I also want everyone to know that no major decision that is made on the forum is ever made by a single individual. These decisions are always discussed between the team of moderators in order to make the most fair decision possible. I don't think opening these discussions up to the general public would accomplish anything. We always discuss our issues with the person we have issue with before taking any actions.

I have to disagree here -- I have a hard time seeing how being more open about decision making could possibly be a bad thing. Of course I'd assume that discussions dealing with a particular member should be kept private between the Forum staff and that person, but I'd love to see more general discussions about forum/subforum organization, policies, etc. be conducted in public. The current thread about why posts may have been deleted isn't exactly all that friendly/open feeling: http://forum.nanfa.o...?showtopic=3351 . Of course this Forum isn't a democracy, but being open about what decisions are made and why will only improve the sense of shared community and direction here.

On another note, if anyone ever has an issue with the way things are being handled on the forum, either personally or in regards to the topics or postings, and you don't feel as though you have received the answer you are looking for through the forum, please contact one of the BoD members or post to the BoD mailing list and your concerns will be considered.

Thanks, Dustin. It would be a great move to add to the resources and policy explanation in http://forum.nanfa.o...p?showforum=131, including information about contacting the BoD (and exactly who to contact and how) if you feel you need to escalate an issue. In fact, I'd suggest renaming it to "About the NANFA Forum: Questions, Bugs, Comments" to make it more clear what's to be found there.

Jase,
I think you think there is more going on than really is regarding forum organization and policies. I went back and scanned though the moderator topics - just about all of them (with the exception of discussions between the forum designers at the very beginning in August 2006) have to do with dealing with individual posts, problem people, and keeping NANFA out of legal trouble by ensuring that it doesn't look like we are advocating illegal activity or anything potentially dangerous to life/limb. Nothing ever happens to posts without some discussion between at least a few moderators/staff, and if a post is removed/edited, the poster has always been contacted (in my memory at least). I think Drew's statement was originally to be a failsafe in case notifying the poster was delayed for some reason. For example, sometimes a post is made invisible until the mods can discuss what to do.

I think just about all of the organizational stuff to date has been discussed openly in the "Questions?Bugs?Comments" forum.

Jase, I think you think there is more going on than really is regarding forum organization and policies.

Thanks for jumping in, Laura. I guess the take-away point on this is that it's very hard for those of us on the "outside" to know what is or isn't discussed among moderators, how much planning goes into Forum organization, what the relationship between the Board and the Forum staff is, etc.

Again, I think the best thing for all would be to build out the "Questions? Bugs? Comments?" forum (and perhaps rename it "About the NANFA Forum: Policies, Questions, Bugs, Comments") with more information about how this all works and more explicit policies as sticky topics:

• How does one become a moderator?
• How do new forums / subforums get added? What's the process to request one? How does the decision get made?
• More policy information -- what you can and cannot post. (Especially discussions about fish that aren't completely legal to collect/keep -- it happens here, whether we acknowledge it publicly or not).
• Who to contact and how if you feel you're being treated unfairly.
• Privacy policy, ownership of posts, etc.
• etc., etc.

<clip>
The goal would certainly be to develop single, authoritative threads on given topics, rather than having the information scattered and repeated throughout dozens of topics. Someone suggested a Wikipedia-like functionality a while back (http://forum.nanfa.o...?showtopic=4167). That kind of tool which allows collaborative editing of a single "article" to produce the best possible answer might be exactly what we need to develop quality summary content on some of the most common questions (first native tank, species compatibility, breeding setup for certain species, etc.). <clip>

I would learn to Wiki.

Again, I think the best thing for all would be to build out the "Questions? Bugs? Comments?" forum (and perhaps rename it "About the NANFA Forum: Policies, Questions, Bugs, Comments") with more information about how this all works and more explicit policies as sticky topics:

• How does one become a moderator?
• How do new forums / subforums get added? What's the process to request one? How does the decision get made?
• More policy information -- what you can and cannot post. (Especially discussions about fish that aren't completely legal to collect/keep -- it happens here, whether we acknowledge it publicly or not).
• Who to contact and how if you feel you're being treated unfairly.
• Privacy policy, ownership of posts, etc.
• etc., etc.

Jase,

Honestly so much has been discussed in this topic that I find it difficult to to reply. We're jumping from issue to issue which makes discussion difficult.
I am one of the staff members here and one person cannot speak for the mod/staff team in it's entirety without prior deliberations. I will try and explain a little about my thoughts on your most recent post. Again I am an just an individual with ideas independent from others.

How does one become a moderator?

Personally I look for the personality of moderator over all else. I look for a person that is quick to uphold the code of ethics/objectives while not alienating the membership. I also look for people that are able to diffuse potential flames without wielding a heavy hammer. I do not overlook the ability of well rounded expression either. Moderators are requested by either mods or staff when the post volume becomes a time issue for mods/staff.

How do new forums / subforums get added? What's the process to request one? How does the decision get made?

The forum has not really changed much since inception and we don't have great plans of changing it in the near future. Part of our job is to make the forum useful to the members. I'm sure many people here that regularly visit other forums can tell you that changes are the most troublesome to regular through infrequent users. This often causes irritation among frequent users as well. We don't take lightly the introduction of new forums or splitting of other forums. Anyone is able to request anything they want either via PM or here in the Questions? Bugs? Comments? section here. When requests are made, the staff has in the past deliberated in an attempt to weigh the benefits versus the risks. Most of the time, all staff have expressed both sides of the issue (this can be said for any changes that are discussed) which really helps the staff learn and form a conclusion. As staunch as I often am in my opinion, I have been swayed many times by the thoughts provided by the staff. I have a tremendous amount of respect for the mod/staff team and rely heavily on their thoughts while staying true to my own convictions.

More policy information -- what you can and cannot post. (Especially discussions about fish that aren't completely legal to collect/keep -- it happens here, whether we acknowledge it publicly or not).

I believe this is spelled out pretty clearly in the Forum Guidelines located at the forum header which is visible on every single page view. We ask that all members who participate here follow both the guidelines AND the NANFA code of ethics. Deviation from this simple set of rules will result in appropriate action by the mods/staff. Each questionable action is discussed in private to allow free discussion while protecting the good name of member with the questionable topic/post. We certainly understand when new members make a goof and requires a little help versus a long time member that constantly requires a great deal of attention by the mods/staff. It's important to remember that we are all volunteers with regular jobs. We care deeply about NANFA and the forum, but we only have so much time to manage members. When we require regular sit downs with members, we must ask ourselves if we can just do something about the member so we get back to making dinner/washing dishes

I don't believe there are discussions about illegal fish (and collections) on this forum. If we felt there was illegal behavior, we would have addressed it immediately. I would encourage all members to click the "report" button with a brief explanation of the concern when you see any illegal activity on the forum (as well as any type of action that personally attacks you or violates the forum guidelines/code of ethics). Jase, please click the report button on these topics/posts with a brief explanation. We will be sure and address your concerns.

Who to contact and how if you feel you're being treated unfairly.

Please click the report button on the post of concern. If you feel a member of the staff/mods has treated you unfairly, you can contact any/all staff/mod members of your choosing. Your concerns will be addressed.

Privacy policy, ownership of posts, etc.

The forum does not sell or offer email addresses or any other personal information. When actions of a member are of concern, we go to great lengths to keep discussions private and not allow them to bleed into public discussion. We prefer the public stuff public and private stuff private. Airing dirty laundry in public is considered in incredibly poor taste. Private messages are indeed private and are expected to remain that way. If a private message in any way makes one feel harassed, forum staff/mods should be contacted at once in private. This forum is owned and operated by NANFA and serves at the request of the duly elected BoD.

Matt, I agree that this forum is much better run than most any other I have seen, and I appreciate the Forum staff's efforts in making it so. I was one of those who argued against the Forum back in 2006, because I was familiar with how many/most wind up going. You get people focusing more on their avatars, animated signature images, smilies, and clever comebacks than actual quality *content*. I would say that the average level of conversation is lower here than it used to be on the email list (many more newbies), but the greater volume, subdivision into subforums, and fact that the same thread can run for months more than makes up for it.

Indeed the forum has greater participation and audience than the list. It therefore has much more "stuff" to wade through. I would however take great issue with suggesting the new members (or newbies as you singled our valued new members as), take down the level of conversation. I consider myself a new member in many aspects. I still have much to learn about so many things, I guess I just don't feel comfortable calling my self an expert of anything. We want the atmosphere to be welcoming to new members and I hope we can all remember when we first started. It's hard to join a forum like this with a background. We must never forget our mission. This forum will always try to accommodate professionals, hobbyists, conservationists etc. of all experience levels simultaneously.

Again, I can only express a few of my thoughts here as I cannot possibly speak for the great volunteers that spend their time making this forum operate.

This has been an interesting and informative thread. I think that this is one of the best run forums on the web. It's very well moderated and welcoming to everyone. I'd also like to thank all the volunteers that make the forum and NANFA itself possible!

Jase,
<clip>
I would however take great issue with suggesting the new members (or newbies as you singled our valued new members as), take down the level of conversation.
<clip>

I will have to remember that 'newbies' is no longer PC.

and
It would be productive and in line with the NANFA Mission for the valuable input from forum participants to be condensed into a more convient form.

Wiki?
Certifications for forum members?
Pinned or FAQ on recurring topics?

I started on a FAQ a few months ago but haven't had to time to finish it. There are quite a few NANFA things that I've had to juggle around and have accomplished the more time-sensitive ones. If someone wants to create such a FAQ, the staff would be happy to look it over and post/pin it. Again, we try to appeal to everyone of all experiences and this would benefit all.

I believe all the other issues brought up in this thread have been addressed in one way or another, but if you need further details, please feel free to PM myself or other staff.

Re: wiki. This has been brought up before in the past (on the list, I believe). If someone wants to start a separate thread regarding this, it can be further discussed.

Honestly so much has been discussed in this topic that I find it difficult to to reply. We're jumping from issue to issue which makes discussion difficult.
I am one of the staff members here and one person cannot speak for the mod/staff team in it's entirety without prior deliberations. I will try and explain a little about my thoughts on your most recent post.

Hi Uland, thanks for the extremely detailed reply. My original post was just expressing curiosity about the interaction of the Forum with the BoD -- I really had no agenda in mind. As I and others have noted, the Forum has very quickly grown to be the most visible and active part of NANFA. Chris's email comment (which he has now clarified) that it was set up to run with little or no oversight by the board piqued my curiosity. I think that question has been settled.

As far as your answers to my suggested topics for sticky topics in the "About the NANFA Forum" forum (my suggested rename for this forum): Thanks much, but I really wasn't asking for immediate answers! I was just suggesting some topics that might be useful to build out as time allows, so that day-to-day users of the Forum have more clarity as to how the Forum is actually administered. The current pinned topics in this forum, and Forum Guidelines are a bit sparse right now given how incredibly active and popular this Forum is. There's more info to be found in other threads (this one included), but collecting it into a series of sticky topics would make it "more official" and easier to find.

Finally, I want to reiterate that I do think this forum is extremely well run, and I really value the contribution of time from all the moderators who make it so. I'm closing in on 400 posts here, so I think it's pretty obvious that I like it here! I wish we could get all NANFA members on here, especially some extremely knowledgeable holdouts like Bob Muller and Bob Sinclair (or is he here?). Perhaps making it a little clearer how everything works behind the scenes would improve the feeling of openness, and attract interest from folks who didn't make the transition from the freewheeling email list to the more structured Forum. In any case, I'm certainly extremely grateful that a few folks stepped up and provided this incredible resource for us all to use!

I will have to remember that 'newbies' is no longer PC.

'
Yeah, I didn't mean it in a derogatory way at all. I think it's just a simple fact that the average level of experience with native fish is lower on the Forum than it used to be on the email list. That's not a bad thing (it means we're reaching new members), but it does mean that we need to work to guide people in the right direction as they just get started in this hobby and reduce the repetition that comes with new people joining all the time.

I will have to remember that 'newbies' is no longer PC.

and
It would be productive and in line with the NANFA Mission for the valuable input from forum participants to be condensed into a more convient form.

Wiki?
Certifications for forum members?
Pinned or FAQ on recurring topics?

Phil,
I can't say the forum is held to a "PC" standard but we indeed want people to feel welcome. To describe someone new to native fish yet has 20 years experience with tropicals as a newbie might be insulting to such a veteran. Calling people newbs also might keep valuable members on the sidelines instead of participating. Each person has a different threshold and by adding a few more keystrokes (new member vs. newbie) everyone can be happy. I think my dislike of the word newbie is my own hangup and will fully admit to that.

Each person has a different threshold and by adding a few more keystrokes (new member vs. newbie) everyone can be happy. I think my dislike of the word newbie is my own hangup and will fully admit to that.

...except "new member" isn't what most of us mean when we say "newbie". I think "people with limited experience keeping native fish" is what we mean. You're right, "newbie" or especially "noob" can have a negative connotation, but others embrace it as shorthand for "inexperienced". I guess "new native fishkeepers" might be the best way to express it in a way that shouldn't offend.

Hi Uland, thanks for the extremely detailed reply. My original post was just expressing curiosity about the interaction of the Forum with the BoD -- I really had no agenda in mind. As I and others have noted, the Forum has very quickly grown to be the most visible and active part of NANFA. Chris's email comment (which he has now clarified) that it was set up to run with little or no oversight by the board piqued my curiosity. I think that question has been settled.

I'm not so sure I would say the forum is the most visible part of NANFA. Sure lots of people come here via search engines, some even join but do they really know what NANFA is? Undoubtedly those that participate regularly are exposed to links and regular calls to join but I think all this talk about the forum being "the face" of NANFA might be a bit overblown. I suspect those who read American Currents and the information navigated on the NANFA homepage might agree. We encourage NANFA members that participate on the forum to expose new forum members to some of the valuable information and benefits joining NANFA has. I think the membership has done an outstanding job while being polite and allowing new members to feel at home and join when they feel it's right.

As far as your answers to my suggested topics for sticky topics in the "About the NANFA Forum" forum (my suggested rename for this forum): Thanks much, but I really wasn't asking for immediate answers! I was just suggesting some topics that might be useful to build out as time allows, so that day-to-day users of the Forum have more clarity as to how the Forum is actually administered. The current pinned topics in this forum, and Forum Guidelines are a bit sparse right now given how incredibly active and popular this Forum is. There's more info to be found in other threads (this one included), but collecting it into a series of sticky topics would make it "more official" and easier to find.

Pinned or "stickied" topics are matter of preference. I can only speak from personal experience but I dislike forums with a half page of pinned topics. I guess I feel this way since I believe using the search function to be more useful. I feel that pinned topics should be used sparingly for ease of use on the membership. We should encourage members to use the search function at every available opportunity. As far as the sparse nature of a strict rule set....I was raised with one rule. Act as a gentleman at all times. I knew when I was not behaving as a gentleman and quickly learned if I was not. I don't believe the forum will ever have a rule set that you're looking for.

Does the software allow one (sub)forum to have unlimited time to edit posts
and the rest of the forums have a 30 minute limit to edits?

If so, then maybe a forum can be made for Thread Summaries. The first post would be the summary and be repeatedly editted. Follow posts would be member input for changes / additions. The person who starts the post would have the responsibility of filtering and summarizintg the info. If someone doesn't like the result, they could copy the post and take their own crack at editing it.

This would be like Wiki, with less power, and fewer computer requirements.

I can only speak from personal experience but I dislike forums with a half page of pinned topics. I guess I feel this way since I believe using the search function to be more useful. I feel that pinned topics should be used sparingly for ease of use on the membership. We should encourage members to use the search function at every available opportunity.

You're right, we are wandering topic-to-topic here, huh? I'm mostly advocating for sticky topics as a way to place more content in the "About" forum to answer questions about policy, process, etc., but also feel like we should be making a more use of them elsewhere.

Yes, I guess it is a bit of a matter of preference. That said, I don't quite understand how fewer "stickies" equate to better ease of use for the membership...? I'd say if the same question keeps coming up again and again ("what fish are compatible in a 10g?", "what do I feed my sunfish?", "will fish X eat flakes?", etc.), it makes sense to take good threads on those topics from the past and sticky them. If a new member enters a topic-specific forum and sees his question already answered at the top, that's about as user-friendly as it could get.

I'm always a strong advocate of "search before you post". Trouble with the current search function is that it doesn't do a great job of weighting returned results appropriately. For example, if you search on "blackworms", the #1 result is the recent post on "Tragedy at Darter Central", which mentions blackworms only in passing. It's mostly the same for the next 5 results. You also get no context (excerpts from the posts) in the results page to help you decide if a given thread has what you're looking for. It can be tough to find the most relevant results.

Compare that to a Forum-specific search for "blackworms" on Google: That nails the "Black Worms, Tubifex, Whatever" as the #1 result, and also gives context for other results so you can tell if they're just about using blackworms, or actually how to culture/maintain them.

Another challenge with search results here is that you can't link to them. The results pages expire after a relatively short time, so it's of no long-term value to link to them. That's why I always post Google results when I try to direct new members to existing posts which answer their questions.

I know these limitations on Search are inherent in the software, and not something the staff/moderators can do much about. My point is that search is simply lacking in some ways, which means it's less useful than it might otherwise be to find information in the archives. To me that's another reason to use sticky topics more liberally.

[One thought on the Search: There's always the possibility of simply adding a targeted Google search box to the Forum, as on http://www.nanfa.org/ . Google even has multiple ways that you can embed search results directly into the site, so that it completely matches the look and feel. I'm actually implementing that for a client this week.]

I like the idea of having some general information that are answers to common questions.

BUT, one of the great things about a forum is a new person coming on board can ask even the simplest question and gets interaction on that question from many people. That is what forums are all about. If you just post too much information on what fish fit in what tank, what fish eat this, what fish will go together in the same tank, etc... Then you might as well just expand a web site. Because that is what websites do is post information. Forums are for discussing information.

One great thing about this forum is that a new person to keeping natives might ask a question on the forum this year. Then they may gain experience keeping some natives. Then 5 months from now another new person to natives comes along and asks some of the similar questions. The person before now has the ability to help a new person.

This type of atmosphere creates an avenue where people learn and then inturn can help other people learn and feel part of a bigger picture.

Those who have kept natives for a long time really need to have patience when new people come on asking questions. Because it is interaction with these new people that will hopefully get them to like being here and want to, hopefully, support an organization where people help others and are working for the conservation of our native fishes.

Edited by Scenicrivers, 26 June 2008 - 04:19 PM.

I like the idea of having some general information that are answers to common questions. BUT, one of the great things about a forum is a new person coming on board can ask even the simplest question and gets interaction on that question from many people. That is what forums are all about. [...]

Scenicrivers, I created a new thread and responded to you over there:
Repetition of questions, sticky topics, search, "wiki", etc.
http://forum.nanfa.o...?showtopic=5140.

As Uland noted, we're kind of wandering all over the place here. This thread was originally about the relationship between the Forum Staff an the NANFA Board of Directors, but has diverged into several different paths. The question of the "reference" vs. "social" function of the Forum is a really interesting one, but probably best to split out as its own topic.

Well said scenicrivers

Part of the NANFA mission statement reads:

to provide a forum for fellowship and camaraderie among individuals who share a common interest in the diversity, biology, captive husbandry, and conservation of North America's native fishes.

I think the forum does a good job of that. Fragmentation of information and repeated questions is just the nature of the Internet. Trying to force people to do advanced google searches or read a Wiki just isn't going to work and is in fact counter to the above part of the mission. (FWIW I'm a librarian by profession, and I've been a user/moderator/administrator of listservs and forums for many years)

Just don't read the "Can I keep a Muskie in a 20 Gallon Long" threads if it really bothers you. The bandwidth is insignificant.