Hmm - I guess that one of the two posts this afternoon to the "Was the '?' thread deleted?" thread got that thread itself deleted.

There was some good stuff going on late last night that I read but didn't get a chance to respond to, and maybe we can get that part of the thread restarted here, without the negative stuff that led up to it and (apparently) followed. Wil had responded to Brooke's and my reiteration of the longstanding request/need for guidelines by asking for help from the user community in composing them. He posted the "Registration Agreement Terms" that everyone sees when registering on the forum, but which currently are not otherwise readily available. I'll repost those as a follow up to this thread.

Archaeologist posted some sample guidelines from the Unofficial Martin Guitar forum, which he said he finds to be a good model working forum community. archaeologist - would you be so kind as to repost those and/or link to them? There was one piece of language included in them that partially defines the posting no-no's - some had started to look at that particular language and consider whether or not it was adequately precise for the needs of our community.

Moving ahead, I think that we actually need two separate documents:

1. User Guidelines that set the parameters of posting and participating forums. What is acceptable, what isn't, how to find the right forum to post in, what the consequences are if you break the rules. If we get ambitious, or as a second round, some useful tips about how to use the software (RSS, posts since last visit, watching threads, ego search, etc) could be included.
2. Moderator Manual & Guidelines that outline how to respond when threads move in the direction of violating the User Guidelines. The best moderators never have to take punitive action - they take gently correcting action before the situation gets out of hand. This document needs to cover both the technical how-tos of moving/locking/deleting threads as well as the specific circumstances when that's warranted. It also needs to include the consequences for not fulfilling moderator duties by omission or misconduct. I think that this document should be available to the entire user base; I'm a big fan of transparency in policy making. Maybe in a thread/forum only for registered users, though.

Let's start with the User Guidelines first, though, and use the two mentioned documents as a base. If others have model language or want to draft language to contribute, please do. If Wil or Jennifer have input on what's been considered or done so far that hasn't yet been communicated to the users, that would obviously move this process along more quickly and successfully.

__________________
Thomas Taylor

Interested in NP tech, kids and snark? Follow me on Twitter.

__________________
Thomas Taylor

Interested in NP tech, kids and snark? Follow me on Twitter.

Can anyone explain why this latest thread was deleted. There was a good amount of sensible discussion, much of it without anger or angst. And now, like the original, it is gone.

This really sucks.

__________________
“Cities have the capability of providing something for everybody, only because, and only when, they are created by everybody.” - Jane Jacobs

Yea, both of them actually. I spent some time typing up what I thought were good suggestions for the site. If you had read them, I think you would have gotte None of my suggestions took at shot at Brooke, the mods etc.

Wil, Jen, have these threads been saved somewhere?

I really thought my suggestions were worth a look............

To be honest, these documents have been in development for some time but were never completed to the point where we ever presented them to the community.

Obviously, we need to fix this.

I'd like to make a suggestion as far as process - and this is how I would prefer to handle it: You, as a community, (not just you thomas, the entire community) know each other very well by now. Why don't you elect four or five leaders and, as a small group representing the larger one, create these guidelines and present them to our board of directors? That way we know what you want, and you have a great deal of influence.

PhillyBlog is designed to belong to the community. But please understand: Those of us that founded this and organized it have assumed a level of risk - which we do so freely and willingly and in the interest of the city, but which I don't think is respected enough by those who enjoy use of this board, probably because we haven't commanded it in the environment we've created or the lack of communication on this point. I, personally, have my own money invested - but, believe me, I am glad to have done it, and I would not have done it if I didn't think it would work.

I think this would be a fair way to handle it. The initial guidelines I set out in the newsletter yesterday should be your framework. Our board of directors will have final say on the rules.

What do you think?

__________________
* Name: Jennifer Kronstain
* Status on PhillyBlog.com: Co-Founder
* Job: Principal / Founder, KMG Worldwide Public Relations (http://www.kronstainmediagroup.com)
* Notes on PB: http://www.phillyblog.com/philly/blog.php?u=7

I have to admit I too am baffled by the recent efforts to "clean up" the content of this site. There were several posts today from regulars about this, all of which have been excised. That seems a bit heavy-handed. Considering how thoroughly we scrutinize Philadelphia's political and social institutions on this site, it seems that a little self-analysis/feedback about the site itself is only fair.

It seems there’s a movement afoot to keep posts "family friendly" and on topic. Forgive my naivety but I have to ask, why? What I found appealing about this site originally was the freewheeling nature of the discussions, which felt so true to life. As for salacious content, everything discussed on this site has been the subject of TV and movies for decades. And I don’t mean cable: there’s little, if anything, said here that you wouldn’t potentially hear on an episode of Seinfeld, Friends or Will & Grace. Furthermore, offering Philadelphians a way to anonymously discuss sex and other sensitive topics is a service to the community, not a blight.

Have any users complained about salacious content, or is this coming from the admin level? The libertarian in me resents efforts from above to regulate something that seems to work very well on its own. I also think it's bad for business. I understand the proprietary feelings the admins must have about their creation, but it's been such a success in its freewheeling format that stricter posting requirements seem likely to undermine usage of the site rather than improve it.

I’ve enjoyed my time on this site but if I start feeling self-conscious about straying from the topic or posting something that’s not family-friendly, I won’t be likely to participate much. No great loss, I’m sure, as most of my posts tend to be inane, breezy, sarcastic and off-color. I fear the site is in for a Disneyfication, a la Times Square. If that’s the choice, give me Fritz the Cat over Mickey Mouse.

__________________
"You can live to be a hundred if you give up all the things that make you want to live to be a hundred." — Woody Allen

(Avatar stolen from this nifty project.)

Jen: Can you please address:

and

Thanks.

There have been many complaints ... New users who don't feel comfortable or who feel this is too 'cliquey' ... complaints from people who feel we've 'squelched' their speech.

We hear it from all sides all the time.

Let's keep to the topic at hand: The guidelines. If family friendly doesn't work for the community, make your case.

We're trying to be as respectful to people as we can while still running a successful operation and respecting the investment we've made thus far.

__________________
* Name: Jennifer Kronstain
* Status on PhillyBlog.com: Co-Founder
* Job: Principal / Founder, KMG Worldwide Public Relations (http://www.kronstainmediagroup.com)
* Notes on PB: http://www.phillyblog.com/philly/blog.php?u=7

I thought I did. Salacious comments are a small proportion of the content, nothing that's not heard on prime time TV, a service to the community, and something that seems to enhance the experience of using the site for many people.

__________________
"You can live to be a hundred if you give up all the things that make you want to live to be a hundred." — Woody Allen

(Avatar stolen from this nifty project.)

Oh you did say that, yes. I'm sorry.

I'll take it under advisement.

__________________
* Name: Jennifer Kronstain
* Status on PhillyBlog.com: Co-Founder
* Job: Principal / Founder, KMG Worldwide Public Relations (http://www.kronstainmediagroup.com)
* Notes on PB: http://www.phillyblog.com/philly/blog.php?u=7