Since it seems to be going ignored elsewhere....

Intmon:

It costs nothing to add a forum..... Can we have one called AO Professionals?

It should be restricted to the following format:-

1: A minimum of 300 posts in security related forums. (negotiable)
2. A minimum of 750 positive antipoints (negotiable)
3. Nominated by poll of existing members with an 80% or better acceptance rate.
4. Can be subsequently denied access after acceptance by poll with a 55% or better denial rate.
5. Non-security related threads are simply deleted by Mods.

Can we make a place here that people who are _actually_ interested in security related issues that is a "haven" away from the idiots we seem to get over in Addicts. If an individual can regain access to Addicts in a week or so simply based on a bs post count it means he an "addict" not that he has anything useful or important to contribute.

Let's make somewhere here that people _aspire_ to as opposed to somewhere that people can get to by default that they can subsequently screw up by their juvenile antics....

Course, I'm going to get told to "whistle Dixie" I'm sure...... But you'd improve the quality of your members no end because those that want to get there will get there, those that can't/won't/want to play "silly buggers" will know that they will never be able to mess with that forum. It should also improve the quality of the other forums in so far as those that do "aspire" to the forum will help more, give better answers and be less of an idiot when s/he is in a shitty mood....

Think about it..... Corporately, it might do well to consider it too.

Quote:

---

3. Nominated by poll of existing members with an 80% or better acceptance rate.
4. Can be subsequently denied access after acceptance by poll with a 55% or better denial rate.
5. Non-security related threads are simply deleted by Mods.

---

I could have sworn I had asked this before but ... I must be losing it.

Point 3: how many existing members would qualify? Do you mean AO membership or membership of the forum? If it's the forum, how do we get those first few in? (chicken and egg concept :D)

Point 4: what factors would exist for denial? As what should people be aware of that might get them kicked out?

Point 5: rather than deleting them, any objection to posts being moved elsewhere?

This seems more like HTRegz suggestion than the other one. To put it simply for those of us who've gotten comfused as to what we're reading:

Two forums at the Addicts level. One general (with new requirements for achieving it) and a seperate one that is security only (with requirements as above?) Do you want a time consideration (might help eliminate trolls?) or rather not so that members that are good, even if new, gain access?

I'm 100% in favour of this idea !!

It might finaly serve the pupous addicts was supposed to serve.

And I do think that most of the members that quallify for the above are of more "use" to Jupmedia and their clients (the banner people) then 90% of the n00bs and all the trolls combined..

I also like MsM's additions..

I have some remarks (who would've thought...):

I think it'd be a bad business decision: all the "professional" members would go to that new forum, taking their interesting discussions with them. Those threads wouldn't show up on the front page... a new member would come to AntiOnline and not see those discussions.

A new member would come to AntiOnline, take a look around and only see "normal" discussions (tech-support, questions that have been asked a gazillion times already,... since all the "good" stuff would be hidden). The members that would stay are the ones you'd like to avoid, and the members that would immediately leave are the ones you'd like to have in AO Professionals.
By the time the "needed" members find out that there is a professional forum, they'd already have left...

A "solution" would be to make the threads viewable to all members, but they wouldn't be able to reply to them. But that'd only lead to frustration, imo :)

It's a nice solution for the existing members, but not that nice for new ones.

I think a lot of this has started when we got the option to select what we see on the front page. I have mine set up to show everything (because I have to), but you could set up yours to only show tech-forums...
The kind of questions that you'd like to see in that new forum are going to be asked anyways, regardless of whether you have the "right" forum to put them in or not. If you set up your front page to not show GCC, Cosmos, Site Suggestions,..., wouldn't that take care of a lot of your problems?

Ms. M:

Quote:

---

I could have sworn I had asked this before but ... I must be losing it.

---

Maybe it's an issue with the tense you are writing in..... ;) <ducking and weaving>

Quote:

---

Point 3: how many existing members would qualify? Do you mean AO membership or membership of the forum? If it's the forum, how do we get those first few in? (chicken and egg concept )

---

You and Neg can decide an initial core of let's say 20 people who currently have Custom Title privilege. I say that because from what I see of those with them they tend not to be the people I am trying to "avoid" allowing in there. If we make any mistakes we can throw them back out again in short order...... {Gore: Take note.... ;)... Joke.... Sit!!!!!}

Quote:

---

Point 4: what factors would exist for denial? As what should people be aware of that might get them kicked out?

---

Persistent flaming, trolling, personally attacking other members etc. The intent of the forum is one where _professional_ people discuss issues, problems etc. in a _professional_ manner. An individual's invitation to join the forum should indicate that and that unprofessionalism is frowned upon. When you start pissing off the other members with unprofessional behaviour then anyone can place a poll requesting opinion as to banning from the forum. If, in a reasonable amount of time, (let's say 48 hours), 55% or greater favor banning from the forum then they are banned. Persistent polls from the same user requesting the banning of others would also be grounds for banning should the other members agree, (let's face it - it's not professional behaviour).

Quote:

---

Point 5: rather than deleting them, any objection to posts being moved elsewhere?

---

None whatsoever. But moving an apparently random post somewhere else might be a little silly. Move a thread that is started with a non security post, ok.... Move an individual post that is a response in a thread probably wouldn't work.

I have actually been rethinking the entry "qualifications" and am wondering if they are not too harsh in some ways. I can think of a couple of people right now that don't come close to the "qualifications" that I could quite happily converse with in a more "controlled" environment. In some ways the level of knowledge isn't that important either, in fact if everyone has a similar level of knowledge then it may be counter-productive insofar as it may go "stale" rather quickly. So maybe it should be opened up a little more to "diversify" the community on a knowledge level, (I know I forget things or benefit from going back and looking up details of things when answering questions quite often, I can't imagine I'm the only one that benefits from it in the same manner).

If it could be seen somewhere, somehow then a better judge than how many AP's would be no more than x% negative AP's since there are plently here with only a few AP's but they are almost entirely positive AP's which is a good sign and those negs they got often stemmed from their very first post because it was in the wrong forum or something equally "iffy".

Really there _should_ be no need for "policing". The intent is to create an "adults" only forum and, as such, issues shouldn't arise in there - they can be taken up in GCC or wherever. But should the need arise the forum members themselves need to have the "teeth" to say - "we don't want you here any more".

Lastly, there clearly has to be room for one kind of non-security thread and that would have to be discussion of potential nominees so someone can say "I've noticed Mr. X. He's cool, he has good questions/answers, what do you think". Discussion of potential bannings shouldn't be necessary and would only cause problems - it should be a no brainer to decide that someone's behaviour is becoming contrary to the intent of the forum.

Thoughts?

[Edit]

Quote:

---

who would've thought...):

---

Yeah, who woulda..... <LOL>

But I have rethought some of the initial things..... More acceptable?

Quote:

---

Those threads wouldn't show up on the front page... a new member would come to AntiOnline and not see those discussions.

---

Addicts survived...... Why do you think that forum members would suddenly stop answering questions in the other forums..... Methinks you have no faith in you membership if you think we would all run and hide in our "little haven".....

Read only view of the discussions is highly questionable..... Addicts isn't read only..... The forum I proposed is something people would "aspire" to gaining entry to rather than just an issue of waiting for the sun to go up and down enough times while you post in GCC.

[/Edit]

Ok, I can agree with both sides of this debate (finially one that is not an arguement). So let me try to combine the two sides and find a compatable compromise for both Negatives (+ MsM) and Tigers side.

What if we were to develope a spotlight forum. By that I mean a forum that purposely selects a topic and the different members of the forum (chosen and picked as per the previous suggestions) respond with in that subject matter. There could be multiple on going discussion on various topics, picking the best brains we have on the site.

When the discussion was deemed to be complete (by who and how??/) the whole thread could be edited if nessessary and then moved into the general forums to what ever catagory it best fits.

That way, you would have an elitist forum that covers the areas that some member want and JupMed has premium content on the main page also. New members would see the results and could/would aspire to gain admittence to that select few.

The finished thread could even be opened up for general comments once the spotlight crew were done with it.

The members of this special forum could vote on what posts contribute the most to the thread and take out the possible junk or misinformed posts before it was presented to the general membership.

Jupiter Media would have very professional discussions they could high light on their enterprise web sites and also increase their revenue.

And we could turn some of this argueing and bitching into something very productive. A win/win solution looking for a few great people to implement.

Very similar to what Pedro does with AO. It may not be a bad idea. Heck, threads wouldn't necessarily have to be complete. The spotlight forum could be almost like a Preview forum. A mod could (based on suggestions from members) highlight threads and other users could see it (but not reply -- similar to the Roll Call). Then if they want to start a thread in the lower sections, that could be done with a reference (link) to the Preview thread.

That would certainly add to the overall forum and perhaps show to new members what the expectation is and what they should strive for.

Hey Hey,

I think that the original suggestion is exactly that this site needs.... We can have serious discussions in Addicts because you get a bunch of post whoring seniors who turn the thread into a joke... we can't have a serious discussion anywhere else because people get pissed off that we're releasing "harmful information to skiddies".... Why not just create the forum.... Not everyone can see Addicts... so why not have another one... with different criteria... There will still be valid information on the main pages.. There is now.. why would that change... it just gives some of us a place to discuss more serious things and have discussions. If you care and want to keep your members happy... then this is the thing to do. Leave things the way they are and you'll very quickly see several of the regularly posting seniors leave.. then you'll definatley be left with a tech support forum... If people bitch and whine about not having access too bad... to hell with them....

I will say, however, that I disagree with the initial group coming out of people with custom titles.... I don't think that's entirely right.

Anyways,

Peace,
HT

[Edit]
If you have a problem with that.. then just create a new forum and make Tiger Shark the mod.... he can just delete the posts of everyone who isn't welcome there... and ban people who post slightly off topic.. I could live with that.
[/Edit]

I had a feeling there was a reason we keep old Mox around rather than just putting him out to pasture but I could never quite put my finger on it....... ;)

Nice idea, Mox...... It should work nicely and benefit everyone.....

Does AO have the technicaly functionality for this?

Quote:

---

Does AO have the technicaly functionality for this?

---

Right now I don't know. Mnstrgrl I think has been busy on another site so when she returns to our little world we can ask her then. For now, if we keep it simple I don't see any reason why not.

Well, I'm all for it too, and I made a similar suggestions...um....somewhere...it's kinda gotten lost in the multiple same-topic threads lately. ;)

For me, I'd use such a forum for more sensitive questions. For instance, if I'm working on a major network vunlerability I've discovered and want to share all the specifics so the other seniors know better how to help me, I'd like to discuss it in that kind of forum as opposed to spilling everything out for the whole world to see (does that make any sense?).

Especially with threads like my FSMO one currently in Addicts, there's such a huge amount of generally confusing technical detail (to me anyway) that I don't want the thread open to a bunch of newbies who'll only further confuse me (not too terribly hard to do). In Addicts, I'm guaranteed a knowledgable answer with every post.

Yes, valuable information won't disappear because interesting stuff is still asked/discussed in the other forums. I think the discussions held in the new forum will be more things that wouldn't be discussed otherwise.

Quote:

---

For me, I'd use such a forum for more sensitive questions. For instance, if I'm working on a major network vunlerability I've discovered and want to share all the specifics so the other seniors know better how to help me, I'd like to discuss it in that kind of forum as opposed to spilling everything out for the whole world to see (does that make any sense?).

---

But there could be an option (maybe a check box that the thread creator could check) which would say prevent it from being put into the Preview forum. That way sensitive discussions could remain where they area while other discussions might be opened up.

HT:

Quote:

---

I will say, however, that I disagree with the initial group coming out of people with custom titles.... I don't think that's entirely right.

---

I just kinda threw that out there. If you don't start with some kind of criteria and ask Ms. M and Neg to pick out of the entire AO community then you place a bit more "pressure" on them than I think they deserve. Someone will only start bitching as to why they didn't get picked or why so-and-so was picked. It is a quick way to limit Ms. M. and Neg's "options" to a few who have already displayed some sense of loyalty or whatever to AO.

I'm open to any alternatives though.....

Angelic:

Quote:

---

For me, I'd use such a forum for more sensitive questions.

---

While the intent of the forum is not to become a "secretive little place where we hide the fethid underbelly of the internet" it would be a good place for initial discussion and assistance. If the vulnerability proves to be real and after a fix is available then the discussion could be opened so that others could see it, (though not reply). It could work quite well the other way too. Say there is a discussion of interest in M$ Security Discussions that, as they all too often do, gets derailed or taken off topic then a "Professional" could simply post to the discussion saying they are opening a thread in "Professionals" to discuss the OP's issue/point or whatever. They then go to "Professionals" start a thread that references the original and if the subject matter were appropriate then the "professionals" discussion could be visible to all members assuming this is technically feasible - If not then the "professionals" discusssion could be appended to the original when some kind of sensible conclusion were reached.

I think all this could be made to work, I think it would benefit everyone involved and what we are really looking at now is details and acceptance by JupM.

My only reservations have already been stated by others in this thread:

* How do we select the first members, and by whom?

* Is it technically possible?

* Would it encourage new members, or discourage them?

I'll find out if it's possible, but it looks like we have other issues to work out before we put this into action.
Thanks,
intmon

*Idea* -- Let's keep entry simple, but stiffen moderation. Senior level admittance. However, rules are much stricter. You flame, post, troll, post whore, you're out. End of story. That would give mods a little more free reign within that forum and make management more efficient, keeping content consistently high-quality.

Encouraging/discouraging new members would depend on how it's used. If used the way Tig and I are talking about -- for more difficult or sensitive topics -- then it would be encouraging. Newbies would have to advance to reach more advanced topics, but there would still be lots and lots on their level. However, if we stayed there all the time and discussed all of our issues in there, it would be discouraging.

My ideas for the right to be able to join this group was taken right from the suggestions that have been already given for entrance to addicts and or another special forum.
1. A minimum number of security related posts ( 300 ?)
2. A certain leval of recognition points (positive AP's -- say 750)
3. A minimum of active time on the site ( 6 months to a year ?)

After it has been established and is running, the core that have been selected via the above criteria could vote or some thing to allow for the removal or entrance of others, or it could be left to the discrecian (sorry spelling ) of the moderators if they wish to take that on.

I believe that it would be a great motivator for our newer members. It would add a level of status not present in AO at this time. Perhaps the members of this special group could even be recognized with some thing like a blue box outlining there nicknames or something. Even perhaps another special add on label to their site status. This would add a recognition easily for those new to the site to be able to tell who they could hold the most credability for.

When Mnstrgr has the time to make the top ten page she was taking about she could also list the members of the forum on that page.

Intmon:

I don't think t he initial selection is really a big deal. The reason for an initial selection is that since members of the forum would be expected to vote up or down on new members it would be kinda hard to get the forum going if you open it with no-one in it.... ;)

What I envision for the core group would be that, if they accept the invitiation, that their first job is to begin to nominate those who are perfectly viable members but who were not placed on the initial list for whatever reason - most probably forgetfulness on the part of the nominators. I don't think it should be a slight, (sp?), to those left off the list if they are viable candidates, just that the number was decided upon and the first x that came to mind were picked.

The technical questions are simply that. It's the bells and whistles like allowing direct view only access to certain threads etc. Things like that can be overcome by less fancy things like pruning a "completed" discussion into a read only forum for example. Yeah, it takes a bit more time but Neg needs something to do.... ;)

Encourage or discourage..... We already have a living example of a forum that not everyone is allowed in from the start, (Addicts). It has a healthy community, (I mean healthy in size), there are dozens of "Phew, finally made it to addicts" threads in there which indicates a desire to "get there", and it can, (though this has been disproved), take a lot of work to get back in were you to be banned after reaching it. It's there, it's been there for ages and I believe it to be a fair model of how a properly run "Professionals" forum would develop. That being the case it would appear to be more of a "carrot" than a "stick" if you know what I mean.

Mox: I have thought a lot about the "entrance qualifications" and I think it needs to be a bit more flexible. Just because someone is an AO newbie with 100 posts and 3 green dots doesn't mean that they don't have something to contribute from a knowledge POV. OTOH, the same person could be relatively clueless technically and therefore bring up numerous very good questions about various topics that the "old hands" may never think to bring up..... That would fuel discussion and keep the place from being "where Addicts go to die".... ;)

I think an invitation to join the forum should be more a reflection of who you are as a human being rather than how technically adept you are. Obviously, members should not be nominating new members who are still asking questions like, "how does the three way handshake work" in the other forums but I do think there is room for those at a middle level, that have grasped the fundamentals, who still have questions that are valid and thought provoking.

Just bouncing stuff around to see if anything sticks..........

I was only addressing Intmon's question of how to get the core group Tiger.

I certainly feel that there are some (like Irongeek for one) who would desearve to be in this group, and others like myself who really have no place in it (even if I would qualify on AP's, posts and time on the board)

I would attempt to qualify by the way, not so much to be a contributing member but to be able to follow the discussions where I could learn a lot.

It also would have the side effect of more detailed and correct answers from me in the regular forums because then I would have to live up to the qualifications the other members of the forum would expect from me.

Mox:

Interesting.... I was thinking of irongeek as an example too.... He's helpful, friendly, isn't abusive, he seems to know his stuff but would fall well short of strict "qualifications". If sufficient "members" looked at him and said yes then he would be an asset to the forum. If he became an ass then we should be allowed the "teeth" to remove him and he should be removed quickly.... I don't see that as unfair or unreasonable.....

Mox... You would absolutely have a place in this group..... Simply because you are a decent and respectable, (though sometimes a little smelly... ;)), individual. You have a level of 'real world" common sense and experience which may cut through some of the more "tunnel visioned" attempts at finding a solution to a problem that others may present. As I said earlier, an invitation to the forum should be more a reflection of you as a human being rather than what you know. Not all professional people know their entire subject, (I, for one), but I do know how to act in a professional manner as do you.

Quote:

---

It also would have the side effect of more detailed and correct answers from me in the regular forums because then I would have to live up to the qualifications the other members of the forum would expect from me.

---

That's what I would hope to be the effect on anyone who would want to be able to participate.... In fact, with more liberal entry qualifications the most helpful, professional people _could_ get in rather quickly, (of course, they could be kicked out even more quickly if it was an SE tactic), which wouldn't present new members to AO with an insurmountable task in order to be able to be part of "The Professionals", (That's a joke on an old British TV show.... I thought it was funny..... :p )

At this point the difficult issues are the technical ones.... JupM need it to be a benefit to them without a horrendous amount of work for them either. Hopefully, if a high tech solution isn't available then there is a creative way to service JupM and those that would like this to happen that works for us all.......

I think this is a great idea, and like the way it's shaping up. But I think the method to gain admittance needs to be fine-tuned. I think Tiger is right that there needs to be several (read: a bunch) of members to start out the new forum and decide on membership. But how would you control it further from there? If it's strictly a nomination process by members who are already allowed, it's possible that some people might be skipped over and over and over... I also think that this method could lead to a bunch of crappy PMs to members saying, "Hey, can you get me in the professionals' forum?" No that that is a bad thing - as some deserving could be left out, but to receive these PMs all the time would be a pain in the ass.

I think the best way to do it is to make a set of standards that make a member eligible to be invited, much like the custom title guidelines. After these members are identified, they are put to a vote by those currently in the Professionals' forum. Those voted in will be allowed in, and those not will be put in the poll the next time around. Elections should happen once a month, around the same time. This way, there is no need to beg, borrow, and steal your way into the forum. No single member will have the ability to nominate or select a new member.

This would be a true mark of community and/or "professionalism" to show that in order to be a part of this group, you must be selected by your peers.

Is there really a reason to place a limitation on qualification such as a number of posts or points? I for one have been reading this site for about 2 months and have only posted when I felt I really had something to add not just posting to get my count up. By being this way I have only racked up around 20 posts. I like the nomination/voting idea and think it should be limited to just that.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by zENGER
Is there really a reason to place a limitation on qualification such as a number of posts or points? I for one have been reading this site for about 2 months and have only posted when I felt I really had something to add not just posting to get my count up. By being this way I have only racked up around 20 posts. I like the nomination/voting idea and think it should be limited to just that.

---

zENGER, the main reasoning behind the minimum qualifications is for the core or starting members of the forum. The other reason being that untill someone builds a reputation on this site, there is not any way to judge the persons quality per say.

As mentioned earlier, I feel that there a a couple of relatively new people that have shown that they are quite knowledgeable about security and computers, more than I will probably ever be, and have shown that in the quality and type of posts they have made. I think that they should be included into this group, but the core membership will have to devise a methode for their inclusion.

At this point we are just throwing ideas out to see what the admins think and also what the general membership thinks. What the finial out come will be depends on Jupiter Media and what they eventually decide to do.