Are You a New Member? Introduce yourself Here!

Now yew lis'n h'yer, little Bond boy. You're fixin to do some prayin', and yew better pray real good!

Sharky wrote:

We'll have to start looking at new ways of advertising BAB. Facebook's a good start, though the membership might be of different sort.

I always saw Facebook as the anti-forum. But, if it was used solely to attract members and lead them over here, I guess it wouldn't be all that bad.

Does Forumotion allow an admin to set a custom domain name to the forum? For example, if we had bondandbeyond.net, would we able to apply it to the forum, or are we permanently stuck with Forumotion sub-domain?

I actually know a few good posters on IMDB, I'll see if any of them are interested.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Incidentally, the site again broke its record for most users online at once with 117 on the site on May 7.

Incidentally, about 100 people walked past my house yesterday. None of them knocked on my door, though. (True story. I'm pretty sure a drug dealer just moved in next door.)

Sharky wrote:

If that's the case, I think it calls for a new thread.

I'll make one then.

Sharky wrote:

On the subject of the layout, how's your brother doing? He might offer some good tips, and his Bond-related posts were all of a high quality.

He hasn't worked on any layout stuff since leaving. We've had long discussions about the board's direction in the past, but we haven't discussed it recently.

Sharky wrote:

Well, there's nothing I do to get the current crop to return. We either keep them on (despite never being able to post) for the sake of numbers, or we shave them off and start afresh.

You're right, we can't get back the accounts that have been removed. (If that's what you were trying to say.) But I suppose we should cease the "0 posts = ban" policy. It's well-intentioned, but misguided. I understand expecting something out of our registered members, but consider this -

It's a fact of message boards that they rack up "dead on arrival" accounts. I've never found any good explanation for this, but it's a reality. (Perhaps viewers register simply to enable functions like profile viewing and the search engine. Or perhaps they register in the hopes that more content will become available, eg. the "scratching post" section.) To use CBn as an example, they have gained about 30 members in the past week. Only 3 of them have made at least 1 post. But this is what matters: even if CBn's staff wanted to remove all those dead accounts, they would only be swimming upstream. Dead accounts are some of the baggage that comes with a forum, especially one for something as popular as Bond.

Some of those accounts might post, and that's the notion we should hold on to. Imagine if you made an account, didn't post, then returned 3 months later itching to talk Skyfall. Wouldn't it be off-putting to find your account inaccessible?

Anyway, I think I've said my piece on the matter.

Sharky wrote:

Louis Armstrong wrote:

We all get to call the shots here, don't you like democracy?

Of course, but without a policy, it's a matter of first come first serve. We have no real formal structure for say, the staff to vote for a course of action (democracy), apart from PMs, which aren't too efficient.

I was trying (and failing) to be sarcastic. I don't think a message board can be run as a democracy. The onus of leadership is spread thin and nothing ever gets done.

Sharky wrote:

Unfortunately this means more proactive mods like me ending up calling most of the shots, by default. There's nothing in place to stop me from banning these inactive accounts, and any disagreement (like this) will be after the event.

I don't like it either, but am glad we're having the discussion. :)

It's good that you tried to find some kind of forward strategy, even if it turned out unpopular.

Makeshift Python wrote:

I actually know a few good posters on IMDB, I'll see if any of them are interested.

Sounds good, Pythagoras.

Mr. Brown wrote:

I always saw Facebook as the anti-forum. But, if it was used solely to attract members and lead them over here, I guess it wouldn't be all that bad.

If anyone wants to try using Facebook, it's worth a shot. (Personally, I don't know anyone on Facebook that's even remotely interested in Bond.)

Mr. Brown wrote:

Does Forumotion allow an admin to set a custom domain name to the forum? For example, if we had bondandbeyond.net, would we able to apply it to the forum, or are we permanently stuck with Forumotion sub-domain?

You can remove the Forumotion sub-domain name if you pay.

I don't think comparisons with other Bond boards are helpful at all, but let me bring up the MI6 and CBn forums for contrast instead. One thing those forums have is a parent site (eg. MI6 HQ) that posts news and articles. A well-maintained affiliate almost guarantees a forum's continued growth. Is that something anyone would want to establish or furnish for Bond and Beyond? If not, then perhaps folks could at least share the link to B&B on their personal blogs or webpages.

Louis Armstrong wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Incidentally, the site again broke its record for most users online at once with 117 on the site on May 7.

Incidentally, about 100 people walked past my house yesterday. None of them knocked on my door, though. (True story. I'm pretty sure a drug dealer just moved in next door.)

:roll:

Yeah, your reductive aside wasn't worth a response.

Louis Armstrong wrote:

Yeah, your reductive aside wasn't worth a response.

If all you can do is ridicule this site and haughtily dismiss whatever good news comes its way, I question your commitment to it. Perhaps you need to reevaluate your status here.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

If all you can do is ridicule this site and haughtily dismiss whatever good news comes its way, I question your commitment to it.

I compared the site to a house that many people have walked by, but not entered. If you think that was ridicule, or that all I posted was ridicule, then you need to check into a clinic. Likewise if you believe your good news is so meaningful as to diminish any of my concerns.

And question my commitment all you'd like, McCarthy. I've made some suggestions for promoting the board, and I've also made some modest efforts at promotion.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

Perhaps you need to reevaluate your status here.

If you can't contribute coherently to discussion, then I will extend the same invitation to you.

You're unremittingly negative, "Satchmo," and respond snarkily to the mere mention of any positive news regarding this site. And I will keep an eye out for your continued churlish behavior. Shape up.

FieldsMan wrote:

How about posting BAB's link on the IMDB Skyfall message boards, or pm some of the more intellectual posters there?

Please do so, by all means. The forums are wide open now, and they're that way for a reason. So any promotion whatsoever is welcome. We can always turf anyone who comes here with destructive intent.

Sent out about 15 messages over IMDB to posters of varying opinions and who seem mature enough. Hope they stop by!

Nice, FieldsDude. I've messaged a few members who have slowed their posting to see how they're doing. Anybody shared our link on personal blogs or pages?

Perilagu Khan wrote:

You're unremittingly negative, "Satchmo," and respond snarkily to the mere mention of any positive news regarding this site. And I will keep an eye out for your continued churlish behavior. Shape up.

First you try to give me the old heave ho, and now you're disciplining me? Don't blatantly misrepresent my posts again.

Looks like folks aren't up for engaging all of my concerns right now, which is fine by me.

I'm still in contact with Major D Smythe. I know he's a regular at MI6book so I'm not sure if he would want to head over here but would anyone have any objections to me sending an invite?

No, not at all :)

Noticed a few things which are causing concern among people here, so I think maybe it's time we drew a line under some of it. The main points which seem to need addressing are:

Inviting members:
Invite anybody you want. The forum is open for public viewing now. We need to show the public what they're getting here, otherwise it's unlikely people will take the plunge and register. This point has been proven when the forums have been locked to the public. So it's open season on who gets invited and people are free to advertise this place anywhere they wish.

Banning members:
We only REALLY need to ban members if they're behaving in an uncontrollably offensive manner. Some of j7's recent "racist" comments would be an example of this. The first step would obviously be a warning. Then, if that warning is ignored, feel free to launch deliberately offensive members from the forums.

Inactive members:
The forums are wide open now, so we no longer need to worry about "spies" or troublecausers from other sites. It's harmless if somebody registers but doesn't post. Sure, it's crap that they choose not to contribute, but if they haven't contributed before then I don't think kicking them out will exactly make them want to embrace the place and start posting. Best to just leave them be. It's more numbers for us for a start, and hopefully we can try a different approach by trying to encourage inactive members to post either via PM or through quality thought-provoking posts on the forums.

I'd also stress to point out that nobody here has mishandled any of the above matters in any way. Mods (and sometimes even myself) have been acting on these matters without any real clarification or procedure being in place, hence my attempt above at providing what I hope is a fair and logical guideline. At the end of the day, these forums will always need growth to survive, and it makes sense to encourage that growth in any way possible. Troublecausers can always be kicked out once they've revealed their intentions, so don't worry about that.

M, does Forumotion allow you to include a Terms of Service message when users sign-up?

It might be good to throw in an '18 years or older' stipulation.

If not, maybe we could mention it in a sticky thread in the New Users forum and the Scratching Post.

With there being so much Bond on the forums, there's always the likelihood of quite a few under-18's turning up here. Probably not fair to deny them the opportunity to contribute, which is why we have the bar section and a restricted area, and can always add to or expand these sections if demand for more adult content is sufficient. For example, a section for Ms Sects' photography would be most welcome....

M wrote:

With there being so much Bond on the forums, there's always the likelihood of quite a few under-18's turning up here. Probably not fair to deny them the opportunity to contribute, which is why we have the bar section and a restricted area, and can always add to or expand these sections if demand for more adult content is sufficient. For example, a section for Ms Sects' photography would be most welcome....

Brother, you can say that again.

:)

I understand that a few younger posters might sneak in, but posting an '18 years or older' notice could cover our asses, in regards to Forumotion's policies.

And are the restricted areas only granted by administrator? If so, I like the idea.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

M wrote:

For example, a section for Ms Sects' photography would be most welcome....

Brother, you can say that again.

:)

In the words of Connery's Bond: "I have no objections."

Mr. Brown wrote:

are the restricted areas only granted by administrator? If so, I like the idea.

Yes, I can pick and choose who can enter and who can't. So it's all perfectly manageable.

FieldsMan wrote:

Sent out about 15 messages over IMDB to posters of varying opinions and who seem mature enough. Hope they stop by!

Louis Armstrong wrote:

Nice, FieldsDude. I've messaged a few members who have slowed their posting to see how they're doing. Anybody shared our link on personal blogs or pages?

Anyone care to send PussyGalores an invite?

Really Sharky? I saw PussyGalores post on IMDB:

Quote :

I just saw Skyflop poster! It's really bad and Craig is ugly like a monkey!

:|

He/she'll will fit right in. ;)

Bring 'er in...will tear her a new vagina.

Just what we need, more doom and gloomers as if we don't have enough!