The LSD Constitution

[dr_draino]

I have much love for the McRib samich

[A.J]

I think that a rule should be set within the constitution for keeping threads on track, and moderators should be commissioned to deal with what I call "thread hijacking". 

I am glad you came up with a term for it.  I think that one might stick.

[A.J]

I have much love for the McRib samich

You mean the McUlcer?

[TDPookie1]

re thread hijacking: normal conversations are like that.  and it's going to be REALLY hard for moderators to control it.  how far off topic can something get before it's considered hijacking?  if there's just one off-hand remark, that's not really hijacking.

anyway, as the only current moderator (other than andrew), i am also one of the biggest hijackers.  good luck getting me to enforce myself

[HURLEY- L.S.D.]

I think that a rule should be set within the constitution for keeping threads on track, and moderators should be commissioned to deal with what I call "thread hijacking". 

I am glad you came up with a term for it.  I think that one might stick.

I actually mentioned it a few months back for the first time, and I've seen it used a couple times by others.  I'm glad that it is catching on!

[HURLEY- L.S.D.]

re thread hijacking: normal conversations are like that.  and it's going to be REALLY hard for moderators to control it.  how far off topic can something get before it's considered hijacking?  if there's just one off-hand remark, that's not really hijacking.

anyway, as the only current moderator (other than andrew), i am also one of the biggest hijackers.  good luck getting me to enforce myself

Good points.  I've run seven online forums over the past 18 months and there is actually a way to do it. 

I'm not sure what kind of administrator capabilities you have here though.

[A.J]

re thread hijacking: normal conversations are like that.  and it's going to be REALLY hard for moderators to control it.  how far off topic can something get before it's considered hijacking?  if there's just one off-hand remark, that's not really hijacking.

anyway, as the only current moderator (other than andrew), i am also one of the biggest hijackers.  good luck getting me to enforce myself

I watched this great show on the History Channel about harrowing mountain climbing adventures.  I was really gripping to watch.

[TDPookie1]

re thread hijacking: normal conversations are like that.  and it's going to be REALLY hard for moderators to control it.  how far off topic can something get before it's considered hijacking?  if there's just one off-hand remark, that's not really hijacking.

anyway, as the only current moderator (other than andrew), i am also one of the biggest hijackers.  good luck getting me to enforce myself

Good points.  I've run seven online forums over the past 18 months and there is actually a way to do it. 

I'm not sure what kind of administrator capabilities you have here though.

i can select posts to split threads, move topics to different boards, etc.  i have the technical capability to do what you're talking about.  i'm just saying it's an overwhelming task, since there are so many discussions here, and i don't necessarily think it's something we should do anyway.  i don't have a problem with topics running into different ones.  that's how we've all come to know each other really well, is by starting a thread on one topic and working in all our personal stories and anecdotes.  it's part of what makes us closer as a group than xoxo, where there isn't as much thread hijacking, at least from what i've seen during my limited visits.

[HURLEY- L.S.D.]

I'm not saying that it is all bad, but it can be a very frustrating thing for newbies.  This will affect the community in the long run.

The solution is to have a tiered-moderation system in place where there are super moderators over standard moderators.  There should be one moderator in charge of each board.  One moderator may elect to oversee two boards, but it should pretty much be one mod for each board.

In addition, the opportunity to moderate will be encouraging and empowering to those who have been here for a long time.  It gives them a sense of responsibility and ownership over the boards, and they will implement what they have learned by experience in order to make LSD a better place for veterans and noobs.  It also gives you and the Admin the opportunity to bring a wider range of innovation to the leadership of the website.  As the good book says, "In the multitude of counsel there is much wisdom".  Also, if you had a policy to initiate a moderation committee vote to ban 'problem' members, then the focus of criticism will be off yourselves and more on the general membership of the site.  No longer will you or the admin be subjected to attacks when a difficult decision is made.  Instead, it will just be "an issue that the committee voted on and approved".

These standards will solve the "overwhelming" factor you addressed.  Yes, it is impossible for one person to police a board so massive.  But "many hands make the workload light", as my Mom used to say.  It would be a very good thing for the community if there were a group of mods who kept the board accountable to a few very simple and basic rules. 

Some forum administrators think that this sort of thing dampens community, but in fact it doesn't.  It makes the community more vibrant because it is organized.  Insults are brought down to a minimum, "weirdos" slowly disappear, and conversation becomes much closer between the members since things are kept civil.

I am not saying that things are not wonderful here at LSD as it stands.  Things are great.  I just see an opportunity to get some of the respected veterans here more involved.  It would be good for them, and also good for your and the Admin.  Two mods on a forum this huge is an invitation to burnout.  I know of several forum 1/10th the size of LSD with 8 or more staffed moderators.