New Guidelines

Well I read the forum first and then the rules.

I can tell you from personal experience that if the rules are too restrictive you will not gain members. My own message board (there is or used to be a link in one of the forums that Jimmy allowed several months back) has a strict "no flame" rule. As such, lots of folks do the once over and decide it is boring and never return. So the first lesson is that a bit of conflict is good. My current membership tends to think alike, which actually limits the discussion.

I don't think the rules are too restrictive as of yet. Time will tell. Good luck Greg.

(PS I do miss some of the smileys though)
 
Any good board owner knows that you can never please everybody. People don't like change all that much, but get used to it quickly. Those rules don't seem any more restrictive than the old ones, mostly the same rules, like don't post a full article, just written differently.
 
\ Meaning if in a few months the discussion is of higher quality and we have more active members then I consider myself successful..

what does the bolded portion mean exactly? I'm really having a hard time liking you and I can adjust to just about anything. In fact, I find that down right insulting. Please elaborate, Cap-ee-tan.
 
=Greg Bernhardt;517926]Trust me I have read all the opinions here and at Jim's other board.

Ok, and this does what to your qualifications?

But understand this, what fun is making a huge commitment with buying a community and then not being able to do anything with it.

Did you really mean what you just said?


It's like buying a house and then leaving all the past owners things in it.

No, a community and a house are not the same. From Salem Or, to Newport Or, about 5 miles from the 101 there was a "town" or community for sale, yes, the whole town. Not just a house. If you bought that, would you implement the same ethos?

I'm the new captain of this ship

Ship??

But I've done this before with many other communities and they've all turned out for the better so I have a little cocky faith in myself.


No comment.


My only goal is to increase quality and increase production. Meaning if in a few months the discussion is of higher quality and we have more active members then I consider myself successful.


So this is not a merger, this is a takeover?


What is your goal, really? What is "quality" and what is an "increase" in production?

Yurt
 
Yurt I won't get into a argument/counter-argument with you. I've said all I need to say.
 
Yurt I won't get into a argument/counter-argument with you. I've said all I need to say.

Greg,
You didn't answer Said1's question. I for one am very interested in hearing the answer to that one.

What do you consider Higher Quality I for one would like to know.:cuckoo:

I know that sometimes these discussions get off topic and a little out of hand, but that is what has always made this place enjoyable.

There are a great deal of very intelligent people on this board and for you to make a statement that, we as a group are not up to your quality standards is very antagonistic. With a comment like that I would expect quite a few on this board to take offense.:evil:
 
Greg,
You didn't answer Said1's question. I for one am very interested in hearing the answer to that one.

What do you consider Higher Quality I for one would like to know.:cuckoo:

I know that sometimes these discussions get off topic and a little out of hand, but that is what has always made this place enjoyable.

There are a great deal of very intelligent people on this board and for you to make a statement that, we as a group are not up to your quality standards is very antagonistic. With a comment like that I would expect quite a few on this board to take offense.:evil:

Higher Quality doesn't have a quantifiable definition, atleast I've developed no metric for it. But I think we should all strive for discussion that is more productive and enlightening, no? So it is indeed abstract, but I think it's something we can feel happen and it's not a destination but an idea of always improving.
 
Higher Quality doesn't have a quantifiable definition, atleast I've developed no metric for it. But I think we should all strive for discussion that is more productive and enlightening, no? So it is indeed abstract, but I think it's something we can feel happen and it's not a destination but an idea of always improving.

LMAO!! Nice tap dance!:rolleyes:
 
LMAO!! Nice tap dance!:rolleyes:

I concur!!! I don't think he answered the question at all.

Greg, if your going to make a statement stick by it with good information or be able to defend it the way you see it..

You have to have some idea of what YOU consider "higher quality" or you wouldn't have made the comment...

What do you consider more "productive and enlightening". Will it only be what you deem better. If this board was so distasteful and unenlightened why did you purchase it?? Your not trying to show all of us the error of our ways in...

.......GASP conservative thinking......

Just be honest and answer the question for all of us unenlightened folk who just don't know no better!!!! (yes I know a double negative)
 
You have to have some idea of what YOU consider "higher quality" or you wouldn't have made the comment...

What do you consider more "productive and enlightening". Will it only be what you deem better. If this board was so distasteful and unenlightened why did you purchase it?? Your not trying to show all of us the error of our ways in...

I'm sorry you're taking my comments personally, it was not my intention. No community is perfect just like no person is perfect. I believe in change, bettering and transforming. I was just bringing up the idea of striving towards improvement in ourselves and the community whatever the details may be. It's a general philosophy not an attack on "you". Part of what I mean when I say higher quality is to eliminate alot of the trash talking and personal attacks in serious discussions.

I'm progressive and take risks in order to change things up for the better. I'm not into the "if it aint broken don't fix it" talk because that is boring and stale. Inability to accept and embrace change is a security issue (within reason, and lets me honest, I'm not butchering the site, it's just about the same)

Part of bettering the community is getting more members active. Our base of 30-40 active posters is great, but we need to triple that, get some fresh perspectives and ideas. We average 2-3 new members a day and few stick around, that is not heathly.
 
Greg Bernhardt states:



Part of bettering the community is getting more members active. Our base of 30-40 active posters is great, but we need to triple that, get some fresh perspectives and ideas. We average 2-3 new members a day and few stick around, that is not heathly.


Greg makes a good point.

I've seen forums die, slowly, but die from lack of attracting new membership.

I say give the man a "go at it", before getting your "back up".:cool:
 
Yep, my take exactly. The past 2 weeks are slow no matter what. There is no news, literally. Then there are some that are trying to blame Greg for the drop off, while sipping their champaigne, egg nogs, or waissal cups. ;)

I don't remember it being so slow in the past..there were always threads of holiday stuff and just chat, as I recall..I don't have stats but IMO it's fallin WAY off.
 
Part of it is the few members that left or were asked to leave, they were active posters that we can't replace immediately.
 
Yeah, but it is likely to get better. I didn't find much change in the rules, just in how they were written. I can't see how this is going to make or break the board. You have a solid community who like each other, this is a great start for any board.
 
As some of you may know I quit posting because I don't agree with the rep thing but I couldn't stay away, the folks here however never met are sort of like family man.

Greg, you were rough on Shattered man. How dare you buy this forum and think you can actually run it. Oh, by the way, why not be a general? You don't have to settle for the rank of Captain.

On a serious note the impression I'm getting is that folks here are used to this community being the way it is. It is a great forum. Some small changes might work well but I would be careful not to toy with what works. Now, that said, if you want to make a GOOD change, change that damn rep system. It is the equal of affirmative action man. It sucks. Just because a smaller group of folks make the more relevant and creditable points does not mean they should be penalized for it. I mean hell, I'm not trying to gain anything here. I am not a heavy poster so rep won't help me much anyway. I have always just thought it was a bad idea.

I wish you luck sir, and would encourage everyone to be receptive to Greg. He has at least shown the interest in OUR community and we need to give him some time. Greg, listen to the folks here, they are good people, intelligent, WELL informed and a treat to interact with.

Hi Kathianne!

Go USMB
 

Forum List

Back
Top