Request for Input from Members on the Creation of a "Member's Handbook"

[Sunstone]

To our Members,

Several good folks have dropped hints and suggestions that something along the lines of a "Member's Handbook" would be a good idea. Such a Handbook would bring together in one easy-to-read document the most important and useful information about the Forum. e.g. there would be sections on the Forum's mission, history, rules, policies, and other such things.

A couple days ago, I began forming up a team of staff members to create the Handbook. The project is just getting started and will take several weeks to complete. When finished, the Handbook will hopefully be quite useful to folks.

If you have any ideas about things and information that should be included in it, please post your ideas in this thread. All ideas will be given due consideration by the Handbook team in the course of creating it.

I must mention, though, that it is way too early to answer many questions about the Handbook beyond what I have already told you. Currently, almost everything about it is up in the air, so the answers to most questions are quite likely to not yet exist, and won't really exist until the final version is signed-off on by the Forum admins. Hence, I must ask that you be patient if we cannot answer most of the questions you might have at this time.

I hope you and yours are healthy and happy in these difficult times.

Sunstone

P.S. By the way, in this thread please refrain from criticizing anyone's ideas. I do not want to risk that someone might refuse to post an idea or two here simply because they think it might draw criticism. All ideas are equally welcome... excepting only @SalixIncendium's fashion ideas. That would be going too far.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

There should be descriptions telling us how, in your views, how members can best avoid creating unnecessary drama and generating reports.

 

[Harel13]

Sounds like a great idea. Good luck!

 

[Thief]

naw…..

freedom of expression is far more important

 

[dybmh]

If you have any ideas about things and information that should be included in it, please post your ideas in this thread.

Examples of rule violations would be helpful, imo.

 

[Secret Chief]

Here's one to immediately dismiss.
Remove the Forum definitions of "debate" and "discussion."
One set of rules for dialogue generally, across the piece.

 

[Erebus]

While there's already a pinned thread covering logical fallacies, it's easy to miss for new members. As such, I think it might be a good idea to give brief examples of a couple of the more common ones and perhaps include a link to the existing thread for a more complete description.

Straw man and false equivalence are the two most common fallacies I see on the forum. I suspect that people often don't realise they've committed those fallacies, particularly when debating some of the more emotive topics.

 

[Father Heathen]

Maybe something that encourages people to try thinking critically and objectively.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

I'd like to see lying and spreading fake news against the rules.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

I'd like to see lying and spreading fake news against the rules.

Just ban Fox News links if it ever comes to that. At least people would have to get much more creative with sources.

 

[taykair]

I hope you folks go easy on the rules concerning what constitues a "legitimate" point of view.

It seems that more and more people -- even those who used to be strong advocates for free speech -- now seek to silence those who have a different opinion. Some are blatant ("anyone who posts X, Y, or Z should be banned"). Some are more subtle ('we should discourage posts which employ types of arguments that we don't consider to be valid").

The more restrictions placed upon speech in a forum, the less interesting the forum becomes.

 

[Revoltingest]

I hope you folks go easy on the rules concerning what constitues a "legitimate" point of view.

I agree. Without going into details from history, I have seen staff
claim that some views are not allowed in some restricted forums,
eg, one cannot be a feminist if one allows prostitution to be legal.

The more restrictions placed upon speech in a forum, the less interesting the forum becomes.

Some restrictions are useful.
Incivility is the biggest problem because it wrecks
discussions, & discourages people.
It should be against the rules to foment hostility,
& to insult, misrepresent, & harass others.

 

[sun rise]

A Handbook is hopefully an opportunity to look at some things that would make our lives easier.

One thing is that this thread was created at 2.10am my time. I happened to notice it when I got up but when I went later on to post something, the thread was gone from the 'recent' list so I had to search for it. Thus the announcement and request for input disappears too easily.

I've also noticed this for some changes such as not using a smilie in a sarcastic sense.

So my suggestions are:

• All us to review, comment and suggest updates to the Handbook. I don't expect a vote but a chance to provide input would be welcome.
• Updates to rules, guidelines etc need to be much more obvious and sticky so they're easy to find and in one place.
• Consider changes in rules/guidelines while you're at it.

 

[Augustus]

While there's already a pinned thread covering logical fallacies, it's easy to miss for new members. As such, I think it might be a good idea to give brief examples of a couple of the more common ones and perhaps include a link to the existing thread for a more complete description.

Straw man and false equivalence are the two most common fallacies I see on the forum. I suspect that people often don't realise they've committed those fallacies, particularly when debating some of the more emotive topics.

I think the absolute opposite. A basic knowledge of logical fallacies is more of an impediment to discussion than an aid.

They are much more commonly used incorrectly to dismiss valid arguments out of hand than they are used to clarify and enlighten.

 

[Sunstone]

Sounds like a great idea. Good luck!

Thanks, Harel! I'm going to reserve offering any positive or negative comments on any ideas for the Handbook that are posted in this thread. It's too early to assess their merits. But I just want you to know I appreciate your encouragement.

 

[Deidre]

RF is a democracy, after all!

My idea, are you ready? Instead of ''new topics'' off to the side, have in its place an update of daily activity, in terms of new posts and threads. I have felt this way for some time, that new threads get a few posts, and then disappear early on, as other new threads are being posted. This way, there will be a steady flow of new and old threads, that continue to get shown in the daily activity.

That's not really a rule suggestion, more of an architecture suggestion.

As far as rules go, sock puppetry to be taken seriously. That'd be a good one. Not saying it isn't being taken seriously, but just what has come to my mind.

 

[Sunstone]

RF is a democracy, after all!

Excellent! I shall at once inform the beautiful and friendly couple who own RF of their new status as deposed "business-owners-in-exile"! Given what a rowdy and unruly forum we can be at times, they probably will weep in profound sorrow for all of three minutes before breaking out the margaritas. Deidre, my love, you quite possibly have made their day!

 

[Aupmanyav]

When the new members introduce themselves, they should say more than Hello or Hi in the heading to interest old members, otherwise they tend to be missed. Uh sure, not by Revoltingest. He is the most generous member. Offered me steaks when I joined.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

When the new members introduce themselves, they should say more than Hello or Hi in the heading to interest old members, otherwise they tend to be missed.

There's probably some nugget of wisdom to this statememt. Though, I find the short introductions easier than the long ones with many words and few paragraphs.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Naturally. One learns as one ages.