It seems that lately the forum is flooded by new members that really don't have anything to say other than "my car r0X0rz, all other car SuX0rz!" (forgive me if I don't have the "l337"-spelling right). There are also certain members that seem to do nothing else than to stir trouble.
I kind of recent that. But I have always made it perfectly clear that I do not ban people from the forum easily. The reason is simple: because if I do so, it will always be because they have crossed a line I have set personally and chances are it is not a reflection of the feelings of the forum community in general.
That's why I'm thinking of implementing a Member Rating System. Each member will be able to rate another member. If someone's rating drops below a certain point, this member will be automaticallty banned.
You will only be able to rate another member once (so you can't single handedly make another member's rating drop significantly). Also, you'll need to have a certain amount of posts made on your name before you can rate (to prevent someone from registering under different usernames just so he/she can influence another member's rating). This minimum amount of posts will be set quite high - like a hundred posts or so.
Sounds like a good idea. You never cease to amaze me with all the thinking you do to make the Forum even better than it already is. Keep up the great work, and thank you for your effort. Michael
It is sad that it comes down to having you become a policeman on the forum. I have noticed many more infantile behaviors by some forum members instigating flame wars for no other reason to flame someone else. I just don't respond and let them rant. In any parlimentary procedure there has been a sergeant of arms available to remove those unruly individuals.
I think that your idea has merit as a way to control those unruly types.
Great Idea Cliff! I myself haven't been on much lately to cause problems .
Will it be annonamouse regarding the casting of votes?
I know from past emails I had received (don't ask how or why), many people had shared with me how they felt, but were afraid to post because they feared they would be retaliated against or ridiculed by others for their opinion or view on the topic.
While your at it, how about a popular voting option as well? j/k Cliff!
I support this idea. I, too, usually just try to ignore them, but I have a very hard time keeping my mouth shut and ignoring some of the nuisances that visit us now and again. This new system would enable me to make a difference, rather than waste my time typing and fueling their flame.
I like the Idea. I can't think of many that would ever need a bad rating. I have got along with ALMOST everyone since I have been here. That has been almost 2 years now with my new and old user name.
I like it, too. Too bad that things like this have to be necessary, though.
I might recommend a "sliding scale". After a certain period of time, the oldest "negative" point drops off. (Similar to drivers license points.) Lets someone who recognizes the error of their ways become a member in good standing. Still shouldn't prevent the more obnoxious people from being booted by overwhelming popular demand. Merely an idea. Don't know if it is even possible from a technical standpoint.
Thanks for all you do!
Steve
[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 10-18-2001).]
I agree that it's sad it's had to come to this, but there are (as previously stated) a few folks that are here to just stir up trouble.
I've yet to contribute any real technical help, but I've learned a generous amount of information on my little car that I really doubt I could ever get anywhere else.
Cliff offers a great service to those of us in the Fiero world and whatever he deems necessary to keep PFF going is ok with me.
Thanks Cliff!
------------------ T.Shawn Palmer '85 SE 4cyl 5spd
That's a very interesting idea. I don't entirely understand how it would work, but it would be something to remember if one feels like getting obnoxious. I know I've sunk to a new low recently, but would still be nice to see how you fit in.
Would be interesting to hear the details, if you decide to do it.
This forum is pure Fiero gold. Anyone who doesn't respect it needs to be banned. I think that not only should a voting member have a respectable number of posts (250?)but also have been on the forum at least a year to vote. That leaves me out but I have faith in the experienced members.
In beautiful West Texas, Robert
[This message has been edited by westtexas (edited 10-18-2001).]
It's an interesting experiment in social management, and a small-scale version of the larger world's problems. How do we prevent an uncivil few from disrupting an otherwise civil and restrained society? (Well, semi-restrained. )
Cliff, are you tired of your role as benevolent despot?
Democratic banishment might work, with some cautions:
> Can a banishee (?) evade his sentence by re-registering under another name? (Smuggle himself back into society?)
> Do you think anyone will be ejected simply for expressing unpopular opinions?
> What's the appeal process? Will you exercise veto power? Is this better than being the board cop?
> Among those who vote, will all have equal voice, or will some be "more equal than others?" I'm not saying that's necessarily bad.
Pardon my EXCITEMENT!!!! This has been a long time coming. This would surely limit the number of idiots that use the Forum to bash and belittle others. I may decide to be more than a casual user again. I really enjoyed this Forum and was saddened when I had no choice but to make it a "read only" web stop. Cliff, I applaud you in all your efforts to maintain the integrity of YOUR Forum. Thanks for this effort even more so.
Sounds like a great idea! Also, kinda like how the warning system on Aol Instant Messager works, could there be a way to limit the number of postings of a user per day that has fallen below a set "acceptance rating"? And then, like Raydar said, have the old votes fall off as new ones are cast?
Hmm wait, just had an idea! How about each user can have, say, 25 votes under their user names. When someone rates them again, the first vote put in that "box" is removed, and they all "slide" down, so there is only a max of 25 votes that make up the acceptance rating of a user? I hope someone else understands what I'm trying to say other than me
Still, it definatly sounds like a great idea. Hopefully, though, we wont get threads started that say "Let's boot *username*" to try to get people to gang up on someone. I would definatly give someone negative feedback for starting a brand new thread like that, whether merited or not.
Cliff, I basically like the idea and think a way to deal with the big troublemakers is a long time coming. I would love to hear more about the refinement. Exactly how the voting would work... something like a set number of votes in a certain time frame, or based on negative votes per post (an average... like if high % of your posts get negative votes?)
Its a good concept, but a lot of thought needs to go into it. You wouldn't want someone who is an overall good contributor to get booted off because he felt ended up involved in a flame war or two either. I guess what I am saying is we want to limit the "colatral damage" to quote our military.
Most of these new troublemakers also have a low number of posts... since they appear and cause trouble right away! How about a rating period for the new memberssay for their first 100-250 posts or so.
Finally, I think the voting results to be kept private so the whole forum cannot see how many votes have gone against a certain member. If not, it may encourage people to push up the vote totals just because they see some other members believe they are trouble makers.
No flames please!! Just a few thoughts! As I have always stated, too much moderation can ruin a forum as quickly as not enough! We must be careful!
My flame threads are done, if it's just me you were referring to. I do think the forums are a great source of fiero information, but too many people bash and belittle anyone who drives anything but a fiero. That is ignorant, close-minded and just wrong.
Originally posted by BlackStang95: My flame threads are done, if it's just me you were referring to.
You really don't think I would go through all that trouble for one person, do you?
We've had our share of "difficult" members in the past, and most of them cleaned up their act in time. This is just a way to speed that process up a little.
Sounds like a great idea, however how are you going to stop a person that gets booted from signing up under a different name to envoke revenge on whomever he runs into.
Hi, Sounds like a good idea if you can keeep the 'punished' from resubing under another new name. Hopefully nobody stops posting here because of people who like to flame. I really enjoy reading Archie's (the V8 Man) posts and really would hate it to see him leave. I agree somthing needs to be done. S.Williams 1988 Fiero
Originally posted by RussB: Sounds like a great idea, however how are you going to stop a person that gets booted from signing up under a different name to envoke revenge on whomever he runs into.
Trust me, I have ways to ban people from the forum even if they have a dynamic ip-address.
I think it is a good idea too. However, I was "banned" from the MR2 Forum when I did nothing wrong. I had even made several very complimentary posts, besides inguiries. One guy emailed me saying I was banned because I didn't 'have' and MR2. He didn't think it was right because several others on the forum didn't either. He went on to say, he really thinks it was because I was a threat to the members rides. I hope if we DO get a rating system, it will be based on people being dillweeds instead of people just reading up on something they are interested in (even if their car is way faster! )
Hey Clif! It sux with a capital F! (Joke meant here!!!)
The only way to treat infantile behavior, including mine is to IGNORE IT... It takes two to fight or flame, and I am always amaised at the sensitivities exibited by people on the forum... Just like you example with "My car RoCs, UrSsUx", if no one replies, there is no flame war, but so many people try to defend themselves, that the flames get fuel, not extiguished...
It has been mentioned before, everyone needs to toughen up and let such comments get what they deserve, NO REPLIES!!! Sure, we may feel bad for a while that someone attacked us personally, but what does it prove to rant away at such drivel???
If a child who is only trying to cause dissention does not get satisfaction of stirring up trouble, they go away on their own... But if everyone replies with flames, that is what the child seeks and enjoys... IT IS TIME TO STOP REPLYING TO TROLLS WHO FLAME!!!
I know I sometimes put in a barb in a flaming topic, but I am trying to point out the folly of continuing to reply to a topic... You have the power to close topics, and you use it if you feel it is out of hand, but some of the topics are fun, like the donut, even though there are flames at times...
Course, I like to take flames aimed at me, reverse them and throw them back at the originator if it adds humor!!! But then I never reply after that...
I'm still pretty new, but have been here long enough to see how this forum goes, and I like it. There are flame wars everywhere, you can't avoid them, but this system will be a good way to slow them down.
But - make it waaay more than 100 posts.... I would say 3 or even 400 before someone can start rating others. That takes me out of the loop for awhile, but that's okay, I don't pay much attention to the flame war stuff as far as posting goes.
Also, you should have veto power, if someone stacks votes against someone in particular, just in case.
Great idea. You really *should* be proud of this forum. Its the online Fiero community I have been looking for since 1996. (I'm a slow looker, I guess.)
- Flamberge (No signature pic for me here, since it is the announcements forum.)
sounds like a good idea. I also do think you should up the limit a bit farther than 100. Like someone already said, 250 seems adequate . I think that just the real Fiero enthusiasts should be able to vote.
.
or why), many people had shared with me how they felt, but were afraid to post because they feared they would be retaliated against or ridiculed by others for their opinion or view on the topic. 
j/k Cliff!
