New welcome & guidelines - comments?

Poppy · Post by **Poppy** » 13 Sep 2007, 21:36

I am unaware that there has been any other public admission that a wrong decision was made.

Yes, there was. By Bellybabe on 6 August in the "Thanks (all about the Play Pen forum and the numbers thread)" thread.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 13 Sep 2007, 21:37

Can't disagree with that. (In reference to Bob's post)

It may be that that Wangi is the only bod prepared to step up and assist with the running of TP. Respect and good faith would be more easily engendered by offering others the chance. Its a win:win situation.

rathbone · Post by **rathbone** » 14 Sep 2007, 09:46

Wangi has made it quite clear that he wants everyone to move on. I don't have a problem with that.

He has set out his terms and conditions for posting. I don't have a problem with those either.

I have said in earlier threads that I'm prepared to give it a go under despotic rule, but that he mustn't expect me to be in agreement with him all the time or to keep my mouth shut when I'm not in agreement.

Unfortunately, on those occasions where I haven't been in agreement, the threads have had a tendency to lock. I do have a problem with that.

Personally, I have always seen this Forum as intended to further community spirit in Portobello. As such it should be inclusive, giving a voice on any issue and allowing people the ability to debate (even argue) if they want to. The Guidelines are there to ensure that such debate doesn't degenerate into personal attack.

One of the difficulties with inclusivity, however, is that there are inevitably people who will have a lot to say, others who are less vocal and some who will only lurk. Arguments have been put forward here that the 'regular' posters were hogging the site and that it had become a club. Maybe so, but most of that activity was taking place in Gossip and Tittle Tattle. (The lighter forum) and not on Portobello Matters (the serious one).

Gossip and Tittle Tattle is the oil that eases community development and none of us should get too hung up over it, or too judgemental about what is 'boring' and what isn't (far less administrators deleting things because they, themselves, are bored by them). My major contribution to this site is the work I do on the Local History side. My kids can't understand why I spend so much time on something so 'unutterably boring'.

Might it not be a good idea for Wangi to now set out, clearly, what his vision for his site is so that people can decide whether they want to subscribe to it or not?

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 14 Sep 2007, 15:16

The thread in question was deleted because it was considered to be 'post-pumping' as I recall, not because it was 'boring'. I agree that 'boring' is a relative and subjective term and is no basis for deletion.

And do we really need a mission/vision statement from wangi? After all, the forum is just an electronic blank piece of paper with a few basic rules thrown in, which together could be summarised as 'be nice'.

Anyway, I'm glad that rathbone is prepared to give the new administration a go and I hope that the other regular posters will follow suit. I think it's time to be friends again. You know you want to.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 14 Sep 2007, 17:14

Bob Jefferson wrote:The thread in question was deleted because it was considered to be 'post-pumping' as I recall, not because it was 'boring'. I agree that 'boring' is a relative and subjective term and is no basis for deletion.
.

Bob, you are in grave danger of regression and therefore thread locking. I can't let the above go by without comment. Post pumping was no basis for deletion either as it was not against forum rules. It was subsequently proved to be a red herring. Admin got themselves in a defensive position and kept on digging.

However, in the interests of moving on. What should have happened back then and, its not too late now, was something like this:

"We regret deleting the numbers thread, it was a mistake to do so, it has now been reinstated . We are generally happy with the conduct here on TP There is no need for the play pen it has now been removed. I have just posted number 188 and would apprecaite if we could just move on"

That would have left us with a good admin team and a happy bunch of users.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 14 Sep 2007, 17:57

I think someone else has already pointed out that people start acting defensively when they feel they are being attacked. But I think we need to continue this discussion in private over a quiet drink.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 14 Sep 2007, 18:14

Bob Jefferson wrote: I think it's time to be friends again. You know you want to.

Speaking personally I hope I haven't fallen out with anybody. I know everybody involved and as real people you're all very nice. However, cyberly some of you are getting on my wick (in the nicest possible wick getting on way obviously). I'm fed up being treated like a naughty child when all I want is a bit of a laugh. So, I may not be posting here very often any more but I hope when we meet in the real world it'll be on good terms. (Even you Bob

)

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 14 Sep 2007, 18:56

Bob Jefferson wrote:I think someone else has already pointed out that people start acting defensively when they feel they are being attacked.

Its a two way street, unjustified thread deletion, unjustifed thread segregation, false allegations of post pumping, whimsical thread locking, further restrictions on free speech, are all forms of attack on the users of this forum. Many are "protecting" themselves by avoiding the place.

Bob Jefferson wrote: But I think we need to continue this discussion in private over a quiet drink.

I would prefer if it were held right here on TP so everyone that wishes to be included, can be. I repeat, one way to move on would be something like this:

"We regret deleting the numbers thread, it was a mistake to do so, it has now been reinstated . We are generally happy with the conduct here on TP There is no need for the play pen it has now been removed. I have just posted number 188 and would apprecaite if we could just move on"

That would have left us with a good admin team and a happy bunch of users.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 14 Sep 2007, 19:04

In which case I'm afraid I have nothing further to say on the subject.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 14 Sep 2007, 21:54

Apologies for my misunderstanding, Bob, Foxy just advised me that you meant you and I thought to meet to continue our discussion. I took it to mean an open invite to everyone.

I would be delighted to share a drink with you anytime.

Post by **wangi** » 14 Sep 2007, 22:45

It's pretty obvious that I'm reluctant to go into this in detail yet again... But here goes! This will all be in other posts I've made, in other threads.

For a decent length of time (as in at least a year) the forum at POL, and in turn Talk Porty, has become an increasingly insular online community. Many users who were once frequent posters have stopped posting (this isn't guesswork - we've been told, along with the reasons) and many lurkers looking in feel too intimidated to register and post. The question of course is why? Well the top reason is aggressive debate. People want to join and discuss local topics, they don't expect the Spanish Inquisition. They don't expect to have to make a blow by blow defense of their views. Not all people are naturally expressive, confident and open with their views - and that sort of aggressive debate basically turns at least half of the population off the idea of contributing at all!

The uproar about the deletion of the counting thread was simply the last straw for Marya & Bellybabe - they'd put a lot of time and effort into the site. A lot of effort acting as a buffer against outsiders complaining about what they saw as personal attacks on the forum and upholding those views where they were reasonable. You do not respond to an action you find unfavorable on a volunteer run site by making demands and "going on strike". That's a bad show, it's impolite at best.

Democracy on an online forum simply doesn't work. We've seen that here from experience - actively trying to do what users wanted in the past; getting a broader moderation team. It's not real democracy - you're simply doing what the vocal minority want - most are unwilling to make their views know. It's not representative. You end up with a forum geared toward the users who are vocal, the forum ends up as their forum. But what was it all about in the beginning? Portobello.

Do I want to loose the existing users? Of course not. Do I want a more inclusive and welcoming forum - definitely. Bob was right with the summary - "be nice".

A forum of this size really doesn't need more than one admin. Look at other forums and compare their moderation styles - show me one which is a democratic bliss! It's like asking to have full oversight on the sharpening of pencils in the council - it's mundane repetitive stuff (see where "admin monkey" comes from?).

I've been honest throughout this - I will mess things up; people will dislike certain decisions. However to date the moderation actually done has been minimal - it's the sort of stuff I was routinely doing anyway "as the monkey". Porty's tales of barely a post escaping moderation are exaggeration and I think simply down to those few posts that did get moderated (a "lets monitor wangi as an admin thread" and a post containing near on 1200 names copied from another site)! No doubt there will be much harder moderation decisions in the future, certainly has been in the past. The really funny thing is those around at the time seem to have forgotten about Dadaist's brief time as a moderator on POL - now there's a proper despot moderator!

As for a "mission statement" - give me a break. I've already had the phase "meta discussion" dissected to paint me as some sort of suit! Leave me with some respect eh!

So, who's managed to keep awake this far?

So, is this going to be an online democracy? Clearly no. I'm going to try my best to be as transparent and fair as possible. But if I'm not, well just deal with it. I'm not going to bend over and take it ... just to keep folk happy! Obviously you've got a choice if you want to participate here or not.

Any feedback, please email or PM it. Ta/L

EDIT: Just wanted to add that I am of course touched with the amount of interest over on Dud Chat!

Post by **wangi** » 14 Sep 2007, 23:10

Porty wrote:One of those could be Wangi but I really think it would be better with completely new blood. (although we need his techy input)

That one made me laugh! Please don't run the house... but we need somebody to clean the toilets!

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 14 Sep 2007, 23:38

wangi wrote:[I've been honest throughout this - I will mess things up; people will dislike certain decisions. However to date the moderation actually done has been minimal - it's the sort of stuff I was routinely doing anyway "as the monkey". Porty's tales of barely a post escaping moderation are exaggeration and I think simply down to those few posts that did get moderated (a "lets monitor wangi as an admin thread" and a post containing near on 1200 names copied from another site)!

Firstly, your honesty has never been doubted let alone challenged. My statement on DA was something like "I reckon oot of my last 12 posts only 4 have remained intact". I stand by that.

The monitor admin thread was a joke. I accept it may have been poorly timed but that is all it was. The post you deleted relating to Lawrence's petition actually contained 1827 names along with the area or country that the lived in. It was an extremely strong signal from the most signed petition currently being hosted by the Scottish Government. Unfortunately I deleted the remainder of the post, this was a result of yet another moderation of one of my posts.

I'm glad you have engaged in this debate, I hope it works out for you. The caveat is that the wrongs that have been perpetrated here on TP have not been addressed and I doubt there will be any moving forward until they are.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 14 Sep 2007, 23:39

wangi wrote:
Porty wrote:One of those could be Wangi but I really think it would be better with completely new blood. (although we need his techy input)
That one made me laugh! Please don't run the house... but we need somebody to clean the toilets!

I meant that for your technical input and knowledge we are forever in your debt. Hopefully for sometime to come.

All the signs are you are not cut out for a customer facing role. You could do with a help.

(edit spelling of All)

Post by **wangi** » 14 Sep 2007, 23:47

Porty wrote:The caveat is that the wrongs that have been perpetrated here on TP have not been addressed and I doubt there will be any moving forward until they are.

I've no idea what else you expect - there have been admissions that we were wrong. The fact remains if you continue to look at it from just one side you miss the point that the reaction to that far outweighed the action.

Want to know what I'd do now with the counting thread since I'm running the show? I'd delete the brain numbingly boring posts that simply contained a number, not the thread itself. I'm sure we can all count, so there's no reason to post the fact. At least have the initiative to post something worthwhile

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 15 Sep 2007, 01:17

wangi wrote:
Porty wrote:The caveat is that the wrongs that have been perpetrated here on TP have not been addressed and I doubt there will be any moving forward until they are.
I've no idea what else you expect - there have been admissions that we were wrong. ............ .....................................................................................Want to know what I'd do now with the counting thread since I'm running the show? I'd delete the brain numbingly boring posts that simply contained a number, not the thread itself. I'm sure we can all count, so there's no reason to post the fact. At least have the initiative to post something worthwhile

Ipso Facto- And with some regret I hereby rest my case.

Post by **wangi** » 15 Sep 2007, 11:56

Porty wrote:Ipso Facto- And with some regret I hereby rest my case.

From my perspective I (or we) seem to be the only ones here actually admitting any failings. I don't see anyone fessing up to the reaction being bang out of order.

It's amazing some of the stuff people will do and say in the "online world" and then be best pals on the street.

The whole implication I'm somehow on trial is amazing. Perspective?

rathbone · Post by **rathbone** » 15 Sep 2007, 11:57

I managed to keep awake and read it all the way through to the end.

And don't worry, I'm not going to ask you for a blow by blow defense of the points you've made. I accept that this is not going to be a democracy. I've said that on a number of occasions now. Nor am I responding by way of a p.m. or e-mail because, like Porty, I think that this discussion is better out in the open.

I didn't ask for a 'mission statement', I suggested that an idea of where you see this forum going would be useful. I think that I am now quite clear about what you don't want, but I'm not quite so sure about what you do want. It's because I do respect you, that I expect you to have some sort of vision of what you would like to see. Share it.

I am not personally convinced that "at least half of the population" have been put off posting by the nature of the debate on here. I have no reason to doubt that some of the people who have given you their reasons for not posting have said that is why they either stopped or never started, but it is a bit dubious to then expand that to cover the whole user base and say that 50% feel the same.

I have never found that this site is particularly aggressive. It's certainly tame when compared to others I could direct you to. There have been spats from time to time and people have been subjected to the Spanish Inquisition, but those have not been general, and usually confined to the same few offenders. You give the impression that the place has been a seething hotbed of intimidation. It hasn't.

There is a difference between robust debate and aggression. What one person finds offensive another won't. It is a hard job for the moderator when they have to arbitrate on what is often a fine line. I think that most people realise that and make allowances. However, if the balance tips either way then problems arise. I would rather have an open forum where sensitivities are occasionaly bruised, than one where the shrinking violets rule and everything is bland and cosy. But that is a personal preference.

I agree that the 'strike' was impolite, but then so is treating adults as if they were naughty children. People stopped posting in protest at the deletion of the counting thread because that was the only way they could make the strength of their feelings known. You can't use a complaints procedure run by admin to complain about the admin's action.

I agree:

wangi wrote: It's not representative. You end up with a forum geared toward the users who are vocal, the forum ends up as their forum. But what was it all about in the beginning? Portobello.

However, as I have also said before, you will get people on here who are vocal, those who are less so and those who will look but not touch. However you cut it, you will end up with a vocal minority. Accept that. Every community is the same. It won't matter, provided you keep the focus on Portobello.

GRANTY · Post by **GRANTY** » 15 Sep 2007, 16:59

As someone who posts very infrequently and on occassion has been labelled a 'lurker', I am absolutely amazed at all this debate. The more I read it, the more ridiculous it all seems. It would be really helpful if it stopped.

I don't particularly mind who moderates the site. It's a big job and not one I'd like, so thanks to everyone who has taken their turn and continues to do so. I tune in every day, so obviously appreciate that Talk Porty is there.

Can I make a suggestion that people just chill out and get back to discussing matters relating to Portobello and stop all the pointless squabbling?

mr magnolia · Post by **mr magnolia** » 15 Sep 2007, 22:30

I'm with GRANTY on this one.

Puerto bella · Post by **Puerto bella** » 15 Sep 2007, 22:52

Here here

magbagpuss · Post by **magbagpuss** » 15 Sep 2007, 23:40

yes Granty my friend , could not agree more , well said , let's get back to having fun n finding out what's happening locally , cheers !!!

arachnid · Post by **arachnid** » 15 Sep 2007, 23:59

magbagpuss wrote:yes Granty my friend , could not agree more , well said , let's get back to having fun n finding out what's happening locally , cheers !!!

That's the reason I joined this forum, because it was so light humoured and cheered me up to read everyone's witty comments to each other!!!

Having lived in Joppa till I got married and moved to Linlithgow, I also like to keep in touch with what's happening in Porty/Joppa.

rathbone · Post by **rathbone** » 16 Sep 2007, 09:21

GRANTY wrote: I am absolutely amazed at all this debate. The more I read it, the more ridiculous it all seems. It would be really helpful if it stopped.

Don't worry Granty, Wangi did ask for comments and I had some to make.

Imagine this:

A website is set up to encourage people from Portobello to get together on-line and form a cyber community. People embrace that idea. They begin to form on-line relationships and develop a lively forum. Those on-line friendships spill over into 'real' life. They meet up for meals, parties and at the pub. That bonding feeds back into the website, which develops a distinct character of its own. Something which you would think should be celebrated. Instead those people are branded a 'vocal minority', who somehow are subverting the site, putting other people off and hence are no longer welcomed. That is what I consider to be ridiculous.

Anyway, I've said my piece and will now retreat into the lonely isolation of the Local History room to contemplate my navel.

ali · Post by **ali** » 16 Sep 2007, 12:37

rathbone wrote:
A website is set up to encourage people from Portobello to get together on-line and form a cyber community. People embrace that idea. They begin to form on-line relationships and develop a lively forum. Those on-line friendships spill over into 'real' life. They meet up for meals, parties and at the pub. That bonding feeds back into the website, which develops a distinct character of its own. Something which you would think should be celebrated. Instead those people are branded a 'vocal minority', who somehow are subverting the site, putting other people off and hence are no longer welcomed. That is what I consider to be ridiculous.

As usual, Rathers you summarise the situation exactly.

Wangi, who are all these people who have been chased off the site by the regulars aggressive posting?
(Apart from nutters like Cleopas who was actually outed in a carefully arranged sting set up by those of us who had had enough of his particular blend of self-obsessed spammery or that woman who posted about seagulls being served up as sweet and sour chicken - and she was not a newbie - I simply asked her to provide some evidence for her story or stop spreading racist nonsense - reasonable enough, no? You could argue that the mods should've confronted her about her post before I got to her).

Do you have numbers - is it a dozen? fifty? a hundred?? have you really had mail from these people or did they stop you in Scotmid to complain?

Seriously you will have a job to do convincing me, for one, that this was a serious problem. New posters were, without question welcomed to the forum and listened to.

The forum is as it is because that's the way it is. You are not going to be able to socially engineer the forum in a direction you think is desirable. It just doesn't work that way. The forum will die because it will become bland - I would argue that it is happening already. Dull as ditchwater, no atmosphere, no excitement........nobody cares really. This forum is nowt without the people who built it up and made it what it was. Mods and posters together.

rathbone wrote:Anyway, I've said my piece and will now retreat into the lonely isolation of the Local History room to contemplate my navel.

You won't be alone in there friend. I still look forward to those posts - as a guest tho......

Post by **wangi** » 16 Sep 2007, 13:01

Sorry, guys. I'm not hamster in a wheel - I'm not going to do yet another turn of this discussion. You're still looking at this purely from your own perspective.

There are five posters above making a lot of sense.