It's not that, it's doing without thinking that caused problems.
I wouldn't say it was done without thinking. There was thinking and discussion among the admins/mods involved. I think that's an absolutely unfair characterization.
I don't think the AO/GD->IL move has been a bad thing at all. I think it's still a really good idea and clears up some confusion as to what belongs where. (I voted to keep IL & PO, for disclosure's sake.) So this isn't a matter of trying to correct a thoughtless lark, it's addressing how the community reacted to the admin team trying to lead.
At the end of the day it's up to the membership to keep the community alive; the admin team can't do that. Everyone has to start threads, participate and engage in the community.
Maybe we should have some Lincoln-Douglas debates where we choose a representative from each viewpoint to make their case, have "the people" read the arguments and only then have a vote.
As far as the efficacy of the vote; of course it's not a proper representation of what everyone wants. That's an impossibility. But everyone has the opportunity to vote and they can encourage others to vote their way.
Not everyone is going to be happy, and at least if we put up a poll it's harder to argue that it's just meanies within the admin team being big stupid meanie meanheads. And even if it's nothing more than a cover-your-ass thing, can you really blame them/us? For Christ's sake, we've all got lives and this is an Internet message board.
Beyond that, hopefully this will at least encourage discussion about what people want (like what you've been posting, which is definitely welcome).
How many people are really interested enough to dedicate a lot of time to make the community better?
If anyone has ideas put them in Feedback.
If you want to help change the look of the place (vB skills welcome), pm or e-mail us (or start a thread in Feedback).
We love all of you (except everyone who posts in PO, because they are all jerks).
Well OK, you talked about it, you thought about it, but you made a mistake in your thinking, it happens, I meant no offence, I apologize.
Personally, I don't see why you have to account to anyone for what you do, even though it seems on the surface like I'm leaning that way, it's the exact opposite that I want to impress.
I don't really care, I merely took some time to offer you good advice (in the interest of this 'community' where I once spent too much time) You will do what you want and peope will blame you, or you will listen to people and then they will blame you anyway. This isn't a government and doesn't require governments sometimes painful disciplines.
You want this place to work well? Do as I have suggested, I'm confident of my analysis. If you want to let the community decide, that's OK too.
You want this place to work well? Do as I have suggested, I'm confident of my analysis.
This has the advantage that then we could all blame Matsu.
I haven't voted yet. Other than closing Creative Corner because it didn't have legs (sorry again PD) and sending the Retail forum back to the Land of Stupidest Ideas of All Time, I really have no idea what should be done and am waiting to be convinced.
This has the advantage that then we could all blame Matsu.
I haven't voted yet. Other than closing Creative Corner because it didn't have legs (sorry again PD) and sending the Retail forum back to the Land of Stupidest Ideas of All Time, I really have no idea what should be done and am waiting to be convinced.
Dear Crazychester, I am not offended at all. Creative Corner did not have any legs, so he deserved to be erased : that's the hard law of life.
I voted for 4 : Separate General Discussion and AppleOutsider with no PoliticalOutsider sub-forum, because like Matsu I think this is the best solution.
BTW we will follow the result of the vote, because we are here, to help the communauty, not to do a dictatorship. The members will choose, I expect that they will make the good choice : not necessary mine, but the choice who will help the communauty and the health of these forums.
I voted for the old structure but very much like the thinking of what Matsu has presented. It is persuasive and relates very much to a discussion Grove and I have been having regarding the different energies people bring to their interactions and how we do not have to like, control or understand all of them.
BTW we will follow the result of the vote, because we are here, to help the communauty, not to do a dictatorship. The members will choose, I expect that they will make the good choice : not necessary mine, but the choice who will help the communauty and the health of these forums.
Successful Organizations are run by good leadership, not democracy. You should decide based on the purpose and goals of AppleInsider. You start asking people what to do and you will ruin it even further. Why did I become a member of AppleInsider? Because I liked coming here. Friendly people having fun. This was about 3 to 4 years ago. These days AppleInsider is boring, too politically correct. Appleinsider was fun back then up until a few you know WHO's came along and ruin it. Yes those that went of to start their own site. The Lo**** guy being the instigator. I can pinpoint where it began. Someone decided to place restriction on what people could say. Words windblows or wintel where banned. Can you believe that? It went downhill from then on.
Originally posted by segovius Kick out the wingers - there's your solution right there. I can guarantee you there will be no aggro after that....
PFFFFFTTTTT!!! That was me spitting my Guinness.
I think Groverat has the right idea.
Quote:
You may be perfectly right that the best thing would be to merge PO and AO again and only open PO when heavy political seasons hit (ala Temporary Insanity for MacWorld expos), but there's really nothing we can do unless it wins the vote.
We learn less about each other when the lounge is in two pieces. There is a level of separation that is ideal, and often that level of separation is that which provides the most generalized categories, think animal, vegetable, mineral and not Ratus ratus, Zea mays, Prussian blue.
In this case, all things not apple is a good general category, but all things not apple but not political and all things not apple but not non-political are bad categories.
Well, personally, I don't think anybody should regard themselves as too new. Especially if you think you'll be a fairly regular participant, then it seems reasonable to me that you should have a say. You can see for yourself what things are like now. And even if you feel unable to pick an option, you can still say what you want. It could be, oh, maybe another six months before we go through all this again. I hate polls for this sort of stuff because they aren't representative and yeah, democracy has its problems. But I do think it's important for members to say what they think about it. And sometimes the perspective of someone who doesn't carry a whole lot of baggage from the past, can be very instructive.
Anyway, welcome.
Quote:
Originally posted by iPeon
These days AppleInsider is boring, too politically correct. Appleinsider was fun back then up until a few you know WHO's came along and ruin it.
I don't know that their dreams will necessarily come true in the end. As the old guard over there becomes increasingly outnumbered, the site could turn into something they don't like. In some ways, they've taken a big gamble. I tend to think they're having less success maintaining standards and keeping away the dickhead element. But vis your comments, I was amused when I came across this in one of the old threads. Grover you'll appreciate this too, I think. The poet speaks:
Quote:
Registering new or using additional accounts to circumvent any of these restrictions will be considered a hostile act and may get your IP addresses permanently banned from AppleInsider. Any such extra accounts will be deleted.
Oh, OK Brad, if you insist. I tell ya, there's been a few times in the past when I wish I'd had that quote handy. I'll be persona non grata with the poor relations again if that's spotted. Ah well, can't win 'em all.
And billybob, seeing as you've popped your head in. I liked this past contribution of yours regarding PO:
Quote:
we assign new personalities to each of the typical participants. random. they receive a message everytime that they enter that tells them the position they need to take for the day. if they dont follow, they take a shot, er, well get banned...
I think this is a fabulous idea. Make the regular POers argue the opposite case every now and then. It could be a sort of a game. sego is a fundie for a day, MarkUK has to be a rabid creationist, and NaplesX is a Democrat fanboi. What a hoot.
Well I'm prepared to throw my vote into the "bring PO back into the fold" hat. I worry that they'll scare new (and some old) people off but it doesn't particularly bother me as I'll either ignore them or abuse them back. But those options are coming last and second last currently.
So how do we rig the vote?
And none of the Poobahs has answered my question about Jonathon's poll yet.
I haven't voted, since I can't remember what the options were all about. But here's my 2¢:
1) Re-merge PO and AO and call it AO.
2) Do NOT bring back "general discussion," since the name is misleading and confusing. Is politics general? Religion? HDTV recomendations? Call it something like "Technology Outsider," since the "Outsider" moniker seems to be used to describe non-Apple matters.
I haven't voted, since I can't remember what the options were all about. But here's my 2¢:
1) Re-merge PO and AO and call it AO.
2) Do NOT bring back "general discussion," since the name is misleading and confusing. Is politics general? Religion? HDTV recomendations? Call it something like "Technology Outsider," since the "Outsider" moniker seems to be used to non-Apple matters.
I haven't voted, since I can't remember what the options were all about. But here's my 2¢:
1) Re-merge PO and AO and call it AO.
2) Do NOT bring back "general discussion," since the name is misleading and confusing. Is politics general? Religion? HDTV recomendations? Call it something like "Technology Outsider," since the "Outsider" moniker seems to be used to non-Apple matters.
The options are described in Jambo's post at the start of the thread deary. Seems you want either 2 or 4. It's not clear to me if you want GD to stay with AO but reabsorb PO (that'd be 2) or to separate GD but reunite AO and PO (option 4). Actually 2 was my least preferred option but it's just struck me that it might not be so bad as the GD topics (which have certainly increased traffic in AO) might counter the problem referred to by young Shawn whereby PO simply takes over AO.
I have a theory that part of PO's problem stems from some participants rarely or never relating to other members outside political discussions so they never discover any common ground or shared experiences and, consequently, lose sight of others as real people with the same sort of human strengths and frailties as everybody else.
OTOH, they could be just a bunch of argumentative ratbags with no life.
Anyway, if you want PO back with AO, midwinter, you best be going with 4 as it has a slim chance of getting up if a miracle happens or I decide to go to the effort of trying to manipulate the vote (unlikely, I'm afraid). 2's dead in the water.
Still about a week to go, OK. Someone remind me to vote if it looks like I'm going to forget. I'm hoping that through serendipity and/or PMs inciting people to electoral fraud, I might enjoy the sense of superiority and power that comes from having the deciding vote. That would be neat.
The options are described in Jambo's post at the start of the thread deary.
I was making a sideways complaint about how the poll was constructed.
Quote:
Seems you want either 2 or 4. It's not clear to me if you want GD to stay with AO but reabsorb PO (that'd be 2) or to separate GD but reunite AO and PO (option 4).
I want GD to be renamed "Technology Outsider" and for AO to re-absorb PO. Again, I'm making a complaint about the poll, which seems to have been advanced prior to any public discussion on the matter.
Quote:
Actually 2 was my least preferred option but it's just struck me that it might not be so bad as the GD topics (which have certainly increased traffic in AO) might counter the problem referred to by young Shawn whereby PO simply takes over AO.
I don't think Shawn's prediction, fueled no doubt by tequila, will come true.
Quote:
I have a theory that part of PO's problem stems from some participants rarely or never relating to other members outside political discussions so they never discover any common ground or shared experiences and, consequently, lose sight of others as real people with the same sort of human strengths and frailties as everybody else.
This is precisely why I want PO and AO merged.
Quote:
OTOH, they could be just a bunch of argumentative ratbags with no life.
Some of them, certainly.
Quote:
Anyway, if you want PO back with AO, midwinter, you best be going with 4 as it has a slim chance of getting up if a miracle happens or I decide to go to the effort of trying to manipulate the vote (unlikely, I'm afraid). 2's dead in the water.
I actually don't like the poll at all. I want the AI staff to consult with us and make decisions. I don't want some kind of faux democracy. There's been a tremendous amount of good commentary here which should be taken into consideration before they do anything.
I don't think Shawn's prediction, fueled no doubt by tequila, will come true.
Well, with or without tequila, that did happen after the split. I found it depressing because I thought ANers' complaints about PO were exaggerated but then it seemed like they were right because AO became overwhemingly dominated by political threads.
The thing that bugged me most about politics dominating AO back then was that, being pretty cynical about politics in general, I'm not very interested in it. To me, most regular POers display a certain naivety about the way the world works that prevents them from seeing the futility of many political discussions while making them blind to a lot of other stuff. Plus many topics are so parochially American or about stupid shit that isn't an issue for those of other nationalities. I'm sure there are others who feel the same.
Quote:
This is precisely why I want PO and AO merged.
Yes that's why I reconsidered my position. I can't see what's to prevent AO becoming a non-event again if GD is reinstated.
Quote:
I actually don't like the poll at all. I want the AI staff to consult with us and make decisions.
Yeah. But you know, as fond as I am of our mods and admins who apparently love us dearly (which I find a little unnnerving, frankly), my impression is they couldn't run a chook raffle in a pub. They lurch from one crisis to another. After they unilaterally decide to make some incomprehensible changes to the forums, we howl about not being consulted, they're hurt by our reaction/upset/overanalyse it/take it too seriously/whatever and the next thing they're proclaiming faux democracy for all.
But hey, if you ask me, it's the combination of incompetent blundering and dedicated sincerity that makes them so charming and irresistible. Besides, I'd say after first complaining about not being consulted, and now complaining because they consulted us the wrong way, you can just about guarantee one or two of them are so filled with despair they're either drinking heavily, sobbing quietly to themselves or have lost control of their bowels.
Besides, I'd say after first complaining about not being consulted, and now complaining because they consulted us the wrong way, you can just about guarantee one or two of them are so filled with despair they're either drinking heavily, sobbing quietly to themselves or have lost control of their bowels.
I don't think it's "despair". "Derision", "disgust" & "disdain" are more accurate.
Comments
Originally posted by Matsu
It's not that, it's doing without thinking that caused problems.
I wouldn't say it was done without thinking. There was thinking and discussion among the admins/mods involved. I think that's an absolutely unfair characterization.
I don't think the AO/GD->IL move has been a bad thing at all. I think it's still a really good idea and clears up some confusion as to what belongs where. (I voted to keep IL & PO, for disclosure's sake.) So this isn't a matter of trying to correct a thoughtless lark, it's addressing how the community reacted to the admin team trying to lead.
At the end of the day it's up to the membership to keep the community alive; the admin team can't do that. Everyone has to start threads, participate and engage in the community.
Maybe we should have some Lincoln-Douglas debates where we choose a representative from each viewpoint to make their case, have "the people" read the arguments and only then have a vote.
As far as the efficacy of the vote; of course it's not a proper representation of what everyone wants. That's an impossibility. But everyone has the opportunity to vote and they can encourage others to vote their way.
Not everyone is going to be happy, and at least if we put up a poll it's harder to argue that it's just meanies within the admin team being big stupid meanie meanheads. And even if it's nothing more than a cover-your-ass thing, can you really blame them/us? For Christ's sake, we've all got lives and this is an Internet message board.
Beyond that, hopefully this will at least encourage discussion about what people want (like what you've been posting, which is definitely welcome).
How many people are really interested enough to dedicate a lot of time to make the community better?
If anyone has ideas put them in Feedback.
If you want to help change the look of the place (vB skills welcome), pm or e-mail us (or start a thread in Feedback).
We love all of you (except everyone who posts in PO, because they are all jerks).
Personally, I don't see why you have to account to anyone for what you do, even though it seems on the surface like I'm leaning that way, it's the exact opposite that I want to impress.
I don't really care, I merely took some time to offer you good advice (in the interest of this 'community' where I once spent too much time) You will do what you want and peope will blame you, or you will listen to people and then they will blame you anyway. This isn't a government and doesn't require governments sometimes painful disciplines.
You want this place to work well? Do as I have suggested, I'm confident of my analysis. If you want to let the community decide, that's OK too.
Originally posted by Matsu
You want this place to work well? Do as I have suggested, I'm confident of my analysis.
This has the advantage that then we could all blame Matsu.
I haven't voted yet. Other than closing Creative Corner because it didn't have legs (sorry again PD) and sending the Retail forum back to the Land of Stupidest Ideas of All Time, I really have no idea what should be done and am waiting to be convinced.
Originally posted by crazychester
This has the advantage that then we could all blame Matsu.
I haven't voted yet. Other than closing Creative Corner because it didn't have legs (sorry again PD) and sending the Retail forum back to the Land of Stupidest Ideas of All Time, I really have no idea what should be done and am waiting to be convinced.
Dear Crazychester, I am not offended at all. Creative Corner did not have any legs, so he deserved to be erased : that's the hard law of life.
I voted for 4 : Separate General Discussion and AppleOutsider with no PoliticalOutsider sub-forum, because like Matsu I think this is the best solution.
BTW we will follow the result of the vote, because we are here, to help the communauty, not to do a dictatorship. The members will choose, I expect that they will make the good choice : not necessary mine, but the choice who will help the communauty and the health of these forums.
Nick
Originally posted by Powerdoc
BTW we will follow the result of the vote, because we are here, to help the communauty, not to do a dictatorship. The members will choose, I expect that they will make the good choice : not necessary mine, but the choice who will help the communauty and the health of these forums.
Successful Organizations are run by good leadership, not democracy. You should decide based on the purpose and goals of AppleInsider. You start asking people what to do and you will ruin it even further. Why did I become a member of AppleInsider? Because I liked coming here. Friendly people having fun. This was about 3 to 4 years ago. These days AppleInsider is boring, too politically correct. Appleinsider was fun back then up until a few you know WHO's came along and ruin it. Yes those that went of to start their own site. The Lo**** guy being the instigator. I can pinpoint where it began. Someone decided to place restriction on what people could say. Words windblows or wintel where banned. Can you believe that? It went downhill from then on.
Originally posted by segovius Kick out the wingers - there's your solution right there. I can guarantee you there will be no aggro after that....
PFFFFFTTTTT!!!
I think Groverat has the right idea.
You may be perfectly right that the best thing would be to merge PO and AO again and only open PO when heavy political seasons hit (ala Temporary Insanity for MacWorld expos), but there's really nothing we can do unless it wins the vote.
Oh wait.
I voted already...
How odd...
We learn less about each other when the lounge is in two pieces. There is a level of separation that is ideal, and often that level of separation is that which provides the most generalized categories, think animal, vegetable, mineral and not Ratus ratus, Zea mays, Prussian blue.
In this case, all things not apple is a good general category, but all things not apple but not political and all things not apple but not non-political are bad categories.
Originally posted by gfisher
I'm too new to have an opinion.
Well, personally, I don't think anybody should regard themselves as too new. Especially if you think you'll be a fairly regular participant, then it seems reasonable to me that you should have a say. You can see for yourself what things are like now. And even if you feel unable to pick an option, you can still say what you want. It could be, oh, maybe another six months before we go through all this again.
Anyway, welcome.
Originally posted by iPeon
These days AppleInsider is boring, too politically correct. Appleinsider was fun back then up until a few you know WHO's came along and ruin it.
I don't know that their dreams will necessarily come true in the end. As the old guard over there becomes increasingly outnumbered, the site could turn into something they don't like. In some ways, they've taken a big gamble. I tend to think they're having less success maintaining standards and keeping away the dickhead element. But vis your comments, I was amused when I came across this in one of the old threads. Grover you'll appreciate this too, I think. The poet speaks:
Registering new or using additional accounts to circumvent any of these restrictions will be considered a hostile act and may get your IP addresses permanently banned from AppleInsider. Any such extra accounts will be deleted.
Oh, OK Brad, if you insist.
And billybob, seeing as you've popped your head in. I liked this past contribution of yours regarding PO:
we assign new personalities to each of the typical participants. random. they receive a message everytime that they enter that tells them the position they need to take for the day. if they dont follow, they take a shot, er, well get banned...
I think this is a fabulous idea. Make the regular POers argue the opposite case every now and then. It could be a sort of a game. sego is a fundie for a day, MarkUK has to be a rabid creationist, and NaplesX is a Democrat fanboi. What a hoot.
Well I'm prepared to throw my vote into the "bring PO back into the fold" hat. I worry that they'll scare new (and some old) people off but it doesn't particularly bother me as I'll either ignore them or abuse them back. But those options are coming last and second last currently.
So how do we rig the vote?
And none of the Poobahs has answered my question about Jonathon's poll yet.
1) Re-merge PO and AO and call it AO.
2) Do NOT bring back "general discussion," since the name is misleading and confusing. Is politics general? Religion? HDTV recomendations? Call it something like "Technology Outsider," since the "Outsider" moniker seems to be used to describe non-Apple matters.
Originally posted by midwinter
I haven't voted, since I can't remember what the options were all about. But here's my 2¢:
1) Re-merge PO and AO and call it AO.
2) Do NOT bring back "general discussion," since the name is misleading and confusing. Is politics general? Religion? HDTV recomendations? Call it something like "Technology Outsider," since the "Outsider" moniker seems to be used to non-Apple matters.
I like it.
Nick
Originally posted by midwinter
I haven't voted, since I can't remember what the options were all about. But here's my 2¢:
1) Re-merge PO and AO and call it AO.
2) Do NOT bring back "general discussion," since the name is misleading and confusing. Is politics general? Religion? HDTV recomendations? Call it something like "Technology Outsider," since the "Outsider" moniker seems to be used to non-Apple matters.
The options are described in Jambo's post at the start of the thread deary. Seems you want either 2 or 4. It's not clear to me if you want GD to stay with AO but reabsorb PO (that'd be 2) or to separate GD but reunite AO and PO (option 4). Actually 2 was my least preferred option but it's just struck me that it might not be so bad as the GD topics (which have certainly increased traffic in AO) might counter the problem referred to by young Shawn whereby PO simply takes over AO.
I have a theory that part of PO's problem stems from some participants rarely or never relating to other members outside political discussions so they never discover any common ground or shared experiences and, consequently, lose sight of others as real people with the same sort of human strengths and frailties as everybody else.
OTOH, they could be just a bunch of argumentative ratbags with no life.
Anyway, if you want PO back with AO, midwinter, you best be going with 4 as it has a slim chance of getting up if a miracle happens or I decide to go to the effort of trying to manipulate the vote (unlikely, I'm afraid). 2's dead in the water.
Still about a week to go, OK. Someone remind me to vote if it looks like I'm going to forget. I'm hoping that through serendipity and/or PMs inciting people to electoral fraud, I might enjoy the sense of superiority and power that comes from having the deciding vote. That would be neat.
Originally posted by crazychester
The options are described in Jambo's post at the start of the thread deary.
I was making a sideways complaint about how the poll was constructed.
Seems you want either 2 or 4. It's not clear to me if you want GD to stay with AO but reabsorb PO (that'd be 2) or to separate GD but reunite AO and PO (option 4).
I want GD to be renamed "Technology Outsider" and for AO to re-absorb PO. Again, I'm making a complaint about the poll, which seems to have been advanced prior to any public discussion on the matter.
Actually 2 was my least preferred option but it's just struck me that it might not be so bad as the GD topics (which have certainly increased traffic in AO) might counter the problem referred to by young Shawn whereby PO simply takes over AO.
I don't think Shawn's prediction, fueled no doubt by tequila, will come true.
I have a theory that part of PO's problem stems from some participants rarely or never relating to other members outside political discussions so they never discover any common ground or shared experiences and, consequently, lose sight of others as real people with the same sort of human strengths and frailties as everybody else.
This is precisely why I want PO and AO merged.
OTOH, they could be just a bunch of argumentative ratbags with no life.
Some of them, certainly.
Anyway, if you want PO back with AO, midwinter, you best be going with 4 as it has a slim chance of getting up if a miracle happens or I decide to go to the effort of trying to manipulate the vote (unlikely, I'm afraid). 2's dead in the water.
I actually don't like the poll at all. I want the AI staff to consult with us and make decisions. I don't want some kind of faux democracy. There's been a tremendous amount of good commentary here which should be taken into consideration before they do anything.
Originally posted by midwinter
I don't think Shawn's prediction, fueled no doubt by tequila, will come true.
Well, with or without tequila, that did happen after the split. I found it depressing because I thought ANers' complaints about PO were exaggerated but then it seemed like they were right because AO became overwhemingly dominated by political threads.
The thing that bugged me most about politics dominating AO back then was that, being pretty cynical about politics in general, I'm not very interested in it. To me, most regular POers display a certain naivety about the way the world works that prevents them from seeing the futility of many political discussions while making them blind to a lot of other stuff. Plus many topics are so parochially American or about stupid shit that isn't an issue for those of other nationalities. I'm sure there are others who feel the same.
This is precisely why I want PO and AO merged.
Yes that's why I reconsidered my position. I can't see what's to prevent AO becoming a non-event again if GD is reinstated.
I actually don't like the poll at all. I want the AI staff to consult with us and make decisions.
Yeah. But you know, as fond as I am of our mods and admins who apparently love us dearly (which I find a little unnnerving, frankly), my impression is they couldn't run a chook raffle in a pub. They lurch from one crisis to another. After they unilaterally decide to make some incomprehensible changes to the forums, we howl about not being consulted, they're hurt by our reaction/upset/overanalyse it/take it too seriously/whatever and the next thing they're proclaiming faux democracy for all.
But hey, if you ask me, it's the combination of incompetent blundering and dedicated sincerity that makes them so charming and irresistible. Besides, I'd say after first complaining about not being consulted, and now complaining because they consulted us the wrong way, you can just about guarantee one or two of them are so filled with despair they're either drinking heavily, sobbing quietly to themselves or have lost control of their bowels.
I think of it as "Member's Revenge".
Besides, I'd say after first complaining about not being consulted, and now complaining because they consulted us the wrong way, you can just about guarantee one or two of them are so filled with despair they're either drinking heavily, sobbing quietly to themselves or have lost control of their bowels.
I don't think it's "despair". "Derision", "disgust" & "disdain" are more accurate.