Future of the Forum

[arthwollipot]

Yeah, the forum's not going to be deleted. There are enough people invested in working to make it happen.

 

[Francesca R]

I consider it more than 50% likely that it disappears, notwithstanding that.

I would prefer to be wrong, of course.

 

[iiwo]

On Something Awful you can pay to defame people's avatar/signature and they have to pay if they want to change it back. Fun right?

I would feel bad every time Lisa's was changed to something along the lines of "blame me". Otoh, that could be a cash cow as long as it reverted back, her ten bucks would have to be in work; otherwise she would be broke by the end of the first thread, and bankrupt in the second .

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

What keeps coming back to me is:

Given that

1--There is at least the scintilla of possibility of legal liability to the JREF if it voluntarily transfers post content to a third party, arguably outside the authority of its non-exclusive licence which does not allow this...

Not likely:

Unfortunately it is not possible to guarantee that any data transmitted over the Internet is 100% secure. As a result, whilst the JREF will strive to protect your personal information, the JREF cannot guarantee the security of any information you transmit to us from or via the Forum.

 

[iiwo]

Digital Dan, you sound just like this jerk called UncaYimmy that got banned here a long time ago.

All this going along and out of nowhere paperskater beats everyone to it.

 

[Planigale]

I think Emily is only meaning if the forum was going to stay with the JREF, and she is to a large extent correct that would be an approach that would result in a forum much more closely aligned with the JREF mission.

But it ain't staying with the JREF so I think this is more an interesting thing to discuss rather than having direct bearing on the new place. Mind you ideas like Emily's will have to be considered because the new-forum will need to raise money somehow.

Could we apply to JREF for a grant to support the forum as an educational resource for skepticism?

 

[pakeha]

[ . . . ]For instance, the reason the 'no smut, no cursing' rules are so strict is because an elementary school teacher who was friends with Randi went to him and said that he had tried to use the JREF Forums in the classroom, but couldn't because of the cursing and dirty talk, and was forced to block the site at the school. [ . . . ]

I agree with this strictness, at least for the public sections.

Thanks for taking the time to keep us informed, icerat. Many people appreciate it.

+1

 

[Francesca R]

Not likely:

The liability I refer to isn't to do with personal information. And "striving to protect it" isn't compatible with turning it over to a third party anyway.

As I said I hope to be wrong.

 

[Francesca R]

(Of course it would be the first time I was ever wrong on the internet)

 

[Hokulele]

I'm not sure it's THAT FAR ahead of things. So far, we have an entity... "The Forums" and apparently that entity is going to have a home or host. But that's sort of like having a kegger that everyone knows about but doesn't know who's actually throwing the bash and who's in charge. Great for a Friday night party, but not so great for a forum that's at least had a sense of direction and unity in the past.

I think this is what Lionking's also referring to. As I said, I'd be happy with a "board" that consisted of yourself, Darat, Jeff, and Terry if he's really been re-drafted and wishes to belong. The "mission statement" as it were could be the old banner from these forums as far as I'm concerned: A place to.... etc...

But if Admins and Mods need to be signed on to some sort of "agreement", they need to be signing with some entity, not carrying one forward from an entity that doesn't seem to know its ass from its elbow in terms of forum management.

If I was doing this in my former employment, the first thing is to establish the management team - the "board". You can do that concurrent with the pressing IT issues of moving the forums, but it should be worked on immediately.

As to the IT issues, particularly the migration of personal data, I would go with (I believe it was) Jeff's suggestion of sending out an immediate opt-in email. Opt-in may lose us a lot of the 35,000 (or however many there are) members, because they joined, logged in once and never returned. It's just an inflated body count. It may also lose us a member or twenty who do not want to have their actual name and email address handed over to any entity other than the JREF. So be it. But legally, an opt-in covers the old forums/JREF and the new forums. (And anyone who doesn't opt in could just join later if they're not comfortable with things being sketchy at present.)

There is also the issue of the finances, looking ahead to 6 months down the road when JREF pulls the funding. Who would people be sending money to, how would it be banked and spent, who would approve the spending, what would happen in the case of excess funds, and would the accounts be available to the public?

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

AFAIK (and I know a little further than most, being able to see into the Sooper Sekrit area) all of the current Mod Team will stay on at least through the transition, assuming that Mr. Wagg and icerat are able to effect a transition.

I just wanna tell you both: good luck. We're all counting on you.

 

[a_unique_person]

I consider it more than 50% likely that it disappears, notwithstanding that.

I would prefer to be wrong, of course.

I think you meant to post this in your parody thread.

 

[Henry Bannister]

If forum rules will be coming up for discussion, can we ban things like the three or more huge ROFLs as an only response to a post. If someone thinks a post is stupid then they should say why rather than just using mockery.

It would be nice to have racism, sexism and homophobia against the forum rules too but I doubt there's much chance of that.

 

[s_pepys]

If forum rules will be coming up for discussion, can we ban things like the three or more huge ROFLs as an only response to a post. If someone thinks a post is stupid then they should say why rather than just using mockery.

It would be nice to have racism, sexism and homophobia against the forum rules too but I doubt there's much chance of that.

Yeah brilliant! We could call the new forum "darats banhammer"!

 

[Belz...]

This isn't about shame or reservation. I'm going to try and explain this calmly because you saying that is making me furious.

It's making you furious in someone else's stead ? Weird. Lionking implied that some things he's said he doesn't want his intimate circle to find out about. I call that shame. It wasn't derogatory. I was also talking about myself, mostly, so your fury is entirely unwarranted.

I'm not sure how it is in other 1st world countries, but it is a very sad fact that (even in 2014) in the USA you can have real repercussions if you are outed as an atheist or as a homosexual. You can lose your job. You can lose your family.

And it's also a fact that my opinions and statements do not vary whether I'm online or not. I was just stating this. Why does that bother you so much ?

But in some other countries it is worse. It is actually illegal to be either of those things and you can lose your life.

Yes, I know all that.

 

[Belz...]

It's one of the poorest attempts at sockpuppetry I've seen. Ever.

You'll have to explain that to me. I didn't catch anything.

 

[The Don]

If forum rules will be coming up for discussion, can we ban things like the three or more huge ROFLs as an only response to a post. If someone thinks a post is stupid then they should say why rather than just using mockery.

It would be nice to have racism, sexism and homophobia against the forum rules too but I doubt there's much chance of that.

Banning all of those would IMO restrict debate too much. Without the racists, sexists and homophobics, who would be left to argue with ?

 

[Henry Bannister]

Banning all of those would IMO restrict debate too much. Without the racists, sexists and homophobics, who would be left to argue with ?

Fair play - I was just thinking about making particualrly nasty individual posts against forum rules though and having the equivalent of 'Against rule 10' stamp over them, rather than banning people. I'm all for a good discussion, it's the abusive tone I don't like.

It does seem that the rules on having a go at others are somewhat flouted, I've seen some pretty nasty comments directed at people rather than their posts.

I do wonder whether that sort of thing is why JREF doesn't seem that bothered about the boards - he might not want his name associated with some of the threads/posts there have been on here.

 

[Orphia Nay]

It appears many forumites are unaware of the imminent changes.

If the JREF cares even slightly about its forum's members, I would hope it would put up a global announcement on the forum alerting the members to the imminent changes, and at least a link to JREFUGEES and/or the new forum if it eventuates.

As it is, this important news is confined to this obscure sub-forum and Community, where many people don't visit.

 

[icerat]

It appears many forumites are unaware of the imminent changes.

If the JREF cares even slightly about its forum's members, I would hope it would put up a global announcement on the forum alerting the members to the imminent changes, and at least a link to JREFUGEES and/or the new forum if it eventuates.

As it is, this important news is confined to this obscure sub-forum and Community, where many people don't visit.

As has been mentioned, everyone will be emailed, and JREF will continue to link to the site. The only noticeable change (unless we update the software at the start) will be the removal of the JREF logo.