Flatlander
Grandmaster
I'm really not sure where to put this, but this seems like as good of a place as any....
First off, let me thank all MT staff for the site. I've been here for a couple of weeks now. I have been through tons of historical threads, trying to catch a glimpse of the various personalities and ideas that have been, and are still here. My only regret to this point is that I didn't find this place sooner, but that's fine. I'm here now.
It takes quite a while to get used to this place, the rules, where things should go, what is polite and impolite, appropriate behaviours, who does what, etc. It takes a lot of research, actually. Unfortunately, most of the people that have started posting since I began here do not take the time to do this. If you're reading this now, go do it. It's very worthwhile, and can save a lot of questions, and hurt feelings.
Recently, I have spent copious amounts of time in the "horrors" forum. I ended up linking through to it from another thread which was moved there. Some of those threads are pretty interesting. I particularly enjoyed Matt Stone vs. Rich Parsons. This is the thread that really taught me the rules of engagement here. I particularly liked the ending. Good job Seig.
My analysis, for what it's worth has brought me to this conclusion, previously stated by many. Most of the people here have a major issue with frauds. As well, many have very differing opinions of who is and who is not a fraud. My question is, how can we go about addressing this issue?
What about a "front porch " or "foyer" to which the newbies are restricted? Something members could go out into to see what's up. A place where you would need to "prove yourself" before gaining admittance to the "rest of the house"? Perhaps with some mandatory reading. (I reccommend Matt Stone vs. Rich Parsons!) Just an idea.
Thank you for your attention.
Dan
First off, let me thank all MT staff for the site. I've been here for a couple of weeks now. I have been through tons of historical threads, trying to catch a glimpse of the various personalities and ideas that have been, and are still here. My only regret to this point is that I didn't find this place sooner, but that's fine. I'm here now.
It takes quite a while to get used to this place, the rules, where things should go, what is polite and impolite, appropriate behaviours, who does what, etc. It takes a lot of research, actually. Unfortunately, most of the people that have started posting since I began here do not take the time to do this. If you're reading this now, go do it. It's very worthwhile, and can save a lot of questions, and hurt feelings.
Recently, I have spent copious amounts of time in the "horrors" forum. I ended up linking through to it from another thread which was moved there. Some of those threads are pretty interesting. I particularly enjoyed Matt Stone vs. Rich Parsons. This is the thread that really taught me the rules of engagement here. I particularly liked the ending. Good job Seig.
My analysis, for what it's worth has brought me to this conclusion, previously stated by many. Most of the people here have a major issue with frauds. As well, many have very differing opinions of who is and who is not a fraud. My question is, how can we go about addressing this issue?
Mr. Rustaz, I'm wondering where you're at with this. I think if this board was able to evolve into the kind of place wherein the people who come here can be reasonably sure that everyone was credible, there would be more positive, less negative discussion. More capability for growth.
What about a "front porch " or "foyer" to which the newbies are restricted? Something members could go out into to see what's up. A place where you would need to "prove yourself" before gaining admittance to the "rest of the house"? Perhaps with some mandatory reading. (I reccommend Matt Stone vs. Rich Parsons!) Just an idea.
Thank you for your attention.
Dan
