[TheForce.Net]  Jedi Council Forums » Inactive Forums: Jedi Council » Focus Group: JCC/Senate Relations » A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate
Register | Login | Search | Help | New Boards | Harassment Policy | Rules of the JC | TOS | Markup Codes
Locked Topic | Read Only Topic | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 - Previous | Next | Reload
Author Topic: A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate
Date Posted: 1/10/06 4:05pm Subject: RE: A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate
J-Rod posted:
Are we talking about the possibility of combining The Senate with the YJCC?
This was never my intent. I merely suggested having "intermediate" threads that weren't hardcore debate but at the same time wasn't people making unsupported claims.

 

-----signature-----
"They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance."
~Terry Pratchett
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Title : Title: Manager Emeritus
Total Posts :
Private Messages (0)
My Blog
My Collection
 Date Posted: 1/10/06 4:36pm Subject: RE: A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate
Firstly, let me just echo Mr44's sentiments regarding the calibre of discussion so far.

Secondly; no, the YJCC and Senate aren't likely to be merged into an unholy union.

Finally; from what I can gather so far, and of course we need some more users to flesh this idea out but I'd say it's going to be fairly uniform, is that whilst some people may follow a thread from YJCC to Senate, if it were redirected, the vast majority would not. And the reason for it has a lot to do with the calibre of posts.

How do you think, then, a co-hosted discussion would go? Let me give you an example; let's say KW and I create a thread called "Reflections on 9/11". Maybe we have one copy in the Senate, on in YJCC. YJCC discusses a more personal aspect of it, Senate covers more of a policy based aspect of it. In the opening post, we linked to the other thread and said, "please visit XXX to discuss this aspect, and here we discuss that aspect of it."

Do you think people from either forum would bother to see what the other is saying? Are attitudes towards the other (Senate's too heavy/YJCC is too light) too ingrained to prevent people from even trying?

E_S

 

-----signature-----
In this truth he knew himself to be.
From sinking sands he stepped into light's embrace.
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Title : Title: Manager Emeritus
Total Posts :
Private Messages (0)
My Blog
My Collection
 Date Posted: 1/10/06 5:22pm Subject: RE: A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate
I saw the athiesm thread and was really surprised that it was allowed to continue, juust because I am so accustomed to serious discussions popping up here and there and then being moved.

The atheism thread was allowed to continue precisely as part of seeing if serious discussion could maintain itself in the JCC without it devolving into a flame war. The thread has required moderation, of course, but so far has maintained itself, and even blossomed, as a separate version of any Senate-based atheism discussions.

There are numerous topics which could engage both forums with totally different discussions. Simply because there are two 'similiar' threads in title and general subject matter does not mean the two threads are going to be anywhere close to the same between the two forums, precisely because of the posting habits of the typical forum regulars, as mentioned before.

IMO, the question is, in the JCC, at what point should the atheism thread be closed and moved to Senate? Let me give an example: there have been numerous abortion threads that have popped up in JCC from time to time. In the event one opens, especially knowing that there was the idea floating of there being a possibility that we could allow more serious topics to flourish in JCC before we simply lock them and redirect them, I would generally try to give the thread a chance to make something of itself, so to speak. However, after generally just a couple pages, those threads would doom themselves with either the topic becoming too heated (the debate becoming more Senate related posting) or would devolve into flaming. In both cases, I've locked threads and told the participants to take the discussion to the existing threads in Senate for this.

With the atheism thread specifically, as Ender pointed to that one as an example, I can see where the discussion can have serious overtones, but be completely different from what might generally be the normal discussion in a like thread in the Senate.

Part of my concern, actually, is in moving a thread of this nature, at what point do the posts that have been allowed to be made in JCC sort of dilute the discussion in relation to Senate?

It basically all comes down to what sort of threads do you believe should be allowed to continue in JCC, and what would you have moved to Senate immediately? Are there topics that you could see both forums maintaining separate threads on without one forum stepping on the others toes?

How do you think, then, a co-hosted discussion would go? Let me give you an example; let's say KW and I create a thread called "Reflections on 9/11". Maybe we have one copy in the Senate, on in YJCC. YJCC discusses a more personal aspect of it, Senate covers more of a policy based aspect of it. In the opening post, we linked to the other thread and said, "please visit XXX to discuss this aspect, and here we discuss that aspect of it."

IMO, a wonderful idea. I think there would be plenty of overlap between the two, with people looking in to see what kind of discussion is taking place in the other forum.

 

-----signature-----
Three-One-Five; Ward - West Wing
"I don't care whatcha did on WHO...
this is a CLOSED session!"
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Title : Title: Manager Emeritus
Total Posts :
Private Messages (0)
My Blog
My Collection
 Date Posted: 1/10/06 5:32pm Subject: RE: A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate
A few ideas come to mind:

First, ix-nay on combining the forums. Having been around for the Senate's inception, it was welcome to see a dedicated forum to serious debate and discussion. I do think that the identities of the respective fora are dissimilar enough that they do not warrant combining them.

Second, I like the idea of tagging threads when higher evidentiary standards are required - threads on pure abstraction (e.g., philosophical questions, theological questions) do not require the same appeals to empirical data that threads on the intelligent design debate, economic models, foreign policy, literacy rates, etc. would require. Tagging threads that require extra effort could help people who might be intimidated.

Third, and this may sound cheesy, but what about an exchange program between YJCC regulars and Senate regulars? To encourage user participation, the admins have the perogative to award titles and colors, which have historically increased participation. These individuals could be ambassadors of a sort, describing how a particular topic would be addressed in the respective forum, how others might change their posting to be more empirical or more social, etc. This is just off the top of my head, so it's not a fully developed concept, but I think it could meet the needs of exposing new users to the different forums (we could rotate participants every month or three).

 

-----signature-----
Defense wins championships.
"The professors are the enemy. Professors
are the enemy! Write that on a blackboard
100 times and never forget it." - Nixon
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Date Posted: 1/10/06 6:11pm Subject: RE: A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate - Date Edited: 1/10/06 6:15pm (2 edits total) Edited By: LostOnHoth
I'd like you to state your reasons for posting in either YJCC or the Senate; mainly so we can get an idea as a group what users are looking for in a serious discussion.

Firstly, I think the fundamental difference between YJCC and the Senate is one of focus - YJCC threads that concern current affairs in the main are very conversational because there is generally little or no focus to the discussion at the outset, nor is there any requirement for a focus to be set/enforced by the YJJC Mods. Senate threads on the other hand, are generally more focused in their opening post and generally require something more than just "Topic XYZ" Discuss". This requirement is continually reinforced by the Senate Mods and the users either go away and come back with something better or the topic is locked and disappears into obscurity.

The other fundamental difference is the quantity and divergence of users that frequent the two forums and therefore contribute to the thread discussion - it only takes one post to make a discussion take an interesting turn or tangent or to deviate completely off topic and you see more of this in YJCC threads, simply because there are more users who will or can post in a thread. Therefore, I have observed that Senate threads tend to have a tighter flow in terms of the tangents in the discussion because there are less users contributing to the thread overall.

For me personally, posting is a time issue as I post at work and not at home and I'm a busy guy who has budgets to meet and who should really just give this place up altogether but can't! tongue So I originally stayed away from the Senate and mainly just lurked. After a while I started to post but still find it hard to maintain quality posts because of lack of time & life pressures etc. Having said that, I find the Senate to be a good read generally because of those members who do have more time to post great posts - some of the threads in the Senate could be condensed into a curriculum!

Secondly, I'd like to know whether or not you think there comes a point when a YJCC serious discussion becomes a Senate one, and if you'd follow it if it moved.

Again, I think it comes to down to the focus of the opening post by the thread author. In the Senate, if there is no evidence of a particular focus to the thread topic that encourages debate/discussion then you are required to create one. This pretty much sets up from the get-go typical and traditional "Senate" style threads as opposed to YJCC threads which may not have the same focus to encourage discussion/debate. The YJCC thread dicussion may ultimately find a focus but that is not a given.

So I would say that general current affairs topics in the YJCC which have a general flavour with no specific focus for discussion by the thread author would be fine for YJCC ( I note that the Senate has a dedicated "General Current Affairs" thread)and if that thread found a focus that the participants wanted to continue without being diluted by "general discussion" then that discussion could continue in the Senate. It's really also a matter of what the thread author intends and wants for a topic that is posted in terms of discussion and their own agenda.

We cannot overlook that 99% of the threads are posted by regular users of the forum in which the thread is posted and so it is important to ascertain the type and level of discussion contemplated by that author.

How do you think, then, a co-hosted discussion would go? Let me give you an example; let's say KW and I create a thread called "Reflections on 9/11". Maybe we have one copy in the Senate, on in YJCC. YJCC discusses a more personal aspect of it, Senate covers more of a policy based aspect of it. In the opening post, we linked to the other thread and said, "please visit XXX to discuss this aspect, and here we discuss that aspect of it."

Great idea.

 

-----signature-----
'Our enemies are innovative and resourceful and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." - George W Bush
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Date Posted: 1/10/06 6:33pm Subject: RE: A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate
Before I begin outlining my thoughts, When I volunteered for the FG, I was informed that my participation was contingent upon prividing a written promise to the JCC mods that I was not participating as part of some sort of personal vendetta or desire to stir up trouble. I promised them that my only concern is for the good of the Senate, and of the boards as a whole. I meant every word of that, and I still do. I have literally put years of work into improving the Senate, both as a mod and as a user, and its welfare is my top priority with these boards. I care too much about it to let any personal feelings interfere with its welfare.

As I was saying quite a bit in Comms, there are a lot of misconceptions about the Senate that are going around the boards, especially in YJCC. These misconceptions are held by both users and mods alike, and are often based on outdated experiences or negative stereotypes that simply aren't true today, nor have been for quite some time. These misconceptions help maintain a strong barrier between the JCC and the Senate, one which is ultimately detrimental to both forums.

For example, in Comms, epic posted:
epic posted:
dp4m, as for your point about the ability to post lighthearted banter within a serious thread within the JCC, exactly, it's fine, you're free to do it, in the Senate you are not.
That statement is almost completely false. Lighthearted banter is, and has been, allowed in the Senate. In Comms, I gave several examples of lighthearted banter (which I won't repost here), and those were just from the first three random threads I picked out. The big difference is that the lighthearted banter isn't allowed to be the focus of a thread. It is usually at that point that a moderator has to step in and tell people to get back on topic.

That, to me, is the critical difference between the JCC and the Senate. For example, contrary to what some people may think, I don't have a problem with an Atheism thread in the JCC. The problem starts when it starts getting several of the Senate-style posts that start shifting its focus away from the lighthearted side and towards the serious side. At that point, the thread should be either put back on track or locked and redirected. (It is also important to note that you can redirect individual users to the Senate without locking the thread itself, which I feel is what should have been done in the Atheism thread.)

Similarly, another misconception is that the Senate requires essay-length posts all the time. While you will find longer posts on average in the Senate, they usually aren't too long. In many threads, posts only go about 3-5 paragraphs (with about 2-3 sentences per paragraph). I'm sorry, but I don't consider that to be long, or even essay-like. That would barely qualify as an essay in middle school English classes, let alone high school or college. If anything, what tends to make posts seem long in the Senate is the quote/response style that many posts use. (In fact, in some discussions, you only need to read every other post, because the other posts are quoted in their entirety).

One more misconception is that the Senate is the place to take flame wars. As a general rule, you aren't allowed to flame another user any more in the Senate than you would in the JCC, even if they are acting like a moron. Telling a moron that they are a moron is still a flame, no matter how true the statement may be (apologies to any morons who may read this). The senate was once dubbed "a higher form of flaming", but that is because passions can run high, and so people often take things fairly personal. However, the moderators have worked hard to try and resove ssues without letting them spread, and without banning people if they can avoid it.

Yet another misconception is that we have no sense of humor, and eat babies for breakfast. This is utterly false. I would never eat a baby for breakfast. They are much better roasted (just a pinch of garlic), with some au gratin potatoes and broccoli, for dinner.

These and other misconceptions help create a barrier between the Senate and the JCC, and that barrier has been growing stronger in recent months.

Quite honestly, some people have blamed me for that barrier (some of you might be surprised with how many people have said that they wouldn't post again in the Senate as long as I was a mod there, and strangely enough they returned a week or two later). I make no apologies for my actions as a mod, because I acted within the authority given to me as best I was able to. People on both sides of issues have regularly accused me of bias, even when I had to act against both sides (both accusing me of doing nothing to the other side). If I was one of the major stumbling blocks to people wanting to post in the Senate, that issue is very much resolved now, as I am most definitely not a mod there any longer, and have no plans to moderaate there again in the foreseeable future.

However, one person cannot explain away all of the reasons behind the barrier. It's been built up because of misconceptions, as well as apathy (on the part of almost everyone, both users and mods). Poor communication is one of the biggest contributing factors to the problem, and I admit that I am absolutely not blameless in that area.

What needs to be done is that everyone, especially both moderating teams, needs to work together to break down those barriers. This FG is an important start, but it will be completely ineffective if afterwards, the moderators don't put forward extra effort to maintain the momentum. We need to work together, as users first, to help break down the misconceptions that go all around. Hosted discussions won't do that by themselves. Q_S's idea of "exchange users" (for lack of a better term) would be a better course. A "hosted discussion" would not work, because it doesn't really include a mechanism to keep the two different threads relating with each other. A variation that might work would be to have a "serious" thread that gets started in one forum, and move it back and forth between the forums once a day for a week.

More than anything, the JCC (users and mods) needs to stop acting as though the Senate is a completely different universe. We're all part of the same forums, and we need a thriving ecosystem here to better both forums. The Senate needs the new blood that the JCC can provide. A large part of why it is slowing down is because there aren't as many new faces in the forum, willing to speak up. At the same time, the JCC needs the Senate to help cover the need for the in-depth discussions. The two forums don't need a competitive relationship, but a symbiotic one.

Kimball Kinnison

 

-----signature-----
You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM
Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW
I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven
Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
7834 posts
19974_Chewbacca
J-Rod 
Date Posted: 1/10/06 6:47pm Subject: RE: A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate
How many lurkers do we have in The Senate? LOH says he was one. Do we have alot of them?

MariahJ, you post occationally. Do you do any lurking? Do you have opinions you've not expressed in a thread? If so, why? I see you alla time in the YJCC, yet only occationally in The Senate.

She may be able to answer many of the questions we have, as I find her to be very mature, yet she doesn't often post in The Senate.

 

-----signature-----
God Bless Barack Obama
Darth_wanderguard :"Maybe you're not quite as crazy as people say you are" thinking
Gamertag: zZ J ROD Zz
My radio show: www.biglipradio.com
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
15928 posts
-1_
HawkNC 
Title : Title: FanForce RSA
Oceania
Total Posts :
Private Messages (0)
My Blog
My Collection
 Date Posted: 1/10/06 6:55pm Subject: RE: A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate
Great ideas all around, I'm glad to see we're all communicating on this issue. happy

I've been mentally throwing around the idea of a "sampler" Senate thread in JCC to showcase what the forum is all about. The major problem I see with the Senate's participation levels is one of perception, and something like this might be able to show the larger audience of the JCC what can and cannot be done in the Senate. Basically what I'm thinking of is just a thread - preferably on a topic that isn't drawn obviously down political lines or alienates a section of the community - that follows the Senate guidelines but lives in JCC. It allows the JCC populace to participate in a debate in a familiar setting with familiar people, but with the more structured setting of a Senate debate. Those that feel that style of thread has appeal for them might then be more willing to venture into the Senate, armed with a slightly better knowledge of how to survive in there.

(Bear in mind this is all off the top of my head, I haven't discussed with any other mods yet so don't take it as anyone's half-arsed opinion but my own. wink )

 

-----signature-----
Use dp/dt
--
Come now, do you really expect me to do coordinate substitution in my head while strapped to a centrifuge?
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Date Posted: 1/10/06 7:20pm Subject: RE: A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate
Having had a quick scan at the thread topics on the first page of YJCC forum and the thread topics on the first page of the Senate Forum, I think we should also keep in mind that the issue of cross over on 'serious' topics is probably not going to be too frequent an occurence.

I think an issue that is just as important is the issues raised by KK in relation to the perception of the Senate in the YJCC as being some kind of boot camp frequented by fascist bully boys. If you can post in a topic about atheism in the YJCC there is no reason why you can't post in a topic about atheism in the Senate - I don't think the bar is set so high in the Senate so as to alienate most of the users that frequent the YJCC.

 

-----signature-----
'Our enemies are innovative and resourceful and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." - George W Bush
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
15928 posts
-1_
HawkNC 
Title : Title: FanForce RSA
Oceania
Total Posts :
Private Messages (0)
My Blog
My Collection
 Date Posted: 1/10/06 7:26pm Subject: RE: A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate
People seem to see it that way, though, which is perhaps part of the problem. The Senate is a daunting experience to a lot of people.

 

-----signature-----
Use dp/dt
--
Come now, do you really expect me to do coordinate substitution in my head while strapped to a centrifuge?
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Date Posted: 1/10/06 7:38pm Subject: RE: A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate - Date Edited: 1/10/06 7:41pm (1 edits total) Edited By: AnakinsGirl
Someone suggested having a sort of advertising cmpaign. I personally think this is a GREAT idea. Hawk, having a "sampler" thread is also an awesome idea. Such a campaign or sampler threads would allow the YJCCers to read a real senate debate and also participate in one, with each other. That way, there would be fewer users they didn't know and thus probably more comfortable. This would also introduce to them the style in which the Senaters are used to posting as well (I'm assuming we would have a mod that could sort of move the thread along in baby steps to make sure the Senate experience is being simulated; what I mean is, not allowing poop jokes, etc)

And I don't know how we would have a campaign advertising each forum, but is there some way to create and include banners up top where we usually see ads for video games and anti-marijuana websites?

And just for the record, I was TOTALLY kidding about the flaming idea. I was just being silly tongue

I also like the idea of the "exchange program". I mean, would it work the same way as the "Newbie Adoption" system works?

edit
And LostonHoth, have faith in your JCC!!!! tongue Having a sampler thread per month or something would be a great idea.

more thoughts that I came up with....sampler threads could feature the same topic name and first post as the one that occurs in the Senate, but allow JCCers to take the debate in any direction they wanted.


....Or would this idea merely fizzle out as most YJCCers are just lazy? thinking Even if we made it a sticky, how would the participation do???

 
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Title : Title: Manager Emeritus
Total Posts :
Private Messages (0)
My Blog
My Collection
 Date Posted: 1/10/06 7:51pm Subject: RE: A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate
I also like the idea of the "exchange program". I mean, would it work the same way as the "Newbie Adoption" system works?

I don't see why not; a Senate reg could take someone under their wing a la the adoptions. There are a number of ways this could work.

 

-----signature-----
Defense wins championships.
"The professors are the enemy. Professors
are the enemy! Write that on a blackboard
100 times and never forget it." - Nixon
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
15928 posts
-1_
HawkNC 
Title : Title: FanForce RSA
Oceania
Total Posts :
Private Messages (0)
My Blog
My Collection
 Date Posted: 1/10/06 8:00pm Subject: RE: A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate
AG, the participation is the one thing I'm worried about with it. There are two things in my mind that could potentially go wrong with it: one is that people simply don't have any interest in it, which might represent a larger problem with interest in the Senate in general, and the other is that it becomes dominated by Senate regulars. The second one is something we'd have to watch as mods, because it is precisely the direction I don't want it to go in. I want people who DON'T know much about the Senate to take part.

 

-----signature-----
Use dp/dt
--
Come now, do you really expect me to do coordinate substitution in my head while strapped to a centrifuge?
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Date Posted: 1/10/06 8:12pm Subject: RE: A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate
Are we talking about the sampler threads? I've heard of the newbie adoption thing but have no idea how it works.

 

-----signature-----
'Our enemies are innovative and resourceful and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." - George W Bush
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
15928 posts
-1_
HawkNC 
Title : Title: FanForce RSA
Oceania
Total Posts :
Private Messages (0)
My Blog
My Collection
 Date Posted: 1/10/06 8:14pm Subject: RE: A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate
My post was in response to the sampler thread, yes. I think the adoption idea would work very well, and doesn't require a great level of participation in order to operate.

 

-----signature-----
Use dp/dt
--
Come now, do you really expect me to do coordinate substitution in my head while strapped to a centrifuge?
Locked Topic | Active Topic Notification | Private Message | Post History
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 - Previous | Next | Reload
[TheForce.Net]  Jedi Council Forums » Inactive Forums: Jedi Council » Focus Group: JCC/Senate Relations » A discussion on the differences between YJCC and the Senate
© 2010 IGN Entertainment, Inc (9.02.17.2300, ASPNET0) 3.094