Moving Forward: Your Opinion of ET

[bwolinsky]

Baron, if you change the site at all YOU HAVE TO LIST FORUM TOPICS BY MOST RECENT LISTED AND AT LEAST SEVERAL NO MORE THAN 10 and at least 5. I don't want to click to see each forum because I don't get any activity information that way.

Whoever is your web designer completely failed in that part of his informational design strategy so don't make that mistake again.

It plagues the wealth-lab.com forum to this day and I haven't participated for years because of it but never mind I still had the program from 99.

 

[bwolinsky]

Quote from sheda:

How would it do that?

People would put posters who have insulted them on ignore, draw their threads to a close, and make a re-hash so that that poster can't post.

This is guaranteed by game theory and so the suggestion is moot and unwarranted. Where similar information is required civility is not the problem political or markedly opinionated differences are, and they can be manipulated with the features being suggested by you and eprado.

Marketsurfer's foaming at the mouth over it, too, so I doubt Baron being as smart as I perceive him isn't going to listen despite a debate centered around moderator issues.

We don't need anything but moderation requests by third parties. Self-moderation leads to the sort of manipulation I've seen happen in the forums that use it. Where there is a regulatory requirement to be honest, I see it isn't being followed especially by any claims marketsurfer has about any profitability on here or elsewhere.

 

[Baron]

Quote from EPrado:

Well....judging by the overwhelming support on here I would hope Baron would give it a shot. I know myself and a lot of the older experienced guys would be back. Hopefully he's cool with the idea and can implement it.

I am cool with it and will implement it. End of story.

I believe that the current ET is good but it's flawed in many ways, which prohibits it from ultimately being great. That's the reason I started this thread to begin with. But I want to make it great, and I know that every person in this thread feels the same way or you wouldn't be contributing your two cents.

IN THEORY, the current model of allowing users to hit the complain link on inappropriate posts seems like it should work well, but I'm learning that it really doesn't work all that great for a variety of reasons, especially on a busy site. Without getting into the details, the important takeaway is that idiots will ALWAYS be present on any site that gathers more than a few people, so the real question is how do you efficiently manage problematic posts? In other words, how do you make the junk posts disappear in a more real-time manner? Well, the best idea I've heard so far is giving the thread starter that control so that each thread already has a built-in moderator with vested interest in keeping it clean.

Now with that said, I don't believe that type of moderation is best for every type of forum. I think that forums which are essentially nothing but right-or-left matters of opinion like the P&R forum are best served as being a free-for-all unless things just get seriously out of control, in which case a designated mod like what we already have could step in and address the problem. But that's chasing rabbits... so enough of the digression.

The bottom line is that change is needed and it will be implemented. The only reason why it has taken so long to get to this point is that I really didn't want to deal with the inevitable downtime and/or speed bumps that comes with such an upgrade on an existing active site, especially after having had an epic fail at a similar attempt back in February. But I can't let that stop the progression, and I've got to come to grips that there are going to be growing pains in trying to get to the next level, even if that comes at the at the expense of losing some members and advertisers along the way. On the positive side, there really isn't better time than now to get the wheels of change going given that the site could be way busier, and therefore way more painful to upgrade, if the market volumes were anywhere near what they were a few years ago.

 

[bwolinsky]

Quote from Baron:

I am cool with it and will implement it. End of story.

I believe that the current ET is good but it's flawed in many ways, which prohibits it from ultimately being great. That's the reason I started this thread to begin with. But I want to make it great, and I know that every person in this thread feels the same way or you wouldn't be contributing your two cents.

IN THEORY, the current model of allowing users to hit the complain link on inappropriate posts seems like it should work well, but I'm learning that it really doesn't work all that great for a variety of reasons, especially on a busy site. Without getting into the details, the important takeaway is that idiots will ALWAYS be present on any site that gathers more than a few people, so the real question is how do you efficiently manage problematic posts? In other words, how do you make the junk posts disappear in a more real-time manner? Well, the best idea I've heard so far is giving the thread starter that control so that each thread already has a built-in moderator with vested interest in keeping it clean.

Now with that said, I don't believe that type of moderation is best for every type forum. I think that forums which are essentially nothing but right-or-left matters of opinion like the P&R forum are best served as being a free-for-all unless things just get seriously out of control, in which case a designated mod like what we already have could step in and address the problem. But that's chasing rabbits... so enough of the digression.

The bottom line is that change is needed and it will be implemented. The only reason why it has taken so long to get to this point is that I really didn't want to deal with the inevitable downtime and/or speed bumps that comes with such an upgrade on an existing active site, especially after having had an epic fail at a similar attempt back in February. But I can't let that stop the progression, and I've got to come to grips that there are going to be growing pains in trying to get to the next level, even if that comes at the at the expense of losing some members and advertisers along the way. On the positive side, there really isn't better time than now to get the wheels of change going given that the site could be way busier, and therefore way more painful to upgrade, if the market volumes were anywhere near what they were a few years ago.

I wouldn't leave for that, Baron, but the self-moderation is more a sign of laziness and disconcern so while I recognize your business issues with worrying about site content, that's fine, but this will be the end result as I explained and since that is your decision, I hope it attracts more professionals.

 

[sellindexvol66]

Quote from EPrado:

You might want to reconsider your stance. That wackadoo Bwolinsky agrees with you. If Hershey agrees as well you will have hit the lunatic daily double.

Actually if those two agreed with me I would remove my support for the idea and check into Creedmore and start shock treament immediately.

You made my night! I can sleep now, lol

 

[EPrado]

Great news Baron. I appreciate you giving this a try. I used to post on here a lot back in the day. Sure trading was much different in the day as there were a ton of trading firms/traders which of course lead to much more participation on here. But there are still a ton of guys out there still trading actively who are real traders and would love a place to converse. I checked out BMT's site...and it's a mess...not even close to what this site was and will return to. I would say it's a pretty good bet a lot more will return here with the EMG's and Surf's not running amok on here. I basically stopped because of a few bad apples ruining it for me with their bs. With this new type of set up I never have to see guys with agendas spew their nonsense. The ignore button, while effective in ways, could never rid a thread of the problematic ones.

Thanks man.

Quote from Baron:

I am cool with it and will implement it. End of story.

I believe that the current ET is good but it's flawed in many ways, which prohibits it from ultimately being great. That's the reason I started this thread to begin with. But I want to make it great, and I know that every person in this thread feels the same way or you wouldn't be contributing your two cents.

IN THEORY, the current model of allowing users to hit the complain link on inappropriate posts seems like it should work well, but I'm learning that it really doesn't work all that great for a variety of reasons, especially on a busy site. Without getting into the details, the important takeaway is that idiots will ALWAYS be present on any site that gathers more than a few people, so the real question is how do you efficiently manage problematic posts? In other words, how do you make the junk posts disappear in a more real-time manner? Well, the best idea I've heard so far is giving the thread starter that control so that each thread already has a built-in moderator with vested interest in keeping it clean.

Now with that said, I don't believe that type of moderation is best for every type forum. I think that forums which are essentially nothing but right-or-left matters of opinion like the P&R forum are best served as being a free-for-all unless things just get seriously out of control, in which case a designated mod like what we already have could step in and address the problem. But that's chasing rabbits... so enough of the digression.

The bottom line is that change is needed and it will be implemented. The only reason why it has taken so long to get to this point is that I really didn't want to deal with the inevitable downtime and/or speed bumps that comes with such an upgrade on an existing active site, especially after having had an epic fail at a similar attempt back in February. But I can't let that stop the progression, and I've got to come to grips that there are going to be growing pains in trying to get to the next level, even if that comes at the at the expense of losing some members and advertisers along the way. On the positive side, there really isn't better time than now to get the wheels of change going given that the site could be way busier, and therefore way more painful to upgrade, if the market volumes were anywhere near what they were a few years ago.

 

[EPrado]

Gotta have a sense of humor right? Lol.

Quote from sellindexvol66:

You made my night! I can sleep now, lol

 

[EPrado]

It's not laziness at all. The mods should be on the lookout for Serious troublemakers who break site rules. Things that could get the site in trouble. That's got to be a ton of work alone. They shouldn't have to police the place for people looking to clog the place up with useless drivel. Let the OP take care of that. If Surf wants to start a thread about his magical Pd's and thinks I'm a problem he should have the right to ban me from cluttering his thread up. Then he can converse with all the remaining posters(in this case...crickets).

Hey...I'm not a bad guy who holds grudges. I'll even let Surf post on my threads.




That is after he writes a 500 word essay on what he can offer to the thread. If he gets a C+ or higher he's in.

I'll bet the under.......

Quote from bwolinsky:

I wouldn't leave for that, Baron, but the self-moderation is more a sign of laziness and disconcern so while I recognize your business issues with worrying about site content, that's fine, but this will be the end result as I explained and since that is your decision, I hope it attracts more professionals.

 

[bwolinsky]

Quote from EPrado:

If Surf wants to start a thread about his magical Pd's and thinks I'm a problem he should have the right to ban me from cluttering his thread up. Then he can converse with all the remaining posters(in this case...crickets).

Hey...I'm not a bad guy who holds grudges. I'll even let Surf post on my threads.




That is after he writes a 500 word essay on what he can offer to the thread. If he gets a C+ or higher he's in.

I'll bet the under.......

Um, "no, he shouldn't." was my answer.

But the story ends as it will be implemented.

 

[R. Raskolnikov]

You were saying? LOL

Quote from marketsurfer:

And make generic bogus boring conversations a guarantee to happen. Happily this suggestion is never going to happen. surf