Caveat: This is a serious thread, so if your posts are vacuous or grossly digressive, I hope they get deleted.

I think this board is suffering from an acute lack of credibility. I mean, any new spinner who comes across this board would be reluctant to join due to the lack of seriousness. It's really holding back newcomers and old-timers alike from registering/participating. Considering the unpredictable status of UPSB3, should this board change to become more like UPSB2 was?

Sure, but how?

Anything that makes this place more credible. Like removing spam, removing members who spam, removing whatever else is detrimental to the board. I doubt people are willing to revert to the community like it was in 2004 (UPSB), even though it was immensely more enjoyable.

Why is this board so different than UPSB? Lets see, the mods have literally no good decision making without tohlz, who was just about the best mod. The rules are NOT enforced at all, no warnings are given to me EVER, even though I deserve them. Zombo isn't on 3/4 of the day, neither is sketching. Half of our members are way too serious about the jokes we make, and there is no search function(not like anyone would use it). Oh yea, and Kam isn't here.

perhaps we should create new moderators
-Ko

look at the members guys, your dealing with a bunch of little kids and people who act like little kids. besides, i could remember you guys (me including) bitching about upsb too so i dunno whats the problem. i dont really have a problem with anyone except that theres a few spammers which is expected cuz its a forum....its bound to happen

I just think we need more mods and to enforce the rules a little more, thats it.

or tell the mods to enforce the rules more...i dont think it would like it if any of the members here were mods.

Theres also the problem of mods being so busy, I mostly see Zombo and sketching, and turb once in a while thats it.



Zombo the most.

The first thing that can be done to improve the credibility of the board is to change the name.
Yeah, UC still means uber cool to me.

I think that the UPSB (circa first half of 2004) and the current UCPSB have their own good points, and right now I'm pretty happy at where UCPSB is at.

Honestly, I found the atmosphere in UPSB to be quite stifling, and at this point in my life I'm feeling stressed enough to want to come home at the end of the day to a PS board with a less intense atmosphere. The spammers should be dealt with, though. Other than that, I think that the moderation is fine; Zombo's doing an excellent job.

The old UPSB that we all love was, of course, more proper and orderly; people respected each other enough not to flame and moderation was at its optimum. The discussions were also damned original and good, and provided an environment that nurtured personal growth in penspinning. I do miss those days as well.

I'm pretty much satisfied with UCPSB right now, but I also don't mind a reversion to the old ways. Gotta go, will type more later.

It seems as if you're trying to minimize the importance of eradicating spam when it's actually a huge part of moderating. You can't judge moderating ability without considering spam removal, because yes, ANYTHING looks pretty good when you consider it in absence of its weaknesses.

I agree that UPSB was stifling because the moderators were very narrow-minded and unreceptive to new ideas, and I have no doubt UCPSB is the same, but what does this have to do with an intense atmosphere? I know we can agree on one thing though: it was frustrating seeing UPSB drive itself into the ground due to moderator futility.

He's saying strict moderators -> users live in fear of posting something bad -> tense atmosphere -> bad for the community.

Just think of how the off-topic section got cut off as a punishment for spammers. Ppl hated that.

My philosophy is to cut people some slack, this is a Internet forum, not a Senatorial forum, people can do whatever they want as long as they don't impede on the rights of others.

The off-topic section was closed because it was thought to be the cause not only of spam, but also of flaming and inappropriate threads that occurred in the months prior to UPSB's closure. You may view this as punishment, but the mods didn't do this with the intention of punishing people. Instead, they thought they were doing whatever was necessary to save the board at the time.

Anyway, there's no reason to think of the atmosphere in terms of extremes. It is possible to have a spam-free forum that's still fun, so long as there's an off-topic section, which there is. I can see you don't just condone spam, you advocate it. Just remember that this is the same thing that partly led UPSB to its downfall. Sure, UCPSB may never die, but if you want to sit back and blithely watch it lose all of its substance then be my guest.

As of this point, 11 people have voted "Yes" and 4 people have voted "No" in this poll, so ask yourself what people really want.

P.S. Just wondering why you told people to stop flaming fratleym when I can't even find a set of rules at this board.

http://s15.invisionfree.com/UCPSB/index.php?act=boardrules

This is pretty much my stance on the whole moderating issue. Go Zombo.

Seriously, if you guys really want your so-called "credibility" why not join the moderators and police it yourselves? It wouldn't affect me all that much since I neither spam nor get too serious. I'd like to see what happens.



Final thought: Serious or not, UCPSB is still a pretty big board with some very good spinners. Gives me all the credibility and confidence I need.

Look at Rule #1.

Because I can't?

Freedom is good, but too much freedom can be just as bad as too strict moderating. So I think the best approach to make a majority of the people happy is to have a communist approach to things. One example is this thread. What use would a poll be if not action is going to be taken, even though its obvious that the majority wants a change? And another example is djf. This excessive freedom approach allows him to troll and spit out racist remarks with no action against him, even with those threads directed at him. Sure its good to let people have fun and do what they want, but there still has to be a line somewhere.

I'm beginning to wonder if you're blowing the spam issue out of proportion. I don't advocate it, but honestly, allowing the forum members more space to breathe will entail some spam to exist, especially since most spam these days blur the line between proper posts and spam posts. I also see a correlation between a high level of strictness in moderation and an increase in spam - just look at the UPSB. No doubt some people will abuse the freedom that they are given, but all in all the situation hasn't blown over, and all I'm suggesting is that the moderators do more to stop the spammers - that's all.

Like I said before, Zombo's doing an excellent job. He wasn't voted 'moderator of the year' at the Kammys for nothing, and his everyman demeanour and creative approach to issues have helped create a more casual atmosphere in this board. Speaking of which, this is the UCPSB, not the UPSB; they both have their own strengths and weaknesses, of which spam control was/is a weakness to both - however, it seems as though UCPSB has had less spam problems. So, when it comes to moderating ability, I give the benefit of the doubt to the current mods.

Now, what led to the demise of the UPSB? Basically, there were internal problems and external problems. The external problems were beyond the control of Kam and the mods, related to software issues and what have you. As for the internal problems...

There was spam, and then there were moderators trying to get rid of spam. The number of moderators trying to get rid of the spam was vastly misproportionate to the amount of spamming and flaming that was building up. The ABSENT mods have to take some of the blame for not contributing to a big enough spam-controlling presence in the board, but at least the ones that remained tried to rectify the problem by recruiting new ones. I for one know that tohlz was having a very hard time controlling the spam, and he did his very best in trying to do his job. There were multiple factors that led to the collapse of the UPSB, and one of them was the lack of moderators. All I'm saying is that not all the mods are to blame for contributing to the collapse of the UPSB, or that they were the sole cause of the said incident (well that was what I got from your final comment, if I misunderstood do state so in your next post).

At the point of typing this, 13 have voted "Yes" and 4 have voted "No" (I nulled btw). Let's be realistic here; out of the entire board, how many were former members of the UPSB?? I gather that most voters, and certainly posters, are old-timers. The poll results are favoured towards change, but it is certainly one-sided. I conclude that most of the old-timers probably want to push for change, but doesn't that leave the rest of the board without a say in this issue?? Also, only 17 have voted so far, which is not a big enough number to change things, according to the name-change poll.

...

Also, I told tohlz over lunch about this thread, so hopefully he'll check it out and shed some light over some of the issues that led to the collapse of the UPSB.

dude kensai, that was semi-grossly digressive. ok not really, but it was long. ah w/e.

i think what lb said in page 1 of this thread is the bull's eye

about the freedom issue: i knew exactly what zombo was talking about. i was actually scared of joining the board cuz I was afraid that I'd get warned. but later, I realized it wasn't all that bad.

nevertheless, keyword is "balance". and the way things are going now, its definitely not balanced.

I was talking to Zombo when I said "you advocate it". Now tell me, why is "no spamming" the FIRST RULE yet it isn't enforced at all, leaving spam strewn all over the place? Either you allow spam or you don't, but you don't make a rule that prohibits it and then turn a blind eye toward everyone who breaks it.

It seems that your opinion of spam has changed quite a bit. Do you now accept posts that add absolutely nothing useful or relevant to the thread? Look around (Spammers' Bin excluded) and you'll see tons of posts like this.

If I remember correctly, the SECOND RULE was "no flaming", but this doesn't seem to be enforced all the time either, giving LB and djf license to flame the hell out of others with impunity.

Wait, as a matter of fact, let me just post what the rules are:

1. No spamming -
Anything that does not contribute to the topic, or replies like "Cool mod, I like it." or "I agree." Will get deleted and a PM will be sent to you from a moderator concerning your violation of the rules.

2. No flaming -
If you guys feel the need to start going at each other, and just arguing about something stupid, all participants in the argument are going to get a warning.

3. No revival of old topics -
Any topics that are revived from over 2-3 weeks ago, will be locked, and the reviver will get a warning.

4. No creation of topics that are already made or answered -
If you start a topic where the answer has already been given in a previous topic or sticky, the topic will be locked and you will get a warning.

Any violation of the rules after a warning will result in a permanent warning level increase. After 3 or more increases, the user will get a temporary 1 week ban. After 5 increases, the member is subject to a lifetime ban.

I highly doubt people have been getting warnings, so these rules are ineffectual and useless.

I would have agreed with that whole paragraph if not for the "creative approach to issues" part. A creative moderator is not narrow-minded and is willing to at least try out the ideas of others, even when the polls are in favour of it. Creativity aside, a moderator has a duty to enforce the rules, and this is the bottom line.

No, most spinners are new. If you mean the poll results are skewed, then I fail to see how. A lack of votes means a lack of interest, so it wouldn't matter to these members either way if they aren't going to bother voting. The name-change poll had far more than 17 votes, it's just that the difference between the two sides wasn't significant enough in Zombo's opinion.

Like I said before, removing spam doesn't have to be thought about in terms of extremes. Just only allow spam to be created in the Spammers' Bin. That way people can spam all they want as long as they keep it there.

Well i dont know if anyone else felt the same, but i didn't vote because i felt really indimidated by firebird's first post...

Yes, I realised that but just wanted to make my stance on the spamming issue clear.

The mods are accountable for this, so they have to speak for themselves. I want to say a few things first, though.

The difference in moderation for UCPSB and the UPSB are very different, as I have pointed out already, and we all identify the spamming problem as the main one for this current board. The difference I'm talking about here is just huge; from the earlier stages of the UPSB (2004) you had moderation that often bordered on intrusion on harmless free speech, like warning members for making a joke or some interesting remark. After all, these posts were technically 'useless', werent' they?

On the other hand we have the current state of UCPSB, which is more lax in its approach towards such comments. Now how are we, or more importantly the moderators, to judge spam? If you want the moderation to switch back to that of the old UPSB, you're just going for another extreme, and that's the kind of moderation that can make the atmosphere stifling. Of course, obvious spam should be removed, which I think we can all agree upon, and which I strongly feel the mods should do something about. But other than that, I say, moderation is fine.

No, my opinion of spam has not changed...look at my last paragraph.

Hmm...I do wish that he'd at least try out the blog thing, since there's a large majority of voters in favour of having one. The paired collab idea, however, is a good example of his creativity, as is his implementation of new smilies/skins/etc. and working with people to bring about such changes.

I see your point on the name-change poll (ok, bad example)...but whaaaaat?! You're drawing the conclusion that making a change to this board doesn't mean anything to newer members just because they don't vote? For one, they don't even know about how UPSB was like, so how can they make an informed decision on the matter? And secondly, check out toast's post...

For all that you and I have said thus far, I'm still undecided about this. Obvious spam should not exist at all, but I think there should be some leeway in determining how casual a post should be, if not it'll be like facing the heat from the UPSB mods all over again.

This might be stupid but, if the spam has a good taste then I don't mind it but if it's just silly i don't like it.

ok let me say this:

Primo, the majority of the audience in this board are mostly spinners for 13-18 roughly. In other words, this should constitute our target audience if we want to satisfy the majority. This is much younger than the target audience of the early UPSB, which had many spinners in their early 20's etc. You simply cannot expect the same level of maturity from the UCPSB. Thus, you cannot apply the same set of rules. It's like applying the military code of conduct to punks on the street. Just won't work.

Secondo, since the target audience is teens, they still have much to learn in order to prepare for their future. Chances are, they are already living on a regular basis in a strictly enforced environment, such as school or perhaps family. In order to provide development of critical thinking, it is primordial that they also experience different situations and learn to adapt in them, which will give them different perspectives to adopt when faced with a problem. In short, it gives them more options.

If the board were to become enforced like said environments, then we effectively deprive those kids of an unique setting where they have a chance to learn in a different way. The assumption when we consider this issue is that people can effectively learn by themselves, without the need of any external pressure. This should intuitively be obvious to most people, except certain behaviorists.

Consider the following example: "A child becomes good at piano because his parents forced him/her to" and "A child becomes good at piano because s/he loves playing it." Both should be plausible cases, and both depict a child with a different perspective on their ability (to play piano). Since school (and other such environments as stated above) can account for the former, this board can therefore account for the latter. After all, it is probably because the person liked pen spinning that they came here willingly.

In more concrete details, this means that persons should realize by themselves on this board what is right or wrong. Rules are suggested, not enforced. It is up to the persons to realize their value. If they can grasp those concept and voluntarily follow them, they would have truly learned something genuine, rather than by coercion. Believe it or not, inner motive is a impotant consideration.

Finally, the fact this board is open-ended may offend certain people, who are expecting something somewhat more in terms of regulation, or by certain offensive content. I suggest to those people to open their tolerance and drop their higher standards of moral for the closed confine of this board only. None of what happens on this Internet board will affect you in real life, so you shouldn't treat it as if it were real life. Just understand that this board is a learning ground, and as a learning ground, students make mistakes, so you should be able to forgive them. The freedom offered in this forum is very controlled due to to the space constraints; it IS only a virtual forum. There is therefore very little chance that any events that happen on this board can degenerate to damage your real-life. And if it were to, moderators will surely intervene, as I have done in the past.

In short here's the summary of my points:
-Target audience are teens
-Teens need to learn in order to prepare for their future
-School and other environments they face daily impose rules on them
-The freedom offered on this board gives them a different environment to learn and adapt into.
-Knowledge learned from self-realization is different, yet necessary, and complements knowledge learned from coercion
-People who are already adults, or are already set in life, may have to drop their moral expections on the board in order to avoid any impediments for the children who DO need to learn.

BTW kensai, I am going to implenet the blog someday, just doesn't work now.
BTW stefan, using the board rules to prove your point is like arguing semantics. I can change those rules any time to better reflect the current moderating position. So it does not constitute a static proof.

That would work if they would actually learn. And I'm not even talking about pen spinning. I'm talking about net etiquette. I believe people have the right to view threads that pertain to the subject without having to read through posts that are irrelevant. It's really trying on patience sometimes. They also have a right to feel comfortable enough to post here without getting flamed. But if you don't teach people what is or isn't acceptable by cautioning them when they make mistakes, this can never happen. Even if you don't plan on enforcing any rules to promote heuristic learning, at least remove the spam posts from threads.

I don't see the reasoning behind this.

About the rules, I'm only asking why they are there if they aren't going to be enforced. What's the point of including the part about 3 warnings for a temporary ban and 5 warnings for a permanent ban if nobody is ever going to be warned? If the rules aren't going to be enforced, then they're merely guidelines to posting.

One more thing,

Just look around and tell me how much evidence of "critical thinking development" you have seen, exactly. UCPSB has been open for more than 8 months now. Responses like most of the ones in this thread are what I take to be signs of actual critical thinking; posts which have plenty of substance to them. I'm glad Kensai has been creating interesting threads as of late to stimulate ideas, so thank you Kensai.

@ Kensai, when I said "new" spinners, I meant the UCPSB generation of spinners, not newcomers.

sry thats a mistake I meant SHOULD NOT.

I'll rebut the rest later, I have to study now.

Perfect example of a USELESS post. Honestly did you really have to say that? That also puts me to think about how many of your 1200 posts were useless as well. Why is this happening to this board? Well obviously because it wasn't enforced by anyone.

Back on UPSB, the flamers flamed the stupid and spammers. That's why everyone was scared to post useless crap. We just did the job that no one else dared to do.

I agree with firebird with this. If the "rules" are not meant to be enforced, they should not be labelled as rules in the first place. Because if they are not enforced, they might achieve negative effect instead. If someone were to discover that the "rules" were not enforced, he may have a higher tendency of breaking them. This may create a chain effect since more people may go around breaking the rules if they were to witness someone breaking them without getting their deserved punishments. They may even proceed to more extreme by breaking the rules purposely in every situation.

On the other hand, if the rules are not laid out clearly, people might not be as daring to break them. People might think of breaking rules as walking around in a mine field. The daring may trying stepping forward, but the majority would probably not dare to try. This might achieve a better environment than the current situation.

ok i changed the rules tell me what you tihnk

Much better, now that they're presented more as guidelines, while the last clause lets you guys do anything you want, haha. :clap:

i really can't see the difference or improvements between the old rules and the "changes" zombo made.

oh and btw, u gotta correct your last statement:
...while the last clause lets you do anything you want, haha.

Firebird said that many were not voting for the lattar option. The point i was trying to get across was that firebirds first post was very intimidating, and as it is the first post in a poll thread, is somewhat biased. So he said that he didnt want any immaturity in this topic, and so i didnt want to mess up the votes as i am considered immature. I was just placing the point otu that many may have also been like me and not voted for a similar reason, as those who would vote the lattar option is generally the younger/newer penspinners.

Firebird's first post was directed to useless posts in the thread, of which yours was one. The thread is to comment on your thoughts about UCPSB, not about whether you would truthfully voted or not, or not voted at all.

If you don't vote, no one will care because they won't know about it. Unless you publically announce that you did not vote. The same goes for whether you did vote and what you voted for.

I'm leaving your post in as a prime example of what Firebird wanted to not happen. Good job for you.

@everyone else: comment if you actually have something constructive to say or want to post a comment that actually pertains to your vote for Firebird's poll.

He added a few clauses like you are strongly suggested to behave yourself on the board (sounds like a parent speaking). Those are the slight differences, whether they're veritable improvements, time will tell.

I'd like to make it clear that my first post is based on the premise that for the time being, UPSB3 is not going to be released.

Both standpoints have their apparent pros and cons. On one side, you promote free expression and heuristic learning through lax rules but are left with less content as a side effect due to the age group. On the other hand, you enforce the rules which prevents poor content but stifles expression and deters certain members from posting.

So I think it'd be a good idea to cull the best elements from both sides. To preserve freedom of speech, members can post anything they want as long as their posts aren't flagrant (as opposed to minor) violations of the rules. In general, this is the how things are being run at the moment.

Those who were at UPSB know that the amount of substantial/thought-provoking material has dropped off since UCPSB opened, so I'd like to suggest something to encourage content and see if we can add a little spark to the board- to transform it from the banal to the interesting. I think that those who really contribute to the board should be rewarded in some way. This way, those who want to spam can still do so, while those who add useful material will be acknowledged for their efforts. Before I expand on this idea, I first want to hear what you all think about this.

well i think Elmo wanted to make an exclusive club and only good members (as voted from members in the club) can get in, but I'm not really sure what was the point of doing that in terms of benefits and also there was not much interested in the project.

Oh btw, if you're looking for members that are willing to work hard in providing good content, I believe the PSConclave is a good place.

What I suggest is that we take a wait-and-see approach before we instill any drastic measures:

1.Post a sticky under News and Updates reflecting the revision to the rules, and the general opinion of this post, and after one month let's review any positive changes to the board. I think we oughta give this boad a chance; as we have seen with the UPSB, any drastic measures taken against members (eg. closing down off-topic) can result in disagreement and rebellion. Since not everyone is a black sheep, many members may react to such change as corporal punishment.

2.To those who have been following this thread: I urge you to take a reasonable stance and outlook when posting. Have fun, but at the same time set an example for others to follow. The responses in this thread so far indicate that we believe in free expression and a heuristic approach to participation in this board. Let us then take some initiative in improving on it.

3.I'm undecided about the exclusive club...The Vault was great though. I say, leave the idea for now for at least until my proposed review.

1) Like I indicated in my last post, I've come to terms with the way rules are enforced (the Block function helps a lot in "removing" spam). Although this poll contains a considerable majority in favour of change, not enough voters are expressing their opinion so we don't have enough views to work with. We don't know what those who voted "Yes" want to change, the degree of change, etc. So I agree that it's best to wait for now.

3) I was thinking of something less than a club. Maybe a weekly (or monthly?) award (or "awards" if runners-up are allowed) for a member who contributed relevant and insightful posts, unique topics that stimulated interesting discussion, helped newcomers, etc. over that time span. Kind of like a weekly Kammy. Most likely the award would be a medal that the person can put in his/her signature, and it would be a crude equivalent to reputation points. Unless you guys know of better ideas. I know those at PS Conclave provide good content there but UCPSB is a different environment where we're looking for members to lead by example. The thing is, we need content here to make reading posts more worthwhile and to keep the board fresh.

I know an invisionfree code that gives awards like this:



But the bad thing is you can't give out more than one award to a person.

Since this is my final post for a while, I guess I should say something meaningful, but there’s little else to say, so I’ll keep this short and sweet. I can’t be bothered to read any topics and participate anymore because I’m tired of condescending. Tired of the spam. Tired of illegible posts. Tired of the lack of maturity. Tired of the lack of interest to improve the board. Tired of the lack of so many things a forum should have.

I have no intention of remaining on a board that’s spiraling downward due to the neglect and apathy of its members because it’s painful to witness. The PS community was doomed ever since the day UPSB closed down and new people joined who couldn’t appreciate either the quality UPSB enjoyed or the artistic side of pen spinning. So I’m leaving for 3 months and 16 days and I’ll be back then to see how things are, if this place still exists. I encourage others to join me too.