wake_up_bomb wrote: Yes WUB there are plenty of dickheads about and no doubt there are plenty of people who would consider me to be a member of that club.

The issue here is that the community is supposed to police itself and call out people who continually behave in a manor that is at best marginally with in the scope of the guidelines. People who fail to present an argument and continually resort to fallacious points, bully and harass other people with an aggressive attitude in a totally disrespectful tone, generally based on biased, prejudice and personal opinion, should not pass by unchallenged IMHO. Clearly the community has a very different understanding of what any of those traits represents as they seem to pass unnoticed when such interactions are delivered by certain individuals - while less offensive members are chastised for far less frequent and obnoxious behavior.

I don't have a problem with presenting my arguments against them and then ignoring them when it's clear that they have nothing of substance to offer, or lack the ability to engage in a rational conversation. The thing I have trouble ignoring is the abuse of other people who don't deserve to be spoken to in such a disrespectful manor.

As the community here is seemingly unwilling or unable to defend the ethics and ethos on which this site was founded I personally am unable to remain apart of it. My continued involvement as an admin is effectively giving my endorsement of such behavior which is something I am not prepared to do. As one of the founders I feel qualified to make a judgment on whether or not I feel the community is meeting the goals and aspirations set out at its inception. Considering that I wrote the rules and guidelines in place here at this time for another community based project of mine, it would stand to reason that I have a pretty good idea of what the intent and purpose of those rules and guides are supposed represent.

The vast majority of past and present members actually did and do live up to the aspirations of the guide lines on an individual bases, but as a community there seems to be a failure to bring the wayward serial abusers to book. As this is supposed to be a community driven site it stands to reason that one would expect the community to take action when others are failing to abide by the principles agreed to on registration here.

As a member of the community I should be in a position to voice my disapproval when I witness the antics of such reprobates. Unfortunately being a member of the admin team here seems to exclude us from the community, because there are a number of members who consider any interaction on our part to be some form of sinister plot to subvert the community.

Fortunately the majority of members here are a pretty discerning bunch and they can spot bad behavior. Constant misrepresentation of other people and their deliberate misquotations are blatantly obvious to even the most casual observer. Argumentum ad nauseam simply compounds the fact that they are on a mission to establish a point where they have none to offer!

Setting up the truth-zone is intended to offer people an alternative place exchange ideas and enter debate, where alternative views are seen as a positive contribution in an open and honest debate. Of course the three of us could be totally wrong in our views, and there is every chance that people don't get where we are coming from, or what our aspirations are. Indeed there will no doubt be people that don't trust us or our judgment and will feel that we have acted inappropriately without consideration for the community. Everyone is free to come to their own conclusions. There is plenty of evidence to draw on from the contributions we have all made here. Sadly the effort we put in here hasn't always been received with the same goodwill as it was freely offered and given, by a tiny minority. We feel that we couldn't deliver what we intended to deliver to the majority of the members here under the community system we implemented. That doesn't mean that people didn't share our aspirations, it means that we didn't create the right environment for them to flourish, which caused a number of members to leave or become inactive. The creation of the truth-zone is an attempt to establish a revised model which meets the needs of members who would like the style of community we originally aimed for. We respect the fact that members here feel passionate about the SZ community and there are many aspects of it that we are proud of, we would like to see it evolve and mature into a thriving community. It just isn't as we envisioned it and doesn't include all the people we set out to include.

dubmeup wrote:
A total misrepresentation of stated facts! Diverse discussion in an environment built on mutual respect doesn't equate to a place for argument! I guess there a lots can be gleaned from the way people interpret information. That may go some way towards explaining why the SZ didn't met our original objectives.

Now you're just playing for laughs right? Please explain how we failed to meet our obligations with respect to a community lead approach. Give me a mo while I pull up a comfy seat.

The funding was never an issue when it came to supporting the site as has been stated! Fortunately the majority of people are aware that we discussed community issues with the members in the open on the forum and that we were open and honest in those discussions. The assumptions and unfounded accusations of a minority do not a fact make!

The three of us see something worth preserving which is exactly why we have gone out of our way to ensure that that is precisely what happens to the SZ! If you're of the opinion that we have done anything other than act in the interests of the members here please feel free to demonstrate that. Please try to use facts when presenting your case and not figments of imagination!
dubmeup wrote:
I'm not sure where the clarity is here given your previous post addressed above. I'm seeing contradictions for the most part to be quite honest.

StarsChildren wrote:
Why thank you m'am....not sure about the cloriform and pain killers though...don't we want them awake? and as to pain killers...isn't that all part of the 'sufferance'?
Maybe some rohipnol insted...so they don't remember?

Jane

thoreau wrote:
Our concerns were put to the community and some had actually been picked up by an admin previously to that as a direct result of comments made in threads by members. For the record I was yet again a loan voice when I stated that I understood why those members felt the way they did on one particular and important issue.

At the risk of sounding like a stuck record my involvement here is as a member of the community, that happens to be involved with the administration not through choice but necessity, my admin roll is simply that a roll and a requirement. I no longer feel I can remain apart of the community which obviously caused an unavoidable issue with respect to my admin which isn't something that can't be avoided. I have tried to lessen the impact of that issue in the best way I can and have been doing that job under duress out of respect for the members of this community even the ones I don't see eye to eye with.

I read the same content as everyone else here and all the concerns and issues that have lead to me wanting to leave are in plain sight on the forum. The only privileged information I have are the comments from departing members who have expressed the same views as me and in relation to the same publicly accessible content. Other members have expressed similar sentiments on the forum on more than one occasion. There is absolutely no black magic involved just a different perception based on available information.

We have lost some great people as a result of those feelings, and if I were not required to admin I would have left with them a while ago. That sentiment is actually on record and is variable as stated earlier in this thread.

From my perspective freedom of speech is not the primary factor in this issue it's attitude and lack of mutual respect - which are fundamental issues with respect to participation here! Having said that the negative attitude and disrespect directed at some members past and present has no doubt limited their freedom of speech. I don't have a problem with anyone who holds an alternative view to me on those issues. Clearly the SZ is meeting their requirements and is the type of community they wish to see and everything has and is being done to help them maintain that community. We don't want to break anything - we simply wish to create something that fits our initial objectives. We didn't manage that with the model we defined here and we are willing to accept that, while taking steps to do a better job for those people we have let down as a result. We have no way of knowing if the members who have closed the door here are will or prepared to take part in the new project. The point is that we are trying to give them the same opportunity that has been given to people here should they be willing to build a community that meets their requirements. The people the TZ is aimed at for the most part are no longer active here so how that can impact the SZ is beyond me. There maybe other active members here who share some of our views who would like to be involved in both projects and they should be free to do that.

The one person who made this place possible in the first place as been treated unfairly by some members who he respects and enjoys the company of. The only crime he as committed is to strive to achieve what he originally set out for on behalf of other people. He has always acted in the interests of the members of SZ past and present and more often than not has been stuck in the firing line while Novum and myself have been some what isolated out back. The has had to shoulder the fallout from some of the hardest decisions we as a team have had to make. He has done that not thru choice and not always in total agreement but because that is his responsibility to the community as a whole. Fortunately the three of us are thick skinned enough to take the abuse and insults directed at us and we share the same principles if not the same views. All we want is to create a community that meets our original goals nothing more and nothing less.

The main bone of contention people seem to have is that they believe that DG, Novum and I planed and schemed the creation of the new site. People believing that we are scheming has consistently been laid at our door virtually from day one here. The fact is we have very little communication about management of the site. None of us had a notion to start a new site prior to the Q 'n A that followed my formal resignation to both DG and Novum. They obviously needed to know as they would need someone to perform the tasks I generally tend to. When asked why I was leaving I stated my reasons which as it turns out were shared by the three of us to a greater or lesser extent. As we discussed different ways of resolving the situation it became clear that we could not make those changes here without making changes to the way things are done. If we did that we would be going against our principles while breaching the trust some members may have in us as a team. The only logical solution was to create a new site there is no other option available. It didn't take long to draw that very obvious conclusion! And we brought the new domain while we were talking and started building the site the next day.

I really need to step back from my involvement in any activity regarding this or any other personal site activity, due to an impending change in my life style, which is unavoidable and could potentially prevent me form having much if any available free time. Novum is also in a state of transition in his way of life which also creates major demands on his spare time. As we are required to undertake the heavy lifting we could both do without the responsibility here or elsewhere! The only reason we have taken any of this on is for the benefit of others who we have never met and in all likely hood never will met. We haven't done this for profit or any other form of personal gain on the contrary it has cost all three of us personally in time and money. None of us regret putting our time and energy it to the SZ or the TZ! That's despite some of the negative and totally unwarranted accusations and assumptions stated and held my some members. Fortunately we are all pig headed and thick skinned enough to take a few hits both above and below the belt.

Personally I see no need for us to defend our actions as we have done nothing which requires defending. We have been totally honest and above board with the SZ community. If people doubt that then that really is an issue for them to resolve personally.

The only real change to the SZ community is with the management team. A team which a number of people past and present have made clear aren't trust worthy and who have a hidden agenda. Given those sentiments it's hard to understand the objections to our departure. Financially a number of the community have been generous enough to contribute. Their generosity has met the day to day running costs of the server, which suggests the community can sustain its self financially. The only other loss is two members who are popular and one who many will be glad to see the back of - me being the unpopular one. I wasn't aware that entering a popularity contest was a requirement and quite honestly have no interest in being popular - which I think most members here will be aware of.

I don't detect any large ladies breaking into song any were in the SZ auditorium. I haven't even heard any outsized chicks doing vocal warmups. I don't know if Dubs does closing ceremonies - I think he is more into weddings and birthday gigs and I haven't noticed him donning a frock of late.

thoreau wrote:
As indicated by Novum we did raise issues with the community and discussed them openly (contrary to some claims made here). When we raised those concerns and offered a solution to them we were directly accused of conducting business in private without consulting the community. And this took place in the very thread which was the open discussion on the very topic we were being accused of keeping secret! Lets get real here some people seem to have a rather perverse view of how running a site actually happens in the real world! Until such time that everyone involved has telepathic abilities that are are all seamlessly in sync 365 days of the year that aint going to happen. The process needs to be instigated at some point and then presented to the community. If there is some rational way of achieving this given the current limitations on human communication I would be extremely interested to hear it and it probably deserves a thread all of its own and maybe some patent in place prior to public disclosure.

Exactly not everyone does see eye to eye on every issue and they very well may decide that here is not for them (evidence of that is plain to see here). At which point they can choose to go elsewhere or create an alternative. We are fully aware that opening the doors to an inclusive community has its problems with respect to people of an awkward nature. Why would that mean that we would/should shy away from the problems inherent with such a venture?

I should also point out that during previous encounters where we were accused of poor performance in our duties here the offer was made to provide those members who were concerned with a website and forum, where they could run things as they saw fit. No one stepped forward to take that offer up and I can guarantee you that had they done so a site would have been provided! They just had to provide the domain which was also made clear at the time.

Frog wrote: I certainly wouldn't. I appreciate you setting the site up, and I understand where you're coming from with your post. I would like to see people treated with respect at all times, and to be non-abusive, and I always try to abide by this ethos.

My point really is that I don't believe it's possible to have an 'open door' policy, and expect people to be nice to each other, and have the community moderate itself. It's asking too much; that's why I started the 'fork in the road' thread, because people need to decide what they want from the forum, as all three of these things together are too much to ask for.

I haven't been privy to everything that has occurred, but I do think any criticism of the founders and moderators of the site is unwarranted. I hope things go well for you with your new site. I won't have time to contribute, but I might sign up and post some links if I have the time to write any articles. I'm possibly going to be working on a new project in the new year, so if that happens, I might post links up related to that as well.

oioioi wrote:
As I recall you were personally involved in the discussions presented for debate and if memory serves me correctly you were personally most vocal in them. So much so you actually broke the one sentence barrier on more than one occasion. I also seem to have some memory of you leading the charge and opening new threads to tackle issues at hand. Which is great that demonstrates that you're passionate about the place and were and are actively involved in the community debate.

So the problem I'm having is understanding the problem your having in understanding that issues were out there to be tackled by the community. The community consensus was always observed and adhered to by the admin team when and where a consensus was formed.

The upside to the current situation is that active members of the community such as yourself now have the opportunity to roll your sleeves and take responsibility while you build the community you wish to see. You now have the limelight from where you can perform your magic as apposed to being cloaked in the shadows of a private box in the upper circle. Your free from the tyrannical admin team that has been holding you back. That has to be a positive thing surely?

So how do you propose to help the community and Andy move things forward? Which is actually the primary objective of this thread as well as serving to inform and involve the community.

The creation of the truth-zone is an attempt to establish a revised model which meets the needs of members who would like the style of community we originally aimed for. We respect the fact that members here feel passionate about the SZ community and there are many aspects of it that we are proud of, we would like to see it evolve and mature into a thriving community. It just isn't as we envisioned it and doesn't include all the people we set out to include.[/quote]




and the quote in your signature?....
Grrrr, my head is spinning....time for for me I think

Jane

wake_up_bomb wrote:
Thanks I should say that I wasn't insinuating that you were opposed to our stance and that the majority of people behave in a pleasant manor towards others. Sadly it takes very little effort from a tiny proportions to cast a cloud which sullies the atmosphere.

The three of us came to the same conclusion which is why we have started the new site in an effort to remedy our failings.

Criticism of us as a team isn't an issue and we are quite open to people challenging a view and opinions. The problem comes when the allegations lodge have no substance, and are purely based on personal opinions without even a hint of evidence to support them.

We appreciate that adding yet another site is going to make it harder for people to be regular visitors. We are happy if people treat the new place as a drop in center. If people can find the time to make worth while contributions all the better but there is no obligation. I would be interested to see the results of your next project as and when the become available.

Thanks for your positive input and good luck with your new project.

angelchemuel wrote:



and the quote in your signature?....
Grrrr, my head is spinning....time for for me I think

Jane[/quote]

Not half as much as mine is after reading your post. Please explain where my attitude as effected a relationship?

oioioi wrote:
Concerns were raised as mentioned above. The purpose of building the new site is to offer members that have closed the door on the SZ a place where they may build a community that suits them.

You read the same content as everyone else here so you are aware of how people interact. The point is this is supposed to be a community lead forum and as such the community should be capable of policing itself. That is clearly not happening with respect to attitudes expressed towards some members by a minority of members. The vibe here is not one of inclusiveness and is very much presenting itself as exclusive to a significant number of past and some present members. As one of those members who shares that view I no longer wish to be apart of that vibe it's simply not for me. This isn't a private members club it's intended to be a open forum where people respect the views of other regardless of their views, provided those views are put forward with respect towards the community, while holding mutual respect for other individuals.

We accept that a significant number of members are more than happy with the evolution of the SZ and have no issue with how they want things to progress. The fact is that others would rather see things progress in an alternative way which isn't in keeping with the current trend here. We haven't attempted to form an alternative group with in the SZ to force or impose our views on other, which would only cause a rift between members. We do not want the community here to be damaged as a result of a difference of opinion. We do want to cater for the people who share our vision and who seek to create a community which is more inclusive that the current SZ. The SZ has in the past been far closer to our original concept on more than one occasion but since then has drifted far off the mark. The only option available to us is to open an new site there is no alternative path that wouldn't result in damaging the whole community. We gave our views and provided our input and our thinking was not inline with the wishes and views of the SZ members so we are taking steps to resolve that situation.

Our management style wasn't what people expected and we were accused of acting behind the communities back on multiple occasions, you were among those casting those allegations. Now we have taken steps which allow the community to progress without out supposed meddling people are shouting foul. You see, where we are sitting we are damned if we do something and we are damned is we don't.

The proposal we have made should provide those members who have reservations about the evolution of the SZ a choice in the direction they take, they can either use both sites or devote their time to whichever one suits them. this way we don't cause an internal battle of wills which could potentially damage the whole community. The main bones of contention of the management process are removed from the equation. The community has the opportunity to take full responsibility for how its run and develops. We get the opportunity to try and meet our original remit which we hope will provide an environment that absent members may appreciate and support. There is no guarantee that those members will want to join, support or participate in the TZ so all the risk is on us. That's a risk we are prepared to take knowing that it isn't an easy route. We feel that we let a significant number of members down by failing to achieve the atmosphere here that we had originally aimed for.

What people seem to be failing to understand is that we do not intend to enter a forum war period. Everything we have done has been done to avoid causing major upheaval. If people can't see that we have not attempted to damage the SZ then there really isn't anything we can do about that. We have explained the what and whys and put everything on the table and yet still people continue to chastise us for trying to met our original goals while continuing to met our obligations here.

It should be pretty obvious that whatever direction we move in we are going to be seen as the enemy. We have been accused of being the enemy within constantly since the get go, and we will now be seen as the enemy at the gate. When the reality is we have only ever tried to deliver a platform for people to hang out in where they feel at home. Thankless and Task spring to mind.

If you have the perfect solution which meets the requirements of all concerned feel free to share it - I for one would be interested in hearing it.

feather wrote:
That's how we hoped people would see it but maybe we were over optimistic. Thanks for delivering a reasoned and sensible over view.
andyh wrote:
And another voice of reason.

Hat tip for stepping up to the plate Andy and for trying to keep this thread on track.

I forgot to reply to an earlier post of yours re backups - the system has a built in back up system which is scheduled to run a full backup everyday. Currently that results in approximately 100Mb compressed with a retention of the previous two backups. The data center also holds a disaster recover backup daily off site which includes the full cpanel account.

i did just type a page of text but it got lost in 3g land....

i'll sum it up quickly.

no hard feelings frog, you are as entitled to an opinion as anyone else. i disagree with a lot of what you have just posted and also agree with a lot of it. i can understand that you may feel a tad aggrieved about the place and some of us at the moment, it certainly comes across in your posts....

i for one would like to wish you, dg and frog all the best in your new venture, there are certainly no hard feelings on my part.

now again, to everyone else. there is no point continuing with the questions, speculations and distractions. the situation is clear as is what we need to do. so let them go in peace and get on with showing the boys that the sz aint quite as broke as they think.

Frog wrote:
Even easier
Ta for the info!

dubmeup wrote:
Nice post
Hopefully now that everyones had a good vent we can get on with what we want to get on with

andyh wrote:
I should also pint out that there is a commercial version of the backup utility which offers more control of the backups and the ability to ftp the file to an off site location. Of course you can add your own script to automate that from cron in cpanel. There is no pressure on you to arrange any thing short term I can handle the regular maintenance stuff for now.

As for docs there is loads of information available on the web. You really would need someone with some knowledge of Joomla and php, css, html, mysql and the other associated web tech like java. Not deep knowledge but a good basic understanding of those will help. I can provide some starter stuff when I get a chance to track down links. You could also migrate away from joomla to a dedicated forum if you wanted to drop the site elements.

php, java and mysql I'm fine with

Joomla I can learn about I suppose, mind you I'm not planning on making big changes anyway.
I would say of primary importance is figuring out how to add a facepalm icon to chat

If I can add cron scripts then I'm sorted for backups.

dubmeup wrote:
Life's a bitch sometimes unfortunately for everyone I didn't suffer the same fate with my 3G connection.

Well if that's the impression you got from my post I must have failed to convey my thoughts tin the tone that I intended. Hopefully others will have read it and interpreted my mood and tone as it was intended. I'm not aggrieved in the slightest I don't have any issues with the vast majority of people here. The general vibe is just not for me in the same way it was obviously not to the liking of others who exited before me. It really is that simple!

There are no hard feelings on our part and we would also like to see the SZ continue to evolve.

We never considered the SZ to be broken! The SZ just hasn't generated the vibe we had set out to create - although we got pretty damned close a couple of times.

Jeez. I'm away for few days and all hell breaks loose in here. I wish it'll be ok soon.. I don't want this forum to go down the drain.

Hexhammer wrote:

Don't worry it won't