exball said:
Alan Pardew said:
Or perhaps a moderation of the "What If" subforum just like what is done on the Updates subforum?
That's the same as deleting it. How often does a truly good what if roll around?
Not often. The amount of energy required to keep the Updates forum moderated in the way it is already stresses out the staff. Adding more stuff for mods to approve is stretching it.
The problem is the quality expectations versus what people are actually able and willing to post. There's people that point at the forums and go, "ah what stupid what-if topics, everything is shit". But, like, that's the entire point. The What If board is unabashedly the place where people post when they want to start a topic but don't have anything particularly poignant to say. It's not really a bad thing. It's just what you get when you go to that forum.
Right now we delete and lock threads based on the nature of the conversation. If it's gross, or retarded, or ween, or people are fighting, then the mods recognize it as a toxic thread and take care of it. What people are suggesting from both within the board and from the outside is a step above that, from cleansing purely toxic threads to actively enforcing quality control. There's a point to that, but really, it's a forum about Chris. I don't know how much we can expect from people. Personally, I don't care if people shit-post in What If. There's a four tier system that works pretty well.
If you have something important to say, it goes in Updates.
If you have something you want to say, it goes in Discussion.
If you have something that could go unsaid, it goes in What If.
If you have something that should never be said, it goes in Spergatory.
Now we'd be telling people what they shouldn't bother talking about. If one asks a question nobody cares about, we'd end up deleting it and telling them to make a better topic or don't post. That's never happened before on this board because nobody takes shit seriously, which is a good thing.