. Some of you more than others. You know who you are."</strong><hr></blockquote>
I personally found this to be fairly humorous. Although my post count does not reflect it, I have been around these forums for a while and I have noticed a disturbing trend. People are taking themselves WAY to seriously. I think the majority of people here need to relax, learn to have fun, and find out how much their doctor will charge for removing the very large stick that is wedged up their butt.
[quote]If you want to bitch slap people for being active, that's your prerogative, but don't expect it to promote quality participation when it's poorly explained and inappropriately negative. Plus, if you do want a different location, *show* where the thread belongs. <hr></blockquote>
From <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/guidelines.html"; target="_blank">here</a>
[quote]3. All comments about a moderator or an administrator should be directed to the moderator or an administrator (if the member does not feel comfortable dealing directly with the moderator) using private messaging or via e-mail. <hr></blockquote>
And to be fair...
[quote]10. Moderators and administrators are members who have volunteered to help enforce the Posting Guidelines and the rules of the forums, and to help with the running of the site, by moving/locking threads, and dealing with problems as they arise. Posts from moderators and administrators do not contain the official views of AppleInsider, unless explicitly stated. Moderators' most visible functions are the locking and moving of threads. If your thread is locked, an explanation should be posted by the moderator who locked the thread as to why. If you feel the moderator who locked your thread has erred in locking it, email or private message the moderator or an administrator about it. Do not create a new thread protesting the lock, or a thread in Suggestions about it. If your thread is moved, the bulletin board software will automatically append a notice to the top of the thread page stating the forum which the thread has been moved to. Again, if you feel your thread was moved in error, please contact the moderator responsible, or an administrator via email or private message. <hr></blockquote>
So in closing, everyone just relax, have fun, and don't take anything personally. <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
Thank you for the pointers to rules which I did not know about. Unfortunately, they do not address the issue of counterproductive moderation.
I believe the issue I raised is 1. still unresolved, and 2. a valid one:
Where should the thread (http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=003081) go?
Just to ensure I'm *not* taking myself too seriously, I'll just point out that this issue is not rocket science. It's a pretty plain question which happens to be core to the site's function, special interest communication.
The moderator's have a monopoly on correctness. We just need their official answer. But it's not rocket science, just a simple question which should deserve a simple answer. I hope an explicit answer is forthcoming.
I would welcome your guess or suggested answer as well, The Milkman.
The thread was not deemed inappopriate, just mislocated. However, it wasn't moved, and the moderators have avoided reactivating it or moving it!
The way to simplify the situation is for a moderator to take the lead by fixing the problem, or for Jonathan to come clean with a new explanation, unlock, or move of thread.
I personally would have put that thread in the OS X forum even though your basis on the possible release of Marklar (never will happen IMHO) on future hardware, it seemed to me that the main point of your post is OS X on intel.
[quote]The moderator's have a monopoly on correctness. We just need their official answer. But it's not rocket science, just a simple question which should deserve a simple answer. I hope an explicit answer is forthcoming. <hr></blockquote>
Have you PM'd Jonathan? That would be your best bet. And be patient. As I type this there are 7470 members here (don't know how many are active) so even if 10 percent of those people all had a problem at once, that would be 747 people that needed to be dealt with. :eek:
[edit: changed Software to OS X]
[ 02-20-2003: Message edited by: The Milkman ]</p>
I did private message Jonathan yesterday afternoon. He's been logged on (one post) since then.
I notice Jonathan is member #11! I guess that's how he got to be moderator. That's only back in 11-11-2001 (a little over a year ago). I didn't know AppleInsider was so new! Perhaps just the forum and membership are that new? Remarkable.
<strong>I notice Jonathan is member #11! I guess that's how he got to be moderator. That's only back in 11-11-2001 (a little over a year ago). I didn't know AppleInsider was so new! Perhaps just the forum and membership are that new? Remarkable.</strong><hr></blockquote>
He is not only a moderator, he is the board Administrator. As far as the age of AI, I do not know how old it is, but it is a lot older than a year, I became a member in dec of 2001 but had been "lurking" here for almost the entire year. AI has been around in some form (I think) for at least 4-5 years. (Someone better versed in the history of AI would be much better for this)
Jonathan. Administrator. I don't know what it means but wow, that sounds serious! I knew he had privileges, but I didn't know he was lead.
Interesting.
this isn't a government, its fun place for geeks to post about computers and have discussions...occationally take shots at eachother when mods rn't looking
>why is it the mods job to explain why u are stupid
Stupid is as stupid does. I suggest "u (and by 'u' i dont mean you specifically)" reread the initial post of this thread to understand the issue.
>the mods stop innapropriate things from going on
So what do you do when the moderator itself behaves inappropriately? What if an admin does? I have no idea the difference, but both set the tone for the board. If certain behaviors are tolerated, then the relaxed laid back atmosphere of the board is undermined.
>this isn't a government, its fun place for geeks to post >about computers and have discussions...occationally take >shots at eachother when mods rn't looking
That's what it's all about.
-=-
Jonathan does not reply to his PM. He's been on at least twice since the original PM, and nada.
I consider this issue closed, and Jonathan's behavior approved.
>learn from it, live with it, relax [-->proposition it?]
What else can you do? [What is "proposition it?"?] The issue does not seem to get resolved and perp is incommunicado.
See you later.
Suggestions is not the place for posting smug lectures for the mods or admins.
[ 02-21-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>