Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 8:12 pm
I am totally with RR on this - the valuable stuff should be kept whatever and wherever it is.
Stating the obvious, I think we have to treat different threads differently, but also different postings. My suggestions would run something like as follows:
CH related threads.
1. Important threads MUST be preserved but may be pruned. We are collecting information that may otherwise be lost for ever. We should see the forum as a vital archive of OB memories and debates concerning the school. However, such threads do need to be pruned of extraneous material. To lesson the burden on JT and Simon, this could be done by trusted members of the forum who have a record of serious posting for at least some of the time and over a longish period. A number of us could volunteer to "adopt" certain threads and keep them free of extraneous matter while preserving both the flavour and substance of any debate.
2. We should respect CH threads and do our best to minimise off topic material and general chit-chat.
3. Certain threads in this section could be marked as "short-lived" - e.g. those that have a bearing on a matter of only passing importance - e.g "anyone know when the carol service is to be held this year?". These would be allowed to drop off once they had remained unused for say 3 months.
Non CH related threads.
1. We should not assume that these are without lasting value even if they do not contain recent postings. Some of us use the search button to research material that may have been posted months even years ago. I think there is an argument for first pruning and then locking such threads. We may need additional moderators to undertake this.
2. We should all try to keep banter and chit chat to certain well defined threads and, while comment is often valuable, equally it sometimes progresses to unreasonable lengths. This effectively shuts off the valuable parts of the discussion from those who do not have time to wade through the extraneous matter. Is it possible to have a chatterbox thread?
3. I think I am now on dangerous ground, but one of the most dispiriting things is to see that every most recent posting is by the same author. I cannot believe that there is any one of us who are so polymathematical as to have an interest in all and every topic under the sun. We should maybe think to contribute only to those threads and topics in which we have a genuine interest. I can well imagine that for all those who regard DBTS as a pompous old prat, it would be a real turn-off to see his name appearing as the most recent poster on every thread and topic in the forum. Please, please let us try to be selective in our postings.
Finally, I have great sympathy with those who come to read our postings and maybe consider posting themselves, but then turn away disapponted, seeing that the forum is dominated by just a small clique who are in the know, and among which they feel they have no place. Some have asked the question as to why so many register and do not post; here I think lies the answer.
Stating the obvious, I think we have to treat different threads differently, but also different postings. My suggestions would run something like as follows:
CH related threads.
1. Important threads MUST be preserved but may be pruned. We are collecting information that may otherwise be lost for ever. We should see the forum as a vital archive of OB memories and debates concerning the school. However, such threads do need to be pruned of extraneous material. To lesson the burden on JT and Simon, this could be done by trusted members of the forum who have a record of serious posting for at least some of the time and over a longish period. A number of us could volunteer to "adopt" certain threads and keep them free of extraneous matter while preserving both the flavour and substance of any debate.
2. We should respect CH threads and do our best to minimise off topic material and general chit-chat.
3. Certain threads in this section could be marked as "short-lived" - e.g. those that have a bearing on a matter of only passing importance - e.g "anyone know when the carol service is to be held this year?". These would be allowed to drop off once they had remained unused for say 3 months.
Non CH related threads.
1. We should not assume that these are without lasting value even if they do not contain recent postings. Some of us use the search button to research material that may have been posted months even years ago. I think there is an argument for first pruning and then locking such threads. We may need additional moderators to undertake this.
2. We should all try to keep banter and chit chat to certain well defined threads and, while comment is often valuable, equally it sometimes progresses to unreasonable lengths. This effectively shuts off the valuable parts of the discussion from those who do not have time to wade through the extraneous matter. Is it possible to have a chatterbox thread?
3. I think I am now on dangerous ground, but one of the most dispiriting things is to see that every most recent posting is by the same author. I cannot believe that there is any one of us who are so polymathematical as to have an interest in all and every topic under the sun. We should maybe think to contribute only to those threads and topics in which we have a genuine interest. I can well imagine that for all those who regard DBTS as a pompous old prat, it would be a real turn-off to see his name appearing as the most recent poster on every thread and topic in the forum. Please, please let us try to be selective in our postings.
Finally, I have great sympathy with those who come to read our postings and maybe consider posting themselves, but then turn away disapponted, seeing that the forum is dominated by just a small clique who are in the know, and among which they feel they have no place. Some have asked the question as to why so many register and do not post; here I think lies the answer.
