Bantari wrote:I think it is generally a good idea to let the community have input into how a forum is run. Even if this input gets ignored for whatever reason.
I agree. There are basically three reasons that this forum exists.
1) The community needed a new forum
2) Jordus made it for us.
3) A group of people from the community volunteered to run it.
Here we see that the motor for the forum is the community, and by extention, we can say that it is the community in the form of its selected representatives that have made the rules and whose job it is to enforce them. There's no reason that these rules should be interpreted as having been written in stone. Certainly, those responsible have put in a good deal of work and thought into them - but that doesn't mean that the rules couldn't be better. Nor should we assume that those doing the enforcing are infallible.
I think it's fair to say that the mods and admins are all doing their best, and in fact, the forum is still active and thriving so they can't be doing everything wrong, but does that mean that we shouldn't consider improving things. The old adage says: "if it ain't broke, don't fix it," but what do we consider "broke?" Is a few unhappy members "broke?" Probably not. Is it when important contributors no longer post for whatever reason? Maybe.
It's worth mentioning that the fact that it could be better doesn't mean that it couldn't be worse. As much as I disagree with some of the decisions of some of the moderators, I am indeed aware that they are doing their best and I can imagine other people doing their best doing the job worse. I certainly appreciate that those who have volunteered to be moderators have managed to keep the forum a place that I like to visit.
The question is: How to ensure that the forum is being run as well as it can? Disallowing discussion has the advantage of not rocking the boat, but also the disadvantage of preventing good ideas from being presented. Without this brief discussion here for example, the moderators would not have had the opportunity to hear the opinions and ideas of a forum member more experienced in moderation than themselves. And Boidhre is not the only one of us with good ideas.
I think that the forum is us, and although it's silly to talk about changing the rules every time they rub someone the wrong way, it's these conflict situations where we have the opportunity to see if they are working as well as they should. Private conversations are good for private matters, but they seem inadequate for dealing with matters of general interest. I would applaud efforts to include rather than exclude the community in such matters. Whether they be through more transparency, through voting, through discussion or some sort of committee, I believe that we don't need to make the forum members feel that they have no say. After all, we are a discussion forum, aren't we?
Patience, grasshopper.
