Been thinking a lot about the Interchange the last few days. And, not because I don't have better things to do. Was wondering in general how the majority of our participants who visit regularly, make good contributions, leave their real names and e-mail addresses, in short follow the rules, feel about how the Interchange is going.

The Interchange really shines when people write in asking for help or advice on how to do things or where to find something. It also does well IMHO in discussions on historical and technical matters. Where it sometimes doesn't do so well is when people use it covertly, or overtly, to take shots at other organizations, groups or individuals. Fortunately this doesn't happen very often, but it seems to be happening more lately and not sure what to do, if anything, to stop it.

I think a person posting under their real name is much more careful about obeying the rules and considering what they say than a person using a screen name or posting anonymously. I don't always enforce the real name rule because we have screen names who make legitimate contributions, and some people who generally do follow the rules don't always remember. They might just use their first name or forget to include their e-mail address.

The general open board format works such that anybody can come in and say what they want, and if something bad gets posted it doesn't get removed until one of the moderators (me or Erik, and soon Brian) sees it or is told about it. This is the easiest, most convenient way to do it, as you can read something on the board, and if you feel like making a response, you just do it right then and there. This is again convenient for the users, but also for the moderators who don't have to constantly watch the board (this will become clearer in a second) but also the highest risk.

A second option, which is recommended by the person who wrote the software is to truly "moderate" the board by reviewing every post that's made. This means your post doesn't get online until a moderator reads it, and, obviously, lots of extra work for the moderators.

Another option is to require users, at least the ones who want to make posts, to register. This means anybody can visit and read the board, but to make a post you have to be a registered user, like on the Timetable. People could still make the spurious anonymous post or attack, but at least they have to go to the trouble of registering and creating a new identity each time they do.

So, if offered the following choices which would you prefer?

A. Keep the Interchange going as is with no changes

B. Keep going as is except immediately pull all posts that don't use complete real names and leave an e-mail address (perhaps people could use non-offensive screen names and omit their e-mail address if they create a valid user profile first)

C. Require all users to register, at least if they want to make a post. Everybody could still read the board, but if you want to post you have to register with a real name and valid e-mail address.

D. All posts are reviewed before being posted online (if we do this any volunteers for board moderator job?).

All comments and suggestions are welcome. Feel free to e-mail me off line if you have any thoughts or concerns.

Thanks.



Railway Preservation News
hkading@rypn.org

Hume,

I am just thankful to have the "Interchange" available. I find many of the posts useful and enlightening. I always look forward to finding out what people are working on and interested in.

I understand your concerns. I also realize this is a labor of love for you guys and I would hate for it to become a chore. Of the 4 options you present, I think item C (make people register) would best strike the balance between providing a forum, making people responsible for their posts, and keeping the "Interchange" from becoming more of a burden than it probably already is.

Sincerely,
Glenn Christensen

christenseng@altavista.com

> Option "C" certainly works for me. I believe that is is almost essential to insure that rypn doesn't degenerate into a free for all like some boards have. I suppose that having a really useful site like rypn is a liability in that when a board becomes popular, it attracts all sorts of folks, some of whom have little positive to offer.
J.David (Conrad)

jdconrad@snet.net

I like option C as well. It imposes a certain self-selection on the community, and gives the moderators an opportunity to discuss any issues with the posters back-channel instead of simply pulling posts or scolding in public, neither of which are very fun to do.



eledbetter@rypn.org

I personally feel that choice "C" is the correct venue also. I place no faith whatsoever in messages that the author is unwilling to sign with his name. If you are ashamed of or embarassed by what you have written, it is better left unsaid.


keith.h.taylor@att.net

"C" is certainly viable, but for ease, I see nothing wrong with "A" as well. Many of us are grateful for what you have been doing, and hate to see you go to anymore trouble. Whatever the case, keep up the good work, and thanks many times over.

stealthnfo@aol.com

Hume:

First of all, I think that INTERCHANGE is pretty great as it is. There are perhaps about .01% of the posts that have been offensive, and with a ratio like that, I can live with it. So I would say to keep option A.

IF a change has to be made, how about an option not presented? People could still use a "screen name" but MUST include an E-Mail address.

I am afraid if you go to an option C (registration), you will lose a lot of people. Some people just wouldn't bother. In the long run, I think it would be a mistake.

Les Beckman (Hoosier Valley Railroad Museum)


midlandblb@cs.com

> Hume:

> First of all, I think that INTERCHANGE is
> pretty great as it is. There are perhaps
> about .01% of the posts that have been
> offensive, and with a ratio like that, I can
> live with it. So I would say to keep option
> A.

> IF a change has to be made, how about an
> option not presented? People could still use
> a "screen name" but MUST include
> an E-Mail address.

> I am afraid if you go to an option C
> (registration), you will lose a lot of
> people. Some people just wouldn't bother. In
> the long run, I think it would be a mistake.

> Les Beckman (Hoosier Valley Railroad Museum)

*Sorry for including the photos of ON 2-8-0 #5 again!

midlandblb@cs.com

Option A or B, I don't see where there is a problem unless you are pulling dozens of bad ones before we see them.

Tom Gears

Hume,

Way back in the day when I had time for Ahead of the Torch, I pondered a message board, but feared dealing with the issues you have raised.

Interchange is a relatively well behaved board, I think partly due to the quality of content that www.rypn.org puts out.

The Internet is growing up. The anonymous frontier is no longer as endearing as it used to be. In fact, I belong to 20+ railroad mailing lists via Yahoo Groups, all of which require me to have a valid e-mail address.

I think Interchange should go to full registration with a password system that requires a valid e-mail to get you initial confirmation.

As for guys that want/need pseudonyms, go for it. Trainorders, Hotmail, Home, Yahoo and so many other offer free e-mails. Set up one with your pseudonym, use it for your choo choo posts and be done with it.

RYPN is one of my few every-day stops on the Internet, and I will stay no matter what is decided.

God bless,

Rob Davis


inlinebob@aol.com

RYPN probably has the least amount of potentially inflammatory postings for any list with similar membership levels and submittals. Whatever changes you decide on, make it easy on yourself, and thanks to all for making this list very informative and enlightening.

KES

> Been thinking a lot about the Interchange
> the last few days. And, not because I don't
> have better things to do. Was wondering in
> general how the majority of our participants
> who visit regularly, make good
> contributions, leave their real names and
> e-mail addresses, in short follow the rules,
> feel about how the Interchange is going.

> The Interchange really shines when people
> write in asking for help or advice on how to
> do things or where to find something. It
> also does well IMHO in discussions on
> historical and technical matters. Where it
> sometimes doesn't do so well is when people
> use it covertly, or overtly, to take shots
> at other organizations, groups or
> individuals. Fortunately this doesn't happen
> very often, but it seems to be happening
> more lately and not sure what to do, if
> anything, to stop it.

> I think a person posting under their real
> name is much more careful about obeying the
> rules and considering what they say than a
> person using a screen name or posting
> anonymously. I don't always enforce the real
> name rule because we have screen names who
> make legitimate contributions, and some
> people who generally do follow the rules
> don't always remember. They might just use
> their first name or forget to include their
> e-mail address.

> The general open board format works such
> that anybody can come in and say what they
> want, and if something bad gets posted it
> doesn't get removed until one of the
> moderators (me or Erik, and soon Brian) sees
> it or is told about it. This is the easiest,
> most convenient way to do it, as you can
> read something on the board, and if you feel
> like making a response, you just do it right
> then and there. This is again convenient for
> the users, but also for the moderators who
> don't have to constantly watch the board
> (this will become clearer in a second) but
> also the highest risk.

> A second option, which is recommended by the
> person who wrote the software is to truly
> "moderate" the board by reviewing
> every post that's made. This means your post
> doesn't get online until a moderator reads
> it, and, obviously, lots of extra work for
> the moderators.

> Another option is to require users, at least
> the ones who want to make posts, to
> register. This means anybody can visit and
> read the board, but to make a post you have
> to be a registered user, like on the
> Timetable. People could still make the
> spurious anonymous post or attack, but at
> least they have to go to the trouble of
> registering and creating a new identity each
> time they do.

> So, if offered the following choices which
> would you prefer?

> A. Keep the Interchange going as is with no
> changes

> B. Keep going as is except immediately pull
> all posts that don't use complete real names
> and leave an e-mail address (perhaps people
> could use non-offensive screen names and
> omit their e-mail address if they create a
> valid user profile first)

> C. Require all users to register, at least
> if they want to make a post. Everybody could
> still read the board, but if you want to
> post you have to register with a real name
> and valid e-mail address.

> D. All posts are reviewed before being
> posted online (if we do this any volunteers
> for board moderator job?).

> All comments and suggestions are welcome.
> Feel free to e-mail me off line if you have
> any thoughts or concerns.

> Thanks.


rrm@texas.net

Hume, I also agree with choice "C". It will not add hardly any time to the posting process, and we can also see who is writing the post.

Brian


bhebert@rypn.org

Hume and all you guys, I don't see a real problem here. Almost all of you are so well behaved that I think putting any restrictions on at this time would just be a real burden to the caretakers of this board.Let's not do anything rash, I think there is time to contemplate before taking action. Everybody, at some time, is going to have a pet beef with some organization. I have yet to see it degenerate into massive petty squabbling on this board. I say leave well enough alone for now and take action with a very light hand. To the rest of us who post, lets do Hume and the guys a favor and police ourselves so they don't have to waste their time having to babysit us.And as for that, I sign this:
Angie Morefield
Ladypardus@cs.com
If you say it, own it!


Ladypardus@cs.com

My vote is "B".

Richard Wilkens

richard.s.wilkens@boeing.com

While RyPN has stayed relatively clear on flack, flame wars, and the other bad stuff we see on some boards, requiring people to register might be the most sane and professional option.

There are probably some disadvantages to that, but it will help keep the board free of libel. I also think all of us have a right to know exactly who we are talking to.

This is a great place to talk and swap information and option C might help keep it that way.

--Malcolm



grinnellglacier@yahoo.com