Suggestion Box

[Cairnsman]

This is a serious suggestion and motivated by nothing except my observations.

Maintain the ban on plugger66. The quality of discussion and significant reduction in abuse since he was banned is no coincidence. Furthermore, it was around the time that he originally started posting that the forum began to degenerate significantly in my opinion.

These events may be unrelated, and I do not intend this to be a slight on plugger66. I have no idea who he is personally, but for whatever reason much of the personal abuse and controversy seems to be worse when he is involved.

If this is too unbearable, perhaps subject him to a post limit of 5 per day (if possible). His enormous post count in a short space of time has dominated the forum and I believe has been a big factor in turning away a silent majority of former posters.

Please do not use this thread to discuss his merits as a poster. I am merely making an observation, having read this forum since 2004 and posted in various forms since 2005.

I'd say that in general, the quantity of discussion in the past 2 weeks has declined considerably and the place has become incredibly boring. That's what "poster cleansing" will do I suppose. Hey but now that the registration function has been fixed we might see things change with an increase of new blood.

[BackFromUSA]

Simon,

Log In - even though I tick the box to 'stay logged in' to SS, once I close the window it loses that logged in status and I have to log in afresh every time I want to view the site. Time consuming. Can the log in process be streamlined?

This should now be fixed.

[BackFromUSA]

Rather than continually trying to plug a leaky ship (this seemingly broken hosting platform) why not consider migrating the whole site to something modern that works, and is far more user friendly for both the admin and posters.

If the current site can't even allow new people to join, why stay with this platform?

For example, bigfooty now uses xenForo, which uses responsive webdesign (so it automatically resizes for any browser site - including mobiles) and is very easy to style - so we could have SS with a totally Saints look on a platform that actually works.
http://xenforo.com/

Rather than have to add all the suggestions people will list in this thread - just go to a modern platform which already has all these things. A big shift perhaps, but in the long run it could mean less work and a better user experience for all.

We looked at migrating data to other platforms but researching help forums shows that this is rarely flawless and I didn't want to risk losing posting history. We are happy enough on the now upgraded version of phpBB - the look and feel can be adapted and most are happy with Extreme Dark Red by Vinnie but for those that dislike white writing on black Damien has created a specialised format called "saintsational" if you prefer black text on a light background.

[BackFromUSA]

"At least one new post has been made to this topic. You may wish to review your post in light of this."

Why would anyone bother taking notice of this message on a fan forum. It's a fan forum. People want to post their point of view.

Fixed

[HitTheBoundary]

We are happy enough on the now upgraded version of phpBB - the look and feel can be adapted and most are happy with Extreme Dark Red by Vinnie but for those that dislike white writing on black Damien has created a specialised format called "saintsational" if you prefer black text on a light background.

Fair enough re staying with this platform - all the changes seem good.

As for the look, the style I am using has been changed (thanks), it now has the Saintsational banner but keeps the black writing on a light blue background (easy on the eyes) that I like.

Thanks for all your efforts.

[BackFromUSA]

Yep.

community or fuedal loyalties i suppose.
one is based on unity the other on seperation.

nonetheless ... "concentration of power IS open to abuse"
... even accidently.

(re the context of permanent bannings of a poster ... not just his current id )

Agreed.

We have been giving this alot of thought. Our thinking is leaning this way ...

Firstly we are working on a new set of rules - and may even open these new rules to input / debate before implementation so that we consider all points of view.

There are currently three administrators - Damien as ultimate owner - me (as head modertor) and Battye - but Battye will be replaced with someone with IT expertise and we shall also add a treasurer. This significantly reduces abuse of the system.

We shall also have an additional two moderators added to Buckets and those three will moderate (with additional protection from abuse) and I shall remain head moderator.

In cases where I feel the moderators have failed to act within the rules I may as head moderator issue warnings or bans.

In cases where posters feel they have been unjustly warned of banned there will be an appeals process ... with applicable rules re behaviour and process ... And then the three moderators will vote and a 2/3 majority required to overturn the warning or ban.

These seven people (4 admin and 3 moderators) will form a 7 member board which must vote (5-2) to change any rule.

Board members will be replaced only by an unanimous vote of the board to vote a board member off or on the board.

[BackFromUSA]

This is a serious suggestion and motivated by nothing except my observations.

Maintain the ban on plugger66. The quality of discussion and significant reduction in abuse since he was banned is no coincidence. Furthermore, it was around the time that he originally started posting that the forum began to degenerate significantly in my opinion.

These events may be unrelated, and I do not intend this to be a slight on plugger66. I have no idea who he is personally, but for whatever reason much of the personal abuse and controversy seems to be worse when he is involved.

If this is too unbearable, perhaps subject him to a post limit of 5 per day (if possible). His enormous post count in a short space of time has dominated the forum and I believe has been a big factor in turning away a silent majority of former posters.

Please do not use this thread to discuss his merits as a poster. I am merely making an observation, having read this forum since 2004 and posted in various forms since 2005.

I'd say that in general, the quantity of discussion in the past 2 weeks has declined considerably and the place has become incredibly boring. That's what "poster cleansing" will do I suppose. Hey but now that the registration function has been fixed we might see things change with an increase of new blood.

If you are bored by the meaningful Saints discussions you are welcome to post elsewhere to fire things up:

- animal enclosure here
- your own fan forum
- big footy (if they allow you)

[Cairnsman]

This is a serious suggestion and motivated by nothing except my observations.

Maintain the ban on plugger66. The quality of discussion and significant reduction in abuse since he was banned is no coincidence. Furthermore, it was around the time that he originally started posting that the forum began to degenerate significantly in my opinion.

These events may be unrelated, and I do not intend this to be a slight on plugger66. I have no idea who he is personally, but for whatever reason much of the personal abuse and controversy seems to be worse when he is involved.

If this is too unbearable, perhaps subject him to a post limit of 5 per day (if possible). His enormous post count in a short space of time has dominated the forum and I believe has been a big factor in turning away a silent majority of former posters.

Please do not use this thread to discuss his merits as a poster. I am merely making an observation, having read this forum since 2004 and posted in various forms since 2005.

I'd say that in general, the quantity of discussion in the past 2 weeks has declined considerably and the place has become incredibly boring. That's what "poster cleansing" will do I suppose. Hey but now that the registration function has been fixed we might see things change with an increase of new blood.

If you are bored by the meaningful Saints discussions you are welcome to post elsewhere to fire things up:

- animal enclosure here
- your own fan forum
- big footy (if they allow you)

Hey BFUSA you shouldn't really have a problem with scrutiny or an opposing view or the hard questions when you nominate yourself for such a public role:

For example I have previously asked you would you allow your children onto SS? (no answer yet).

Also do you have some stats similar to the ones you presented recently from dates as far back as 3/9/12 months ago maybe even 3/5/7 years ago, (no answer yet).

If you do then they would paint a more balance picture than the one you tried to paint of your own performance.

BFUSA you are doing a great job getting a lot of the things done that us long time posters have been screaming out now for years, personally I couldn't say thanks enough, but please don't get all huffy if you are occasionally held to account with the hard questions.

[GrumpyOne]

[Board members will be replaced only by an unanimous vote of the board to vote a board member off or on the board.

As always, this forum remains in the hands of an elitist group.

Why don't the people who put their hand in their pocket, more than once I add, get a say.

The members still own this forum; it will not continue without our input. Remember that next time you run out of money and ask us to chip in.

[asiu]

Simon .

i'm not sure that an appeals process can be 'justice seen to be done'
if its conducted by those who initially adjudicated.

... to be fair ... buckets is 'your' man.
(handpicked to meet your requirements of acceptability)
the next two mods will be 'your' men or women.
(picked no doubt , to meet that same personal criteria)

all , operating on your instructional leadership
and all capable of being over ridden , if you dont agree with 'their' non action.

are you seeing the point i am trying to present ?

your crew of modsters will back each other in ... as would be expected
... how could any appeal process ever be 'seen' as fair dinkum?

[BackFromUSA]

This is a serious suggestion and motivated by nothing except my observations.

Maintain the ban on plugger66. The quality of discussion and significant reduction in abuse since he was banned is no coincidence. Furthermore, it was around the time that he originally started posting that the forum began to degenerate significantly in my opinion.

These events may be unrelated, and I do not intend this to be a slight on plugger66. I have no idea who he is personally, but for whatever reason much of the personal abuse and controversy seems to be worse when he is involved.

If this is too unbearable, perhaps subject him to a post limit of 5 per day (if possible). His enormous post count in a short space of time has dominated the forum and I believe has been a big factor in turning away a silent majority of former posters.

Please do not use this thread to discuss his merits as a poster. I am merely making an observation, having read this forum since 2004 and posted in various forms since 2005.

I'd say that in general, the quantity of discussion in the past 2 weeks has declined considerably and the place has become incredibly boring. That's what "poster cleansing" will do I suppose. Hey but now that the registration function has been fixed we might see things change with an increase of new blood.

If you are bored by the meaningful Saints discussions you are welcome to post elsewhere to fire things up:

- animal enclosure here
- your own fan forum
- big footy (if they allow you)

Hey BFUSA you shouldn't really have a problem with scrutiny or an opposing view or the hard questions when you nominate yourself for such a public role:

For example I have previously asked you would you allow your children onto SS? (no answer yet).

Also do you have some stats similar to the ones you presented recently from dates as far back as 3/9/12 months ago maybe even 3/5/7 years ago, (no answer yet).

If you do then they would paint a more balance picture than the one you tried to paint of your own performance.

BFUSA you are doing a great job getting a lot of the things done that us long time posters have been screaming out now for years, personally I couldn't say thanks enough, but please don't get all huffy if you are occasionally held to account with the hard questions.

Hi Cairnsman

Perhaps you missed my answers to these so called hard questions but for clarity sake:

- my 9 year old son has no interest in Saintsational (too busy playing footy and minecraft) but if he wanted to do so, I doubt his mother would let him come anywhere near this place (she even hates me reading it)

- I have told you previously that YOU can manipulate the OPEN member data to determine sign in data per pay and calculate variations etc IF YOU WANT ... I don't want it ... you do

What I can tell you in that whenever I sign in between 7am and 11pm there are more people on here in the past month than I have seen in years ... usually a dozen or so members logged in, another dozen or so members online and reading and then usually another dozen or so non members lurking. Pretty good for a dying forum. Happy with the numbers.

Have a great night.

Simon

[BackFromUSA]

FYI at midnight:

In total there are 34 users online :: 9 registered, 1 hidden and 24 guests

[BackFromUSA]

Simon .

i'm not sure that an appeals process can be 'justice seen to be done'
if its conducted by those who initially adjudicated.

... to be fair ... buckets is 'your' man.
(handpicked to meet your requirements of acceptability)
the next two mods will be 'your' men or women.
(picked no doubt , to meet that same personal criteria)

all , operating on your instructional leadership
and all capable of being over ridden , if you dont agree with 'their' non action.

are you seeing the point i am trying to present ?

your crew of modsters will back each other in ... as would be expected
... how could any appeal process ever be 'seen' as fair dinkum?

Fair comment.

How do you propose that the appeals process works then?

This is the time to get it right as we are re-writing the rules and we do want to have a fair process.

[BackFromUSA]

[Board members will be replaced only by an unanimous vote of the board to vote a board member off or on the board.

As always, this forum remains in the hands of an elitist group.

Why don't the people who put their hand in their pocket, more than once I add, get a say.

The members still own this forum; it will not continue without our input. Remember that next time you run out of money and ask us to chip in.

The forum remains in the hands of Damien. He started it. It is his.

The donations made in the past were donations.

The two )ownership and donations) are not connected.

Everyone gets a say - not just those who donated $20 once in early 2008.

And those who donated more don't get more say than those that donated nothing.

We have listened to EVERYONE with their suggestions, complaints etc and creates forums suited to all needs.

We are modifying the rules and how the board operates to reflect the feedback received.

[BackFromUSA]

FYI at midnight:

In total there are 34 users online :: 9 registered, 1 hidden and 24 guests

And 214 unique members logged in over the 24 hour period on Friday 9 May.

[Cairnsman]

Thanks for the reply BFUSA,

Whilst you came close to answering the question I will take it as representative of your views too as I assume you and your wife are on the same page when it comes to parenting...gee you can be slippery. Anyway, suffice to say I have another question and it is this, so if you won't let your 9 year old come anywhere near this place then what does "all ages" mean? What is the youngest age you are catering for?

Ps: have you ever considered not posting in a condescending tone and acting like you are some superior intellectual being?

[Cairnsman]

Simon .

i'm not sure that an appeals process can be 'justice seen to be done'
if its conducted by those who initially adjudicated.

... to be fair ... buckets is 'your' man.
(handpicked to meet your requirements of acceptability)
the next two mods will be 'your' men or women.
(picked no doubt , to meet that same personal criteria)

all , operating on your instructional leadership
and all capable of being over ridden , if you dont agree with 'their' non action.

are you seeing the point i am trying to present ?

your crew of modsters will back each other in ... as would be expected
... how could any appeal process ever be 'seen' as fair dinkum?

Fair comment.

How do you propose that the appeals process works then?

This is the time to get it right as we are re-writing the rules and we do want to have a fair process.

I think that any appeals system should be transparent and held in threads open to all. I think that PMs to and from mods regarding anything to do with warnings and bans should not be allowed and that all coms should be posted in a public thread. Total transparency.

[BackFromUSA]

Thanks for the reply BFUSA,

Whilst you came close to answering the question I will take it as representative of your views too as I assume you and your wife are on the same page when it comes to parenting...gee you can be slippery. Anyway, suffice to say I have another question and it is this, so if you won't let your 9 year old come anywhere near this place then what does "all ages" mean? What is the youngest age you are catering for?

Ps: have you ever considered not posting in a condescending tone and acting like you are some superior intellectual being?

Hi Cairnsman

All ages means ... all ages. Like a movie G rating. I guess it means anyone with the ability to read. Not sure what my son has to do with it all? And as for my wife, I often disagree with her parenting style ... problem is that I just get over-ruled!

Not sure how you are reading my posts. Just answering your questions, accusations, misquoting etc. Would you prefer I not reply? Just trying to be polite and open.

Have a great weekend.

Hope we win this week.

Think we are a definite chance.

Simon

[asiu]

dunno bloke ,
have given the 'answer' no thought.

... all i wanted / needed to do , was express the point i made.

[Cairnsman]

Thanks for the reply BFUSA,

Whilst you came close to answering the question I will take it as representative of your views too as I assume you and your wife are on the same page when it comes to parenting...gee you can be slippery. Anyway, suffice to say I have another question and it is this, so if you won't let your 9 year old come anywhere near this place then what does "all ages" mean? What is the youngest age you are catering for?

Ps: have you ever considered not posting in a condescending tone and acting like you are some superior intellectual being?

Hi Cairnsman

All ages means ... all ages. Like a movie G rating. I guess it means anyone with the ability to read. Not sure what my son has to do with it all? And as for my wife, I often disagree with her parenting style ... problem is that I just get over-ruled!

Not sure how you are reading my posts. Just answering your questions, accusations, misquoting etc. Would you prefer I not reply? Just trying to be polite and open.

Have a great weekend.

Hope we win this week.

Think we are a definite chance.

Simon

Like trying to catch an eel in a bucket of snot.

Anyway BFUSA I think you know where I'm going with the line of questioning. I can tell you from the parents I talk with, most are of the belief that they should shield their children from free access to the internet for as long as they can but especially under the ages of 13-16 (seems to the general consensus). And by free access I mean any internet program that allows them to communicate with strangers which includes MMOGs.

So as I have said in the past, I am not against the all ages concept, I just wonder if you should see if that is what the market wants. If you drive away the all of the adults (long time posters) from this site and the kids do not flock in then it could possibly die a horrible death.

Will you be willing to say you were wrong if your "all ages" concept" does not work out?

[BackFromUSA]

In total there are 46 users online :: 11 registered, 9 hidden and 26 guests at 9.20am

[BackFromUSA]

and 48 registered members have logged in since midnight (by 9.24am)

Both numbers have been going up daily over the last few weeks.

I think we are heading in the right direction.

[BackFromUSA]

In total there are 39 users online :: 16 registered, 7 hidden and 16 guests at 10.08 when I am logging out ... nice to see so many people on Saintsational in a down week and no game until Monday.

[BackFromUSA]

and 74 unique registered users since midnight. That does not include lurkers who have not signed in.

Great traffic.

I am sure posting volume will increase once they feel safe to post AND there is more to talk about.

[HitTheBoundary]

Thanks for all the changes. Apart from the basic improvements in functionality, it's great to know that changes and updates can and are being implemented - even the small things like tapatalk will make a massive difference.

As for the altered styles, would you consider throwing out to the forum users (some of whom have shown great skill in the past re graphic design/photoshop etc.) the chance to design a funkier look for the site?

The changes to the styles are good, but why not go the whole way and drop in a saints themed background image (such as that currently used on the Saints website - see it standalone here).
http://www.saints.com.au/staticfile/AFL ... -image.jpg

Not too hard to do if someone else comes up with the image (just a change of the background).

We could have a competition for the best image - and users could vote for a background - would be a good way to get people involved.