eplaya summit

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Sun Feb 13, 2005 2:59 am

Sweet!

Um.......

Very.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Sun Feb 13, 2005 2:50 pm

You know,

I'm not near my servers right now and forgot the adress and said to myself, "wait a minute I have a link in this thread on eplaya." so I got thumbing through the thread and come along this:

stuart wrote:
raster
a scan pattern (as of the electron beam in a cathode-ray tube) in which an area is scanned from side to side in lines from top to bottom

is that what you meant? I am a bit confused.

Stuart is right. It's roster.

I just could not let this pass.

Now what was I here for again?

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:39 am

I work with IPV6 and since eplaya is on the topic of chat....(maybe maybe not.) I have this other chat I was looking at called "Jabber" http://web.amessage.info/IPv6/ In IPV6.

any takers?

Anyone wanna try it?

It would be nice if there were those that had an open mind to it.

I'll set it up on here if anyone wants to try it.

No extra anything. Well....It's not VooDoo.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:41 am

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:34 am

http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic. ... 845#145845

So peep will know what I'm talking about anyway.

stuart · Post by **stuart** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:06 pm

This is the best functioning message board I have ever used

this whole message board chat thing is new to me. Eplaya is the only time I've interacted with end users this way

can you help me understand the validity of the first statement in the context of the second?

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:13 pm

stuart wrote:
This is the best functioning message board I have ever used

this whole message board chat thing is new to me. Eplaya is the only time I've interacted with end users this way
can you help me understand the validity of the first statement in the context of the second?

Huh?

joel the ornery · Post by **joel the ornery** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 1:16 pm

Sorry for the confusion, DVD.

Stuart was using english to ask his questions.

Blenderhead · Post by **Blenderhead** » Mon Feb 14, 2005 9:00 pm

Rabbi Dali Rick · Post by **Rabbi Dali Rick** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:26 am

This whole conversation on geek-speak is making me dizzy I am seeing multi-colored LEDs spinning around in my head. The eplaya just needs some minor tweaks, but the chat room idea sucks. It's too immediate, can't look at the things people have said in the past, I have never been able to there at the specific time some interesting shit would be going on. Everybody's schedule is so hetic, it would be one of those outerlimits thing where everyone would get on just after 25 people got off, with everyone just being a lookie loo. A chatroom availabel would be nice kinda of a realtime PM replacement but as the sole means of Eplaya communication it would truly suck.

technically,
the rebbi

cowboyangel · Post by **cowboyangel** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:01 am

I'd like to see webcam chat...but that could be a ways off....

swampdog · Post by **swampdog** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 2:25 pm

Well, I'm willing to speak up on behalf of the silent majority (you can count the contradictions in that statement on your own time).

I read eplaya a lot in between things at work. Way too much, actually. I post seldom and fairly carefully, partly because I am in fact intimidated by some of the frequent posters. I don't enjoy flame wars, don't want to start one. Sometimes I feel like an accountant in a biker bar.

I lurk in the bar rarely, other GD areas occasionally.

Most of this whole intense drama passed me by until a day or two ago when I started figuring it out. You guys are talking to yourselves. It doesn't have that big an impact on the rest of eplaya.

However, the impact that it does have is the people who go away. I've noticed that some names don't appear very often anymore as people are figuring where they find a community that works for them. Oh well, someone will fill the gap.

Technically? The board is just fine. I like it at least as well as any of the few bbs I've worked with.

Rob the Wop · Post by **Rob the Wop** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 2:37 pm

I think one of the most ignored rules of thumb is that people don't always get along. This has been proven throughout recorded history. On major and interpersonal scales. Some people just rub each other the wrong way.

A plonk button would easily fix this. You could wade through the threads you like without have someone you find annoying push your buttons.

My $.02 on how to stop 90% of the flaming shitstorms.

geekster · Post by **geekster** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 2:51 pm

Rabbi Dali Rick wrote:This whole conversation on geek-speak is making me dizzy I am seeing multi-colored LEDs spinning around in my head. The eplaya just needs some minor tweaks, but the chat room idea sucks. It's too immediate, can't look at the things people have said in the past, I have never been able to there at the specific time some interesting shit would be going on. Everybody's schedule is so hetic, it would be one of those outerlimits thing where everyone would get on just after 25 people got off, with everyone just being a lookie loo. A chatroom availabel would be nice kinda of a realtime PM replacement but as the sole means of Eplaya communication it would truly suck.

technically,
the rebbi

I dont think anyone ment to turn eplaya INTO a chat room ... my thought was to add a chatroom as an ADDITIONAL resource to remove some of the back and forth chat that goes on in the threads. The eplaya BBS would still be there as a more persistant form of communications but the evening banter in the bar thread might be better taken to a chat room where people could sit around and ... banter back and forth.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 3:31 pm

[/quote]I dont think anyone ment to turn eplaya INTO a chat room ... my thought was to add a chatroom as an ADDITIONAL resource to remove some of the back and forth chat that goes on in the threads. The eplaya BBS would still be there as a more persistant form of communications but the evening banter in the bar thread might be better taken to a chat room where people could sit around and ... banter back and forth.[/quote]

I agree, additionally it really makes perfect sense. Some threads like the bar are more socially chatty with a rapid number of limited lines per text, ideal for chat functions. The existing format is ideal for people posting important information to multiple people to read, that would otherwise not exist very long in chat.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 3:57 pm

man my formatting sucks today

Rabbi Dali Rick · Post by **Rabbi Dali Rick** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 4:25 pm

geekster wrote:
I dont think anyone ment to turn eplaya INTO a chat room ... my thought was to add a chatroom as an ADDITIONAL resource to remove some of the back and forth chat that goes on in the threads. The eplaya BBS would still be there as a more persistant form of communications but the evening banter in the bar thread might be better taken to a chat room where people could sit around and ... banter back and forth.

Again I would have to disagree, sometimes I can't get back here for days, yet when I get into the thread I can catchup on the past stuff and throw my 2 cents in even at that late date. Not possible in the chat environments. If I don't want to read I got to the end of the thread and work my way back.

partially,
the rebbi

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 5:52 pm

Rabbi Dali Rick wrote:Again I would have to disagree, sometimes I can't get back here for days, yet when I get into the thread I can catchup on the past stuff and throw my 2 cents in even at that late date. Not possible in the chat environments. If I don't want to read I got to the end of the thread and work my way back.

Good point, overlooked that.

geekster · Post by **geekster** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 6:17 pm

Rabbi Dali Rick wrote:
geekster wrote:
I dont think anyone ment to turn eplaya INTO a chat room ... my thought was to add a chatroom as an ADDITIONAL resource to remove some of the back and forth chat that goes on in the threads. The eplaya BBS would still be there as a more persistant form of communications but the evening banter in the bar thread might be better taken to a chat room where people could sit around and ... banter back and forth.
Again I would have to disagree, sometimes I can't get back here for days, yet when I get into the thread I can catchup on the past stuff and throw my 2 cents in even at that late date. Not possible in the chat environments. If I don't want to read I got to the end of the thread and work my way back.

partially,
the rebbi

I can understand that. I am torn. Part of the draw of a chat area would be a possible reduction in the small post banter that goes on. I suppose there are advantages and drawbacks to any change that might be made.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 7:03 pm

I can understand that. I am torn. Part of the draw of a chat area would be a possible reduction in the small post banter that goes on. I suppose there are advantages and drawbacks to any change that might be made.

I am wondering if the 3playa would have this problem or not. It can que up messages to go back over, but still has the chat pace. Here, what would that que volume look like?

geekster · Post by **geekster** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 7:10 pm

I would guess that 3playa is more active than this board lately. If you stay away for any lenth of time, it is like what RDR posted, you jump to the end and read back. I don't really CARE that there be a chat area, it is just an idea that jumped to mind. It isn't like I feel a need to defend the suggestion or anything.

It would result in conversation that happens when you aren't there evaporating into thin air, much like what happens in real life when people get together and you aren't there. It would be more of a cocktail party than a chronicle.

Moderating postings would be difficult, it would have to be done by someone with a LOT of spare time on their hands.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 7:18 pm

I was not shooting the idea down, I think there is a real need thats obvious from the bar topic.

geekster · Post by **geekster** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 2:09 pm

If I start a topic, it would be nice if I "owned" the thread and could remove postings from it and/or select users that would not be allowed to post in it.

It would be nice if I could ignore threads and not see them unless I clicked a "show all threads" button but when I click "filter" my ignored threads are removed from my display.

This would allow more community self-policing and reduce the amount of "running to teacher" that goes on when someone pulls your hair.

If a posting is deleted, I would not mind if a blank space is shown with the original poster's name/avatar with a blurb something along the lines of "Posting removed by thread owner" and possibly one-line comment from the owner with the reason for deletion. This at least lets people know that moderation has happened and who was throttled.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 11:57 am

geekster wrote:...( fantastic ideas)...

Did you happen to note ActionGrl with this? I see her popping in here now, but I think its mostly to read PM's.

III · Post by **III** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 12:47 pm

these are not new ideas.

there are, however, two distinct and compounding problems:

1) it would give a certain amount of administrative control to the users. this would imply that the actual admins are giving up some control. this is not the burning man way. (i have *never* been at a burning man staff meeting of any sort where anyone asked "how can we be in charge of less stuff? it's an anathema to the control structure.)

2) there are no existing mods to support that behavior. phpbb is a hosepile of code. even though 3 new people have signed up to do development, afaict they have not received access to the development area, developed a list of projects/requirements, or even indicated what they would personally like to look at/work on, much less that they can actually achieve their goals with the existing code base. (that's the problem that killed two previous efforts at a "lite" skin: there was an effort, but the restrictions on what would be changed/accepted made it impossible.)

between those two problems, one technical, the other social, as good as those ideas might be (and i think they're allright, though i think they'd do better as tactical blocks in a larger strategy) i wouldn't hold my breath waiting for them to be implemented.

III · Post by **III** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 1:00 pm

btw, i fully expect another post claiming i'm wrong.

i also fully expect, just like that last time, to see my predictions of no substantive change to be borne out by time.

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 1:19 pm

III wrote:these are not new ideas.

Step 1 Which would probably be a good idea to link to where they were discussed before, which you included one in the followup comment, thanks.

developed a list of projects/requirements

Step 2. After going over those links, get a listing of ideas.

Step 3. Debate, argue, research, prioritize, fight, drink...

indicated what they would personally like to look at/work on ...achieve their goals with the existing code base.

Step (how many steps to get through 3? yeah right). Develop

Did you work on the previous dev team?

geekster · Post by **geekster** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 1:47 pm

Trey,

Those changes came out of what I have experianced on your board. You do things differently there, even differently than what I described above. I was trying to find some common ground ... trying to find the features out of your feature set that I think could work in the culture here. Yes, it would take some hacking on phpBB or a rewrite from scratch or using something else.

Part of the problem is that a user environment needs to be clearly spelled out. Then something must be written to fulfill those requirements. This requires people with the skill and time to do it. PART of the problem is that people seem to want to re-invent the wheel when all the backend tools are already written. The only thing that needs to be written is the wrapper around it.

I had an idea once to use standard NNTP news server software in a stand-alone local server configuration as the message store. In this case, a thread would be a group. Even better, subthreads within the thread could be threaded (and much better than Tribe does it with their silly indentation).

Moderation tools exist to allow all to post, allow all but CERTAIN people to post, require messages to go through the thread owner, require CERTAIN messages to go through the owner, etc. The overall site admins could kill a message (cancel) or clobber a thread. Archival tools and message expiry mechanisms exist too. When they are expired, they are moved to an archive store which could be CDROM.

The only thing that would need to be written is the UI ... how the stuff is displayed and how information is entered. In fact, it could look so completely custom that the users would have NO IDEA it is really an NNTP backend. WIth that kind of a backend store, anything is possible. Any number of off-the-shelf news packages could be used. The only thing custom is the middleware that translates the user interface to the NNTP API.

That is the technical piece. The cultural piece you mention is a little more difficult. It requires, as you say, that the admins decide to allow the participants to manage their own experiance to a greater extent than they are now. It also requires, as AG mentioned elsewhere, a rethink of exactly what this forum's purpose is. Is it to be a meeting place for burners to make contact with others, fostering communications, building relationships or is it designed to be more of a place to broadcast information, post requests for assistance, etc. or both?

If you are going to have a lively community of regulars you HAVE to be prepared for clashes of personalities and some level of drama. That happens WHENEVER you have a group of people together in any venue for some period of time.

The suggestions I made were aimed at reducing the drama by providing a mechanism to be able to avoid confrontation. If someone has a thread I think is just a shit storm, I can ignore it. If someone posts something simply designed to push someone's buttons in a thread I own, I can delete it ... they are free to start their own thread on the subject and I am free to ignore that too but others that wish to discuss the subject are free to do so. Someone that repeatedly posts only to cause irritation can be blocked from posting in the thread. Again they are free to start their own thread if they wish.

The bottom line is that nobody's freedom of expression is limited by these measures. They are simple "context management" devices that can snuff a flamewar early and keep an otherwise constructive conversation alive by preventing it from degenerating into mudslinging. Nobody is prevented from starting their own thread to carry on with their expression of opinion, point of view, debate.

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 3:11 pm

Re: past discussion of the eplaya and its features, there was some discussion on the "old" (WebX) eplaya. The archive was available until a server crash a few months ago, I believe. There was more discussion in older threads in the Feedback forum.

AFAIK, much of the look & feel of the board depends on the default style sheet(s). I don't know whether the phpbb authors offer a front end to alter this or create others. Some browsers such as MSIE let you set a default global style sheet, and it didn't take me much hacking around with it a couple years ago to change the colors, fonts, and borders to something that looked cleaner.

I've never investigated tools for moderating and such, figuring it would require people interested in moderating for the long term, after the owners determined better-defined organizational purposes and functions for the BBS than the current free-for-all would indicate.

geekster · Post by **geekster** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 3:35 pm

And I would like to clarify one thing. The features I suggested, while they are designed not to limit one's expression (since they can always make their own topic) they ARE designed to limit one's ability to be disruptive and create havoc for it's own sake.

eplaya summit

the court jester is stumped again by superior intellect

..............dez nutz.......................

silent majority

Re: ..............dez nutz.......................

Re: ..............dez nutz.......................

Re: ..............dez nutz.......................

Re: ..............dez nutz.......................

Re: ..............dez nutz.......................

Re: ..............dez nutz.......................