If you add yourself, bitserve, then that is six volunteers.
Maybe this group could share the job.
If a vote is needed (and it looks like option 1 is winning) then maybe the group stand as one entity and the vote can be opened up to anyone else who wants to stand against it, or anyone within the group who would rather stand alone, of course?
We can have a chat about some essential agreement on how we would moderate collectively - which we could publish (and then how we organise any rota, so there would not be too many moderating at the same time).
Also a loose system for sorting out any disagreements on collective policy / replacing a mod with a new one if needs be over time (majority vote of existing mods?).
If option one allows for a group to moderate the thread, I'd be happy to be a part as long as the permissive spirit of the thread is upheld. If option one doesn't allow for a group, then I was thinking the OP could employ a mod bot. Select members could pm the bot with a #postid to report or remove content. The OP could limit or revoke this right for a user if they were abusing it. Ironically I am sort of suspicious of anyone who would want to be 'The Candidate' as I have a distrust of anyone who seeks power, because they are usually just the sort of person who I don't want to have it.
That's part of the problem. Those best able to moderate may not wish to seek approval. I'd put forward a number of people like Elwar, Gentlemand, etc... I agree wholeheartedly with 'keeping the spirit' and I would be happy with a party I trusted to do just that. You, Elwar and Gentlemand would be the sorts that I reckon would be fine (no particular agenda, clear thinkers and a sense of humour), and I would happily offer to help / dep to any of you. I think it IS a lot for one person, so if it has to be one, but he can appoint deps - it would help. I think a loose group would ensure a wider range of views approaching a rough consensus with the thread itself and (importantly) it would curb any tendency towards megalomania - the binding ethos should be to simply keep the spirit of the old thread. Which means we would necessarily have to tolerate any Stolfi or Lambchop types even if they did piss us off. Either that or we just vote for a random crazy pot-smoking drunk to ensure chaos rules and see what happens. |
|
|
|
Theymos is asking for a list of who might want to take over the old WO thread: If option 1 or 3 occur, who are the candidates for new listed owner / mods? Someone please compile a list.
Just spreading the word... Who wants to be the new Adam? Does that mean we would have to make embarrassing drunk posts? Naturally - wouldn't be a proper Wall Observer otherwise. The idea is to keep it going: If option 1 or 3 occur, who are the candidates for new listed owner / mods? Someone please compile a list.
|
|
|
|
If option 1 or 3 occur, who are the candidates for new listed owner / mods? Someone please compile a list.
Guys, theymos has explicitly asked for a list of candidates so... can you guys please add your name to the list? He has not yet stated how the election would be nor if there will be one or many listed owners/mods, but I guess more than one individual would be needed and that we will have some say (maybe even another poll?) on the election. So anyone willing to help please quote and add your name to the list and, if you want, a description of your moderation style or whatever you feel appropiate. Also feel free to change/modify your own entry (no need to be a single line/paragraph, be as verbose as you want), this is just an example: lightfoot - "I would go with a largely hands-off option, no directly blasting other people, no posting marketing crap, simple stuff"
yefi - "I'll throw my hat into the ring if there's a shortage though"
arklan - "if mods are needed, i have the time to do it"
kurious - "'Happy to help any team on a part time basis if it will keep the WO going in a fashion as close to its original anarchic form as possible'"
Erkallys - "I candidate if this is needed. At least I have no hatred toward me as well as any fanboy."
P.S.: Missed a candidate (Erkallys) that already expressed his willingness to help. Added him to the list. But please, candidates add yourselves, thanks  If you add yourself, bitserve, then that is six volunteers. Maybe this group could share the job. If a vote is needed (and it looks like option 1 is winning) then maybe the group stand as one entity and the vote can be opened up to anyone else who wants to stand against it, or anyone within the group who would rather stand alone, of course? We can have a chat about some essential agreement on how we would moderate collectively - which we could publish (and then how we organise any rota, so there would not be too many moderating at the same time). Also a loose system for sorting out any disagreements on collective policy / replacing a mod with a new one if needs be over time (majority vote of existing mods?). |
|
|
|
Fork your Wall Observer if you want fork  On the 'what to with WO' thread someone is trying to assemble a team of mods to keep the old thread running - step in if you want to register your willingness to help keep it going? |
|
|
|
Now I would like to also see in the list marcus_agustus, Bitcoinnewmagazine, infofront, etc... but it is up to them to express their willingness to help by putting their names on the list.
I posted on their WO threads when Theymos was seeking candidates, might need to give 'em a nudge as if the WO is revived their own threads may fade in any case. |
|
|
|
If option 1 or 3 occur, who are the candidates for new listed owner / mods? Someone please compile a list.
Guys, theymos has explicitly asked for a list of candidates so... can you guys please add your name to the list? He has not yet stated how the election would be nor if there will be one or many listed owners/mods, but I guess more than one individual would be needed and that we will have some say (maybe even another poll?) on the election. So anyone willing to help please quote and add your name to the list and, if you want, a description of your moderation style or whatever you feel appropiate. Also feel free to change/modify your own entry (no need to be a single line/paragraph, be as verbose as you want), this is just an example: lightfoot - "I would go with a largely hands-off option, no directly blasting other people, no posting marketing crap, simple stuff"
yefi - "I'll throw my hat into the ring if there's a shortage though"
arklan - "if mods are needed, i have the time to do it"
kurious - "'Happy to help any team on a part time basis if it will keep the WO going in a fashion as close to its original anarchic form as possible'"
Better shorter. |
|
|
|
I am prepared to be part of a mod team - but can't commit to more. I will offer to help, but if Theymos wants a candidate to lead this, I don't think I am suitable.
Ironically I am sort of suspicious of anyone who would want to be 'The Candidate' as I have a distrust of anyone who seeks power, because they are usually just the sort of person who I don't want to have it.
Yep. That's why I am asking you to put your name on the list if you are willing to help in any way. You can clearly state in the list any restriction on your willingness to help. Let's get this rolling. OK, since you are helpfully compiling it, consider me added as a helper. I can hardly advocate the cause of saving the WO and refuse to help. 'Happy to help any team on a part time basis if it will keep the WO going in a fashion as close to its original anarchic form as possible' |
|
|
|
Guys, theymos has explicitly asked for a list of candidates so... can you guys please add your name to the list?
Who should be placed on that list of people? There are a lot of people in there that are definitely not material for that 'position'. Maybe, Jimbo? At this point I guess it is just a list of CANDIDATES. Even YOU could put your name on the list if you wish to enjoy the lulz of being one of the least voted for the "position" (assuming there is a voting or some sort of community feedback requested about the self-appointed candidates). It's just a preliminary list, as requested by Theymos. First step is to know who would be WILLING to help. Jimbo seems to be happy on Meuh's new thread. I went on to hint to him he should put himself up for the role, but he hasn't said anything. People do need to put themselves forward, of course, but Theymos seems to have agreed by asking for candidates that the thread regulars will need to approve. As to what the thread should be, I think it only will work if it looks like and feels like the old one. There are already 'no nonsense' WO threads emerging and as long as some want them, I am sure they will survive and there is no reason why they should not. Theymos just wants the original thread to be watched over in a way that doesn't use too much of his moderation resources. The only point of continuing the old WO is to not change is too much. It was a pain at times, but its anarchy was its character. Put your name on the list. Is not that hard, just go quote the message with the list of candidates and add: kurious - "The only point of continuing the old WO is to not change is too much. It was a pain at times, but it's anarchy was its character"... Or whatever you think would define your "moderation style". I am not going to actively run the list, just wanted to have the ball started. I am prepared to be part of a mod team - but can't commit to more. I will offer to help, but if Theymos wants a candidate to lead this, I don't think I am suitable. Ironically I am sort of suspicious of anyone who would want to be 'The Candidate' as I have a distrust of anyone who seeks power, because they are usually just the sort of person who I don't want to have it. EDIT: that said, the list you have so far has no one I would object to on it. I am happy to offer help to any / all of them. I can do European time zone early shift as I always read forums early every morning witb my coffee to catch up. |
|
|
|
Guys, theymos has explicitly asked for a list of candidates so... can you guys please add your name to the list?
Who should be placed on that list of people? There are a lot of people in there that are definitely not material for that 'position'. Maybe, Jimbo? At this point I guess it is just a list of CANDIDATES. Even YOU could put your name on the list if you wish to enjoy the lulz of being one of the least voted for the "position" (assuming there is a voting or some sort of community feedback requested about the self-appointed candidates). It's just a preliminary list, as requested by Theymos. First step is to know who would be WILLING to help. Jimbo seems to be happy on Meuh's new thread. I went on to hint to him he should put himself up for the role, but he hasn't said anything. People do need to put themselves forward, of course, but Theymos seems to have agreed by asking for candidates that the thread regulars will need to approve. As to what the thread should be, I think it only will work if it looks like and feels like the old one. There are already 'no nonsense' WO threads emerging and as long as some want them, I am sure they will survive and there is no reason why they should not. Theymos just wants the original thread to be watched over in a way that doesn't use too much of his moderation resources. The only point of continuing the old WO is to not change is too much. It was a pain at times, but its anarchy was its character. |
|
|
|
The reason we are here is that Adam went AWOL and no one was moderating the thread. Adam was AWOL when he was active and posting.  Option 1 (or 3) will provide one and we get our thread back. Sure, we may be back here again, but that is not a reason to do nothing.
I chose 3. It seems to be a longer term solution than 1 at least. This is fine and may be the solution, but we still need 'acceptable' volunteers / candidates. Don't get me wrong, I just want the thread back - but we need to offer Theymos an exit strategy. |
|
|
|
I don't understand why people like option 1.
First of all, Adam didn't moderate at all (afaik)... He was probably one of the most moderated posters in the WO thread, with his drunken late night rants needing cleaned up and whatnot. Unless that's the point... LOL.
If we simply transfer ownership to someone else, at some point in the future we will be at this juncture again. That doesn't make any sense to me.
I voted for options 3 and 2 (although I would clearly prefer 3) but, afterwards, Theymos said something in the line that if we chose option 1 it would be up to the moderator to do (or don't) do its job and that Bitcointalk moderators would not moderate anything on the thread on the basis of offtopic. And that the report button will clearly indicate that (ie: it will only be considered offtopic if the appointed local moderator chose to). That would make option 1 also acceptable IF the appointed moderator is someone that will only intervene in clear disruptions of the thread, heavy spam and blatant offenses to other members. Maybe that's why people is chosing option 1. I would also choose that option if I knew, in advance, who the moderator will be and what his "moderating style" would be. Personally I liked the "moderation" style (or lack thereof) of Adam and anyone who shares it has my support. I was writing mine while you were composing yours, but generally I agree. Option 1 is fine if I know who it is and I agree, Option 3 is a committee and therefore cumbersome, but a mix of the two may work. I hope a candidate, or candidates will emerge - and I am sure Theymos will agree to a poll, if it makes sense. He doesn't want to kill the thread, just have a way of letting it run without being a pain in the ass. The consensus seems to be we want it to continue, we want it to be roughly the same. Ok - so we must offer Theymos something who will rid him of having to police it, so it's not his problem. Can we? May the spirit of Adam live on... |
|
|
|
I don't understand why people like option 1.
First of all, Adam didn't moderate at all (afaik)... He was probably one of the most moderated posters in the WO thread, with his drunken late night rants needing cleaned up and whatnot. Unless that's the point... LOL.
If we simply transfer ownership to someone else, at some point in the future we will be at this juncture again. That doesn't make any sense to me.
I like option 1, but with reservations. Which are, essentially only if it's someone I trust - take a look at the new threads? The longest is run with strict controls that would kill the 'real' WO thread. The reason we are here is that Adam went AWOL and no one was moderating the thread. If someone is, then it can continue. Theymos is Pontious Pilate - he just wants to see a solution and wash his hands of it. Option 1 (or 3) will provide one and we get our thread back. Sure, we may be back here again, but that is not a reason to do nothing. |
|
|
|
So, I guess he's saying 'please can someone take this on, it's a pain to have to keep an eye on it'
Indeed. We first need a nominating committee...  Honest thought: If people need someone to help moderate I would be willing to give it a shot. However I am highly partial to stupid pictures of trains and spacemen, so it might wind up devolving.... I have posted on all the other threads that Theymos has asked for anyone offering to Mod if either Option 1, or 3 is chosen. So he is offering to open the thread if a mod (or team of mods) steps forward. I am not sure it's a one man job, so maybe it can be shared, but so far only you and Erkallys have expressed any interest. Someone has to put their name to Theymos and gain some consensus with old WO thread-lovers. I don't blame anyone for thinking it's a lot of work, but a team could probably do it. I can offer occasional help, but I run a business and travel too, so I can't commit to a fixed permanent rota. I am of course in the European time zone however, so splitting the modding up might mean we can have a loose rota covering different times of day. It doesn't have to be so arduous. Let's face it, Adam would disappear for weeks on end and then turn up rolling drunk. It could work well on an agreed light touch, low intervention, just keeping an eye basis? Most people would want it to be fairly hands off - I persoanlly don't want an authoritarian hand with an ego doing it, it's not what made the WO what it was. Even trolls have to be tolerated to keep it as it was - but it could maybe be tweaked it to make it easier in some simple ways. Thoughts? |
|
|
|
Good morning Bitcoinland. Same old, same old.
Still bouncing along sideways, right where we were 5 days ago... currently $2470USD (Bitcoinaverage).
Coiling for a big move, or just the summer (northern hemisphere) doldrums?
_____
It seems that new wall observer threads are popping up like mushrooms. Until another one gives me a compelling reason to move, I'll stick with this one, the first and most reasonably structured.
We can have the old one back if anyone trusted (like you) would put themself forward as a mod Theymos is asking for nominees. So far seems there's been only one expression of interest. |
|
|
|
Leave the existing thread as it is, but with Theymos' relaxation of rules to reduce the load on bitcointalk mods.
Nothing else was wrong with it was there?
I guess we still need an owner/mod, but as long as that's another adam (a 'light touch' mod), I'm happy. I thought things went downhill when BCT mods started to attempt to keep things 'on-topic'.
I don't really see why they got their knickers in such a twist about topicness. And a lot of the 'off topic' stuff such as the E coin does have an impact on Bitcoin too. The topicness should be abandoned, disable the post reporting somehow if the mods are annoyed by it, and whoever takes it on can trim the blatant spammy junk. Everything else should be fair game. Who or what is it harming? It wasn't doing any harm, other than no one was responsible for it, so Theymos had to be - and he doesn't want to spend the time on it. So, I guess he's saying 'please can someone take this on, it's a pain to have to keep an eye on it' |
|
|
|
Theymos is asking for a list of who might want to take over the old WO thread: If option 1 or 3 occur, who are the candidates for new listed owner / mods? Someone please compile a list.
Just spreading the word... Who wants to be the new Adam? |
|
|
|
The WO thread just got locked. Theymos want to solve the problem of the wonderful rudderless ship.
It was locked because the OP abandoned it and mods are tired of deleting all the off-topic posts. That sets an interesting precedent. Perhaps if users consistently report all the low-content, spam graphic heavy, and price speculation posts from the Dash [ANN] thread it will likewise be locked until someone volunteers to help move all the offending posts to the proper thread in the Speculation subforum.... Theymos is asking for a list of who might want to take over the old WO thread: If option 1 or 3 occur, who are the candidates for new listed owner / mods? Someone please compile a list.
Let's see who steps up? |
|
|
|
Leave the existing thread as it is, but with Theymos' relaxation of rules to reduce the load on bitcointalk mods.
Nothing else was wrong with it was there?
I guess we still need an owner/mod, but as long as that's another adam (a 'light touch' mod), I'm happy. I thought things went downhill when BCT mods started to attempt to keep things 'on-topic'.
Now is the time for someone to step up. Candidates required to be the new Adam... If we find a Mod we can put forward, we get our thread back |
|
|
|
Theymos is asking for a list of who might want to take over the old WO thread: If option 1 or 3 occur, who are the candidates for new listed owner / mods? Someone please compile a list.
Just spreading the word on all the new threads. |
|
|
|
If option 1 or 3 occur, who are the candidates for new listed owner / mods? Someone please compile a list.
I have spread the word to other 'WO' threads.... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
