Let me ask this....

[aron]

Is there any reason why the forum shouldn't be readable by only the members?

Just wondering??

[The Tone God]

Is there any reason why the forum shouldn't be readable by only the members?

Just wondering??

I belive the original thinking was that it would prevent anonymous trolls and having information stolen by companies. I belive my personal stance when the forum changed and this topic came up was the reading of the forum should be open to guests since someone could use a anonymous email address to read the forum but posting should still be availble only to members.

I belive that option does exsist within phpBB.

Andrew

[MartyMart]

I dont see that as a big problem, join, then "join in"  but it will prevent new people from "browsing" for a few weeks, just as I did ! ?

Marty.

[Mark Hammer]

You say "Only the members" like there is some exclusiveness involved.  To the best of my knowledge, there are no criteria for "membership" other than desiring it.  In which case, what exactly would membership filter out?

Even long-time deserving members have had bouts of petulance now and then, so it's not as if one could defend against flame wars by restricting membership.  Could it prevent others from using "our R&D"?  Nah.  I'm pretty confident that most people/companies who stand the remotest chance of making some money from new ideas have large teams of people way ahead of us.  Even if a technical idea, a component value, or a schematic never showed up hear again, such companies stand to make far more money off of knowing what features we like than from knowing how we *made* those features.

I think the majority of "behavioural problems" with people here stem from an ever-expanding and ever-diversifying community.  That increases the likelihood of people misunderstanding each other and stepping on toes.  It's a bit like a huge immigrant community.  It increases the opportunities for the same questions to be asked over and over (here's a Christmas project for the terminally bored:  go through the archives and count up the number of times "What's the best fuzz?" has been asked, per year, since the inception of the forum), and for soem people to be bored or frustrated.

Does that mean the answer to such problems lie in restricting the number of members/users?  Nah.  The whole point is to spread the DIY gospel and provide a huge resource to each other.  Stick me, Ton, Mike, Steve, RG, Aron, Jack, Doug, Joe, Tim, Tom, the ROG people and Francisco in a room on our own and we'd run out of stuff to say pretty soon after and the innovation stream would dry up faster than you'd think.  Very often it is the naive questions that cause people to rethink things, or even just restate them in a way that helps stuff to make sense to them.  Happens in science all the time.

Nope, I think the best hope for the vitality cameraderie of this site is to focus as tightly and sharply as possible, on pedals, mods, and learning how stuff works.  If it's about one thing and one thing only (more or less), it will draw out the professionalism and hunger for information in everyone.  The moment it veers off into everything for everybody, it'll fall apart.  Even though I've posted there, I *still* have some misgivings about the wisdom of having an OT forum.  If you look at the open forum and OT forum at Ampage, there are people who post there and simply never post anywhere else.

When he established "The Well" on-line community in the San Francisco area, way back at the start of all this, Stewart Brand ( http://www.well.com/user/sbb/ ) insisted that people use their actual names, because he felt that misbehaviour would be more likely to occur in electronic environments when there was no accountability.  As much fun as it is to use humorous handles, it is the facelessness of on-line forums that often makes it possible for people to behave to each in ways they would not think of doing in their everyday face-to-face lives.  I'm not advocating a draconian measure that says you MUST use your full name when posting or lurking here.  But, I *will* suggest that stronger guarantees of good behaviour can be offered if more people do so.  I can be as big an ass as anyone else if I'm anonymous, but if my name is there for all to see, then there is a public record of my behaviour and I tend to act a little more responsibly.

[RDV]

Familiarity breeds contempt. :evil:

Unfortunately. :cry:

I however, love almost everybody!

RDV

[Gilles C]

I don't think it would be a solution, and it could even make things worst for you.

One day, you could have to say somebody that he is not welcome anymore as a member. Not always easy to decide when it's time to do that.

Gilles C.

Btw, Thanks for the EDIT function. I had to use it again to correct a few words...

[brian wenz]

Hello Hello--
     Thanks for posting this, Aron.  I didn't see how  "That Thread" played out [wish that I had...]  but since Doug  has apparently left the forum there has been an air of  "something's not quite right around here".  
I don't know if the cure would be worse then the problem but I don't see anything wrong with your  idea.   Since I don't know if any one person [or, "type" of person]  is really to blame, it's dificult to comment on a solution.   No matter how  tall the walls are there's always gonna be somebody that gets over them.
Brian.

[lightningfingers]

it would stop anonymous browsers from stealing ideas i suppose, but it would stop people from lurking and searching archives before they post to see how the forum works...people who have lurked rather than just dived right in generally know not to ask for ZVEX schematics, etc.

[David]

Is there any reason why the forum shouldn't be readable by only the members?

Just wondering??

Aron:

Please don't change anything in the operation of the forum.  There is nothing you or anyone else could have reasonably done to prevent the events caused or exacerbated by the infamous "?" thread.  Written language is only so effective a means of communication.  When you think about it, sometimes it's a miracle that it works at all.  Doug may be back, he may not.  It will be a great, keenly-felt loss if he does not come back, but I have to believe that there was more than just a discussion thread to produce such a reaction.

[troubledtom]

whatever you think is best, aron.
  i left ampage because of the flames and bullshit. i like the way you and
peter run the ship. i will gladly play be the rules per say.
           good health, :wink:
                 - tom pollock

[puretube]

...what features we like than from knowing how we *made* those features...

To find out which features are being favoured lately,
I (actively) participate/browse in the HC FX forum, and check around in our local and the celebrities musicians scene...

How to make/do those features: well, some people here may have noticed, that I don`t ask too much technical questions here...

Stick me, Ton, Mike, Steve, RG, Aron, Jack, Doug, Joe, Tim, Tom, the ROG people and Francisco in a room on our own and we'd run out of stuff to say pretty soon after and the innovation stream would dry up faster than you'd think.

I`d love to meet Mr. Vex in that room, too... (and Mrs. Ebneter);
don`t think we`d run out of stuff,
but whatever would evolve out of that, would probably be the finest stuff concerning analog stompbox/sound/synthesis/mojo/synergy,
which however would be:
a) not commercially realizable,
b) not at all DIY-able,
c) beyond the current popular/requested features
d) never-ending...
e) in turn extremely tweakable, thus requireing an extra forum...


[here`s hoping, the edit button survives till tomorrow]

[Paul Perry (Frostwave)]

I have never joined a forum unless i could read it first. Why would I?? Why would anyone?? there are enough forums around without having to jump thru hoops.

[RedHouse]

Yep, read-only to non members, then, part of the membership agreement should be...to be cool and abide. If one doesn't, ...boot 'em!

[brett]

Like some other "unsettled" creative types of people, I have an aversion to rules and regulations.  
What initially, and continues to impress me, about the forum is that it is;
a model of free speech and diversity,
a "classless" society (noobs are welcome, etc.),  
a place of personal development ("learning"), and
good natured and fun ("polite").

To have a membership system might impact on some of these, so I'm a little concerned with the concept.

[Regan]

Aron,
First of all, I must say that you and Peter do an excellent job, and the forum is a great environment, and I can't imagine how it can be improved without it being a full time job for somebody.
I don't think you can keep pros from benefiting from the info, there is too much grey area there- what is cosidered a pro etc.
I wouldn't mind seeing a  forum that we have to give a real name register etc. I can't see how that would be a problem unless somebody has something to hide.
I was really choked by the Kiki troll in the thread Doug walked out on, I don't think posting like that should be allowed and I think whomever it is should be banned. If you can't say it with the name you go by regularly, you shouldn't say it. Its not like anybody is going to come after you with a bat or anything. I think the ideal would be a registry with a real name, and maybe  a reminder at the top of the page to check the FAQ?
Regan

[troubledtom]

I have never joined a forum unless i could read it first. Why would I?? Why would anyone?? there are enough forums around without having to jump thru hoops.

that's true, point taken, frostman
   - tom

[puretube]

http://diystompboxes.com/sboxforum/viewtopic.php?p=47&highlight=#47

I`d stick with my statement in that (old) thread...

(seen that the "?" thread was an argument amongst longterm members with just a minor interference by an "on-jumper", who very probably is a very well-respected "oldie" here in his "other life").

[aron]

Here's my thought, if the forum required membership and people had to "try" to use their real names, I think it might be a better place.

New people will not remember that there was a time when we called each other by our real names more often than not.

I'm old fashioned but calling someone "Mark" is much better than calling hime diode21  (unless that's his/her real name).

I had another thought too. What if all the info was public, but not right away? If people were able to see that cool things were happening, but that they would not be able to read the most current 2 months or so without joining, they would probably want to sign up and contribute.

These are just ideas I am having.

[puretube]

my name is Anthonie Theodoor - friends (and relatives) call me "Ton" - I`m old fashioned (~late 60`s, early 70`s...), too.
(my last name can be read on my homepage).

Though I`m also interested in modern solidstate stuff,
I don`t mind being addressed as: "Puretube" in the future...


(joking: wonder who`ll turn out to be: MarkII ?)

p.s.: no need for the edit button in this post.

[bioroids]

Hi!

On some forums the administrator has to aprove each post for it to apear on the board, maybe this could be done on new members?

It has the drawback of requiring Aron or Peter checking every new message... to much work and probably not a good idea

By the way I dont mind using my real name and don't think anybody can say it's a heavy restriction, but I'm not sure if it would help prevent trolling

Good luck to everyone, the forum is still a great place

Regards

Miguel Canel