WTF is feedforward?

randylonghorn

Dohnny Jepp wrote: »

EDIT: Damn you randy for unbolding that sentence.

/shakes fist :P

I left the bit I meant to bold bolded.

DeVore wrote: »

f*ck it Randy we're 18 pages* into a topic that was derailed back on page three, why stop now.

DeV.

Ok, I confess ... I didn't plough through it all, I can be a bit masochistic, but there has to be at least one naked woman involved ... >_>

psni wrote: »

Please tell me Dav has the car keys...

leninbenjamin

DeVore wrote: »

But thats what it is, that PLUS an open public area so people dont even have to wait for access to be granted.

But apparently without even giving it a chance people already know how its going to work and turn out which is frankly astonishing because I have no freakin' idea so either I'm thick or everyone is talking bollix and projecting their beliefs and suppositions onto it before it has even had a chance to be still born.

Oh yeah. Its the later.

DeV.

No it's not the same. You've split the discussion down the middle through the creation of the restricted, private and public fora. You've created a little fortress for the inner circle and an outer yard for the plebs with you shouting down from your lofty balcony unwilling to engage the rabble.

And it clearly is unworkable if you're all going to get so ****ing petty about it before it's even opened for business proper. If you're going to get all defensive over my original post here then you're well too pissed to post tbh.

Overheal

Thaedydal wrote:

Boston is being an arguemenative querllous git atm, dunno maybe he's in his flowers

Look, im impartial: but I don't see the need to make anything that could be perceived as a snide remark in the Guy's absence. This whole situation appears hostile and stand-offish enough as it is.

Dav

psni wrote: »

Please tell me Dav has the car keys...

Who do you think bought the wine?

DeVore

I've split the discussion the way people split their post with TL;DR... some people will want the condensed high signal to noise and others will want to kick it about or read the kick about. I wasnt deriding your comment by the way, but quite frankly FB has become a cess pit of what it should be and I'm trying to raise the bar.

Though I do have to have a giggle that in the same post in which you deride me for my last post you make and unequivical statement that its "unworkable". Wow. I wish I had your foresight.

Sorry if I'm still human enough to give it a shot.

DeV

Nevyn

Overheal wrote: »

Look, im impartial: but I don't see the need to make anything that could be perceived as a snide remark in the Guy's absence.

I am sure he will pm me or leave me a message on my vistors page or dig the thread back up when he gets access, or good looking back over my posts to find something to report, somewhere to someone as a way of letting me know he cares.

DeVore

PS: Me and Dav will be travelling for most of tomorrow so if everyone could keep from predicting armageddon or ripping each other to shreds, that would be just peachy.


DeV.

Overheal

Thaedydal wrote: »

I am sure he will pm me or leave me a message on my vistors page or dig the thread back up when he gets access, or good looking back over my posts to find something to report, somewhere to someone as a way of letting me know he cares.

Why encourage him though. I like thinking you're one of the better mods: No need to be a flame-baiter.

If I started talking about a banned user the way you have in one of your forums I'd have been banned before the think-twice edit.

Steve

leninbenjamin wrote: »

Seriously, simplify the whole thing. Why not make FeedForward a restricted access form like Soccer is, that way access is still a privilege, only open to those who are actively interested in it, yet gives all those willing to participate and open and even floor upon which to express themselves?

That's pretty much the way it's heading - the access can't be as straightforward as reading a charter and quoting the correct words but in a broader sense that's what it is.
There are some names being discussed in the private FF forum right now - it's a difficult discussion to have when the prerequisites to entry are still for the most part undecided and are evolving somewhat based on some of the suggestions put forward.
The general consensus thus far seems to be someone that has shown themselves to be level-headed, has the bests interest of the greater boards community at heart and can put their point forward in an intelligent, objective, concise, non shouty, and non biased manner. That's only my personal take on it and in no way represents anything official.

Another thing that's been burning in the back of my mind is "should there be a thread in FF public where people can volunteer / show they are interested in participating?" By "burning", I mean annoying the hell out of me and I've wanted to bring it up in FF but didn't think it was appropriate.
What's getting me is what happens when say 10 people post interest in participating and two of them are selected ? Eight are going to feel hard done by.
what's the alternative? vet people in private and then approach them to see if they're interested? That only breeds calls of 'clique' and 'closed shop' and goes against what FF is trying to achieve.
Neither situation is very fair but where is the compromise? - I'm having a hard time coming up with one that will satisfy both the admins needs and the userbase's needs.
This the typical of the many issues that need to be addressed before FF can open for business - I'm just trying to give some perspective on it.

Steve

Thaedydal wrote: »

I am sure he will pm me or leave me a message on my vistors page or dig the thread back up when he gets access, or good looking back over my posts to find something to report, somewhere to someone as a way of letting me know he cares.

DeVore

Ok, can we keep this even vaguely on topic. Also, is it wrong that my first thought was "woah, she's hot".

Its not fair to discuss Boston now, nor is this topic about him.

DeV.

copacetic

DeVore wrote: »

well if you want to drag it back further... FF was an idea in my head alone. So, basically, I was the first and only person invited into FF. Then and get this cos it will bake your noodle, the next two people I invited were Amadeus (because he was a a dissenting voice I could respect) and Seamus (because he's a supportive voice who has laser logic imho).

Then I thought "hey, I'm doing exactly what I am trying to avoid, ie: decide lots of things without Mod input which will affect the mods without mod input". Right at that moment I broadened the base and invited any Mod who wanted to, to join Seamus Amadeus and I.

Then we set about deciding how to decide stuff and who else to invite.


And then I made the mistake of trying to explain this to everyone, some of whom simply wanted to **** on it.

Oh and I forgot to actually give Amadeus access in the end. Yeah, thats the only bit I actually regret.

And now we are here.

DeV.
And yes, I'm drunk and listening to Zero Punctuation reviews, but that doesnt make what I'm saying any less true.

So, bascially. YES, any fecker who happened to be among the hundreds of mods AND happened to be one of the few who reads the mod forum AND decided to volunteer is NOW a trustee?

ffs, can you not see that the very first step has been a massively wrong one? Plenty of us are hopeful for boards and enthusiatic about it's chances, but with idiotic decisions like this what is there to hope for?

The general consensus thus far seems to be someone that has shown themselves to be level-headed, has the bests interest of the greater boards community at heart and can put their point forward in an intelligent, objective, concise, non shouty, and non biased manner. That's only my personal take on it and in no way represents anything official.

This sounds pretty good Steve, but why wasn't the same critical viewpoint taken of the initial members, some of whom don't come near to meeting any of the above criteria. Why did the various non-biased current members not stand up to whats been done? Why did you allow your posts to be edited untruthfully? Why did you let Dev away with claiming they are 'factually incorrect' when they clearly weren't?

DeVore

Where was I supposed to start?

They do tons of work for the site, more then users. Yes more then users because they are users TOO. They post TOO. In lots of forums that arent ones they mod.

So, again I ask, where was I supposed to start?


DeV.

copacetic

DeVore wrote: »

Where was I supposed to start?

They do tons of work for the site, more then users. Yes more then users because they are users TOO. They post TOO. In lots of forums that arent ones they mod.

So, again I ask, where was I supposed to start?


DeV.

With a smaller group? Get yourself, amadeus and seamus together, add a couple of user who aren't ex-mod/ex-admin. amadeus or seamus can help there. 5 of you, no more. Start off that way.

Ignore the arse licking wannabes and the hating never weres. Don't allow the people who appear to be on your side but shame your side of every argument bring you down to their level. Respect the other opinions, no matter who they come from and how frustrating they are.

Remember that other people care as much as you do, and more. Remember other people may be drunk too...

DeVore

Oh so a smaller group, selected by me would garner fewer cries of clique????



Really??





DeV.

Edit: in case thats too subtle for anyone... that would have ended with the same cries of clique from the users, drowned out by cries of "more top down enforcement" from the mods and kranks korner... and quite rightly too.

Wibbs

On the remeber* others may be drunk front.....OK having late returned from a particularly fine wake with an attendantly** fine free bar..

The where was it/he/the process supposed to start is a valid point. Regardless of viewpoint. Hey I can be Ranty McRant from the Village of WhatTheFuc on the Wold, but it is a first step. The next steps could be as faltering as me about to navigate the stairs to my leaba, or it could be the start of a marathon. It is a first step though. It could go arseways or it could go well. Either way it's going. Thats a move forward from before. So I'm thinking(stretch TBH) lets see it pan out for good or ill.





* a word that should have less M's as a rule.

**Again, is that even a word? I dunno, Im digressing as per.... I feel an analogy coming on. Oh shít too late.... see above.

Sparks

copacetic wrote: »

ffs, can you not see that the very first step has been a massively wrong one?

I wholeheartedly agree.
The first step was to decide to try something. As any politician could tell you, that's a risky thing to do - far better to just not do anything and deny there are any problems of any kind, or picking a scapegoat.

:rolleyes:
Seriously, this is like giving up on the coronary bypass surgery because how can anything that starts by cutting you open be good for you?

copacetic

DeVore wrote: »

Oh so a smaller group, selected by me will be garner fewer cries of clique????



Really??





DeV.

Well with Boston banned and me saying I'd agree with that approach and everyone else who might have disagreed already a 'trustee' then, yes.

leninbenjamin

DeVore wrote: »

I've split the discussion the way people split their post with TL;DR... some people will want the condensed high signal to noise and others will want to kick it about or read the kick about. I wasnt deriding your comment by the way, but quite frankly FB has become a cess pit of what it should be and I'm trying to raise the bar.

Though I do have to have a giggle that in the same post in which you deride me for my last post you make and unequivical statement that its "unworkable". Wow. I wish I had your foresight.

Sorry if I'm still human enough to give it a shot.

DeV

I guess I can't blame you for having a giggle over it. And forgive me if I'm human enough to have an opinion on it, even if I express it poorly.

You're right about FB in some ways, but at the same time part of the problem with FB has been that so many people have been willing to turn their back on it at the first sign of trouble imo.

Honestly I've seen some very valid points dismissed or even totally ignored because they were expressed poorly or come from an individual with a bit of a bad rep. And fair enough, that's totally understandable.

But honestly, if you really want to engage with all and generate consensus for the future of the site in the way feedforward purports to, there is always going to be some level of shovelling through the ****. And it's necessary imo, afterall perception is everything and for feedforward to function imo it needs to extend to all in as much as is possible.

It's not just about finding the best path to take, but leading the masses to it too.

Nevyn

The thing is, the critea for trustee are the same as those we tend to look for in a mod.
Involved in the site/communities, a good grasp of how things work, trust worthy, level headed, able to reason and argue rationally (well most of the time), like the site, want to give something back, have the good of the site at heart and making discussions flow.

With the explosion of forums over the last two years the numbers of mod swelled as well
and a lot of those I would consider putting forward as names for FF as posters, I would also consider putting them forward to be mods.

It's just the over lap.

Steve

copacetic wrote: »

This sounds pretty good Steve, but why wasn't the same critical viewpoint taken of the initial members, some of whom don't come near to meeting any of the above criteria. Why did the various non-biased current members not stand up to whats been done?

Because at that point in time it was an empty page and nobody had any clue as to what it was going to be or where it was going to go - and in fairness to DeV, he threw everyone in at the deep end to begin with without giving any 'substantial' direction and allowed the initial members to swim around a bit and find their own initial direction.
Ad DeV said said, he had to start somewhere. I would have done the same thing as he did which was basically post a thread to the mods saying "I'm setting up FF, anyone who is willing to give a bit of time and effort figuring out how it will work let me know." Why mods only? well, as has already been said, they have already been vetted and should know how to work within a framework to achieve an end without having post after post bitching at each other. I use the term 'should' lightly there as it hasn't 100% panned out that way.

Why did you allow your posts to be edited untruthfully? Why did you let Dev away with claiming they are 'factually incorrect' when they clearly weren't?

I raised the point and called Dev on what you are referring to. The point was taken.
It turns out that I was correct in the end but I don't feel the need to get the last word or say 'I told you so' if that's what you mean.

copacetic wrote: »

Ignore the arse licking wannabes and the hating never weres.

That's not a very encouraging thing to say and I'd be disappointed if you were including me in that collective.

leninbenjamin wrote: »

But honestly, if you really want to engage with all and generate consensus for the future of the site in the way feedforward purports to, there is always going to be some level of shovelling through the ****. And it's necessary imo, afterall perception is everything and for feedforward to function imo it needs to extend to all in as much as is possible.

I think that it's a given that anyone included as a trustee should be willing to go shovel through the shíte and collate the opinions of the users. Going forward, I'm not sure how suitable I'll be as a member there, I've already said it but my strengths are in putting the framework together more than discussing policy so time will tell.

Ste05

Ste05 wrote: »

Dev has said they're talking about who else to bring in as we type, so why not just let them do that and then see what happens.

This. Just in case anyone missed it.

copacetic wrote: »

As does banning him because you are frustrated that some mods can't be trusted. Whatever about his attitude on this thread, he comes across as more sensible and objective than a variety of 'trustees'.

FWIW, I also agree with this. There needs to be a collective untwisting of knickers here people. I know Boston isn't the be all and end all of FF or FF discussion, but he did/does make some good points and ask a few pertinent questions, even if his style was a bit.....abrasive.

DeVore wrote: »

listening to Zero Punctuation reviews

:cool: Respect.

copacetic

Steve wrote: »

That's not a very encouraging thing to say and I'd be disappointed if you were including me in that collective.
.

Apologies Steve, trying to be a smart arse seldom works out for me.

For what it's worth most of the 'trustees' are people I would have picked if I though a large group was a good idea. It's not though and I think we are getting off to bad start.

Overheal

Thaedydal wrote: »

The thing is, the criterea for trustees are the same as those we tend to look for in a mod.
Involved in the site/communities, a good grasp of how things work, trust worthy, level headed, able to reason and argue rationally (well most of the time), like the site, want to give something back, have the good of the site at heart and making discussions flow.

Surely there are more suitable mod-candidates than there are mod positions though who may have only been refused on one of a few spare technicalities. Not to mention (like Seamus) people who have already met all of those high standards but may no longer have the time or energy to be a moderator: they step down/retire all the time, but they should be plenty eligible.

Ste05

A few thoughts. Being a mod and being eligible or want to be a mod shouldn't come up for people to be thought of as a trustee.

There are hundreds of users who LOVE this site but who don't give a monkeys about the politics or the crap that goes with being a regular in FB or in the mod forum.

IMO there wasn't really another way to start FF, but the next step IS NOT to go looking for more people who could make mod at somestage or who are able to behave rationally in FB. Everyone that falls into that catagory is already represented in what's there. The next step IMO is to ask ths group who know the users in their various forums to recommend some intelligent articulate posters who might not have cared about politics of the site before. The solution to boards problems are not going to be solved by the same faces fighting it out and then Dev having to pick sides, it's going to be sorted by a group of intelligent people who might have new ideas and who haven't been tainted by previously being involved in pitched battles. The battle hardened warriors of each side are needed to highlight issues but they're not needed to develop solutions because their POV has already been debated and has become set when discussing it with the same people (BTW I consider myself very much in this group and it's why I haven't really said anything of substance).

So in conclusion, what is needed now is the usual faces we always see but on addition to these we need completely new blood, ask thus group to simply recommend intelligent posters from their forums, maybe even people that aren't OCD in their boards obsession but their 10 minutes a day to post in FF would be invaluable IMO. All they should need is intelligence, an ability to be objective, and a history of posting on the site. I'd remove the need for them to have previously shown undieing love for the site above all others and a FB history. Now most of these people won't want to be involved by definition, but a few might be willing to offer their thoughts.

BTW. Posting from my phone so I can't reread it to check for fluidity and spelling etc. But I'll edit it appropriately later if I haven't explained what I meant properly in places.

Overheal

Thats some post from a phone.... damn these blackberries.

Ste05

Bored on the bus :rolleyes:. and iPhones FTW \o/

DeVore

I think Ste has a good plan and its something we'll throw into the mix. In fact its something other people have suggested too, thats some fresh opinions might be a good addition.

I think this thread is running out of steam and I'd like to get cracking from Thursday on actioning a few things.

My one and only god-child is making her confirmation tomorrow (which is why I'm back) and I will be spending the day with her. I'm back in the office on Thursday.

If anyone has anything pressing to add, ill leave this thread open for it. Or use FF Public.

DeV.

Nevyn

wow Dev going off to kiss the arch bishops ring, who'd have tought it

TequilaMockingBird

Feedback, Feedforward, Feedforward Public, Feedforward not Public, Helpdesk...

I'm too old for this confusion.