USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

Josh Cryer · 2005-07-20 22:57:39

Groups allow users here to collaborate on different subject matters relating to Mars. Groups have group moderators whose job it is to insure that collaboration is clearly organized. I am allowing anyone to have a user group, but I have to be convinced that you're serious before I make one for you.

To apply for a group PM me with details on what you wish the group to be about. It must be at least marginally Mars related, and I retain the option to close your group if it gets too off-topic or abused in some way (such as inviting everyone to a group that is aimlessly run). They're not toys. They're collaborative tools.

Rxke · 2005-07-21 06:07:28

Hmmm... Is that 1st 100 topic/section such a thing?

If one can't access it, how can one find out what it is about?

clark · 2005-07-21 06:15:26

Here is the brief description for Martian Chronicles:

"This is a controlled area of the board designed for the development of creative work related to Mars and space.

Members of this group act as resources to one another to develop ideas, improve their creative projects, and help encourage individuals in their work.

This group is by invitation only, and the members should all be inclined to offer their own work for critique, as well as provide feedback on the work of others."

Rxke · 2005-07-21 06:38:51

Okay. Why is this description not accessible from the forum?

Or even more bluntly: why is it listed at the forum if it's not public?

I have no problems with not being invited or something like that (I'm not an artist)
But i have huuuuge problems with the impression this makes to people visiting the board:
you see a category, looks interesting, you cick it and get a absolutely retarded 'sorry, you're not welcome' message. Problem with that is it does not say WHY you're not welcome, it's like ...

I dunno, it does *NOT* belong smack in the middle of the list with categories. Put it at the bottom or something.

Cobra Commander · 2005-07-21 06:53:19

Or even more bluntly: why is it listed at the forum if it's not public?

A valid concern which has been raised from the outset. Hopefully a good balance can be found between allowing usergroups for specific undertakings without giving the impression of elitist snobbery about it.

Perhaps Josh can make it so usergroups are only visible to those granted access to them?

Rxke · 2005-07-21 07:04:13

That'd be cool.

Now I'm pretty sure it gives a "you're not worthy/paying/wanted/whatever" message, esp. to new people, I'm sure.

Rxke · 2005-07-21 07:08:10

Another niggle with this: why oh why does it flag 'new post' (ie. the icon turns orange) when i can't read it anyway?
Another proof it does not belong there. IM not humble O

Palomar · 2005-07-21 07:21:34

*Frankly, I question the necessity of these "Usergroups." New Mars is, of course, Moderated and a person can always create a topic-specific thread. Mods will (and have) oversee that the threads don't go off-topic. People attracted to the topic will post...people who aren't won't. Seems a strange sort of redundancy to me.

The Usergroups seem to encourage a sense of exclusivism. Get enough pockets of exclusivism and ... well, I'm hoping New Mars doesn't go there.

One gentleman here has apparently been posting about his Mars story for quite some time now. I haven't followed that thread closely, but it doesn't seem he's had any troubles with it as a *thread.*

My 2 cents' worth.

--Cindy

Cobra Commander · 2005-07-21 07:45:21

When the idea of usergroups was first proposed I was reflexively against the idea for the very reasons we're seeing now. Concerns about irritating current members and putting off new ones. I'm still not entirely convinced this is worth the headache.

However, various user groups do have the potential to lead to some very good work. Whether the current writers group or specific technical groups that could form at some point, a closed environment could make individual members more likely to not hold back and offer less orthodox ideas without worrying about a bunch of people trashing the idea before it's out of the box. It creates a controlled gestation area for new stuff, some of which will be refined and introduced to the entire New Mars community and some of which will have a much deserved demise.

Point being, I have reservations about this but can see some benefits as well. At any rate I can't do anything but advise on the matter. If the usergroups can be hidden that could be all that's required, otherwise we're going to have issues.

First rule, You DO NOT talk about fight club.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Rxke · 2005-07-21 08:14:17

Get enough pockets of exclusivism and ... well, I'm hoping New Mars doesn't go there.

Exactly my feelings.
Mind you, I'd understand there'd be exclusive content stuff for paying/card-carrying MS members or something like that. But this...
If it's exclusive, fine, but then I DO NOT NEED TO KNOW about it, it does NOT belong on a PUBLIC board. It's like publicing a letter that only says: "group X came together and are doing things, but you can't learn about it, because you're not part of group X" I'd go: what is the use of sending me that letter in the first place???????

And yes I'm yelling.

Cobra Commander · 2005-07-21 08:23:50

And yes I'm yelling.

I hear ya Rik. I'm surprised myself at how quickly this went through.

I'm sure a reasonable solution can be found that balances the various issues.

Ick, I sound like Congress now. Don't like it. :evil:

Rxke · 2005-07-21 08:35:58

just quit smoking, heh, so do not take my yelling too seriously.
but i *do* feel it's not giving the right signal.

Cobra Commander · 2005-07-21 08:41:16

but i *do* feel it's not giving the right signal.

I concur. It either needs to be hidden ar at least have an explanation that can be accessed through the link. Have the "access denied" message replaced with an explantion of what goes on in there and why it's restricted. Something.

Josh Cryer · 2005-07-21 15:13:44

Ah, the absolute intricacies of running a community. You guys know I don't particularly like being something of a "leader" right? The whole "Coyote" (character from Red Mars, Blue Mars, Green Mars) mindset. The things I do to distract me from a girl. But okay, I'm rambling.

Obviously a description for what is going on there is needed, I meant to add one last night but another project I'm working on distracted me (email PM's and another thing).

This is one of those situations where all opinions have merit. The thing is, we needed a new category for usergroups. An empty category would stick out like a sore thumb (and it would look empty if the forum there was hidden). And I did not want to hide the fact that I'm allowing usergroups. When I added it, clark had suggested moving it to the bottom of the page (so it doesn't "stick out" like Rxke noted), so I found Rxke's response somewhat ironic. I chose not to do that because "The First Hundred" is a category for creative or personal (such as Robert's probe he was working on) content, and the "Earth" forums are barely used (in fact, I may join them and make a more general forum for those topics).

So, what are the solutions? If we hide the usergroup, we're saying, "we don't want anyone to know we even exists." If we allow people to read but not post in the usergroup we're saying, "you can read this but only contribute if you join." If we make it private we're saying, "you can't read this unless you join, and to join you must contribute." Which of these three things suggests the most powerful type of collaborative effort?

Obviously usergroups aren't "necessary" but they do have their merit. I am planning other ways for content to be expressed in a more open manner, but I fully acknowledge that closed groups can get more things done than open ones, and I see nothing inherently wrong with it.

I admit that it wasn't completely clear, however, and I am working on modifying the code to clarify what certain forums are about on the error page, but this may be non-trivial (as I thought I had a solution within 5 minutes but that solution looks like it won't work).

Comments?

Palomar · 2005-07-21 15:23:37

*Speaking only for myself of course...I'm sticking with my routine. Create a thread: People will respond or they won't. Their prerogative, and the Mods are good about keeping stuff on-topic.

Usually I welcome change. Perhaps Usergroups will prove beneficial in the long-run; who knows? But it does create some real dilemmas which could swiftly become interpersonal.

Basically I'm concerned (and I believe it's legit) about New Mars turning into a bunch of Usergroups and no one's actually discussing stuff at the board.

I could probably easily muster up an idea for a Usergroup or two, but I'd rather create a thread and let it go from there.

But to each their own, of course. Just my preference and another 2 cents' worth.

--Cindy

Josh Cryer · 2005-07-21 15:35:24

I don't think usergroups are going to become significant at all. I won't let them. I even told clark that he might be disappointed if no one posts in that usergroup. clark has shown that he likes creativity and wants to express that. He has a few months of spare time going for him, so I decided to let him have a usergroup. Usergroups, by definition, should be for something that isn't already here at NewMars. And they should be projects that people seriously want to work on, not "ideas mustered up at a whim."

Rxke · 2005-07-21 15:44:08

So, what are the solutions? If we hide the usergroup, we're saying, "we don't want anyone to know we even exists." If we allow people to read but not post in the usergroup we're saying, "you can read this but only contribute if you join." If we make it private we're saying, "you can't read this unless you join, and to join you must contribute." Which of these three things suggests the most powerful type of collaborative effort?

Ban me but this is utter, complete bullshit. I ain't buying.

Now you have a group, that as a non-member you know exists, but you can't get in (it's "full") you can't read... You can't in short, access at all.
So all that iffing is not applicable here. No-one can join that group. it's full. So there is NO point in putting it up at the board. for 95% of visitors it's off limits, and thus waste of screen estate.

Now this is only the first group. Now say I start one, then Cindy, then Clark another one, etc etc...
What does that lead to? a whole lot of sections on the main screen-the 'welcome' screen, that is off-limits for the majority of peeps visiting. Smack in the middle of the page.

Rxke · 2005-07-21 15:47:09

Hmmm... Crosspost.

So they won't be significant. mKay, then my point re: screenestate is moot.

Josh Cryer · 2005-07-21 16:29:30

Rxke, I just realized that the group was closed, thus, no one could go into the moderator queue, I fixed that. I had mistakenly taken "closed" to mean "private," but those are set in the forum permissions. Sorry, don't mean to get technical, but you should not have been getting a "this group is no longer accepting members" message. Mind you, there is no obligation for one to accept someone into their usergroup, and if you don't contribute you can get kicked out.

clark · 2005-07-21 17:48:21

If I may, I would like to clear up some misperceptions here.

I understand the worries related to the perception regarding areas on the board that are closed off. This is something new to the newmars board. This is a change in the flow of how things have generally been done around here.

However, this is just as much an opportunity as much as an experiment in adding a new value to newmars.

The goal of this group is not to exclude, but to provide a space within the community for a focused attempt at producing valuable content for everyone. It is my sincere hope that those with an interest in pursuing their creative ideas developed within this forum will eventually share some of them with the rest of the board.

Individuals may choose to share what they wish on the board, but I believe that some would like to do so when they feel ready. The idea of this forum is to create a positive and safe environment in which others can feel comfortable during the development process of their work. Trying to work alone can be difficult, but having a supportive community can help make it easier.

The alternative is to try and pursue their work with individuals through email or PM's or in areas off board. This is another alternative to all of that.

The group will be focused on producing Mars and space related creative ideas. There will be a structure that encourages development and growth (or at least an attempt at it).

Some people may feel uncomfortable sharing ideas in an open space when they feel it is not ready. Some people may wish to develop a private project. With this new board, we have an opportunity to try a new process by which to expand choices and opportunity for newmars members.

Now others may wish to start a private group related to different interests. My interest is writing and creative expression. Any who have followed some of my posts know that. The intent of the forum is to provide a space for people with a similar interest to help one another in that specific interest. It is the intention of the forum to focus primarily on space and Mars related creative projects. This is directly related to this board and this community.

I do have some experience with this process, and honestly, an open area tends to be uncomfortable for some people. Not all people, and even for some people, not always.

I have no problem with posting in the open, but not everyone is ready for that, and I don't always post everything I have. I would like to help encourage other people to develop their work because I think we all, as a community, will profit.

Rxke · 2005-07-22 01:35:37

Ok guys, forget the yelling.

Even before Clark posted his clarification, I clearly understood the idea behind the usergroup(s) and I think it's a *good* thing, mind you. But I *still* do not like the way it is presented.

Good thing: as Clark pointed out, there are various reasons why groups could be interesting, and I agree with him. I people come up with ideas, here, on the 'open boards' the chances of either getting hijacked (by political discussions for instance,) or getting stupid comments, or... are real.
So set up usergroups with hardcore members that you know or think will stick to the case etc... The chances to bear fruit are thus seriously increased. Meanwhile, keep an eye on the boards, see if there are newbies or even old hands expressing similar ideas and invite them.

Other good thing is: you have these groups at the board, ready to go, so the hassle of setting up some collaboative intarweb thing has been taken care of, good thing..

etc. So I'm all ok with the usergroups, heck even enthousiastic (believe it, I am!) This might very well turn out to be a very important addition to the community...but the way they are presented is wrong,wrong,wrong!

Now you have this group of 'privileged' members, on a restricted part of the board, and when you click on it, it sez, "get out, yer not wearing the right suit!
" I find that *ahem* mildly offensive, and I'm sure others will, too.
If the group is restricted, it does not belong to the main page.

I can't check what it now says when one tries to enter, because it looks like I'm invited, probably because I sound all upset, but I already stated I'm not an artist, and since I'm non-native I would never endeavour to write in English (Ok so I did, but that was when I was a teenage angst-ridden kid )
So all my screaming etc. is NOT because I'm not in that group, but because it LOOKS bad. Right now, the groupsI look like an exclusive cigar-smoking club thing, with no real chances for other people to get invited...

Again, the groups are a GOOD thing, but right now they're a P.R. disaster....

Josh Cryer · 2005-07-22 02:02:23

Unsubscribe, and click on the link, and tell me what you think of the message I modified in there.

Josh Cryer · 2005-07-22 02:07:29

At the psuedo-request of our loudest most outspoken person on this, Rxke, I have moved the category to the bottom of the forum. Now, I wonder what happens when I start joining Earth topics to prune away all those redundant and unused forums (and The First Hundred category becomes more visible again)?

Rxke · 2005-07-22 02:33:06

Unsubscribed, and...
it's a totally different setup now?
I mean :? Now it's not closed at all anymore...
I hope you didn't change that because I did some -ahem- vocal stuff here?

This way, I can't have anything against it of course, but canging groups from "invitation only" to "invite yerself" I hope the current members of the group are comforatble with that

I mean, now every troll can invite himself, just to see wether the groupmod has the guts to say no, and THEN raise a stink about it... It should be clearly stated membership is not assured, maybe.

(Sigh, I'm glad I'm not Josh or Clark, I get a headache listening to my own drivel!)

Josh Cryer · 2005-07-22 03:46:34

No! It was never intended to be closed! That's what I said earlier. We want to utilize the usergroup feature to its fullest extent, then we keep usergroups open that way usergroup moderators have the job of accepting and declining memberships and so on. You can say it's "invite only" in a sense, because you have to "ask for an invitation."

I never intended it to be "closed" as in, no one could even "click to join." If I were to do that, it would be a totally hidden forum. I fixed that as soon as I realized that I had done that. It was totally unintentional. I keep doing things like that, like not having a description there, or like missing peoples requests for new passwords, and so on. I'm only human. Heh.

The only thing you did is persuade me to move the category to the bottom of the forum list (which is fair enough, but I want this feature to be used, not ignored, and I know you still have misgivings about it, but I believe it can work!), but I'm telling ya, as soon as I start pruning forums it's going to be stickin' out like a sore thumb again!

And Cobra Commander persuaded me to hack the PHP to allow me to change the "error message" so that it would guide people into the right direction. If it had that feature I would've totally used it (well, let's just say that I would've got around to using it, as I'm obviously so discombobulated over here I forget to turn on certain features!). But I had to actually bork with the code to spit out an appropriate message.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2005-07-20 22:57:39

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#2 2005-07-21 06:07:28

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#3 2005-07-21 06:15:26

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#4 2005-07-21 06:38:51

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#5 2005-07-21 06:53:19

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#6 2005-07-21 07:04:13

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#7 2005-07-21 07:08:10

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#8 2005-07-21 07:21:34

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#9 2005-07-21 07:45:21

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#10 2005-07-21 08:14:17

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#11 2005-07-21 08:23:50

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#12 2005-07-21 08:35:58

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#13 2005-07-21 08:41:16

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#14 2005-07-21 15:13:44

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#15 2005-07-21 15:23:37

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#16 2005-07-21 15:35:24

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#17 2005-07-21 15:44:08

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#18 2005-07-21 15:47:09

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#19 2005-07-21 16:29:30

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#20 2005-07-21 17:48:21

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#21 2005-07-22 01:35:37

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#22 2005-07-22 02:02:23

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#23 2005-07-22 02:07:29

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#24 2005-07-22 02:33:06

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

#25 2005-07-22 03:46:34

Re: USER GROUPS: We are allowing users to have user groups...

Board footer