A Land Far Away

The question is: Should we have two channels ?

One for the new comers, as a help desk with ARs and OAS DMs and other people who want to help: #alandfaraway
This channel will be strictly PG-13.

One for the chit chatting: #alfa
This channel won't be PG-13.

This poll will run for 7 days with a simple majority.

Had to vote no - unless we have 24/7 staff coverage of the 'official' channel, njubs may get no answer rather than 7 sarcastic ones and the one they need.

Had to vote yes, Having no answer at all at a point in time is better than receiving seven sarcastic ones as well as insults. And as far as I've seen, the new channel has never been empty during my tz, so I am just not getting where the staff issue is coming into play....

Had to vote no, just because i wanted to make the numbers even. <evil grin>

Seriously though, although #alandfaraway has not been empty, the very few people there have been unresponsive (afk, asleep, whatever).

We have, in the past, been able to clean up the behavior in #alfa chat. We just haven't been consistent. With diligent and respectful moderation, we can bring it back to something viable, then stick to policy and keep it there. It will still be fun, just less offensive. And similar to part of the problem we have with the forums, the chat room has a lot of 'retired members' just goofing around. We define the rules, they'll refine their behavior or step-off (and that includes me).

Had to vote yes, it's not that great of a stretch for the helpful-type folks to be on both channels and respond when required on #alfahelp or whatever it ends up being called. Members, new or old, shouldn't have to run the gauntlet to get an answer to a question.

I repeat: the #alandfaraway channel isn't already working.
We are voting about it right now.

Of course it is currently empty.
We haven't yet decided to use it.

changing my vote to yes (-1 to no, +1 to yes).

We can always try it. Doesn't hurt to try. If it doesn't work, we can just point our moderator guns to #alfa and dispense with #alandfaraway.

A question. Does anyone have any 'real' issues why this shouldn't happen? Besides just voting no due to resistance to change, is there any powerful arguments why you are voting no? On the same note, any powerful arguments why you are voting yes?

Honestly, I don't see it working. But I don't think this needs a vote. Just do it and see what happens, not like it's going to do any real harm.

PG13 is for lamers.

Just to clarify, as well as i understand, moderating WILL happen. The discussion is merely in regards to whether a 'second' chat room be created, leaving #alfa chat room pretty much as is.

So, if you vote no, you're saying you want the #alfa chatroom to be moderated, with no other chatroom created.

Both proposals are flawed IMO WW, so I don't much care if a No results in "moderation". I don't see two chat rooms working.

danielmn wrote:Had to vote yes, Having no answer at all at a point in time is better than receiving seven sarcastic ones as well as insults. And as far as I've seen, the new channel has never been empty during my tz, so I am just not getting where the staff issue is coming into play....

Which new channel are you even talking about?

So, if you vote no, you're saying you want the #alfa chatroom to be moderated, with no other chatroom created.

Moderation in the past has resulted with what can only be described as an abysmal failure, i do not see it being turned around if the no vote wins. Chat is a different beast, and when forum like moderation has tried to be applied, the people doing the moderation copped a hell of a lot of stick, whether it was their fault or not.

Needless to say, i voted no. There are already periods in #alfa where there is no one paying attention or even there (regardless of how many nicks might be logged on). A channel less staffed is unlikely to surpass the current one in regards to being monitored.

White Warlock wrote:A question. Does anyone have any 'real' issues why this shouldn't happen? Besides just voting no due to resistance to change, is there any powerful arguments why you are voting no?

Read above. If you find it hard to get answers from the main channel, your far less likely to get an answer from a channel many will consider to not be the main one.

Now, this is my question to everyone that votes yes: Are you actually going to go and sit in the new channel should it be made to ensure it works, or are you merely voting in retaliation to possible dislike of how #alfa currently exists?

That is the only way i see it possibly working.

I'll probably be logged into the new channel, but won't check with any frequency. I only voted yes in an attempt to end the attacks on the community.

Really, what we could do is just remove the webchat link, have the forums the "front office" for asking questions, and anyone who can't handle IRC can just stay out. Making a second moderated channel is the most similar to that, so whatever.

*nods to what GF said*

If this doesn't pass and we can't moderate the #alfa channel:
1- the webchat link will be removed;
2- #alfa will no longer be considered a part of ALFA (as long as I am the Infra Admin) and I don't want to hear anything about it.

Voted No. Fionn is correct about not getting enough 24/7 coverage to be useful since 3/4 of IRC logins are afk at any given time. New members will have no choice but to wander over to the seedy side of ALFA for help.

Also, since moderation will occur within the Help channel anyway, it makes no sense to not just moderate the main channel and keep everyone together. It's simpler, just as easy to moderate, it's stocked with at somebody at all times and it helps improve our image which will be important in drawing in new members, DMs, builders, scripters from other PWs.

Personally I find it laughable that wanting to clean up IRC a touch for the betterment of ALFA has been interpreted as an attack on our community. Keeping the status quo is.

Kate