Proposal for New USMB "Invite Only" Threads.

[OldLady]

USMB Mod Staff is preparing to roll out a new feature. This is a TRIAL, not a guarantee that it will work out. The success of this concept depends largely on the ability of our members to "self-moderate" themselves and cooperate with the rules for this feature. It is NOT open yet. THis is an opportunity to comment on the plan and the rules. The explanation here is LONG. So if you tl;dr it -- this feature is probably not gonna work for you..

The feature is having "Invite Only" threads. They will all reside in the Structured Debate forum for now. For those of you not familiar with the Struct Debate forum, it's a place where the OP can stipulate an ADDITIONAL 3 rules for the thread participants in addition to normal Zone2 moderation. You will be able to still use the ORIGINAL Struct Debate rules OR create an Invite Only thread that meets all the guidelines below.

The concept is that any member can start a thread on any topic that would be acceptable in Zone2 or Zone3 and choose 12 people to "invite in" for the discussion. Sorting out the invites and who are people you want and trust is all on you.. In the future, the number of invites may increase and I've tested that at LEAST 25 are possible.

Read the guidelines carefully. They are more complicated than other forums and we must get compliance on every one of them to make this work. I honestly believe this could be the most popular feature on USMB and give folks a break from being constantly on the front lines of a very nasty Amer. political divide while having to deal with Mega trolls and Ultra partisan Battle Bots. It's NOT a safe zone. It's NOT a "chat room" or clubhouse. These are topical discussions meant to promote more uninterrupted adult discussion.

Comments/suggestions are welcome -- but stick to discussing this feature and the rules.

Rules for Posting "Invite Only" Threads -------- Forum not opened yet !!!!

For an "Invite Only" thread in the Structured Debate Forum ---- where OPs have always been allowed to stipulate 3 additional rules of their own. Under an "Invite Only" format this will automatically adopt 2 rules automatically -- you need not specify these..

Make Rule One that Site Wide Rules apply and threads will be Zone3 moderated

In addition -->
-- flaming or mention of ANY MEMBER (including moderators) who is not in the Invite list is not allowed. Not even by pseudonames or pet names. You want to flame USMB members, don't whimp out. Take it to the Flame Zone where they can flame back. You want to go 9 rounds with another member -- take it to the Bull Ring.

Make Rule Two be to include an "Invite List" of mention alerts (like @FCT @DTMB @catpaws) embedded in the OP for everyone to see. Can be anywhere in the Opening Post AFTER the Bold Red "Invite Only" warning.

Make Rule Three ---- any one additional rule that the OP desires to specify that does not violate the Site Wide or Zone3 rules.. If you WANT to make an additional rule -- place it near the TOP of the Opening Post after the red and bold "invite" required warning (see below).

You could still use the Structured Debate forum under the original Guidelines or use it for Invite Only threads.


Other guidance for members using the Structured Debate Forum under Invite Only rules would be:

- The first line of the OP MUST BE the following statement in Red Bold..

This is an Invite Only thread. If your member name does not appear in the alert call list -- DO NOT POST HERE -- do not even use the rating buttons on posts in this thread.

- simply and politely tell intruders the rules and ask them to leave. Then report them if they dont. Moderators will thread ban any intruders automatically. If it's chronic abuse, warnings and other sanctions may be applied.

- these threads WILL BE closed if members NOT on the Invite list are flamed or named in any way.. (Maybe some requested mod help for those that slip up once if someone REQUESTS a post deletion)

-- no material from these threads LEAVES those threads to be quoted elsewhere on the boards. This applies to both invited and uninvited members. Moderators should not MERGE or MOVE any threads out of or into the Structured Debate forum.

-- Moderation will NOT add members to the invite list or delete members from the invite list or recognize any additions NOT in the Opening Posts ----- so get it right in the Opening Post. Similarly Moderators will not eject invited members from an existing thread except for violations of the Invite Only rules. Live and Learn. Make another thread. And behave like a good guest if you want to be in Invite Only threads. How an OP decides how an invite list is created is SOLELY up to the person who creates the Opening Post.

-- if a person is alerted to one of your threads and requests in that thread that you DO NOT invite again, please respect that request. Who gets invites is solely up to the membership to sort out. But keep a list of those who DO NOT want to participate in the invite threads that you create.

- We're gonna start out with a limit of 12 invites per thread until everybody is familiar with the rules and bugs are shaken out of the rules. Moderation MAY increase that number in the future..

- Topic control is STILL in effect. So don't forget a specific Title and OP like any other Z2 or Z3 thread. These are discussion topics, not chat rooms. The purpose is to get better TOPICAL discussion. Make the Title and OP thematic or fairly narrow. Moderation will cut a LOT of slack on friendly personal banter -- but the TOPIC needs to be respected. Moderation may close if the topic is nowhere in sight.

Wow. Sounds really confusing a shitload of work for staff. Why not just put back social groups? Tis the same thing.

Not liking the exposure of having ISIS open up a recruiting station in the dark spaces of USMB where not even the Mods can see thread or post counts or ANYTHING. It was set up WRONG with too many public options and we could never get it fixed. Couldn't even remove the 4 pot forums from the listings with identical names without a lot of Admin effort that some stoner accomplished one night. . It was a total SNAFU and was cluttering up the forum lists with genuine garbage and abandoned spaces. A big embarrassment as seen from tthe Home Page.



.

"Not liking the exposure of having ISIS open up a recruiting station in the dark spaces of USMB"

The probability of that happening is zero.

How so? A bunch of new member register. Their profiles don't show any "recent activity" or post count but they sure are HERE A LOT. Where you think they MIGHT BE? There's a forum on motorcycle repair that no seems to know about. You SURE it's not an illegal activity?

Or Spammers that register socks but never seem to post. Are they ORGANIZING and educating each other in a Dark USMB "social group"???

If they show no post count they are not posting anything, they could use the PM function, but no posts is no postings, even when we had the Groups if someone was posting those posts were included in their post count. There is a member at this forum adamberns who joined in 2010 and they have not posted ONE TIME, they ONLY ever come here to PM, I know because I have monitored them because I think their behaviour is bizarro, when I see them on I just look to see if finally they are posting and no it's the PMing again always reads Engaged In Conversation.

Are you an undercover mod or what?

 

[OldLady]

USMB Mod Staff is preparing to roll out a new feature. This is a TRIAL, not a guarantee that it will work out. The success of this concept depends largely on the ability of our members to "self-moderate" themselves and cooperate with the rules for this feature. It is NOT open yet. THis is an opportunity to comment on the plan and the rules. The explanation here is LONG. So if you tl;dr it -- this feature is probably not gonna work for you..

The feature is having "Invite Only" threads. They will all reside in the Structured Debate forum for now. For those of you not familiar with the Struct Debate forum, it's a place where the OP can stipulate an ADDITIONAL 3 rules for the thread participants in addition to normal Zone2 moderation. You will be able to still use the ORIGINAL Struct Debate rules OR create an Invite Only thread that meets all the guidelines below.

The concept is that any member can start a thread on any topic that would be acceptable in Zone2 or Zone3 and choose 12 people to "invite in" for the discussion. Sorting out the invites and who are people you want and trust is all on you.. In the future, the number of invites may increase and I've tested that at LEAST 25 are possible.

Read the guidelines carefully. They are more complicated than other forums and we must get compliance on every one of them to make this work. I honestly believe this could be the most popular feature on USMB and give folks a break from being constantly on the front lines of a very nasty Amer. political divide while having to deal with Mega trolls and Ultra partisan Battle Bots. It's NOT a safe zone. It's NOT a "chat room" or clubhouse. These are topical discussions meant to promote more uninterrupted adult discussion.

Comments/suggestions are welcome -- but stick to discussing this feature and the rules.

Rules for Posting "Invite Only" Threads -------- Forum not opened yet !!!!

For an "Invite Only" thread in the Structured Debate Forum ---- where OPs have always been allowed to stipulate 3 additional rules of their own. Under an "Invite Only" format this will automatically adopt 2 rules automatically -- you need not specify these..

Make Rule One that Site Wide Rules apply and threads will be Zone3 moderated

In addition -->
-- flaming or mention of ANY MEMBER (including moderators) who is not in the Invite list is not allowed. Not even by pseudonames or pet names. You want to flame USMB members, don't whimp out. Take it to the Flame Zone where they can flame back. You want to go 9 rounds with another member -- take it to the Bull Ring.

Make Rule Two be to include an "Invite List" of mention alerts (like @FCT @DTMB @catpaws) embedded in the OP for everyone to see. Can be anywhere in the Opening Post AFTER the Bold Red "Invite Only" warning.

Make Rule Three ---- any one additional rule that the OP desires to specify that does not violate the Site Wide or Zone3 rules.. If you WANT to make an additional rule -- place it near the TOP of the Opening Post after the red and bold "invite" required warning (see below).

You could still use the Structured Debate forum under the original Guidelines or use it for Invite Only threads.


Other guidance for members using the Structured Debate Forum under Invite Only rules would be:

- The first line of the OP MUST BE the following statement in Red Bold..

This is an Invite Only thread. If your member name does not appear in the alert call list -- DO NOT POST HERE -- do not even use the rating buttons on posts in this thread.

- simply and politely tell intruders the rules and ask them to leave. Then report them if they dont. Moderators will thread ban any intruders automatically. If it's chronic abuse, warnings and other sanctions may be applied.

- these threads WILL BE closed if members NOT on the Invite list are flamed or named in any way.. (Maybe some requested mod help for those that slip up once if someone REQUESTS a post deletion)

-- no material from these threads LEAVES those threads to be quoted elsewhere on the boards. This applies to both invited and uninvited members. Moderators should not MERGE or MOVE any threads out of or into the Structured Debate forum.

-- Moderation will NOT add members to the invite list or delete members from the invite list or recognize any additions NOT in the Opening Posts ----- so get it right in the Opening Post. Similarly Moderators will not eject invited members from an existing thread except for violations of the Invite Only rules. Live and Learn. Make another thread. And behave like a good guest if you want to be in Invite Only threads. How an OP decides how an invite list is created is SOLELY up to the person who creates the Opening Post.

-- if a person is alerted to one of your threads and requests in that thread that you DO NOT invite again, please respect that request. Who gets invites is solely up to the membership to sort out. But keep a list of those who DO NOT want to participate in the invite threads that you create.

- We're gonna start out with a limit of 12 invites per thread until everybody is familiar with the rules and bugs are shaken out of the rules. Moderation MAY increase that number in the future..

- Topic control is STILL in effect. So don't forget a specific Title and OP like any other Z2 or Z3 thread. These are discussion topics, not chat rooms. The purpose is to get better TOPICAL discussion. Make the Title and OP thematic or fairly narrow. Moderation will cut a LOT of slack on friendly personal banter -- but the TOPIC needs to be respected. Moderation may close if the topic is nowhere in sight.

I like the idea. I don’t get this stipulation though:

"-- no material from these threads LEAVES those threads to be quoted elsewhere on the boards. This applies to both invited and uninvited members.”

Why is that? If someone makes a memorable point, it reflects the feelings of that member. They should be liable/applauded for it elsewhere as conditions warrant.

If there was a lot of self control on a Message board -- it wouldn't be abused. It's in the rules because we pretty know some folks can't control themselves when they cant spray paint up a thread.

If it's your OWN material and it meets the requirements of the Zone you want to repost it just paraphrase it without any included quotes from others.

Ooops. You can't discuss actual quotes from upstairs in an FZ thread? You know, I've read the damned rules on this site more than once and I never saw any such rule, for starters.

It’s been there…Cereal Killer has it there plain as day at the top of this forum.
I just never saw the need to go into a forum so the rules never came into my consciousness.

Copy it for me, please. I just read the rules again and I don't see it.

 

[candycorn]

USMB Mod Staff is preparing to roll out a new feature. This is a TRIAL, not a guarantee that it will work out. The success of this concept depends largely on the ability of our members to "self-moderate" themselves and cooperate with the rules for this feature. It is NOT open yet. THis is an opportunity to comment on the plan and the rules. The explanation here is LONG. So if you tl;dr it -- this feature is probably not gonna work for you..

The feature is having "Invite Only" threads. They will all reside in the Structured Debate forum for now. For those of you not familiar with the Struct Debate forum, it's a place where the OP can stipulate an ADDITIONAL 3 rules for the thread participants in addition to normal Zone2 moderation. You will be able to still use the ORIGINAL Struct Debate rules OR create an Invite Only thread that meets all the guidelines below.

The concept is that any member can start a thread on any topic that would be acceptable in Zone2 or Zone3 and choose 12 people to "invite in" for the discussion. Sorting out the invites and who are people you want and trust is all on you.. In the future, the number of invites may increase and I've tested that at LEAST 25 are possible.

Read the guidelines carefully. They are more complicated than other forums and we must get compliance on every one of them to make this work. I honestly believe this could be the most popular feature on USMB and give folks a break from being constantly on the front lines of a very nasty Amer. political divide while having to deal with Mega trolls and Ultra partisan Battle Bots. It's NOT a safe zone. It's NOT a "chat room" or clubhouse. These are topical discussions meant to promote more uninterrupted adult discussion.

Comments/suggestions are welcome -- but stick to discussing this feature and the rules.

Rules for Posting "Invite Only" Threads -------- Forum not opened yet !!!!

For an "Invite Only" thread in the Structured Debate Forum ---- where OPs have always been allowed to stipulate 3 additional rules of their own. Under an "Invite Only" format this will automatically adopt 2 rules automatically -- you need not specify these..

Make Rule One that Site Wide Rules apply and threads will be Zone3 moderated

In addition -->
-- flaming or mention of ANY MEMBER (including moderators) who is not in the Invite list is not allowed. Not even by pseudonames or pet names. You want to flame USMB members, don't whimp out. Take it to the Flame Zone where they can flame back. You want to go 9 rounds with another member -- take it to the Bull Ring.

Make Rule Two be to include an "Invite List" of mention alerts (like @FCT @DTMB @catpaws) embedded in the OP for everyone to see. Can be anywhere in the Opening Post AFTER the Bold Red "Invite Only" warning.

Make Rule Three ---- any one additional rule that the OP desires to specify that does not violate the Site Wide or Zone3 rules.. If you WANT to make an additional rule -- place it near the TOP of the Opening Post after the red and bold "invite" required warning (see below).

You could still use the Structured Debate forum under the original Guidelines or use it for Invite Only threads.


Other guidance for members using the Structured Debate Forum under Invite Only rules would be:

- The first line of the OP MUST BE the following statement in Red Bold..

This is an Invite Only thread. If your member name does not appear in the alert call list -- DO NOT POST HERE -- do not even use the rating buttons on posts in this thread.

- simply and politely tell intruders the rules and ask them to leave. Then report them if they dont. Moderators will thread ban any intruders automatically. If it's chronic abuse, warnings and other sanctions may be applied.

- these threads WILL BE closed if members NOT on the Invite list are flamed or named in any way.. (Maybe some requested mod help for those that slip up once if someone REQUESTS a post deletion)

-- no material from these threads LEAVES those threads to be quoted elsewhere on the boards. This applies to both invited and uninvited members. Moderators should not MERGE or MOVE any threads out of or into the Structured Debate forum.

-- Moderation will NOT add members to the invite list or delete members from the invite list or recognize any additions NOT in the Opening Posts ----- so get it right in the Opening Post. Similarly Moderators will not eject invited members from an existing thread except for violations of the Invite Only rules. Live and Learn. Make another thread. And behave like a good guest if you want to be in Invite Only threads. How an OP decides how an invite list is created is SOLELY up to the person who creates the Opening Post.

-- if a person is alerted to one of your threads and requests in that thread that you DO NOT invite again, please respect that request. Who gets invites is solely up to the membership to sort out. But keep a list of those who DO NOT want to participate in the invite threads that you create.

- We're gonna start out with a limit of 12 invites per thread until everybody is familiar with the rules and bugs are shaken out of the rules. Moderation MAY increase that number in the future..

- Topic control is STILL in effect. So don't forget a specific Title and OP like any other Z2 or Z3 thread. These are discussion topics, not chat rooms. The purpose is to get better TOPICAL discussion. Make the Title and OP thematic or fairly narrow. Moderation will cut a LOT of slack on friendly personal banter -- but the TOPIC needs to be respected. Moderation may close if the topic is nowhere in sight.

I like the idea. I don’t get this stipulation though:

"-- no material from these threads LEAVES those threads to be quoted elsewhere on the boards. This applies to both invited and uninvited members.”

Why is that? If someone makes a memorable point, it reflects the feelings of that member. They should be liable/applauded for it elsewhere as conditions warrant.

If there was a lot of self control on a Message board -- it wouldn't be abused. It's in the rules because we pretty know some folks can't control themselves when they cant spray paint up a thread.

If it's your OWN material and it meets the requirements of the Zone you want to repost it just paraphrase it without any included quotes from others.

Ooops. You can't discuss actual quotes from upstairs in an FZ thread? You know, I've read the damned rules on this site more than once and I never saw any such rule, for starters.

It’s been there…Cereal Killer has it there plain as day at the top of this forum.
I just never saw the need to go into a forum so the rules never came into my consciousness.

Copy it for me, please. I just read the rules again and I don't see it.

Here ya go:

 

[OldLady]

I like the idea. I don’t get this stipulation though:

"-- no material from these threads LEAVES those threads to be quoted elsewhere on the boards. This applies to both invited and uninvited members.”

Why is that? If someone makes a memorable point, it reflects the feelings of that member. They should be liable/applauded for it elsewhere as conditions warrant.

If there was a lot of self control on a Message board -- it wouldn't be abused. It's in the rules because we pretty know some folks can't control themselves when they cant spray paint up a thread.

If it's your OWN material and it meets the requirements of the Zone you want to repost it just paraphrase it without any included quotes from others.

Ooops. You can't discuss actual quotes from upstairs in an FZ thread? You know, I've read the damned rules on this site more than once and I never saw any such rule, for starters.

It’s been there…Cereal Killer has it there plain as day at the top of this forum.
I just never saw the need to go into a forum so the rules never came into my consciousness.

Copy it for me, please. I just read the rules again and I don't see it.

Here ya go:

View attachment 196920

Thanks, Candycorn. I was referring to the rule about not quoting comments/posts from others in Zones 1,2&3 in the FZ. I've never copied an entire post, but when I need to spout off (which they don't appreciate downstairs--it's whining) I've copied a particularly noxious comment from a poster I'm calling out. It's kinda hard to bitch when you can't say what it's about and "paraphrasing" doesn't cut it.
So arrest me, I guess.

 

[ChrisL]

If there was a lot of self control on a Message board -- it wouldn't be abused. It's in the rules because we pretty know some folks can't control themselves when they cant spray paint up a thread.

If it's your OWN material and it meets the requirements of the Zone you want to repost it just paraphrase it without any included quotes from others.

Ooops. You can't discuss actual quotes from upstairs in an FZ thread? You know, I've read the damned rules on this site more than once and I never saw any such rule, for starters.

It’s been there…Cereal Killer has it there plain as day at the top of this forum.
I just never saw the need to go into a forum so the rules never came into my consciousness.

Copy it for me, please. I just read the rules again and I don't see it.

Here ya go:

View attachment 196920

Thanks, Candycorn. I was referring to the rule about not quoting comments/posts from others in Zones 1,2&3 in the FZ. I've never copied an entire post, but when I need to spout off (which they don't appreciate downstairs--it's whining) I've copied a particularly noxious comment from a poster I'm calling out. It's kinda hard to bitch when you can't say what it's about and "paraphrasing" doesn't cut it.
So arrest me, I guess.

They can quote what you say UPSTAIRS, but you cannot quote what they say DOWN THERE. That is how it works.

 

[ChrisL]

Well that is the same situation with the Zone 4 Sections you cannot quote from Zone 4 threads in the Open Forum.

Oh. Okay. What someone says should be quotable across all zones IMHO. But for the mods, their sandbox, their rules.

Thanks for the info!

As Lucy just pointed out -- that is not a precedent. We don't allow ANYTHING from Zone4 to go anywhere else. And why should we let folks who weren't invited rip that convo and take it elsewhere to flame it?

But...you do allow it. Just look in the FZ and you will see lots of threads started just to diss someone that said something somewhere else. Even if the person isn't down there, they get bashed. So yeah..you do allow it.

No nothing from there or Badlands or The Rubber Room can be brought out of Zone 4, eg. you cannot copy and paste, Screen Shot etc anything from a Badlands thread and post it in Politics, Current Events, General Discussion, The Lounge or any other section in Open Forum.

Thats not what I said. I said ANY thread, ANY post, ANY member of USMB can be quoted and bashed DOWNSTAIRS.

Yes, Gracie has it right. That is how it works.

 

[ChrisL]

I was a member of a couple of groups when we had them. I barely ever posted in them though. I'm here to fight leftist douchebaggery in public!

 

[OldLady]

I was a member of a couple of groups when we had them. I barely ever posted in them though. I'm here to fight leftist douchebaggery in public!

I've been thinking about that, too. Do I know six reasonable conservatives? Yeah, probably. It would take some work to come up with six, though.

 

[flacaltenn]

USMB Mod Staff is preparing to roll out a new feature. This is a TRIAL, not a guarantee that it will work out. The success of this concept depends largely on the ability of our members to "self-moderate" themselves and cooperate with the rules for this feature. It is NOT open yet. THis is an opportunity to comment on the plan and the rules. The explanation here is LONG. So if you tl;dr it -- this feature is probably not gonna work for you..

The feature is having "Invite Only" threads. They will all reside in the Structured Debate forum for now. For those of you not familiar with the Struct Debate forum, it's a place where the OP can stipulate an ADDITIONAL 3 rules for the thread participants in addition to normal Zone2 moderation. You will be able to still use the ORIGINAL Struct Debate rules OR create an Invite Only thread that meets all the guidelines below.

The concept is that any member can start a thread on any topic that would be acceptable in Zone2 or Zone3 and choose 12 people to "invite in" for the discussion. Sorting out the invites and who are people you want and trust is all on you.. In the future, the number of invites may increase and I've tested that at LEAST 25 are possible.

Read the guidelines carefully. They are more complicated than other forums and we must get compliance on every one of them to make this work. I honestly believe this could be the most popular feature on USMB and give folks a break from being constantly on the front lines of a very nasty Amer. political divide while having to deal with Mega trolls and Ultra partisan Battle Bots. It's NOT a safe zone. It's NOT a "chat room" or clubhouse. These are topical discussions meant to promote more uninterrupted adult discussion.

Comments/suggestions are welcome -- but stick to discussing this feature and the rules.

Rules for Posting "Invite Only" Threads -------- Forum not opened yet !!!!

For an "Invite Only" thread in the Structured Debate Forum ---- where OPs have always been allowed to stipulate 3 additional rules of their own. Under an "Invite Only" format this will automatically adopt 2 rules automatically -- you need not specify these..

Make Rule One that Site Wide Rules apply and threads will be Zone3 moderated

In addition -->
-- flaming or mention of ANY MEMBER (including moderators) who is not in the Invite list is not allowed. Not even by pseudonames or pet names. You want to flame USMB members, don't whimp out. Take it to the Flame Zone where they can flame back. You want to go 9 rounds with another member -- take it to the Bull Ring.

Make Rule Two be to include an "Invite List" of mention alerts (like @FCT @DTMB @catpaws) embedded in the OP for everyone to see. Can be anywhere in the Opening Post AFTER the Bold Red "Invite Only" warning.

Make Rule Three ---- any one additional rule that the OP desires to specify that does not violate the Site Wide or Zone3 rules.. If you WANT to make an additional rule -- place it near the TOP of the Opening Post after the red and bold "invite" required warning (see below).

You could still use the Structured Debate forum under the original Guidelines or use it for Invite Only threads.


Other guidance for members using the Structured Debate Forum under Invite Only rules would be:

- The first line of the OP MUST BE the following statement in Red Bold..

This is an Invite Only thread. If your member name does not appear in the alert call list -- DO NOT POST HERE -- do not even use the rating buttons on posts in this thread.

- simply and politely tell intruders the rules and ask them to leave. Then report them if they dont. Moderators will thread ban any intruders automatically. If it's chronic abuse, warnings and other sanctions may be applied.

- these threads WILL BE closed if members NOT on the Invite list are flamed or named in any way.. (Maybe some requested mod help for those that slip up once if someone REQUESTS a post deletion)

-- no material from these threads LEAVES those threads to be quoted elsewhere on the boards. This applies to both invited and uninvited members. Moderators should not MERGE or MOVE any threads out of or into the Structured Debate forum.

-- Moderation will NOT add members to the invite list or delete members from the invite list or recognize any additions NOT in the Opening Posts ----- so get it right in the Opening Post. Similarly Moderators will not eject invited members from an existing thread except for violations of the Invite Only rules. Live and Learn. Make another thread. And behave like a good guest if you want to be in Invite Only threads. How an OP decides how an invite list is created is SOLELY up to the person who creates the Opening Post.

-- if a person is alerted to one of your threads and requests in that thread that you DO NOT invite again, please respect that request. Who gets invites is solely up to the membership to sort out. But keep a list of those who DO NOT want to participate in the invite threads that you create.

- We're gonna start out with a limit of 12 invites per thread until everybody is familiar with the rules and bugs are shaken out of the rules. Moderation MAY increase that number in the future..

- Topic control is STILL in effect. So don't forget a specific Title and OP like any other Z2 or Z3 thread. These are discussion topics, not chat rooms. The purpose is to get better TOPICAL discussion. Make the Title and OP thematic or fairly narrow. Moderation will cut a LOT of slack on friendly personal banter -- but the TOPIC needs to be respected. Moderation may close if the topic is nowhere in sight.

I like the idea. I don’t get this stipulation though:

"-- no material from these threads LEAVES those threads to be quoted elsewhere on the boards. This applies to both invited and uninvited members.”

Why is that? If someone makes a memorable point, it reflects the feelings of that member. They should be liable/applauded for it elsewhere as conditions warrant.

Well that is the same situation with the Zone 4 Sections you cannot quote from Zone 4 threads in the Open Forum.

Oh. Okay. What someone says should be quotable across all zones IMHO. But for the mods, their sandbox, their rules.

Thanks for the info!

As Lucy just pointed out -- that is not a precedent. We don't allow ANYTHING from Zone4 to go anywhere else. And why should we let folks who weren't invited rip that convo and take it elsewhere to flame it?

But...you do allow it. Just look in the FZ and you will see lots of threads started just to diss someone that said something somewhere else. Even if the person isn't down there, they get bashed. So yeah..you do allow it.

That's a feature of Flame Zone. If folks say stupid or even borderline illegal stuff "upstairs" -- we want them mocked in the FZ --- not in the open forums.

Stuff can go IN -- but nothing comes out..

 

[candycorn]

I like the idea. I don’t get this stipulation though:

"-- no material from these threads LEAVES those threads to be quoted elsewhere on the boards. This applies to both invited and uninvited members.”

Why is that? If someone makes a memorable point, it reflects the feelings of that member. They should be liable/applauded for it elsewhere as conditions warrant.

Well that is the same situation with the Zone 4 Sections you cannot quote from Zone 4 threads in the Open Forum.

Oh. Okay. What someone says should be quotable across all zones IMHO. But for the mods, their sandbox, their rules.

Thanks for the info!

As Lucy just pointed out -- that is not a precedent. We don't allow ANYTHING from Zone4 to go anywhere else. And why should we let folks who weren't invited rip that convo and take it elsewhere to flame it?

But...you do allow it. Just look in the FZ and you will see lots of threads started just to diss someone that said something somewhere else. Even if the person isn't down there, they get bashed. So yeah..you do allow it.

That's a feature of Flame Zone. If folks say stupid or even borderline illegal stuff "upstairs" -- we want them mocked in the FZ --- not in the open forums.

Stuff can go IN -- but nothing comes out..

Ahh…

 

[flacaltenn]

I was a member of a couple of groups when we had them. I barely ever posted in them though. I'm here to fight leftist douchebaggery in public!

I've been thinking about that, too. Do I know six reasonable conservatives? Yeah, probably. It would take some work to come up with six, though.

Like I said earlier -- you take folks OFF the battlefield and reason with them without the constant conflict -- and you'd be SHOCKED (I mean SHOCKED) how reasonable they become. I've had that opportunity with folks who in the constant thread wars seem like jerks become trusted friends to converse with.

In a sense -- USMB is doing a dis-service to Amer. discourse by putting every one on the front lines in every thread. Time to change that.

Smaller convos usually are more productive anyways. Even without the legions of tribal warriors and trolls..

 

[flacaltenn]

I was a member of a couple of groups when we had them. I barely ever posted in them though. I'm here to fight leftist douchebaggery in public!

I've been thinking about that, too. Do I know six reasonable conservatives? Yeah, probably. It would take some work to come up with six, though.

Like I said earlier -- you take folks OFF the battlefield and reason with them without the constant conflict -- and you'd be SHOCKED (I mean SHOCKED) how reasonable they become. I've had that opportunity with folks who in the constant thread wars seem like jerks become trusted friends to converse with.

In a sense -- USMB is doing a dis-service to Amer. discourse by putting every one on the front lines in every thread. Time to change that.

Smaller convos usually are more productive anyways. Even without the legions of tribal warriors and trolls..

Just as an example. Coyote knows what I mean. We have a tough time moderating the Israel/IP forum and the 2 of us have kinda "adopted" it over the years. CONSTANT repetitive positioning and hopeless for resolution. But when we had a serious Mega Troll issue in there. BOTH SIDES came to us to ask us to fix it. And we had some private topical discussions in there with BOTH OPPOSING tribes that were simply AMAZINGLY productive.

You cannot DO that when the whole audience is watching. The folks that LOVE the smell of conflict LOVE that audience. It's like a Jerry Springer Message Board without SOME control over who CHOOSE to discuss with.

 

[flacaltenn]

If there was a lot of self control on a Message board -- it wouldn't be abused. It's in the rules because we pretty know some folks can't control themselves when they cant spray paint up a thread.

If it's your OWN material and it meets the requirements of the Zone you want to repost it just paraphrase it without any included quotes from others.

Ooops. You can't discuss actual quotes from upstairs in an FZ thread? You know, I've read the damned rules on this site more than once and I never saw any such rule, for starters.

It’s been there…Cereal Killer has it there plain as day at the top of this forum.
I just never saw the need to go into a forum so the rules never came into my consciousness.

Copy it for me, please. I just read the rules again and I don't see it.

Here ya go:

View attachment 196920

Thanks, Candycorn. I was referring to the rule about not quoting comments/posts from others in Zones 1,2&3 in the FZ. I've never copied an entire post, but when I need to spout off (which they don't appreciate downstairs--it's whining) I've copied a particularly noxious comment from a poster I'm calling out. It's kinda hard to bitch when you can't say what it's about and "paraphrasing" doesn't cut it.
So arrest me, I guess.

There is only a solid rule on things not going OUT of Z4. As far as bringing things INTO Z4 --- the mods do it ALL day long when we "give up" on threads and toss them to Badlands, The Rubber Room, and the FZ. To US they each have a special character. But we toss contentious personal crap or un-moddable stuff there every hour probably.

Something like (to ME) Badlands is the High Brow Toxic dump for convos out of control, the Flame Zone is the personal squabbles burial ground and the Rubber Room is "tell me you didn't go there" SMH kind of stuff that we just won't censor.

As far as what goes in -- members can only make Call-out threads in Z4. Only place that you can NAME a member in an OPost or title. And those threads CAN contain content from "open" forums. Don't let any member tell you different -- because that's the policy. On a few occasions we've disallowed material because it was unfairly taken out of context or totally fabricated. Can't DO that.

 

[OldLady]

I was a member of a couple of groups when we had them. I barely ever posted in them though. I'm here to fight leftist douchebaggery in public!

I've been thinking about that, too. Do I know six reasonable conservatives? Yeah, probably. It would take some work to come up with six, though.

Like I said earlier -- you take folks OFF the battlefield and reason with them without the constant conflict -- and you'd be SHOCKED (I mean SHOCKED) how reasonable they become. I've had that opportunity with folks who in the constant thread wars seem like jerks become trusted friends to converse with.

In a sense -- USMB is doing a dis-service to Amer. discourse by putting every one on the front lines in every thread. Time to change that.

Smaller convos usually are more productive anyways. Even without the legions of tribal warriors and trolls..

Are posters from other boards saying that USMB is corroding their language? Are they going to FB and saying "Hey, I can say that on USMB!"
I agree with you, by the way, that we all have some responsibility for behaving like human beings, even if we are on social media.

 

[OldLady]

I was a member of a couple of groups when we had them. I barely ever posted in them though. I'm here to fight leftist douchebaggery in public!

I've been thinking about that, too. Do I know six reasonable conservatives? Yeah, probably. It would take some work to come up with six, though.

Like I said earlier -- you take folks OFF the battlefield and reason with them without the constant conflict -- and you'd be SHOCKED (I mean SHOCKED) how reasonable they become. I've had that opportunity with folks who in the constant thread wars seem like jerks become trusted friends to converse with.

In a sense -- USMB is doing a dis-service to Amer. discourse by putting every one on the front lines in every thread. Time to change that.

Smaller convos usually are more productive anyways. Even without the legions of tribal warriors and trolls..

I've had a couple of conservative trolls PM me to be complimentary--so I know what you mean. There is a lot of posturing here for who's the biggest bad ass.

 

[ChrisL]

I was a member of a couple of groups when we had them. I barely ever posted in them though. I'm here to fight leftist douchebaggery in public!

I've been thinking about that, too. Do I know six reasonable conservatives? Yeah, probably. It would take some work to come up with six, though.

Like I said earlier -- you take folks OFF the battlefield and reason with them without the constant conflict -- and you'd be SHOCKED (I mean SHOCKED) how reasonable they become. I've had that opportunity with folks who in the constant thread wars seem like jerks become trusted friends to converse with.

In a sense -- USMB is doing a dis-service to Amer. discourse by putting every one on the front lines in every thread. Time to change that.

Smaller convos usually are more productive anyways. Even without the legions of tribal warriors and trolls..

I've had a couple of conservative trolls PM me to be complimentary--so I know what you mean. There is a lot of posturing here for who's the biggest bad ass.

Me, I'm the biggest bad ass. I would never PM you to compliment you.

 

[ChrisL]

I'm probably the smallest bad ass actually, but my YUGE attitude more than makes up for that.

 

[Picaro]

Basically just a Debate Forum with more than two members. Nothing wrong with that, except most of the spammers here are not here to debate, they're here to spam, and shut down the other Party's spam. Don't see how it can be 'un-moderated', and in any case the 'Group' feature worked just fine for that , didn't it?

Try a 'No memes' rule and a no fake news rule, see if that will work. lol ...

 

[OldLady]

I was a member of a couple of groups when we had them. I barely ever posted in them though. I'm here to fight leftist douchebaggery in public!

I've been thinking about that, too. Do I know six reasonable conservatives? Yeah, probably. It would take some work to come up with six, though.

Like I said earlier -- you take folks OFF the battlefield and reason with them without the constant conflict -- and you'd be SHOCKED (I mean SHOCKED) how reasonable they become. I've had that opportunity with folks who in the constant thread wars seem like jerks become trusted friends to converse with.

In a sense -- USMB is doing a dis-service to Amer. discourse by putting every one on the front lines in every thread. Time to change that.

Smaller convos usually are more productive anyways. Even without the legions of tribal warriors and trolls..

I've had a couple of conservative trolls PM me to be complimentary--so I know what you mean. There is a lot of posturing here for who's the biggest bad ass.

Me, I'm the biggest bad ass. I would never PM you to compliment you.

That's a relief, you bitch.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Think of Invite rooms like Vegas. What happens in Vegas...is probably illegal and cost you a lot of money.