Forum Members, We Need Your Help

[gpurlee]

This is also posted in the latest bankruptcy thread:

Dear Forum Members:

We are having a  discussion among the moderators and your input would be appreciated.

(1) We want to maintain topics and thread that are specifically focused on issues of the bankruptcy. We recognize that this is a very valuable source of information for many persons.

(2) We want to maintain a positive and safe environment for persons to express feelings, concerns and hopes.

(3) We want to ensure a respectful environment, recognizing that these are emotional issues for many of us.

(4) And we want to avoid constantly "cat-herding" to avoid numerous tangents that go off topic.

This is your forum. We need your ideas how can we provide the best possible forum experience for all of us. 

So, our question to you is:

How can we do this better? 

[David CO]

35 minutes ago, gpurlee said:

How can we do this better? 

Would it be possible to place some reasonable limit on the number of posts by an individual member?  A few people are dominating the conversation by the sheer number of their posts, most of which are just repeating what has already been said a hundred times already.  I am not suggesting that you limit the content, just the numbers.

[gpurlee]

Thanks for your input.!

[MattR]

Let's identify the sub threads. My limited view:

1) ch 11, so money and court proceedings.

2) whatever Mutsy and Cynical are grappling with. Legal vs moral?

3) healing

4) charter orgs

More, different?

David makes a point but the usual response is identify the thread and pull it out.

 

[Eagle1970]

While topics do bounce around a bit, almost all are relevant to either the bk issues, sol issues or my personal favorite-trying to work through my abuse and move forward.  I have been an admin on a fb forum in the recent past and certainly understand your desire to keep it on track.  But the fact is, at least in my case, it already is.  Each of these issues is of great interest to me and if they were bounced over to other forums, I would likely miss out on valuable info.

[MattR]

@Eagle1970, I think there's a mechanism that might keep you from missing out. Suppose there are 5 threads related to what you're really interested in (all threads related to ch11). Since there are a dozen or so people that are going to have the same interest we can tag those threads and show all of you how to only look at those threads. So, when you click on unread content it will only show, from the list of 5 threads, which contain new material. You wouldn't miss anything and could read it in the order you'd like.

Would that help?

My fear is, because of the volume of posts, people are missing things anyway.

[Eagledad]

I think the moderators have done as good as they can in holding the posters to a scout like tone. And I’ve not always been so kind with my opinions of the mods.

The discussion is being dominated by emotionally fueled posters who believe they are the smartest contributors in the thread. Add newer members who expect extra leeway with the victim card, and the discussion gets very one-sided. Fine as long it stays on the facts of chapter 11, but most folks here have a vested interest in the future of the program, so any opinions about the future of the program can draw expected responses.

It’s a complement to the mods that victims feel safe in this forum. But, being scout-like means there has to be fairness, balance, and respect for all the members, including the passionate members who have a stake in the future of the program. After all this is a scouting form.

Barry

[Eagle1970]

Yes, I am a very good sheep.  That would clearly help.  And, yes, I am missing most everything off the main thread unless I am knocked on my head and linked to it.

[Eagle1970]

2 minutes ago, Eagledad said:

I think the moderators have done as good as they can in holding the posters to a scout like tone. And I’ve not always been so kind with my opinions of the mods.

The discussion is being dominated by emotionally fueled posters who believe they are the smartest contributors in the thread. Add newer members who expect extra leeway with the victim card, and the discussion gets very one-sided. Fine as long it stays on the facts of chapter 11, but most folks here have a vested interest in the future of the program, so any opinions about the future of the program can draw expected responses.

It’s a complement to the mods that victims feel safe in this forum. But, being scout-like means there has to be fairness, balance, and respect for all the members, including the passionate members who have a stake in the future of the program. After all this is a scouting form.

Barry

Being a victim who has been tortured for a lifetime, I am guilty of expressing myself as I am still working through it all.  My vested interest is gone, as I prohibited my children from participating in BSA after cubs.  So, really, I get what you are saying but find myself on the exact opposite position.  I would separate the future of BSA into a spinoff.

[DuctTape]

The only idea I can think of to help with #4 is to create some type of "tag" or identifier ( by either mod or thread creator) which identifies the thread is dedicated to "on-topic". Then any tangential responses can just be deleted. Not sure how well it would work in practice.

[yknot]

46 minutes ago, MattR said:

 

My fear is, because of the volume of posts, people are missing things anyway.

I don't think so. I think most of us are reading absolutely everything. What gets hard is trying to go back and find something buried pages and pages deep. But we have some folks who seem to have their fingers on that and are willing to help when someone needs it. 

 

I think the question to me is are the moderators finding this onerous? If so, how can we make your jobs easier? 

[yknot]

3 minutes ago, yknot said:

 

I think the question to me is are the moderators finding this onerous? If so, how can we make your jobs easier? 

As a follow up to my own post, I think one thing I've noticed is that some of us have been here for years following this issue. When new folks come, even if they've been lurking, it seems like we keep going down rabbit holes covering some of the same ground over and over as they get up to speed. I wonder if it would help if we developed a recap post that could not just welcome folks but lay out ground rules and hit the highlights of where we are at?

[Jameson76]

I think the best thing would be to rename the current Scouter Forum .... The Bankruptcy Forum.  (Honestly it's sort of that now) Then form a NEW forum called Scouter Forum Part 2 . 

Then those that want to diver deep into the  minutia, blue sky thoughts, what if's, and pure speculation of the bankruptcy and what may, may not, may never happen will have a home.  Put on the tinfoil hats and go to town.

Those that want to discuss and review actual Scouting program topics will have a home.

Just a thought.

 

 

[CynicalScouter]

2 hours ago, MattR said:

2) whatever Mutsy and Cynical are grappling with. Legal vs moral?

Ok, sorry. I'll drop it.

[David CO]

4 hours ago, MattR said:

My fear is, because of the volume of posts, people are missing things anyway.

Well, I'm missing it, but I'm not missing it.