DCP going down the tubes?

[acolli17]

Plateau System -

Member joins DCP. Established members already have credibility and "rate" posts, maybe something as simple as "thumbs up/thumbs down". Ratings from other members are weighted accordingly - if a member with a huge amount of credibility gives a good rating, it's worth a lot more than a member with hardly any credibility. DCP Support team can also grant credibility if there is something seemingly unfair about a members rating. There's also a separate platform of forums where only members with a given credibility rating can comment in (think "high rollers" room at a casino). Other people can read these forums, but they can't comment, unless they're credible.

But I have absolutely no idea how to even begin programming that, and yes it would be a nightmare to govern.

I apologize for not being "on topic".

[The Other Mike]

Thanks Mike.

I guess since we're stuck in customer service ......... who has good ideas on how to change the structure?

Is it needed? Can it be done better? Do we need better rules? Do we need more MOD's?

(see mods .. this wasn't about you ... but now it is because you made it so :)

What George hated the most was all the "off topic" posts not having an "OT" in the header. The great thing about DCP is the fact that there is an off topic section for general "goof offs" to have fun and not everyone can go there. It would be great if there were a "professional" or "serious" section that things could be discussed without the groupies who cloud the threads with their inexperience posting.

How it could be done ? I don't know but will give it some thought. As a former member, former instructor, former director, former judge and a high school band director ( getting too old to do DC anymore) I would love a section where people who actually have a clue could debate, argue and discuss things without some band parent crying that you are bashing the kids.

There will always be shows that I don't care for and shows that I love but dare say anything negative about a corps show design or lack of talent in a certain section and behold, the rath of band parents and or moderators. ( no offense moderators, but it does happen )

I realize I'm arrogant, but hell, I've been doing this longer than most posters have been alive and what I'm seeing on DCP is the influx of the people/kids who post nonsense just to post without regard to discussion or debate. Yes, I look down my nose at alot of people, but just like on a long bus ride with my students, only certain ones are allowed to sit near me because I don't want to hear the stupidity of the others. Of course, many people on DCP consider my remarks to be stupidity.

[supersop]

I apologize for not being "on topic".

dont' apologize, this has now been forced as THE TOPIC even though it wasn't the topic.

It's getting late early.

[Matt_S]

(see mods .. this wasn't about you ... but now it is because you made it so :)

From your original post:

So now I'm pointing the finger at almost everyone. DCP, lay down some better rules and tighten up the site. DCP'ers ..... put in some effort and take care when you post. Mod's..... help clean this place up. At least make an effort.

Modding here is a pretty thankless job already. We're all volunteers, I don't get compensated for modding any more than you do for starting this thread. So when you make a post accusing us of not even putting any effort into this site, then yes, you've made it about the mods.

Those Slam Threads that you hate? Those one line posts that are done just to stir up trouble? Those are examples of trolling, flaming, baiting, sniping, whatever you want to call it, and such behavior is already against our Community Guidelines. When you come across threads and posts you feel match that description, then help us out; hit the report button. It's a lot easier to put out fires when someone first sounds an alarm.

Like Cainan said, DCP is a community. We're all members here. If you don't like the mindset of the community, take a part in helping to make this a better place. Flag abusive behavior for us. Start as many Highbrow Threads as you are able - even if some resort to sniping at your topic, the cream will rise to the top, I promise.

[Liam]

What George hated the most was all the "off topic" posts not having an "OT" in the header. The great thing about DCP is the fact that there is an off topic section for general "goof offs" to have fun and not everyone can go there. It would be great if there were a "professional" or "serious" section that things could be discussed without the groupies who cloud the threads with their inexperience posting.

How it could be done ? I don't know but will give it some thought. As a former member, former instructor, former director, former judge and a high school band director ( getting too old to do DC anymore) I would love a section where people who actually have a clue could debate, argue and discuss things without some band parent crying that you are bashing the kids.

A long time ago I suggested a system whereby the thread starter could designate who is allowed to post in that particular thread. Anyone can read, but only those designated by the OP could post. Sounds complicated, but it really isn't. How this can be accomplished easily is by the use of user groups.

Say you, The Other Mike, decides to create a group that meet your criteria of serious dicussion only, over a certain age limit, only FMM, whatever you choose. You monitor your group to make sure that there are no miscreants by your standards. If I am impressed with your diligence and the makeup of your group, then I will automatically allow your group to post in my threads. If someone in your group is acting up, it is in my best interest to let you know so that I can continue to reap the knowledge of the rest of your group, and in your best interest to kick that person out of your private group so that guys like me will still include your group in my threads.

Over time, many different groups will emerge with different makeups (fun groups, serious groups, younger folks, old farts, newbies, DCP get-a-lifers, sports fans, Cadet fans, etc, etc, etc). Each groups will eventually garner a reputation, both of the posters themselves and of the diligence of the group leader to stick to their mission. If a group says that they are free of bashers, but the group leader doesn't monitor his/her group enough to ensure this, then the group will get a weak reputation and be excluded from threads. Like-minded members will then seek out a better maintained group.

When anyone starts a thread, they can choose to allow everyone to post, just certain individuals, or certain groups. Over time, many on DCP may default their threads to include certain reputable groups that fit their posting criteria and only make changes as problems arise or new groups emerge or are discovered.

Mind you, I am not talking necessarily about only including groups with like opinions -- what fun would that be? (Although that could be wanted in certain threads, too -- "Crown fans only -- comment on this years show!!!", for example). No, in general, I'm talking about groups that meet certain behavioral criteria -- no trolling, no bashing, etc, etc. -- or that are likely to show an interest/knowledge in certain topics. If you like bashing, then by all means allow bashers into your group -- maybe some folks want that in their threads. All I'm offering is an opportunity for thread starters to better control the tone of their threads.

Groups will succeed or fail based on market forces, supply and demand, and without too much intrusion required by the mods or admins. This way each thread starter can control to as much or as little degree the tone, pace and direction of their threads. And individual posters, if they care to, can seek out groups and threads that are started by members whose reputation ensures the kind of discussion desired.

Edited July 7, 2009 by Liam

[supersop]

What George hated the most was all the "off topic" posts not having an "OT" in the header. The great thing about DCP is the fact that there is an off topic section for general "goof offs" to have fun and not everyone can go there. It would be great if there were a "professional" or "serious" section that things could be discussed without the groupies who cloud the threads with their inexperience posting.

How it could be done ? I don't know but will give it some thought. As a former member, former instructor, former director, former judge and a high school band director ( getting too old to do DC anymore) I would love a section where people who actually have a clue could debate, argue and discuss things without some band parent crying that you are bashing the kids.

There will always be shows that I don't care for and shows that I love but dare say anything negative about a corps show design or lack of talent in a certain section and behold, the rath of band parents and or moderators. ( no offense moderators, but it does happen )

I realize I'm arrogant, but hell, I've been doing this longer than most posters have been alive and what I'm seeing on DCP is the influx of the people/kids who post nonsense just to post without regard to discussion or debate. Yes, I look down my nose at alot of people, but just like on a long bus ride with my students, only certain ones are allowed to sit near me because I don't want to hear the stupidity of the others. Of course, many people on DCP consider my remarks to be stupidity.

nice idea on the "private thread/ read only but no touchy" area. I think this can easily be done by creating a new category that you can only access if you're on the list for that category. The question is, who moderates who gets in? We don't have enough mods to do so at this time.

Then again, we're talking about restructuring the site into a sub sites. In affect, you're putting a bandaid on the real problem. I.E. this is why DCP was formed to begin with ... to get away from RAMD. I don't want to see another site start up, this one has a lot of good stuff in it and some VERY smart fan$. Why force what is good to leave rather than fix the bad stuff by modifying the user agreement or through better enforcement?

I would prefer to keep the good here. I do think giving certain people a private section that others can watch would be refreshing. By all means, you know they'll put a response thread in general discussion about what the brainiacs are talking about. I say good, let them snicker in general chat and keep it out of the good threads that make this place fun, entertaining and thought provoking for the rest of us.

How's this for a new structure?

DCP DIAMOND MEMBERS:

Drum Corps WORLD CLASS DISCUSSION

Show Threads - for following the daily shows and video streams live

Show Reviews - Where people won't be afraid to actually do a review

The Pot - where we can stir things up and be honest about the good, bad and ugly

The Thinktank - Where we look at things from a different perspective and be braniacs

It's a read only forum unless you have been granted access to post. My impression is, this type of forum would be the Gold Standard for DCP, would be read the most, reacted to the most in general open forum discussion and set the proper example on how the site really wants people to post their thoughts and ideas.

Access can be granted or taken away ... it should be a privilege and not a right. Think of it like the NY Times keeping their writers on to blog even though the paper is no longer being printed. Put the best of the best in there and let the masses have the existing forum to do their THANG.

Any thoughts?

[supersop]

From your original post:

Modding here is a pretty thankless job already. We're all volunteers, I don't get compensated for modding any more than you do for starting this thread. So when you make a post accusing us of not even putting any effort into this site, then yes, you've made it about the mods.

Those Slam Threads that you hate? Those one line posts that are done just to stir up trouble? Those are examples of trolling, flaming, baiting, sniping, whatever you want to call it, and such behavior is already against our Community Guidelines. When you come across threads and posts you feel match that description, then help us out; hit the report button. It's a lot easier to put out fires when someone first sounds an alarm.

Like Cainan said, DCP is a community. We're all members here. If you don't like the mindset of the community, take a part in helping to make this a better place. Flag abusive behavior for us. Start as many Highbrow Threads as you are able - even if some resort to sniping at your topic, the cream will rise to the top, I promise.

I didn't hit the button, I called a meeting of the minds. That's the intent of the thread. I know those who run DCP are busy people and don't always want to have jobs dictated or to see suggestions that things aren't being done right. I think someone in the mod community (or all) are reading too far into the post. It should be okay to debate structure changes or guideline changes without it being assumed as an attack on the mods. Let people discuss it. If you think in the end there is merit to making a change, then that's up to you all. The thread didn't have to be derailed and removed from the public forum just because there are suggestions that mods or DCP could be doing things differently or better. Just let things play out and see what you actually get. It might actually make your lives easier in the end.

Yet again, the thread was about the community, their behavior and their willingness to actually put in some effort. It was not about DCP itself or the mods. Now it is, so here we are and it is what it is. So let's do this thing.

[Liam]

Supersop is onto a similar thing that I was talking about just above.

However, I'm not advocating a seperate sub-forum (there's plenty division already), merely potential restrictions solely at the discretion of the topic starter.

Also, no DCP mod or admin involvement required. Strictly market forces of private group/thread starter reputation for behavior, knowlege, fun, diligence, whatever as the product.

Edited July 6, 2009 by Liam

[supersop]

A long time ago I suggested a system whereby the thread starter could designate who is allowed to post in that particular thread. Anyone can read, but only those designated by the OP could post. Sounds complicated, but it really isn't. How this can be accomplished easily is by the use of user groups.

Cool ideas Liam. I think we're both thinking along the same lines with the groups/categories idea. I think the only problem DCP would have with your suggestion is that it puts the power of moderation into the hands of the OP or their "group". Over time, I could see groups joining, failing, conspiring, splitting into factions and before long you either have 3 or 4 Super Groups or we're right back to where we are now - mass chaos. Kinda reflects the current state of drumcorps doesn't it?

Again, cool ideas and I agree with the premise. But I do think mods have their place within the system, should they choose to exercise their function in our current structure. In a new structure like yours, they just have a mod tag and have little to no function other than to ban people for User Agreement violations. It might all create more trouble than it's worth. Is there another element I'm missing in your plan or maybe something I overlooked? How do you see that system panning out after a year?

[Liam]

Cool ideas Liam. I think we're both thinking along the same lines with the groups/categories idea. I think the only problem DCP would have with your suggestion is that it puts the power of moderation into the hands of the OP or their "group". Over time, I could see groups joining, failing, conspiring, splitting into factions and before long you either have 3 or 4 Super Groups or we're right back to where we are now - mass chaos. Kinda reflects the current state of drumcorps doesn't it?

Again, cool ideas and I agree with the premise. But I do think mods have their place within the system, should they choose to exercise their function in our current structure. In a new structure like yours, they just have a mod tag and have little to no function other than to ban people for User Agreement violations. It might all create more trouble than it's worth. Is there another element I'm missing in your plan or maybe something I overlooked? How do you see that system panning out after a year?

Well, I think the mods role would be similar to what it is now. However, what I am proposing is to ALSO give the thread starter a better chance to control their own thread by restricting the types of posters that can post. If the thread starter doesn't care to do this, then status quo. But if I want to start a thread and I want to better control the type of poster who will contribute -- ones who will stick to the topic, who will argue intelligently and not bash, etc, etc. -- then I would like to have access to a ready-made group of posters who I feel suit that criteria better than the DCP posting masses in general.

I actually don't believe that there would be 3 or 4 super-groups. I agree that would be a failure, but I think that if that happened that smaller groups would inevitably continue to arise and advertise thmeselves as better controlled. Maybe some threads, I'll want a pro-amp group to discuss something specific without getting into the for and against arguments. For a different post, though, I want that discussion, so I'll choose a group that argues intelligently, but has folks on both sides of the issue. Mind you, individual DCP members can join multiple groups, but their membership in each group is dependant on their behavior in threads that accept that group. And groups themselves will be "monitored" by the community at large. If I'm not satisfied that you are controlling your group sufficiently, then I'll stop including your group. If enough people exclude you, then you're out of business -- supply and demand. If The Other Mike's group is in high demand, then posters will want to be included -- if he allows in too many though, his group may lose focus/control and it all starts all over again.

Details, details ... I know ...

All I'm trying to suggest is a way for DCP members to be monitored and evaluated, but not by DCP itself (i.e., the mods), but rather by the community for each individual purpose.

Edited July 6, 2009 by Liam