Mister Scratch wrote:The best new post, though, is this one from Dale, who suggests a kind of "Worthiness Interview" for people who want to post on the fittingly named MADboard:
Dale wrote:Make the person indroduce themselves in the introduction section. Perhaps everyone should interview them for five days before they can post in other sections. The purpose would give the moderators the time they need to check for IP tunnels. Let everyone get to know the person before they can post in other sections like the LDS Dialogue & Discussion. If they have any sincere questions they can get answers if they need it.
(emphasis added)
You know, I sort of hope they take his suggestion.
Is this the way they are going to start weeding out the critics? Maybe they should have a quiz during registration that asks for a testimony?
And what's an "IP tunnel"?
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
Mister Scratch wrote:The best new post, though, is this one from Dale, who suggests a kind of "Worthiness Interview" for people who want to post on the fittingly named MADboard:
Dale wrote:Make the person indroduce themselves in the introduction section. Perhaps everyone should interview them for five days before they can post in other sections. The purpose would give the moderators the time they need to check for IP tunnels. Let everyone get to know the person before they can post in other sections like the LDS Dialogue & Discussion. If they have any sincere questions they can get answers if they need it.
(emphasis added)
You know, I sort of hope they take his suggestion.
Is this the way they are going to start weeding out the critics? Maybe they should have a quiz during registration that asks for a testimony?
I just noticed this posting from Dan_G/Chaos in a freshly closed thread:
Chaos wrote:Here is the real deal. If someone asks a stupid loaded question they are going to get the response they asked for. This board already fills a special niche, debate with LDS. Its not Sunday school or relief society here. There are already boards such as ldstalk.com nauvoo.com and a few others that are more tame then this place, and not geared towards debate. However a message board has personalities and we cannot control them all. However we try our bestand require help from the community. You have to understand that the people that are here want to be here for what this place is. Even the people we don't want here want to be here. Look at the latest sock puppet outed by David B. Adding another folder is out of the question however designing a way to weed through all the registrations and posters is a better solution. I think Dale is on the right track by making people post in the intro area before being able to go into the debate folder and post. Ill have to see the best way to do that.
Chaos
(emphasis added)
A couple of thoughts---to my astonishment (and possible delight), it seems they are actually taking Dale's suggestion seriously. Second, am I "reading too much into" Chaos's remark, or is he actually admitting here that the MADmods are interested in controlling people's personalities?
Mister Scratch wrote:Second, am I "reading too much into" Chaos's remark, or is he actually admitting here that the MADmods are interested in controlling people's personalities?
If they are, they aren't trying very hard (on the apologist side anyway). There are a few posters who need their rabies shots updated.
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
Mister Scratch wrote:The best new post, though, is this one from Dale, who suggests a kind of "Worthiness Interview" for people who want to post on the fittingly named MADboard:
Dale wrote:Make the person indroduce themselves in the introduction section. Perhaps everyone should interview them for five days before they can post in other sections. The purpose would give the moderators the time they need to check for IP tunnels. Let everyone get to know the person before they can post in other sections like the LDS Dialogue & Discussion. If they have any sincere questions they can get answers if they need it.
(emphasis added)
You know, I sort of hope they take his suggestion.
Is this the way they are going to start weeding out the critics? Maybe they should have a quiz during registration that asks for a testimony?
I just noticed this posting from Dan_G/Chaos in a freshly closed thread:
Chaos wrote:Here is the real deal. If someone asks a stupid loaded question they are going to get the response they asked for. This board already fills a special niche, debate with LDS. Its not Sunday school or relief society here. There are already boards such as ldstalk.com nauvoo.com and a few others that are more tame then this place, and not geared towards debate. However a message board has personalities and we cannot control them all. However we try our bestand require help from the community. You have to understand that the people that are here want to be here for what this place is. Even the people we don't want here want to be here. Look at the latest sock puppet outed by David B. Adding another folder is out of the question however designing a way to weed through all the registrations and posters is a better solution. I think Dale is on the right track by making people post in the intro area before being able to go into the debate folder and post. Ill have to see the best way to do that.
Chaos
(emphasis added)
A couple of thoughts---to my astonishment (and possible delight), it seems they are actually taking Dale's suggestion seriously. Second, am I "reading too much into" Chaos's remark, or is he actually admitting here that the MADmods are interested in controlling people's personalities?
I think that they are seriously considering Dale's suggestion. Here's a quote from Chaos on the closed "Is MADB a Cruel Board" thread:
Im going to figure out the best way to implement something like this.
Seems like an odd initiation process. I can't imagine it going well. Odd ducks over there.
I may be going to hell in a bucket, babe / But at least I'm enjoying the ride.
-Grateful Dead (lyrics by John Perry Barlow)
This is just disturbing to me. The "siege mentality" seems to have taken over at MADB. However, I should not be surprised...they've been slowly implementing tighter and tighter controls on the board. I'm not a fan of the whole "Pundit" thing either. I think it sets up a caste system, and making new requirements for newbies only reinforces this class system.
But, I'm obviously in the minority--so just like the Pundits' forum, it will probably be adopted also.
Is it really so hard to be polite to a person who asks a question? If a poster thinks the question is beneath them, why not ignore it? If the poster is a "troll" or sock-puppet, don't they think it will come out eventually? Seems to me that going to a lot of extra work to prevent trolls from coming on the board will not discourage trolls--just embolden them by creating for them a challenge to make it past checkpoints...and it will only have the effect of discouraging new, sincere members by giving them the impression that the board is cold and uninviting.
In my opinion, they're coming up with some bad ideas.
Alter Idem wrote:This is just disturbing to me. The "siege mentality" seems to have taken over at MADB. However, I should not be surprised...they've been slowly implementing tighter and tighter controls on the board. I'm not a fan of the whole "Pundit" thing either. I think it sets up a caste system, and making new requirements for newbies only reinforces this class system.
But, I'm obviously in the minority--so just like the Pundits' forum, it will probably be adopted also.
Is it really so hard to be polite to a person who asks a question? If a poster thinks the question is beneath them, why not ignore it? If the poster is a "troll" or sock-puppet, don't they think it will come out eventually? Seems to me that going to a lot of extra work to prevent trolls from coming on the board will not discourage trolls--just embolden them by creating for them a challenge to make it past checkpoints...and it will only have the effect of discouraging new, sincere members by giving them the impression that the board is cold and uninviting.
In my opinion, they're coming up with some bad ideas.
Careful, Alter Idem. You're sounding an awful lot like me when I was a Mod over there. Look what happened to me. ;)
Alter Idem wrote:This is just disturbing to me. The "siege mentality" seems to have taken over at MADB. However, I should not be surprised...they've been slowly implementing tighter and tighter controls on the board. I'm not a fan of the whole "Pundit" thing either. I think it sets up a caste system, and making new requirements for newbies only reinforces this class system.
But, I'm obviously in the minority--so just like the Pundits' forum, it will probably be adopted also.
Is it really so hard to be polite to a person who asks a question? If a poster thinks the question is beneath them, why not ignore it? If the poster is a "troll" or sock-puppet, don't they think it will come out eventually? Seems to me that going to a lot of extra work to prevent trolls from coming on the board will not discourage trolls--just embolden them by creating for them a challenge to make it past checkpoints...and it will only have the effect of discouraging new, sincere members by giving them the impression that the board is cold and uninviting.
In my opinion, they're coming up with some bad ideas.
Careful, Alter Idem. You're sounding an awful lot like me when I was a Mod over there. Look what happened to me. ;)
I believe the aptly named MADboard is quite overdue for another round of purging.
Alter Idem wrote:This is just disturbing to me. The "siege mentality" seems to have taken over at MADB. However, I should not be surprised...they've been slowly implementing tighter and tighter controls on the board. I'm not a fan of the whole "Pundit" thing either. I think it sets up a caste system, and making new requirements for newbies only reinforces this class system.
But, I'm obviously in the minority--so just like the Pundits' forum, it will probably be adopted also.
Is it really so hard to be polite to a person who asks a question? If a poster thinks the question is beneath them, why not ignore it? If the poster is a "troll" or sock-puppet, don't they think it will come out eventually? Seems to me that going to a lot of extra work to prevent trolls from coming on the board will not discourage trolls--just embolden them by creating for them a challenge to make it past checkpoints...and it will only have the effect of discouraging new, sincere members by giving them the impression that the board is cold and uninviting.
In my opinion, they're coming up with some bad ideas.
Agreed.
What I have been unable to understand is how they would go about vetting the newbies. The online community is relatively anonymous (with some notable exceptions), so it seems that this would be a very difficult task. Is there some litmus test that people would be required to pass before they'd be permitted to join? Who determines who is worthy? Would there be a rubric of what makes an "acceptable" poster? I'm picturing some horrible twist on a temple recommend interview. Seems that they'd be wanting to encourage new participants, rather than to make it a closed club.
I may be going to hell in a bucket, babe / But at least I'm enjoying the ride.
-Grateful Dead (lyrics by John Perry Barlow)