LibriumArcana.Games

If you want to discuss things.

Hello Marina.

Here's my current thought- we each retain our independent boards (Independently hosted and controlled) but linked via image map links at the top. The main failing of the standard web ring lies in the fact that the worst place to situate items of interest is at the bottom of a page, because there's a definite degradation of attention from the top to the bottom of a web page (witness how web boards tend to have ever-decreasing levels of posts as you scroll down, excepting hot topic fora.) Locating a link at the top and blending user registries will serve to drive traffic for both our sites in the most ideal fashion short of outright merger.

The virtue of this is that we all retain independent control of our boards, but can boost each other's traffic (by means of a shared userlist if you so desire), but can also detach from each other if needed, and also can take such administrative action (banning and the like) as needed while retaining our mutual independence.

If we have same user table, won't that cause errors when a user calls up another users posts and the software tries to show all the forums?

Dunno...

ADAM!!!!!!

Nay, no problem there. phpBB actually has a page on doing this:
http://www.phpbb.com/kb/article.php?article_id=55

But I don't think it is a good idea because bans will have to be shared unless much of the software is rewritten..

edit: And you were talking about search. That isn't a problem either, becuase each board would still have its own post tables.

I've thought about this a bit, and my conclusion is:

If the software requires shared bans, that I would want an agreement made whereupon only Petrosjko and I, acting in concurrence, can perm-ban someone. If either one of us disagrees, the person cannot be banned. Administrators can also ban people, but they cannot make the ban permanent--in short, the rules would be set up so that admins can ban at either board, for both boards, and then report their action to us and we decide how long the person stays banned, from one day up to a permban.

Does that sound agreeable?

It would probably be wise for us to also agree to seek mutual concurrence on the appointment of all admins for our two respective boards, but existing admins would be grandfathered in.

All of this would have to be formalized and added to our respective rulesets, of course.

Do those provisions sound acceptable?

The problem with that design is that this isn't my board. This is mine, Allen's, and Scott's in no particular order, beyond the fact that it was Allen's idea and work on the initial setup. We've all shared the costs for our upcoming transition, and we function as an oligarchy in order to prevent what we view as the failings of autocratic-admin situations.

An oligarchy is a horrendous structure for dynamic management, but for preservation of stability, it does have its advantages.

Adam, I'm no code geek, but looking at that listing for the link you posted, it looks to me like the banlist can be specifically excluded, which would resolve our problems nicely. Am I totally off-base on that?

Yes, the banlist can be excluded, but it is slightly more complex than that.

There are two main things we are sharing:

The user list - this is obviously the list of users. It also includes your sig, av, etc. Sharing this means that your avatar must be the same across the boards. And PMs are tied into this, so they are shared as well.

The sessions list: this lists who is currently logged in. Sharing it means if you log into one board, you are also logged into the other boards.

The ban list: this lists who is not allowed to log into a board.

Let's say we share users and sessions to make logging in easier, but not banstick. Admin of board A bans the user from his board. This means the user can't log into board A. But he can still log into board B. He logs into board B, then follows a link to board A. But, since they are sharing sessions, he is logged into board A too!

Since circumventing the ban is that trivial, sharing the banlist is the only way to make bans effective. One other possibility is to rewrok the login code so they don't share the real sessions list, but one login works on them all. I don't know how hard this will be though; I will need to be with my computer (at work right now) to give it a try first.



Actually, in my opinion, sharing the actual data isn't a good idea. The aforementioned ban problems, the problems of haveing to use the same av and sig, etc. What I think would be better is saying if you register on one board, you are automatically registered on the others, but after registration they are completly independent. Of course, this is also easier said than done. It is my opinion that sharing in this way is more trouble than it is worth.

Noted, then.

Any other proposals?

I understand your oligarchy and all that, but consider where I'm coming from as an ASVS veteran--I've seen my longtime friends corrupted by power and I don't like it. I remember when it was also USENET, and we were all equals. My main goal in running DS.com is to have a place run as close to the rules of an unmoderated USENET group as possible without having it overrun with spammers (which is why nobody posts at ASVS anymore).

With due respect Duchess, but the Librium was created, and it's Administrative setup instituted by me for just that reason, I did not trust myself with having sole power over the board. I placed Josh and Scott into Administrative positions to be my Checks and Balances, so that there could be no corruption.

I would say though, that due to that arrangement, the Librium and it's managment have remained relatively free of corruption and power abuse.

The only incident in which we had to bring any of our administrative powers to bear, have been resolved with littl fuss and all fairness, hell, our first incident on the board ended with the Administrator banning the user AND himself for both infringing upon our rules.

The Librium, and the site as a whole, is meant to be rather loss and easy going, much like USEnet was.

Josh has already made a proposal, we link to each other's respective boards, without sharing resources.

That is amenable to me.

Oh, I don't disagree with your effort at all, I just don't really like the idea of the community fragmenting so extensively.

agreed, I dislike the idea of the community being fragmented myself, but I've placed a good deal of work into the forum and site itself, to simply give it up.

-shrugs-

The original plan which involved this forum, Rogue9's and Comrade Tortises was to have them all hosted on the same server, but each specializing in a certain aspect (Rogue's was to be Fantasy, Tortises Academia, and this board primarily focusing on Gaming and games).

I'm agreeable to any proposals which would allow the community to remain together, without any of us forcing to give up more than we wish.

agreed, I dislike the idea of the community being fragmented myself, but I've placed a good deal of work into the forum and site itself, to simply give it up.

-shrugs-

The original plan which involved this forum, Rogue9's and Comrade Tortises was to have them all hosted on the same server, but each specializing in a certain aspect (Rogue's was to be Fantasy, Tortises Academia, and this board primarily focusing on Gaming and games).

I'm agreeable to any proposals which would allow the community to remain together, without any of us forcing to give up more than we wish.

Allen wrote:The original plan which involved this forum, Rogue9's and Comrade Tortises was to have them all hosted on the same server, but each specializing in a certain aspect (Rogue's was to be Fantasy, Tortises Academia, and this board primarily focusing on Gaming and games).

Really? I'd have thought you'd have told me about this plan.

I thought we had told you of that plan...

well, that was prior to us assimilating you anyway Rogue.

I blame josh, he was suppossed to be handling the PR part of all this.

It was supposed to be a surprise, Rogue.

Much like the 'Crack you over the head and toss you off the bridge' surprise we have coming up for your birthday.

...

SHIT.

A new merger plan:


Would you be willing to consider a board merger again, but on less equal terms? Put me and Steve over there as Admins with you, and create several private forums (with Chris as the moderator of them all) for us, along with an essay forum (with Posbi as the moderator) where a lot of the content here could be reposted and a dedicated TGG forum (also with Chris as moderator). One of the private forums would be a general discussion group for a select number of individuals from this board and LA to be invited into, and the other two would be for the Drakaficverse (which still has planning going on for it) and other private fiction--like my novel I don't want openly published--and the third for planning real-time chat-based RPGs. Membership would be open to all three by invitation amongst the larger LA community.

You'd get additional very dedicated posters, boosting your own community, and I think you can trust the reliability of Steve (who was the most respected supermod on SB.com) and myself to do a good job handling things. Chris is, of course, above reproach.

The essay section would be for the posting of various historical and philosophical essays of a serious nature, probably with a sub-forum for commentary like the fiction section, as something of that nature doesn't exist over there yet.

The TGG section is because of the sheer quantity of TGG-related material we post, which should because it's more of a round-robin style be kept separate from the rest of the fanfiction and gaming. We may try to run TGG-type games at LA, which would also be in that forum, and of course we prefer in-thread commentary for most of our work. Since they're very complex geo-strategic sims operating on consensus there's a reason to keep them separate.

Those would be the only two new forums.

The private Drakaficverse/OH thread is important for major and arcane technical discussions, and also for posting stories to be potentially published as novels.

Our private discussion forum is to basically keep some of the more inflammatory issues out of the public eye, and also to allow us to keep up a few of the traditions we have here and so on.

The private RPG forum may not even be necessary--we could fold that material into our general discussion forum--since it's mainly for people reliable enough to get invited to the nightly chats. So we could go with two open and two private forums, me and Steve as Admins and Chris and Posbi as full moderators.

LA rules would be adapted exclusively.

Interested at all?

May I ask just how much power you're asking for here?

Supermoderator status? Admin status?

I don't really grasp what's so bad about the community fragmenting into specialized bits. It's not like there are walls at the edge of the forums. I really find it to be unnecessary bloating of forums into copies of each other. I don't really come over to LibArc for any of the things this would add, and thus don't see the point. Nor much of a need for an expanded administration.

frigidmagi wrote:May I ask just how much power you're asking for here?

Supermoderator status? Admin status?

Myself and Steve as Administrators.

When companies merge in the real world, that is generally how things work out.

SirNitram wrote:I don't really grasp what's so bad about the community fragmenting into specialized bits. It's not like there are walls at the edge of the forums. I really find it to be unnecessary bloating of forums into copies of each other. I don't really come over to LibArc for any of the things this would add, and thus don't see the point. Nor much of a need for an expanded administration.

The merger would increase the number of posters at LA and increase its exposure, and increase the exposure of our fiction and essays (the only parts of the old DS.com forum), along with opening up new opportunities for bringing people into our games and collaborative round-robin stories. We're very much the juniors in such a merger and acknowledge it, which is why I'm only suggesting that my moderators (except Shep, who is too controversial) be given equivalent positions here that they had on DS.com, and nothing else. We adhere to your rules, and play to your game, there's just some added forums (all the content would be transferred, including the essays, which are preserved) and a few new faces in the operation.

I will be willing to accept the idea that since I'd be demoting myself from owner to an Admin here, that Steve could be demoted from an Admin at DS.com to a Supermod here. That would also preserve the 1:1 Admin:Supermod ratio you have going.

I'd also be willing to have appointed only one Moderator--Chris--for the two new open and two new private forums which would be added, though I think the number of forums there recommends to both Chris and Posbi, both of whom are unimpeachable in their reliability.

However, the appointment of at least one of us to an admin, one to supermod, and one to a mod position, along with the addition of the two open and two private forums, would be necessary for the merger to take place. I won't lower my terms below that.

Essentially what's being offered here is up to fifty new and fairly committed members, once we get the word out to everyone, and a wealth of additional content to enhance this forum and help it to grow further and maintain its vitality. Not even the private forums will exclude anyone; membership in them will be decided by internal vote and we'll add as many people as we think fit in to those. The public forums will of course enhance the content experience for everyone.

The integration of the enlarged moderation staff is simply a natural part of any form of merger between two organized entities.

If you have financial issues, I am prepared to provide a reasonable sum to defray the costs, about what I was spending on DS.com a month, i.e., about $12.00 right now.

One administration post would be, however, a necessary precondition, but, if the problem is with me personally, I will step aside in favour of Big Steve rather than myself for that post, and just take up a Supermodship myself.

If that revision isn't acceptable then I suppose we don't have enough common ground to negotiate such an arrangement.

Okay, what just happened? There was a post here from B4UTRUST that is now missing.

Ma'am he is drunk and posted prematurely. Darksilver as removed his post.