New Format For Advanced Forum Access

[digital_blue]

We have discussed and settled on some changes to the way members are granted access to the advanced forums. Before I explain the changes, allow me to outline the problem with the existing system as I see it, and review what the objectives of the screening process are.

Under the current system, members applying for access need to get 3 votes from the moderator team in order to be granted access. New and previous applicants are gathered together on a list that is posted in the moderator forum at the beginning of each month. Moderators have the month to place votes beside the names of those applicants they feel should be admitted into the advanced forums based on the following criteria:

1) Has the user treated others with respect, and been respectful of site rules?
2) Has the user participated in discussions in the public forums and made attempts to contribute, either by answering questions, asking questions, or sharing information?
3) Has the user shown a level of skill and/or interest in topics which demonstrate that they would benefit from the information contained within the advanced forums?

Of course, the only primary source of information by which moderators can make judgements based on the above criteria is post history. This means that every month moderators are asked to review dozens of posts by each applicant (sometimes as many as 50) in order to determine whether the user should be admitted. This is a tremendous amount of work given the number of applicants, and I feel that this is asking more from our moderator team than is fair.

Of course, under the current system if the moderators are unable to perform this duty to the fullest extent, it can mean that users that perhaps should have been admitted end up getting passed over. This is unfortunate and troublesome as it can lead to both frustration, disappointment, and boredom with LP101 on the part of those that were missed.

However, it is also important that we maintain a screening process for the advanced forums for the following reasons:

1) Some of the material posted in the advanced forums is of particular risk of being misused by someone who is inclined to do illegal and immoral things with it.
2) Many members of this site feel additional confidence posting material in the advanced forums if they are concerned that this material my otherwise be leeched from this site and posted/sold elsewhere. Having the material available only to "trusted" lp101 members adds a layer of protection of this material, particularly because the material is not viewable by unregistered guests. It is important that there still be a screening process which continues to make advanced members comfortable.

So, in an effort to address the problems with the existing system, and still meet with the objectives for advanced forum screening, there will be a new process in place effective January 06.

Qualifying applicants will still be gathered on a list and posted in the advanced forums, however moderators will be asked to "vote out" those members that they feel do not meet the above criteria. They are asked to give some reasoning (typically with a link to one or more posts) as to why they feel a user should be excluded from the advanced forums. A member will be excluded if they receive two "opt out" votes from the moderator team.

If excluded, members WILL receive a PM explaining that they have been denied access to the advanced forums AT THIS TIME. They will be encouraged to apply again at a date no earlier than 60 days later. Please note that excluded applicants WILL NOT be given the reasons why they were not granted access - in other words, once this decision is made it is not open for discussion. After a period of 60 days the user is free to apply again, and will be considered once again.

One final change to the admissions requirements will be that applying members must have a minimum of 50 quality posts (previously was 40 posts before applying AND 50 days of membership (old rule: The 90 day minimum will remain.) Please understand that even if you've been a trading locksmith for the last 200 years, and have more knowledge on advanced topics than everyone else on the site combined, if you do not have a posting history on the site you are still an "unknown" and will not be granted access. The advanced areas of the site are intended for use by participating members of LP101, and until you are a participating member, you will not be granted access.

I believe that the above system will make it more difficult for applicants to be overlooked as a result of time limitations on the part of the moderator team, but will still allow for an adequate screening process to maintain the integrity of the advanced forums.

If you have clicked the link at the bottom of THIS THREAD at some point, your name will appear on the next list and you will be considered at that time.

PLEASE NOTE: The frequency with which we update and consider new lists depends largely on the volume of new applicants, and the time constraints of our moderators and admins. PLEASE BE PATIENT.

I will be updating the "HOW DO I GET ACCESS TO THE ADVANCED FORUMS? READ HERE" thread to detail the new requirements.

If you have any questions about this new system, please feel free to post here.

Cheers!

db

{edited by Squelchtone - January 2013}
{edited by Varjeal: I'd like questions to be posted in this thread and the answers as well to avoid repetition. No offense I hope db.....}

[foo]

Please note that excluded applicants WILL NOT be given the reasons why they were not granted access - in other words, once this decision is made it is not open for discussion.

db,

Perhaps you could elaborate on the rationale of this policy? It seems counterintuitive to me.

I don't dispute the bit about the decision not being open to discussion, but I am confused about the usefullness of denying the applicant information about why they're being excluded.

I would think it could be particularly useful to everyone if you told the applicant something like:

"You're being excluded because of your abusive posts in such-and-such thread"

...or...

"You're being excluded because your posts to date don't indicate appropriate skill level, willingness to share, etc..."

That sort of information could help everyone by encouraging polite discourse, information sharing, etc...

/foo

[Shrub]

Once you start giving reasons arguments start.
It is better to just refuse and forget.

[foo]

After I posted the question two possibilities occurred to me:

A) Too much workload to send 50~ish PMs
2) Don't want arguments from applicants over their demeanor, willingness to share, level of experience...

Once you start giving reasons arguments start.
It is better to just refuse and forget.

So, I guess it's reason #2.

Still, I think that providing feedback to the applicants could be useful, and don't think that the feedback has to mean that the topic is open to discussion / argument.

Methinks you could s/better/easier/

/foo

[grit1]

I think this is a very good and workable solution db...it's democratic, fair and logistically sound. I appriciate all of the work you have done toiling on this project, especially as an applicant in standby...~Grit.

[TOWCH]

Never knowing the original process until now, I understand why it used to take so long. I guess the forums could use the activity. My only concern is people who just blend in fairly well and aren't really noticeable getting defaulted in. Is "I have no idea who this is." grounds for disqualification? If this system doesn't work out, will things revert back to how they used to be?

[digital_blue]

Ok, I'm not really sure atm who it was that unlocked this thread. I had not really intended a whole lot of discussion on the matter, thus I opted to make the announcement and lock the thread.

But, since the gates have been opened, I suppose I'll field a couple questions and concerns.

foo: Both issues you point out are equally important as far as why we will not be providing an explanation for those excluded. I, for one, am not particularly interested in having those conversations. For starters, it is a lot of work, and I guarantee you it would not be as simple as a single PM in many cases. Secondly, once the matter is decided, it is not open for discussion or argument. Also, I would like the moderators to feel free to express any concerns without the fear of creating hard feelings or starting wars. If mods know that no explanation will be provided, they will likely feel more free to bring up any concerns they may have.

This new system is a fairly open system, and will almost certainly allow more people to gain access to the advanced forums. It is a "loosening of the reigns", so to speak. It is important that there still be a valid control mechanism in place, and any politics that might get in the way of that mechanism is a concern to me.

There is, of course, always the chance that someone with "untoward" intentions may slip in. Of course, this isn't new, as there has always been that concern with the existing system. It's not something that can really be ruled out entirely. People on this site are judged solely on their post history. People can present themselves any way they like in their post history. If this were not true, none of you guys would realize that I'm actually a retired widow woman from Idaho... oops... did I let that slip.

But holding the reigns tightly does nothing to benefit the site or its members. If it is too difficult to gain access to the advanced forums, people eventually just go away and stop contributing to the site out of frustration, disappointment, or boredom.

With this new system members conduct will still be judged after they gain access to the advanced forums, and remember that it is still a privilege that can be taken away. People are still responsible for their own behavior and will do what they choose with the information provided here. It's always been that way, and it's a delicate balance that we try to uphold here. The nature of our hobby is such that it will always attract some deadbeats, but I think it's only the committed deadbeats that will stick around and spend the time it takes to gain access to the advanced.

Anyway... much effort has gone in to working out this new approach, and I hope that it will address some of the problems that have been occurring as of late. If I seem a little abrupt in the way I've chosen to roll this out, please forgive me, but there are always a multitude of opinions and you just can't please everyone. Such is life. You know what they say. Opinions are like a*******, everybody's got one.

db

[TOWCH]

Cool, the fresh faces should liven those forums up a bit.

[mouse]

I bet by the time I get to 40 post's it will be changed to 80.

I joined a web server forum which offered free web hosting for people who had 20 post's.
When I got to 19 they changed it to 30.

When i finally got to 30 and was given space, the server was shut down.

I'm lucky that way.

[Lowtech]

I think some things are more appreciated when they are earned, instead of given for free. Does anyone remember their first vechicle? My first car was a used chevy impala with alot of miles, all I could afford at the time. I know some people that when given their first car just trashed it. Someday hopefully I'll gain access to the advanced forums. I guess what I'm saying is that if its a month, year, or 2 years from now it will mean something. Just my opinion everyone, so don't jump my donkey

[Raccoon]

I guess my question is-- Why do we even have an application process?

There are 2 flaws I see with this and the previous method.

1. Users are expected to actively "join the club", so to speak. They are given a goal, and told how to achieve it. In a sense, this becomes a game with instructions and a promoted incentive to win. Anyone with a bit of patience can beat this system. There's no real chance involved; just a treasure map with an X marking the spot. It encourages persistence of the unsavory.

2. This is a non-standard method of granting rights or power to individuals over internet chat mediums. In a typical scenario, a user joins a forum and becomes an active participant. Said user eventually becomes a respected member and is randomly asked if they would like to moderate. In this way, the administrator feels secure knowing that they have chosen a moderator based on merit alone. As the adage goes, "Those who seek power are unfit to wield it."

I know this isn't about assigning moderators, but I feel it should be treated the same. Having lived by the above rule for so long, I feel uncomfortable asking for access to the advanced forum. It's like I'm "begging for ops", if you're familiar with that phrase. I'd feel more comfortable knowing that I earned access because those above me decided they could trust me, and granted me that access at their own motivation and readiness.

If you want to try a new system, try a new old system. Invite the individuals who you feel would benefit from, and contribute to, the information the most. Reject those who seem too egger to gain access, or who are trying too hard to obtain it. In my eyes, even applying is already trying too hard, because, who am I to decide if I’ve earned it.

[Lowtech]

Raccoon, the people that started and that run this forum make the rules, and the bottome line is that anybody that doesn't like this is free to find another forum. And, as far as knowing and trusting someone, this is the internet. I've known people who have been married and still don't really know their better half. Are you who you say you are, am I supposed to trust you? Give this a try, and if it doesn't work, you can say I told you so, until then give it a chance at least. No offense intended, and whether you agree with me or not, have a Merry Christmass

[Chrispy]

This is quite an interesting thread.

Wonder when it's gonna get locked.

[vector40]

It's not Jedi membership, Raccoon, and I disagree with your analogy. It's a section of the site that's unavailable to the public because it may contain information the mods have decided is too sensitive to be visible to anyone with Google and a web browser. Membership is not really a privilege and not a knighthood; it just means you're interested in some or all of that content, for whatever reason (it's useful to you, you're a particularly deep hobbyist, etc.), and the mod team has decided that you're not a crook and are responsible enough to have access to it. Most of the users of this site probably couldn't care less.

That's all.

[Grudge]

I wouldn't be too hard on Raccoon, I think he has some validity to his point. However, optimal and practical are two different things. Anything which works fairly well and lightens the load on the mods (think unpaid and thankless job) is a good idea. The only serious potential flaw I can see if two mods just hate some qualified candidate and lock him out, but that would probably be pretty obvious eventually and they would get some heavy pier pressure (or overruled from above).

Just my 2 cents, and with inflation...