ShadowFlar3, on 28 Jul 2014 - 7:29 PM, said:
What with the Crossbones+ system being kind of fuzzy (is this still the latest on the matter?) I'd figure maybe something else...

as far as i'm aware this is still the status, but truthfully i suspect if you pm any mod saying you'd like to contribute to the forum by being a cross-bone member, they'd gladly make you into one.

How is begging for a decorative title after your name "contributing"?

ShadowFlar3, on 28 Jul 2014 - 7:29 PM, said:
-> it's kind of like moderating, you view it and approve or not for publishing and only moderators see the posts...
ShadowFlar3, on 28 Jul 2014 - 7:29 PM, said:
-> beginner posts would be more visible for experienced users and less visible to beginners who'd think "nobody seems to ask which language I should use!" since they get moderated out.
I disagree, in no way would it be moderating, in my opinion all the information should still be publicly visible, it'd just be emplacing a potential delay on the poster.

"I disagree your view posted hours ago accurately describes this system I just made up and typed in this very same post" No, quite surprisingly I was commenting on OPs proposition that actually existed by the time I posted.

ShadowFlar3, on 28 Jul 2014 - 7:29 PM, said:
-> the moderators are actually pretty much all the site frequenters (except who don't want to participate) so really it'd be like the beginners were the only people who didn't see it.
I disagree with the idea that the moderators are the only site frequenters. plenty of people lurk this site daily, and many of us sit in chat regularly.

I didn't state that frequenters were explicitly moderators. By moderators I was referring to OPs mentoring system moderators, which would have been obvious if you read my previous sentences that you quoted just above.

ShadowFlar3, on 28 Jul 2014 - 7:29 PM, said:
-> it's like an own subforum for beginner questions that is only visible to experienced users before they're published in the beginner area
a sub-forum might be a decent way for this to work

Wow, look at you! Despite all the stumbling and getting lost you still arrive where I was leading you. We have the beginners-subforum already where the "problem" is more or less contained with adequate results/effort ratio.

You're completely missing the point of the whole system.

You're suggesting:

- make current "for beginners" subforum only visible to some group of "sub-moderators" (I'm not going to use the word mentor, I don't find it accurate in the system you describe) making it some kind of "secret forum"

- make a new "for proper beginners" subforum that is identical to the above closed subforum where proper posts are moved

- beginners only see the good posts on the "for proper beginners" subforum and aren't exposed to the trash their kind is responsible of (that they really need to see)

- most people opt to become "sub-moderators" so they can see and act on the posts on the exciting "secret forum"! and will be exposed to the trash. Everybody wants to see them and nobody wants to try to answer them.

=> duplicate beginner forums, new fuzzy sub-moderator group to manage and for what? So that beginners will be spared from the unwanted content while only the most experienced selected few carry the burden to single handedly answer every iteration of spam type posts by PM. Because the noobs can't even see that certain stuff like programming language gets asked a lot they will ask it a lot more. Who's up?

1) Crossbones+ let's you peer review articles. Apparently you don't know how the forum works.

2) Well then redact your comment about the system.

3) There's already the resources for it. Your argument is completely void because you act like if we don't make all the new posts visible, all the previous posts will disappear.

4) No, we don't. The whole point is that the problem isn't adequately contained.

5) Ok, wait. Go back, re-read the posts. Like I said, you've completely, completely missed the point. You're now just making baseless assumptions.

Let's break this down, because it's obvious you're having a little trouble understanding what I'm proposing:

First of all, the idea is that only people who are contributors / who have good reputation / who are good contributing members to the forum can opt-in. It's not a free-for-all where literally anyone can opt-in. And it's not a "sub-forum". When a new user makes a post, it gets sent to one of the "mentors", they can approve it or not, and if they don't they can send the new member a message helping them out. If the mentor doesn't approve / disapprove of it within twenty-four hours, it gets sent to another mentor.

Many other forums have this system for different reasons. Experienced forum members review "new" members posts and make sure they follow the rules. I suggest doing this, but also having the mentors remove posts which are essentially "what language should I use?" threads, and direct the new members to helpful resources. There would be no "secret forum".

Almost everything you say is completely baseless hyperbole specifically designed to make my argument look bad. You either have serious reading comprehension problems, or you're doing it on purpose. Considering that I know you're very intelligent (from reading your previous posts), I assume that you're doing it because you think it will make my argument look bad. In reality, it's just making your argument look even worse.

Numbers, let's use them!

1) I looked into it when I hit 1000 and didn't get crossbones. FYI I was also about to publish 2 articles before I ran into an issue with the site moderation and decided not to do it. I'm familiar with how little the crossbones means, "know how forum works" and can also point it out to you that articles are not part of the forums.

2) Where was this referring to? Please use "Selective Quote" button. Apparently you don't know how the FORUM works. Assuming it relates to where I answered second quote from slicer...it doesn't make sense. If you got something to say about my interpretation or opinion on your system, refer to the parts where I discuss it.

3) What? Maybe I didn't get your numbering right? Can it make some sense as an answer to third part in any way...no?

4) The problem is contained and restricted to the one area. But it's still a problem arguably.

5) That's even worse than I could have ever imagined from the scraps you provided earlier.

Let's break this down, because it's obvious you're having a little trouble understanding what I'm proposing:

First of all, the idea is that only people who are contributors / who have good reputation / who are good contributing members to the forum can opt-in. It's not a free-for-all where literally anyone can opt-in. And it's not a "sub-forum". When a new user makes a post, it gets sent to one of the "mentors", they can approve it or not, and if they don't they can send the new member a message helping them out. If the mentor doesn't approve / disapprove of it within twenty-four hours, it gets sent to another mentor.

A post by a beginner, assigned to _one_ of the sub-moderators? And 24 hours before automatic re-assignment? Did you really think this through? What kind of hours do you think people spend on this site and in this case only to respond to a series of noob posts? Those posts could easily get assigned to someone who isn't actually online ATM and bounce back and forth for a long time. It could easily take something like 30 hours on average.

I suggest doing this, but also having the mentors remove posts which are essentially "what language should I use?" threads, and direct the new members to helpful resources.

So wait, the sub-moderators both approve and disapprove the posts that get "assigned" to them" but also can remove posts (from where)? What are you on? What I can't still figure out from your "extensive research into your brilliant idea nobody just quite understands the way you do" is whether the beginner posts are actually published anywhere and in which case.

I think I'll stick to how I interpreted it in the first place. Being a limited visibility pool of posts (such as subforum) that any spare sub-moderator could dip in when he has time makes much more sense.

Many other forums have this system for different reasons. Experienced forum members review "new" members posts and make sure they follow the rules.

A system where each post gets assigned to _one_ of the moderators and no other moderators can do anything with it? Sure they have. No, the moderators do what they can when they can when they see moderation is needed, they aren't exclusively assigned symmetrical cases on arbitrary basis unless it their paid day job.

Considering that I know you're very intelligent (from reading your previous posts), I assume that you're doing it because you think it will make my argument look bad.

I have no interest in make you look bad, I'm only interested in how to handle the problem. I'm only highlighting the fact that you're proposing building a heavy and redundant system that establishes the opposite of your intentions due to your limited scope in planning and less than punctual phrasing. Unknowingly.

I'm thinking that enacting something that discourages new users to post (regardless of the quality of the question) whether by adding a layer of interaction that a user has to also work up the courage to engage in or through some form of censorship will discourage new users from joining. With fewer newbies to grow up into intermediate users there's fewer people to draw knowledge from. There's also fewer people to result in impressions and clicks on advertising which will further reduce the quality of the site.

It's not that hard to figure out which threads are the ones that are going to bother you. And even if you find yourself reading a thread from yet another over ambitious idealistic user that doesn't want to do the real work necessary to attain their goals that causes bruises to mysteriously appear on your forehead, you should have enough self control to leave it be and proceed to the next thread. I say, worry less about new users trying to get a clue and worry more about the unhelpful or misleading posts.

Alright, I still personally think this system would work, but thanks for all the interesting discussion around it. My goal's been achieved, and I'd rather not draw out a long argument about it. The moderator can close the thread now.

Also, I know my previous comment was fairly mean. I'm a little passionate about this (and the forum in general).

What I don't get is why people suggest this kind of system that is made too difficult for what it is.

Ie. if there should be people deciding whether post appears on the forum or not or if there's a delay, it should be the moderators. If some content covered by FAQ should not be posted in the beginner sections then you can make it clear and moderators can enforce it more or less gracefully, to the best of their abilities and per-case basis. There's no need for extra layers.

Currently the posts get effectively answered appropriately and people get redirected to where they should be looking by people of many different experience levels without dividing the advisors into moderators / sub-moderators / intermediate / beginner users. Don't regulate what you don't need to.

Peace =)

ShadowFlar3, on 28 Jul 2014 - 7:29 PM, said:
What with the Crossbones+ system being kind of fuzzy (is this still the latest on the matter?) I'd figure maybe something else...
as far as i'm aware this is still the status, but truthfully i suspect if you pm any mod saying you'd like to contribute to the forum by being a cross-bone member, they'd gladly make you into one.

How is begging for a decorative title after your name "contributing"?

ShadowFlar3, on 28 Jul 2014 - 7:29 PM, said:
-> it's kind of like moderating, you view it and approve or not for publishing and only moderators see the posts...
ShadowFlar3, on 28 Jul 2014 - 7:29 PM, said:
-> beginner posts would be more visible for experienced users and less visible to beginners who'd think "nobody seems to ask which language I should use!" since they get moderated out.
I disagree, in no way would it be moderating, in my opinion all the information should still be publicly visible, it'd just be emplacing a potential delay on the poster.

"I disagree your view posted hours ago accurately describes this system I just made up and typed in this very same post" No, quite surprisingly I was commenting on OPs proposition that actually existed by the time I posted.

ShadowFlar3, on 28 Jul 2014 - 7:29 PM, said:
-> the moderators are actually pretty much all the site frequenters (except who don't want to participate) so really it'd be like the beginners were the only people who didn't see it.
I disagree with the idea that the moderators are the only site frequenters. plenty of people lurk this site daily, and many of us sit in chat regularly.

I didn't state that frequenters were explicitly moderators. By moderators I was referring to OPs mentoring system moderators, which would have been obvious if you read my previous sentences that you quoted just above.

ShadowFlar3, on 28 Jul 2014 - 7:29 PM, said:
-> it's like an own subforum for beginner questions that is only visible to experienced users before they're published in the beginner area
a sub-forum might be a decent way for this to work

Wow, look at you! Despite all the stumbling and getting lost you still arrive where I was leading you. We have the beginners-subforum already where the "problem" is more or less contained with adequate results/effort ratio.

You're completely missing the point of the whole system.

You're suggesting:
- make current "for beginners" subforum only visible to some group of "sub-moderators" (I'm not going to use the word mentor, I don't find it accurate in the system you describe) making it some kind of "secret forum"
- make a new "for proper beginners" subforum that is identical to the above closed subforum where proper posts are moved
- beginners only see the good posts on the "for proper beginners" subforum and aren't exposed to the trash their kind is responsible of (that they really need to see)
- most people opt to become "sub-moderators" so they can see and act on the posts on the exciting "secret forum"! and will be exposed to the trash. Everybody wants to see them and nobody wants to try to answer them.

=> duplicate beginner forums, new fuzzy sub-moderator group to manage and for what? So that beginners will be spared from the unwanted content while only the most experienced selected few carry the burden to single handedly answer every iteration of spam type posts by PM. Because the noobs can't even see that certain stuff like programming language gets asked a lot they will ask it a lot more. Who's up?

This is a long thread, so I just read the OP.

I totally get what you are saying--it can be rather annoying.

But, for the same reason they are here asking those silly questions, they do not realize they are silly. In my life as a programmer I have met at least hundreds of people who have the "next killer app" idea and offer to let me in for a tiny slice if I'll just build it for them.

It might be more polite, respectful and effective to intervene during new-member sign-up with a statement about our ethos and some examples of what we consider contribution vs. spam.

This is a long thread, so I just read the OP.

I totally get what you are saying--it can be rather annoying.

But, for the same reason they are here asking those silly questions, they do not realize they are silly. In my life as a programmer I have met at least hundreds of people who have the "next killer app" idea and offer to let me in for a tiny slice if I'll just build it for them.

It might be more polite, respectful and effective to intervene during new-member sign-up with a statement about our ethos and some examples of what we consider contribution vs. spam.

People ignore that kind of stuff. For example, look at the big stickied post in the for beginners forum. It specifically states to check the FAQ, but it's obvious no one actually reads it before posting.

Otherwise I agree.

Take a chill pill mate.

Go to school.

I don't think there is much merit to this continuing.