If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Like I said; I wasn't having a dig at anyone involved, and I'm sure your intentions were fair and reasonable. I've got nothing against having fun, "online marriages", faction vs faction etc, and I really do think it is nice to see people having fun and getting on well with each-other.
Unfortunately we keep seeing these threads crop up; it's almost as if being accepted on this forum has taken higher priority over the sense of community, the willingness to help, the desire to promote equality, and the ability for us to have sensible discussions. What I'm seeing in these threads is the same minority expressing their like for each-other constantly; it's fine in small doses, but when it becomes excessive and seemingly the main thing that people care about then I really do have to question which direction this site is heading in. We've got plenty of forum games for people to tell each other how they feel about one-another - why do we need entire threads dedicated to one particular member? Why do we need to separate ourselves into families, when really what we should be aiming for is a sense of the entire community being as one big happy family?
I've never seen a thread dedicated to @Starry, or @Individuality, or @BrokenDreams, or @Never Gone, or @CrystalxFate, or @DanielaPereira, or @Danimal, or @darkness_prevails, or @hallace. These people and plenty more have contributed an aweful lot to this forum, be it through providing advice, welcoming new members, offering to take up forum positions and just in general being friendly, intelligent and mature people. There's plenty of people deserving of recognition, however they simply don't get it because they don't have enough rep or posts, don't get enough mentions or likes, or don't have the approval of someone considered to be "popular". Why is this? Why has becoming accepted and popular become such a priority? The reason why a lot of people here is because they feel excluded in the real world; do we really wish to promote that sort of behaviour here?
EDIT:
Sorry, just thought of something else to back-up my point here. There was a time on Teen Forumz when I was considered a "popular" member; I still am in a way but not to the extent I was before. I swear-down this is the truth when I say that I had people approach me at times and ask me how I became so popular, or just state it as if it were a compliment. I hated it. I don't care for acceptance or reputation; I came here to make friends and help people - that is it. If I had the popularity of a new member then I couldn't honestly care less. People should not have to think of themselves are "lesser" than any other member - it all comes down to treating everybody as equals. Sure, people will prefer particular individuals to others, but they don't have to make everybody aware of it.
Thank you for this, Seriously. That is one thing that does annoy me and you made a point here, Kirk. People join forums because they feel excluded from real life and may want to come to a community(s) where everyone can get along and become friends. I feel like people on this site and several other communities I have been on just favor each other and pick a group of people that they just wanna hang out with and don't wanna get to know anyone else. a forum is supposed to be, like you said, where we are ALL a big happy family here. not separate ones. That bugs me to no end. But yeah, this whole post right here is one of my points exactly. Kirk said it correctly. Yeah, I don't see any harm in fun threads but it just seems like people here make threads about one certain person but don't make any about others or don't try to get to know others. That's what it seems like. I think it is an unfair advantage completely.
Quote:
I don't care for acceptance or reputation; I came here to make friends and help people - that is it. If I had the popularity of a new member then I couldn't honestly care less. People should not have to think of themselves are "lesser" than any other member - it all comes down to treating everybody as equals. Sure, people will prefer particular individuals to others, but they don't have to make everybody aware of it
This right here. Thank you, thank you. *BIG CLAP!* There shouldn't be where there are people that feel left out, everyone should feel like they can fit in and feel equal to one another. These are just points that should be taken into consideration. Once again, communities are supposed to be where people can make friends, have advice, and just being able to have fun. In that case, it's almost like dealing with real life two times.
I hear out what Kirk says, and I'll keep saying what I have been saying: cliques are the problem with this forum.
However, in all fairness, I consider everyone you mentioned to be in some sort of clique (except a few). The ends simply don't justify the means for a lot of people. Its a lot easier to say it on the outside looking in, it truly is. But I am sure people feel intimated by you, and everyone you mentioned. I know I was. In all honesty, the people Kirk listed off are excellent contributers, and from what I have gleaned, excellent people. But we keep forgetting about the little man, which needs to be remembered.
I've said it a bazillion times, and I'll say it til my face turns blue: We can bitch all we want, but nothing will change if a nice chunk of the members refuse to change. And thats fine. A lot of people fear change. But if more then 50% have no problems with the fun little threads, thats all good and dandy.
Listen, responsible, intelligent posters are a rarity on the internet. If you believe you are one of those people, continue what you are doing. However, you can't hurt people's fun on the internet; it doesn't really affect you. Now, exclusivity is a problem; but anything sans that makes it too much like high school: the big kids with lots of guns trying to pull some strings.
Strings won't be pulled unless people want it to be, and thats that.
"A toothache, or a violent passion, is not necessarily diminished by our knowledge of its causes, its character, its importance or insignificance".- T.S. Eliot
I personally am not a big fan of online marriage threads. Cooll to have fun and coolto online wed but I don't wanna post. But to ppl who dont like them like me, why not just avoid them like me. Plenty of threads I loke and plenty I don't like. Overall I like it here. Wish we had more members, and miss many past members but it's all good
I hear out what Kirk says, and I'll keep saying what I have been saying: cliques are the problem with this forum.
However, in all fairness, I consider everyone you mentioned to be in some sort of clique (except a few). The ends simply don't justify the means for a lot of people. Its a lot easier to say it on the outside looking in, it truly is. But I am sure people feel intimated by you, and everyone you mentioned. I know I was. In all honesty, the people Kirk listed off are excellent contributers, and from what I have gleaned, excellent people. But we keep forgetting about the little man, which needs to be remembered.
I've said it a bazillion times, and I'll say it til my face turns blue: We can bitch all we want, but nothing will change if a nice chunk of the members refuse to change. And thats fine. A lot of people fear change. But if more then 50% have no problems with the fun little threads, thats all good and dandy.
Listen, responsible, intelligent posters are a rarity on the internet. If you believe you are one of those people, continue what you are doing. However, you can't hurt people's fun on the internet; it doesn't really affect you. Now, exclusivity is a problem; but anything sans that makes it too much like high school: the big kids with lots of guns trying to pull some strings.
Strings won't be pulled unless people want it to be, and thats that.
I'm going to go off of what Jared said because my sentiments are either corollary to his or a refutation and rebuttal of what he said. First of all, I'll differ a bit and get it out of the way. I don't think cliques are an inherently bad thing. In fact, it's a sign of a good community. Like I've said before there are people you won't like and if you stick around a place long enough most people will find people that they "click" with and that begins to form a group. Cliques are inherent to any community because of human nature. Because of the way we can't hold a conversation with some people. However, there are different types of cliques. There are inclusive cliques which is, I admit, a fairly loose definition of clique. These cliques are intrinsically better for communities. They don't require status or post number or any certain amount to join but rather just a general willingness to get along with the other members of the so called group. However, there are more exclusive groups that will not allow a member to join the ranks without a certain type of status or because one of the members of the clique doesn't like the other person. They are inherently harder to become a member of. It is these "exclusive" cliques that have the potential to kill a community.
I will echo the sentiment that it will take the whole community or close to all of it to change. And we've been raising awareness of this for a long time now. It's time to either stay the way we are or change. And it's up to us to decide that. I know some people are trying to change. But the whole community may be being held up because we can't reach a consensus on if change is actually needed. And that is another problem I see. We can't seem to have a civil debate about this without things getting a little too edgy (although, I personally think that this aspect is overplayed in threads such as these).
I will also say that although the type of posters that were mentioned are a rarity on the internet as a whole. There are a lot of quality posters here in this community as compared to the global average. (A lot of times those quality members are just outshined and forgotten about because they aren't as loud as trolls and immature posters. That seems to be true of all of the internet not just this site). Because of this fact, I know that as a community we can change it back to what everyone who is calling for change wants it to be. The only problem is getting widespread support for such a change to occur. The ones that "fear" change are the ones that benefit from the culture and layout of the site as of right now. That's not necessarily a bad thing but an attempt to rationalize the difficulties in rallying actual support for change. (Albeit, a weaker rationalization than many of my smarter colleagues would be able to produce).
In regards to fun threads, I consider it a slight problem but nothing major really. There are much more pressing issues here in this community that we should address before that one needs to be dealt with. I will also add on that the little person is not always forgotten. There are people who do not forget about them at all. However, I also disagree with the notion that all of the members Kirk mentioned are in cliques. By just scanning the names, Some of them are in a clique but the majority of them aren't. And just another quick thought, even if over 50% doesn't want change that doesn't mean change is not necessary or that change is not a welcome event. Just my thoughts on all of this again. I don't know. I may be wrong about many of these things.
Allan what change are u talking about?? What "pressing needs"?
Am I missing something? Its a forum. You read and u type. What's wrong here that I'm not getting?_
Its the same change everyone else was referring to in all the threads that were similar to this if you have read any of them.
You're missing the fact that when you type you are interacting with real people. It's more than reading and typing. I'd agree with you if you were not interacting with people when you typed. Human interaction creates a community and certain things lead to a dying community or a community that inhospitable to humans staying or joining a community. You may think it's the illusion of a community or not a community at all but the fact is online communities are similar to real communities in many many ways. And you can choose to care or not care that's your choice. But the point I was making was, When you compare the fact of a splintered community to that of an excess of exclusive "fun" threads the former seems more important.
I'm just going to leave what I liked about Allan's argument and attempt to make light of his refutation or agree with his reasoning:
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkness_prevails
Cliques are inherent to any community because of human nature. However, there are different types of cliques. There are inclusive cliques which is, I admit, a fairly loose definition of clique. These cliques are intrinsically better for communities. They don't require status or post number or any certain amount to join but rather just a general willingness to get along with the other members of the so called group. However, there are more exclusive groups that will not allow a member to join the ranks without a certain type of status or because one of the members of the clique doesn't like the other person. They are inherently harder to become a member of. It is these "exclusive" cliques that have the potential to kill a community.
I will echo the sentiment that it will take the whole community or close to all of it to change. And we've been raising awareness of this for a long time now. It's time to either stay the way we are or change. And it's up to us to decide that. I know some people are trying to change. But the whole community may be being held up because we can't reach a consensus on if change is actually needed. And that is another problem I see.
I will also say that although the type of posters that were mentioned are a rarity on the internet as a whole. There are a lot of quality posters here in this community as compared to the global average. Because of this fact, I know that as a community we can change it back to what everyone who is calling for change wants it to be. The only problem is getting widespread support for such a change to occur. The ones that "fear" change are the ones that benefit from the culture and layout of the site as of right now. That's not necessarily a bad thing but an attempt to rationalize the difficulties in rallying actual support for change.
In regards to fun threads, I consider it a slight problem but nothing major really. There are much more pressing issues here in this community that we should address before that one needs to be dealt with. I will also add on that the little person is not always forgotten. There are people who do not forget about them at all. However, I also disagree with the notion that all of the members Kirk mentioned are in cliques. By just scanning the names, Some of them are in a clique but the majority of them aren't. And just another quick thought, even if over 50% doesn't want change that doesn't mean change is not necessary or that change is not a welcome event. Just my thoughts on all of this again. I don't know. I may be wrong about many of these things.
First, excellent, insightful post as always. I agree with you that cliques are inherent, its just how life is, we attain a comfort zone. However, while there are a few inclusive cliques on this forum, the vast majority are exclusive, or have the outside view of being exclusive, disincentivizing involvement. As you stated, this is what will and is, killing this community.
Further, I could not agree more with your "those who fear change bit." Just thought I would voice support on that.
To continue, with all due respect to Kirk, he inherently was exclusively cliquishish when he rattled off names of people who "deserve respect/appreciation and don't." While I assume it was unintentional, because what I have gleaned of Kirk is that he is a fair guy, it still excluded people from even being thought of or rationailzed as the little man the one who needs a voice. So, the little man is making the little man even smaller. Last, on your refutation of my 50% bit, majority rules. Simple as that.
If my reasoning is flawed, I apologize. I've had a long week.
"A toothache, or a violent passion, is not necessarily diminished by our knowledge of its causes, its character, its importance or insignificance".- T.S. Eliot
Today's Toppers
169Likes
Re: Taking Teen Forumz forward.
