(Moved to Vote) A new forum - a new approach? Curial Decision

[Tacticalwithdrawal]

I've long heard stories of the great and good past of the Symposium, a place where the intelligent, in-depth discussions on weighty (and interesting) topics. A place spam, flaming, silly posts etc did not exist.

Yet you look around the site and nowhere like that exists, and a lot of people regularly complain about it.

Well, I'd quite like to see such a place again, and at the same time offer a target for really good debaters/posters to aim for. So, I'd like to suggest a fairly radical approach to having such a forum.

Anyway - this is early stage and needs discussion so see what you think:

What I propose is:

• Forum would be invitation only with 2/3 of current members having to vote in favour - and all votes would be open
• Moderation is handled differently:
  
  • Only senior moderators have access
  • Other than major issues (ie PG13, Racism/sexism) moderators will only moderate a post if a forum member reports it - in effect it is self-moderating
• A 2/3 majority vote of current members can remove a member from the forum

The whole idea is to get a community of serious posters together who can effectively moderate themselves (and so allow good aggressive debates) but at the same time discuss any topic they wish. It would also provide a target for really good debaters to aim for.

Anyway, it needs a lot of discussion and input from people like Sib etc

[Garbarsardar]

It's a good idea. But who will be the "original" members?

[Shaun]

We. Have. The. Symposium. A lack of 'intellectual' threads there will not suddenly be solved by creating a fancy new subforum. Instead it will create more elitism - we have ana for that - and will probably end up like the Symposium. I am against this.

[Tom Paine]

I might add that in the past, some of those who have been the best posters have, when engaged in truly heated discussions, flamed. Some have trolled. And other such crimes. The ToS is universal - as has been stated whenever moderation-free area ideas are floated. I don't think an exception should be made.

However, on the rest of it, with Garb's stated reservation, I think I tend to agree...

[Tacticalwithdrawal]

Well, there's the difficult part - I'm not really sure about how we go about it.

We could put it up for a vote, all members (not just Civs) get to nominate people, if (say) 5 people support a nomination then that person goes forward to a general vote?

I might add that in the past, some of those who have been the best posters have, when engaged in truly heated discussions, flamed. Some have trolled. And other such crimes. The ToS is universal - as has been stated whenever moderation-free area ideas are floated. I don't think an exception should be made.

It isn't unmoderated - its just that the members of the site decide when someone has crossed the line

[Tom Paine]

Hm sounds pretty reasonable. I'd say four nominators, not five, by the by.

[the Black Prince]

i don't disagree with any particular point, but won't this only further serve to drain the symposium and make it even more pointless?

[Tom Paine]

The Symp is basically totally drained, and 100% pointless. We might almost equally well totally replace the Symp with this...

[Elrond]

If all civs still have access to it then it sounds like a good idea.

Ana shouldnt be taken into consideration when changing the Symposium - its a private closed forum which it isnt effected (directly at least) by TWC.

The standard for non civs would have to be very high - if it isnt it would turn into a 2nd TD.

It would be a good way of highlighting people who would be good civitates as well.

If a voting system were introduced then a hiden subforum would have to be created in the sympoiusm for nominations and votes - its normal to make sure that people being nominated dont here what people have said about them (therefore discussion threads would have to be deleted before the person in question was given access).

On the issue of moderating - there would be no shortage of people - there are 7 admins, 4 super moderators and 3 global moderators who can moderate any public part of the site - is this amount even remotely necessery for the symposium even if it became very active?

[Tacticalwithdrawal]

If all civs still have access to it then it sounds like a good idea.

hmmm, the idea would be that it would be open to anyone on the site (Civ or non-Civ) but nobody gets in automatically - it would be invitation only.

Ana shouldnt be taken into consideration when changing the Symposium - its a private closed forum which it isnt effected (directly at least) by TWC.

agreed

The standard for non civs would have to be very high - if it isnt it would turn into a 2nd TD.

standard for any member would have to be very high

If a voting system were introduced then a hiden subforum would have to be created in the sympoiusm for nominations and votes - its normal to make sure that people being nominated dont here what people have said about them (therefore discussion threads would have to be deleted before the person in question was given access).

I was thinking more that the vote is public, basically the member of the forum that wants to propose someone puts them up for proposal and lists posts they think justifies the selection, and all the other members simply vote yes or no - no needs for a sub-forum or any discussion

[Elrond]

Removing any civs access could make the situation worse - it would reduce the number of active debaters - voting in non civs would help boost numbers on top of citizens, which is better adding non civs to replace the civs that we have already removed.

If changes are to be made to the symposium then now is the time - the CC re organisation might encourage the growth of the CC and therefore increase the number of high standard non civ debaters.

I still think that having any kind of public non voting thread on a member joining the symposium would be a very bad idea - it would discourage people from saying what they think.

[Tacticalwithdrawal]

well, it might, but it might also spark better debate elsewhere instead.

Anyway, there is always the option of turning the Symposium into this I suppose

[Fabolous]

Anyway, there is always the option of turning the Symposium into this I suppose

This is what I'd encourage.

[Tom Paine]

But the rationale is not just to create somewhere active. It is to create somewhere active of the highest possible standard, a utopia of posting. Its a standard I cannot see myself, for instance, reaching.

[makanyane]

Strangely I like the idea (though having no desire to attempt to be in it), it would give those that enjoy that sort of posting somewhere to do it unhindered, and allow somewhere for the intellectual elite to gather without having to have great debating skills enforced as a citizenship requirement.

[Tacticalwithdrawal]

Strangely I like the idea (though having no desire to attempt to be in it), it would give those that enjoy that sort of posting somewhere to do it unhindered, and allow somewhere for the intellectual elite to gather without having to have great debating skills enforced as a citizenship requirement.

rep for the Opifex who put it much better and more clearly than I did

[Siblesz]

I support this. I would include regular members, but they have to be hand-picked by civitates in order for this to work. Also, posts should not only be moderated, an intellectual standard should also be set. I propose the following standard:

1.) No one-liners as rebuttals in debates, unless the arguments are lacking in depth.
2.) Good spelling should be promoted, but not enforced.

The idea is not to be overly strict and thus scare away possible posters who might be overwhelmed by the posting rules of such a forum. The only major rule should be:
3.) A measure of logical consistency to every argument should be followed.

Other steps should involve:
-Merging Symposium with new forum.
-Placing the forum below the Thema Devia.
-Including the Helios as a sub-category.
-Creating incentive for posting quality topics, including rep and awards.
-Creating propaganda campaign in CC to give regular members a chance to prove themselves in the new forum.
-Create a new civitate process that includes this forum as a major stepping stone for civitatehood. Those who succeed in writing quality posts, will be invited to become civitates. Those that fail to do so, will have their right to post in the forum revoked. Consider this an initiation test for right of passage.
-Heated arguments, as long as they remain moderately civil and as long as they remain logical, should be allowed.

The age of PCness, of letting spammers and trollers of the hook for posting minor spam and minor trolls, will be over. Regular members will be allowed to post their regular things in the other sections of the CC, whilst outstanding members will have a chance to show their true value as quality posters and thus contribute to the future survival of TWC.

Only then, the meaning of TWC as it was practiced by its founding fathers, a meaning that has been robbed by the current system of political correctness and appeasement to the ignorant, will be revived from its former glory. The soul of TWC will be returned to its body. And with that change, TWC will outlive yet another dangerous threat from Barbarism and provide a safe haven of fine intellectual caliber for another generation of posters.

A concerned Divus,

Sib

[Leonidas The Lion]

1.) Posts have to be four lines or longer when a debate is taking place.
2.) Watch the spelling.
3.) A measure of logical consistency to every argument.
4.) Emotional posters, such as religious zealots, left-wing nutters - out.

Other steps should involve:
-Merging Symposium with new forum.
-Creating incentive for posting quality topics, including rep and awards.
-Creating propaganda campaign in CC to give regular members a chance to prove themselves in the new forum.
-Create a new civitate process that includes this forum as a major stepping stone for civitatehood. Those who succeed in writing quality posts, will be invited to become civitates. Those that fail to do so, will have their right to post in the forum revoked. Let's say it's an initiation test for right of passage.

Now that is something I would support.
EDIT:except for the last point lets not make things harder for members to become civs
We could have for example after a member becomes a civ he then has to prove himself worthy of posting in this forum this way new civs can still vote in the curia.

[Siblesz]

Now that is something I would support.
EDIT:except for the last point lets not make things harder for members to become civs
We could have for example after a member becomes a civ he then has to prove himself worthy of posting in this forum this way new civs can still vote in the curia.

One step ahead of you. I thought about the implications of the last rule, so I edited.

[deRougemont]

So just to be clear: are you suggesting that the Symposium be moved from The Capitol to the TD?

In that case, we will also have to figure out a plan for transferring the the non-debate threads in the current Sym to the Curia. Considering how little use the Sym is, I'm not opposed to this.

1.) The Curia main can handle all the threads currently in the Sym.

2.) The historical stickies in the Sym can be stickied in the Living History sub-forum, and that sub-forum can be added to the current sub-forums of the Curia

...thoughts?