-- Posted by drifting at 4:55 pm on July 22, 2008 Ive had some frustrations with the "Serious Forum". To start, I think it needs to inform users with a message when they click "Create Topic" that only SLs can reply to it. Many of the newer users dont realize this, and those of us who arent SLs but still take things seriously are unable to reply. Second, I think that EVERYONE should be able to reply to it, but members who have a history of off topic posts, unseriousness, etc, should be banned from replying in it until their behavior changes. Third, I think replies should be rated in the serious forum. This would filter out and auto-remove those who are not serious, or just give bad advice. Naturally you shouldnt be allowed to vote on someones reply if you friends with them, or have them blocked. This would keep the system balenced. Lastly, I think "The Serious Forum" should include all of the "Serious" boards. (most things that arent DTRM/Pop Culture). I would be surprised if this issue hasnt been brought up, but I wanted to give my opinion on it. -- Posted by LazySouthSideHyna at 4:56 pm on July 22, 2008 i am very serious -- Posted by RockerTori106 at 4:57 pm on July 22, 2008 I like this idea. A lot. -- Posted by CaliKevin at 4:57 pm on July 22, 2008 I fully agree with everything you said. Many a times I find myself forming this huge, serious, helpful response and then get denied when I click Add Reply because I'm not an SL, it's quite frustrating. -- Posted by crazy4you at 4:58 pm on July 22, 2008 I agree. -- Posted by Discordany at 4:58 pm on July 22, 2008 Quote: from drifting at 5:55 pm on July 22, 2008 Second, I think that EVERYONE should be able to reply to it, but members who have a history of off topic posts, unseriousness, etc, should be banned from replying in it until their behavior changes. Thank you! I find it frustrating when I'm willing to be serious and answer a serious question (which I would rather do than silly questions, most of the time), but since I'm a support leader, I can't. I am fully able to be serious, but I simply don't have a special title. Third, I think replies should be rated in the serious forum. This would filter out and auto-remove those who are not serious, or just give bad advice. Naturally you shouldnt be allowed to vote on someones reply if you friends with them, or have them blocked. This would keep the system balenced. Also a good idea, imo. -- Posted by amara at 4:59 pm on July 22, 2008 I think you are right. I almost stopped using livewire because it seems that you can not get true good advise on here anymore because the only thing you hear is sex and drugs and how 13 year old kids thinks it is cool. I need honest true advise I think there should be at least one forum on here that is monitored better. -- Posted by silverbullets at 4:59 pm on July 22, 2008 i agree. -- Posted by tait at 4:59 pm on July 22, 2008 I think it should start with demoting Pro again. -- Posted by hithere at 4:59 pm on July 22, 2008 the serious forum does include all serious topics....that's the point of it having a generic name.... -- Posted by drifting at 5:02 pm on July 22, 2008 Quote: from hithere at 7:59 pm on July 22, 2008 the serious forum does include all serious topics....that's the point of it having a generic name.... Thats not what I meant though. It should be "Teen, College, Tech, Serious". "Serious" would then include the topics that need SERIOUS advice. And there is no reason this should be limited to SLs. Plenty of people who ARENT SLs can still give good advice. -- Posted by hithere at 5:03 pm on July 22, 2008 ahh, i see...so just delete "the serious forum" and move the support forums to a separate index? -- Posted by drifting at 5:20 pm on July 22, 2008 Quote: from hithere at 8:03 pm on July 22, 2008 ahh, i see...so just delete "the serious forum" and move the support forums to a separate index? Pretty much. Although, there should still be some serious standards. -- Posted by TheOtherHorseman at 5:30 pm on July 22, 2008 Quote: from drifting at 7:55 pm on July 22, 2008 Second, I think that EVERYONE should be able to reply to it, but members who have a history of off topic posts, unseriousness, etc, should be banned from replying in it until their behavior changes. Rather than suggest some kind of goofy scheme to methodically weed out every single non-helpful person, why don't we develop some kind of system to specifically mark people who want to be helpful. Maybe if someone has a history of supportive behavior, we'll institute some kind of process by which they can be marked an officially "supportive" member? -- Posted by drifting at 5:51 pm on July 22, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 8:30 pm on July 22, 2008 Quote: from drifting at 7:55 pm on July 22, 2008 Second, I think that EVERYONE should be able to reply to it, but members who have a history of off topic posts, unseriousness, etc, should be banned from replying in it until their behavior changes. Rather than suggest some kind of goofy scheme to methodically weed out every single non-helpful person, why don't we develop some kind of system to specifically mark people who want to be helpful. Maybe if someone has a history of supportive behavior, we'll institute some kind of process by which they can be marked an officially "supportive" member? True. That would probably work better. -- Posted by TheOtherHorseman at 5:51 pm on July 22, 2008 Quote: from drifting at 8:51 pm on July 22, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 8:30 pm on July 22, 2008 Quote: from drifting at 7:55 pm on July 22, 2008 Second, I think that EVERYONE should be able to reply to it, but members who have a history of off topic posts, unseriousness, etc, should be banned from replying in it until their behavior changes.    Rather than suggest some kind of goofy scheme to methodically weed out every single non-helpful person, why don't we develop some kind of system to specifically mark people who want to be helpful. Maybe if someone has a history of supportive behavior, we'll institute some kind of process by which they can be marked an officially "supportive" member?     True. That would probably work better. I just described support leaders and only letting them reply to the Serious Forum. -- Posted by CaliKevin at 9:13 pm on July 22, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 5:51 pm on July 22, 2008 Quote: from drifting at 8:51 pm on July 22, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 8:30 pm on July 22, 2008 Quote: from drifting at 7:55 pm on July 22, 2008 Second, I think that EVERYONE should be able to reply to it, but members who have a history of off topic posts, unseriousness, etc, should be banned from replying in it until their behavior changes.   Rather than suggest some kind of goofy scheme to methodically weed out every single non-helpful person, why don't we develop some kind of system to specifically mark people who want to be helpful. Maybe if someone has a history of supportive behavior, we'll institute some kind of process by which they can be marked an officially "supportive" member?      True.    That would probably work better. I just described support leaders and only letting them reply to the Serious Forum. Damn you and your way with words! The Support Leader position itself is fine with me, it's the application process that bothers me. -- Posted by drifting at 2:12 pm on July 23, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 8:51 pm on July 22, 2008 Quote: from drifting at 8:51 pm on July 22, 2008 Quote: from TheOtherHorseman at 8:30 pm on July 22, 2008 Quote: from drifting at 7:55 pm on July 22, 2008 Second, I think that EVERYONE should be able to reply to it, but members who have a history of off topic posts, unseriousness, etc, should be banned from replying in it until their behavior changes.     Rather than suggest some kind of goofy scheme to methodically weed out every single non-helpful person, why don't we develop some kind of system to specifically mark people who want to be helpful. Maybe if someone has a history of supportive behavior, we'll institute some kind of process by which they can be marked an officially "supportive" member?        True.    That would probably work better. I just described support leaders and only letting them reply to the Serious Forum. Actually, no you didnt. The position you described included ALL helpful members, not just those who took the time to look through their 8,000 posts to find 10 helpful ones. I would much rather spend my time POSTING and HELPING than digging through my posts, so I can find a few to make me an SL, so I can reply to a couple of posts in the Serious Forum where I have good advice, or personal experience. As it stands now, the Serious Forum is pointless. Its eHelps. It just frustrates those of us who arent SLs. And by the way, I really dont want to be an SL. I dont need Sudo mod powers, or a special label to tell me Im a contributing member. Thats why Im part of the site. There is no reason that supportive members should be treating like the elite on a site that is supposed to be support. The Support Leader position just further kills the support from non-SL members. -- Posted by TheOtherHorseman at 3:07 pm on July 23, 2008 Actually, no you didnt. The position you described included ALL helpful members, not just those who took the time to look through their 8,000 posts to find 10 helpful ones. Allow me to revise. I described the current Support Leader system, which is inclusive of all helpful members who aren't so infrequently helpful that it has become a chore to actually find ten instances of actually being supportive to another human being. I would much rather spend my time POSTING and HELPING than digging through my posts, so I can find a few to make me an SL, so I can reply to a couple of posts in the Serious Forum where I have good advice, or personal experience. If are as concerned with supporting people as you claim to be, it shouldn't be at all difficult to locate ten supportive posts you've made in the last week, let alone in the entire time you've been posting here. That essentially makes what you're doing unproductive whining. Think, in the time it took you to write this, you could have been putting the finishing touches on that SL application. As it stands now, the Serious Forum is pointless. Its eHelps. It just frustrates those of us who arent SLs. While the Serious Forum may very well need an overhaul, it serves a nice purpose in allowing people to post something where it won't be flooded with inane replies by an over-energetic pack of wild nitwits lured in from the forests of the internet. And by the way, I really dont want to be an SL. I dont need Sudo mod powers, or a special label to tell me Im a contributing member. Thats why Im part of the site. If you're too much of a lazy ass to fill out a Support Leader application so you have a visible mark on you that says, "Hey, I'm here to help you guys, feel free to contact me," a mark that shows that you took the time and bare effort required to put through the application to show that you are actually here to help people rather than just incidentally provide support when not just chatting it up with friends, then perhaps you shouldn't be taking such an up-your-own-ass self-righteous approach to this. If you have such moral opposition to moving topics and hiding posts, then guess what: You don't have to do that! It's crazy, I know. You're the one who can decide how much of a pseudo-mod you want to be. Don't be so dim as to suggest that those capacities somehow ruin the position for you, as if you're such an ignorant sheep that the mere potential to use them would completely destroy your ability to be supportive. There is no reason that supportive members should be treating like the elite on a site that is supposed to be support. The Support Leader position just further kills the support from non-SL members. If you think that the Support Leader position is about being an elite and not about providing a means of self-identification so that the people who want others to know they're available for help whenever they're seen around, then that isn't a flaw with the SL system. It is some kind of ridiculous inferiority complex you've developed because someone has a little badge and meaningless powers on an internet forum. -- Posted by Discordany at 6:49 pm on July 23, 2008 TheOtherHorseman; you're saying that we shouldnt be able to respond to a serious topic because we're not ALWAYS serious, making it a bit of a pain to search through pages upon pages of replies, just to find some supportive ones? Especially when, among the requirements, those supportive replies need to be spread out, so you DO need to search, rather than take them from your last page or so? I mean, I applied to be a support leader early on. I was rejected. Why? Because my 10 supportive replies werent taken from a large enough span of time. The problem with that logic? I hadnt been there for more than two months or so, so I didnt HAVE a great enough span of time to take it from. And, yeah, now it is a pain to go back and find my supportive posts. Why? Because a great majority of the topics I start a serious, supportive reply on, I'm not allowed to reply to. What's left? Sure, there are some I can be supportive on, but you have to admit that the majority of non-serious forum topics that we ARE allowed to reply to, are not serious, spam, and generally just silly stuff. So it is a pain to look through. That isnt to say that I cant apply. I have a list of replies going, and once I'm satisfied with them, I will apply again. However, it doesnt make sense that one should have to apply for a special little badge just to respond to a serious topic. Edit: And apparently, I have to restart my list. I just went back to look at the posts I had chosen, and all of them are gone. Yes, gone. I dont know why; I can only assume its because the most recent one is from january (I left for a couple of months, and am now returning). -- Posted by hithere at 7:06 pm on July 23, 2008 Quote: from orange joy at 6:49 pm on July 23, 2008 we shouldnt be able to respond to a serious topic because we're not ALWAYS serious? it says right there in the forum description that only support leaders can reply; people know what they're getting into. they know they can make serious topics in other forums, if they want replies from people who "are not always serious." I hadnt been there for more than two months or so, so I didnt HAVE a great enough span of time to take it from. moderators have said time and time again that they don't hold it against a member if the member hasn't been here for long. so i don't believe it. maybe i would believe it if it were a week, but not two months. the majority of non-serious forum topics that we ARE allowed to reply to, are not serious, spam, and generally just silly stuff. the majority may not be "serious," but a decent enough percentage are serious, AND a much larger amount of them are serious than serious forum topics. it's not hard to come across good opportunities to be genuinely supportive, at all. it doesnt make sense that one should have to apply for a special little badge just to respond to a serious topic. again, people know that only SLs can reply in that forum. they post there because they only want people with "special little badges" to reply. -- Posted by Discordany at 7:10 pm on July 23, 2008 Quote: from hithere at 8:06 pm on July 23, I hadnt been there for more than two months or so, so I didnt HAVE a great enough span of time to take it from. moderators have said time and time again that they don't hold it against a member if the member hasn't been here for long. so i don't believe it. maybe i would believe it if it were a week, but not two months. Well, it doesnt matter if you believe it, and it doesnt matter if they've said that. The reasons cited to me were that I had not been there long enough to prove that I could be consistently supportive, although I was able to prove that I was consistently supportive over the period of my first two months. -- Posted by hithere at 7:13 pm on July 23, 2008 yeah, i just realized that you must have applied back in 05, so the system was probably different then.