Poll

Should there be more limits on who can post UPDATES in SpaceX

Yes
162 (50.9%)
No
156 (49.1%)

Total Members Voted: 318


Author Topic: Poll: Should there be more limits on who can post UPDATES in SpaceX threads?  (Read 33376 times)

Offline cuddihy

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1251
  • Liked: 580
  • Likes Given: 935

Offline RocketLover0119

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2891
  • Space Geek
  • Tampa, Florida
  • Liked: 6777
  • Likes Given: 1609
10,000% yes, though would maybe just limit it to big days such as static fires/launch days.

And more specifically, starship related things. Starship nowadays is a thing that is becoming popular (doh!)  ;)
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 04:43 pm by RocketLover0119 »
"The Starship has landed"

Offline yg1968

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17194
  • Liked: 7051
  • Likes Given: 3032

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39249
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25187
  • Likes Given: 12104
I’d say no, but with some exceptions. It should by default NOT be restricted, but perhaps with some way to turn on restriction temporarily if mods see it’s a big problem.

I have accidentally posted in the updates before but I quickly move it over to discussion.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline GruiicK

  • Member
  • Posts: 2
  • Lyon, France
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 1542


Offline Rekt1971

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 116
  • Liked: 304
  • Likes Given: 1165
I would not limit it for most of the time, but I would absolutely limit it during launch and for a while after it.

Usually, somebody posts in the update thread by accident and it's not a big deal (happens to everybody). The same cannot be said whenever something major happens and it is a little annoying.

Offline Joey D

  • Member
  • Posts: 63
  • NJ, USA
  • Liked: 113
  • Likes Given: 49
I voted no.

However, it is not clear if the poll is "should there be more limits on who can post to the 'UPDATES' threads in SpaceX forums" or is it "who can post updates to any threads in SpaceX forums."

I have no issues with rule enforcement (being subject to a few myself of course).  This forum does have the most strict and "precise" (and numerous) rules I have ever seen for a forum.  It's like a condo HOA on steroids.  :)

This is not a complaint about the rules.   However, when you factor in the plethora of rules in combination of what is likely MANY new members that join specifically out of SpaceX interest...you are going to need more moderation than usual in the SpaceX forums.

So hats off to the mods (seriously) for doing your job...hopefully relatively new members (like me) will quickly learn the ropes after a couple of hand slaps.
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 04:58 pm by Joey D »

Offline philw1776

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1836
  • Seacoast NH
  • Liked: 1842
  • Likes Given: 978
Elsewhere it has been suggested that UPDATE threads have a button that you must select to post. The button comes up stating something like "UPDATE Thread Only! Do not post replies & discussion"
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 05:11 pm by philw1776 »
FULL SEND!!!!

Offline RocketLover0119

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2891
  • Space Geek
  • Tampa, Florida
  • Liked: 6777
  • Likes Given: 1609
This is why I said yes. I think on a regular basis, it doesn’t need to be locked to certain people, but as said, I think on launch days before, during, and some time after some people should have posting roles.

(Pointing out the bottom post, not top. Good job Steven)  ;)
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 05:06 pm by RocketLover0119 »
"The Starship has landed"

Offline Jeff Lerner

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 615
  • Toronto, Canada
  • Liked: 270
  • Likes Given: 239
I voted No....for the most part we don’t have a problem in other threads where there is an Update and Discussion thread...members need to do a better job of policing themselves....and failing that the mods can send those posters who don’t seem to get the message to “the penalty box” for the day..

Offline Everything Space

  • Member
  • Posts: 94
  • Space Editor
  • Liked: 158
  • Likes Given: 22
I think yes, but only on launch days and not only too L2 but anyone who can prove themself that they are reliable.
Although, it doesn't bother me that much that we see the occasional mistake so I am a little turn.
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 05:14 pm by Everything Space »
Avid Starship and all space stuff fan

Offline Ben the Space Brit

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7203
  • A spaceflight fan
  • London, UK
  • Liked: 802
  • Likes Given: 896
No - Absolutely not

If we're going to start gate-keeping here, why not just drop the pretence and make the site read-only except to L2 members and verified aerospace professionals?
"Oops! I left the silly thing in reverse!" - Duck Dodgers

~*~*~*~

The Space Shuttle Program - 1981-2011

The time for words has passed; The time has come to put up or shut up!
DON'T PROPAGANDISE, FLY!!!

Offline mlindner

  • Software Engineer
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2883
  • Space Capitalist
  • Silicon Valley, CA
  • Liked: 2179
  • Likes Given: 810
No. A lot of times people come to this forum who are new but also in the industry. If they're blocked from posting we won't get any input from such people. Further, having a blessed curated list of posters puts too much division into the community (there's enough between the moderators and normal posters already).

These problems only crop up during major events where we get a flood of new people posting. Most of the time it isn't a problem on these forums.
LEO is the ocean, not an island (let alone a continent). We create cruise liners to ride the oceans, not artificial islands in the middle of them. We need a physical place, which has physical resources, to make our future out there.

Offline mlindner

  • Software Engineer
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2883
  • Space Capitalist
  • Silicon Valley, CA
  • Liked: 2179
  • Likes Given: 810
A better solution would be to have a pop up on update threads that says "You're posting on an update thread, are you actually posting an update?" with an option to shut the popup off in forum settings for people who commonly post updates. If people ignore the popups and post clear non-updates then they can be given temporary bans by the moderators.
LEO is the ocean, not an island (let alone a continent). We create cruise liners to ride the oceans, not artificial islands in the middle of them. We need a physical place, which has physical resources, to make our future out there.

Offline mlindner

  • Software Engineer
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2883
  • Space Capitalist
  • Silicon Valley, CA
  • Liked: 2179
  • Likes Given: 810
This is why I said yes. I think on a regular basis, it doesn’t need to be locked to certain people, but as said, I think on launch days before, during, and some time after some people should have posting roles.

(Pointing out the bottom post, not top. Good job Steven)  ;)

RocketLover, you've posted non-updates in the updates thread yourself a few times today. So I'm not sure why you're complaining. I reported at least one of your posts today that was in the updates thread.
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 05:21 pm by mlindner »
LEO is the ocean, not an island (let alone a continent). We create cruise liners to ride the oceans, not artificial islands in the middle of them. We need a physical place, which has physical resources, to make our future out there.

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6807
  • California
  • Liked: 8462
  • Likes Given: 5371
Yes - But with the caveat that it should only be enabled during launches/events. Not otherwise.

Yes - But with the caveat that it should only be enabled during launches/events. Not otherwise.

I agree. People should be allowed to post new information between launches but shouldn't be allowed to argue/theorize on launch day.  :)

Offline mlindner

  • Software Engineer
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2883
  • Space Capitalist
  • Silicon Valley, CA
  • Liked: 2179
  • Likes Given: 810
Yes - But with the caveat that it should only be enabled during launches/events. Not otherwise.

I agree. People should be allowed to post new information between launches but shouldn't be allowed to argue/theorize on launch day.  :)

No. Arguing/theorizing on launch day is fine, as long as it's not in the updates thread and it shouldn't be allowed in updates threads even on non-launch days.
LEO is the ocean, not an island (let alone a continent). We create cruise liners to ride the oceans, not artificial islands in the middle of them. We need a physical place, which has physical resources, to make our future out there.

Offline Cody Smith

  • Member
  • Posts: 1
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Yes. Several of the people saying no are frequent violators of the updates only rule. Joey D literally just had a post removed a few minutes ago.

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6807
  • California
  • Liked: 8462
  • Likes Given: 5371
How about a simple(?) filter for updates thread. If a post ends with a '?', reject it. Always.

Offline Joey D

  • Member
  • Posts: 63
  • NJ, USA
  • Liked: 113
  • Likes Given: 49

I agree. People should be allowed to post new information between launches but shouldn't be allowed to argue/theorize on launch day.  :)

Respectfully disagree.  Just one more "rule" for people to learn in a long and complex set of rules already.

* The forum has rules...check.
* The forum has active mods...and members who actively report problem posts to mods....check.
* Mods can and do enforce rules through moving messages and/or banning members...check.

Ultimately I don't see the real problem with the status quo....other than there being a slight uptick in moderation needed during certain events (since they tend to attract new users).

If you want to decrease entropy...you must impart energy.   The price you pay.  ;)
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 05:40 pm by Joey D »

Offline chopsticks

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1057
  • Québec, Canada
  • Liked: 1075
  • Likes Given: 164
I don't know really.

This is what I think:

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=53409.0

philw1776 referenced this above as well.

If authorized members are the only ones allowed to post in update threads, it should only be for launch days or other high profile events.

If my idea was implemented, regular updaters should be whitelisted from the warning. (Like Bocachicagal, RocketLover0119, Nomadd, StevenOBrien, etc.) Even people like Herb have occasionally commented in the updates thread by accident, and it can be easy to do if there's a dynamic conversation happening. The extra step would solve that I think. But only having whitelisted members to post updates seems like a bit of a reach. It might be better than the way it is now, but it seems like there could be a better solution.

Offline Joey D

  • Member
  • Posts: 63
  • NJ, USA
  • Liked: 113
  • Likes Given: 49
Yes. Several of the people saying no are frequent violators of the updates only rule. Joey D literally just had a post removed a few minutes ago.

Yes, I did have a post removed from an Updates thread.  And now I have learned exactly what an "updates thread" is and is not for.  Mod did his job....and I learned. 

So what exactly is the issue?

Offline cuddihy

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1251
  • Liked: 580
  • Likes Given: 935
The issue is there are LOTs of people who have UPDATES threads on email notification. Very few notify on other threads like discussion threads.

Getting pinged constantly as people give their hot takes or nube questions in the updates thread makes notifications more like spam. It's nice if notifications stay update notifications so those who don't have time to troll forums all day can separate the wheat from the chaff.
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 05:43 pm by cuddihy »

Offline _MECO

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
  • Central KY, USA
  • Liked: 775
  • Likes Given: 447
 More restrictions on who can post will just lead to an increase in elitism on this board. Updates threads usually only get mis-posted to the day of a launch campaign and even then it's just a couple of times. And the people who do it are always well-intentioned. It's not that big of a problem.
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 05:45 pm by _MECO »

Offline Joey D

  • Member
  • Posts: 63
  • NJ, USA
  • Liked: 113
  • Likes Given: 49
The issue is there are LOTs of people who have UPDATES threads on email notification. Very few notify on other threads like discussion threads.  Getting pinged constantly as people give their hot takes or nube questions in the updates thread makes notifications more like spam.

To be clear...you are going to get "spammed" by "updates" threads around event days no matter what....that's when most new posts (legitimate and illegitimate) occur.

The proper solution to this is to modify the forum software to specifically make an "update thread" recognizable and functionally different than an ordinary discussion thread.  Something that distinguishes it other than "hey...I put the text 'UPDATES' in the subject heading!" 

At the very least (as some have suggested) an official "updates thread" should come with a pop-up that specifically states the rules before starting the post.  You may even limit who can CREATE an updates thread to certain people...or you might require that all posts in updates threads be reviewed prior to posting.  (That comes with its own challenges though.)

However, if you limit who can post...you are going to limit the information that everyone ultimately wants.


Offline StevenOBrien

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1143
  • Ireland
    • Steven O'Brien
  • Liked: 4381
  • Likes Given: 2629
There have been some great updates today from people who aren't regulars in the updates thread. It would be a shame to lose those if posting was restricted.

Offline OldSpace

  • Member
  • Posts: 2
  • United States
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 1
As a new guy to the Forum, I find it interesting but difficult to figure out rules even after reading the how to posts.  Just one persons comment.  Thanks

Offline steveleach

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
  • Liked: 2735
  • Likes Given: 952
Yep, if for no other reason than it is probably confusing for the people who post in the updates thread without realising it is wrong (either they didn't check or didn't appreciate the rules).

Having your post moved, or having people reply to it in an entirely different thread, probably doesn't make sense if you didn't know you'd posted incorrectly in the first place.

And it's also likely to be a bit unnerving when you get shouted at in the forums.

And only a few people actually post updates in the updates threads anyway.

As for the "elitism" risk, I'd say that "there are rules that you are expected to know, but we'll just let you make the mistakes and then moan at you" probably feels more elitist than "there are a handful of threads that you need to earn the right to post in".

I'm including a pop-up warning under "more limits" by the way; I feel there should be more controls on posting to the updates threads, but I'm not fussed what they are.

Offline rickyramjet

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 114
  • Killeen, TX
  • Liked: 106
  • Likes Given: 77
NO!!

The OP didn't say why there should be restriction on update posts, I'm assuming it's to stop unimportant posts and accidental posts that belong in the discussion threads.  But who decides what is unimportant?

I made the suggestion a long time ago when update only threads first appeared.  When you hit the submit button on an update thread a second confirmation popup should appear with the question "This is an update only thread, are you sure this is an important update"?  Or some other similar text.  Requires a bit of programming, but why not try it?

People talk about self-policing, but come on, we know that isn't going to work!!

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
I voted yes and only during live events to L2 Members which helps support the site... Other times are fine and anyone can make a mistake from time to time... You can still post it to the Discussion Thread...

Edit to Add:
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 06:28 pm by Rocket Science »
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline theebag

  • Member
  • Posts: 40
  • Netherlands
  • Liked: 29
  • Likes Given: 39
No. Everybody should be able to add usefull updates. Limiting to L2 members goes against the open, helpfull and friendly nature of Nasaspaceflight.com which makes it such a great platform.  A kind of gatekeeping or reminder could be considered:

- Add a warning that you are about to post in the Update thread instead of the Discussion thread. (This is where I went wrong today, mea culpa.)

- Disable Quick-Reply in Update threads to add an extra step and limit impulsivity.
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 06:31 pm by theebag »
Floating around the globe.

Offline Pueo

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 146
  • Liked: 255
  • Likes Given: 202
How about a simple(?) filter for updates thread. If a post ends with a '?', reject it. Always.

Alternatively, there could be a "passcode" posted in the first comment for the thread that you need to include at the bottom of your post or your post is auto-removed.  It would be a constant reminder for the regulars that they were in the Updates thread, and if they still forget then the post is auto-removed anyways so there's not need to publicly berate them.
However there needs to be some method of verifying the location of the passcode so newcomers responding via quotes still trigger the auto-removal even though the passcode is in the quote.

Another strategy, and I apologize to the mods because this would require additional work on their part, is on launch days set the updates thread so that posts are held for mod approval.
Could I interest you in some clean burning sub-cooled propalox and propalox accessories?
Forget drinking ethanol meant for rocket fuel, propĆne is the eutectic fuel mixture you can huff!

Offline RocketLover0119

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2891
  • Space Geek
  • Tampa, Florida
  • Liked: 6777
  • Likes Given: 1609
I voted yes and only during live events to L2 Members which helps support the site... Other times are fine and anyone can make a mistake from time to time... You can still post it to the Discussion Thread...

Edit to Add:

That’s just pay to win.....
"The Starship has landed"

Offline Steve G

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 574
  • Ottawa, ON
    • Stephen H Garrity
  • Liked: 612
  • Likes Given: 56
This site can be very intimidating to the non-rocket-scientist space enthusiasts. It should be open, and patient with we laymen. We shouldn't cringe every time we post something, wondering who's ego-fuelled teardown for the sake of them looking smarter, better, or superior to the poster. There shouldn't be limits on people posting. There should be higher standards of civility and inclusiveness and not to shun people away.

Offline eric z

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 541
  • Liked: 470
  • Likes Given: 2102
 I once posted the word "wow" during some EVA coverage and got slapped down. I was mad for a bit, but in retrospect
realized it wouldn't really contribute to the historic record of the event itself, which I feel is one of the site's great responsibilities. Plus over the years I've went from neutral to fan of SpaceX, but I certainly don't have the firepower upstairs to contribute much to any particular updates. Self-discipline is probably the way to go. :-X 

Offline pb2000

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 671
  • Calgary, AB
  • Liked: 758
  • Likes Given: 236
I vote no. You'll get the same problem, but in reverse: people will post updates in the discussion thread and perfectly good posts will just be lost in the noise.

How about a simple(?) filter for updates thread. If a post ends with a '?', reject it. Always.

People post perfectly legit updates framed as a question all the time, that would never work.
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 07:08 pm by pb2000 »
Launches attended: Worldview-4 (Atlas V 401), Iridium NEXT Flight 1 (Falcon 9 FT), PAZ+Starlink (Falcon 9 FT), Arabsat-6A (Falcon Heavy)
Pilgrimaged to: Boca Chica (09/19 & 01/22)

Offline Pete

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 767
  • Cubicle
  • Liked: 1028
  • Likes Given: 395
I thought the Update threads were *already* restricted to updates by authorized people only?

Offline Pueo

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 146
  • Liked: 255
  • Likes Given: 202
Yep, if for no other reason than it is probably confusing for the people who post in the updates thread without realising it is wrong (either they didn't check or didn't appreciate the rules).

Having your post moved, or having people reply to it in an entirely different thread, probably doesn't make sense if you didn't know you'd posted incorrectly in the first place.

And it's also likely to be a bit unnerving when you get shouted at in the forums.

Would the stray posters even see the reply in the different thread?  As far as I can the "notify" option tells you about all the new replies to a thread, and there's no way to filter it to just the people actually responding to your post via quotes.
Could I interest you in some clean burning sub-cooled propalox and propalox accessories?
Forget drinking ethanol meant for rocket fuel, propĆne is the eutectic fuel mixture you can huff!

Offline SirBlah

  • Member
  • Posts: 1
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 1
As someone who has been lurking this forum for quite a few years now (I don't really have anything interesting to say, so that probably won't change) I do feel like part of the issue comes down to just how crowded this specific sub-section has become over the few years.

There's a ton of threads with extremely similar sounding titles to the point where even I have difficulty keeping track of which thread I'm looking at, everything simply moves too quickly with threads constantly jumping up and down the stack every time you refresh the page. I was going to suggest building some kind of colour coded tagging system to make it easy to see the topic of each thread at a glance (I still think that would be useful) but really a easier solution might be to just use the thread sticky/pinning feature more effectively -

What I mean by that is if the most recent Updates & Discussion threads were pinned to the top of the sub forum then they would be fixed into place on the page, becoming fixed points of reference which users would see as distinct from the regular threads that make up this forum - you could have something like:

1: Starship SN11 Test Launch Campaign - UPDATES
2: SpaceX Boca Chica - Production Updates - MASTER Thread (4)
3: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 20 : Discussion
etc

But I'd also make sure that the threads follow the same naming convections as well. I'd also put UPDATES or DISCUSSION in all caps either at the start or end of each thread title, along with the thread no. in a fixed position, for example. So:

1: "SpaceX Boca Chica - Production Updates - MASTER Thread (4)"
2: "SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 20 : Discussion"

becomes:

1: "SpaceX Boca Chica : Production Master Thread 4 : UPDATES"
2: "SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 20 : DISCUSSION"

or maybe just:

1: "Starship Production Thread 4 : UPDATES"
2: "Starship Prototype Thread 20 : DISCUSSION"

Or something of that sort. Any new "official" threads for other topics (Superheavy?) could then follow a similar convention.
Regardless I do think a large amount of the offtopic posting comes from just how busy this subforum is and how much threads jump around as a result, you shouldn't really have to dig for the correct thread when the thread in question is supposed to be the official discussion page for example. Currently I don't think the pins aren't really being used particularly well - I mean half the pinned threads right now are locked due to being years out of date.

And yeah, as a lurker seeing threads constantly delve into off topic arguments has become very disheartening. Unfortunately as this forum continues to become more and more popular this doesn't seem like something that's going to change any time soon - I can't imagine the traffic when SpaceX eventually get to the point of full production orbital flights. The mods have done a great job keeping the forum relatively under control given the circumstances, but at some point I think some large scale rejuggling of the SpaceX section may need necessary to stop the whole thing spiralling out of the control. Perhaps the Starship sub-section has become so busy it needs to be split into multiple subforums, dare I suggest?

Anyway, back to lurking.  :)

Offline JCopernicus

  • Member
  • Posts: 75
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 63
You need less backseat moderators.

Offline Alberto-Girardi

I’d say no, but with some exceptions. It should by default NOT be restricted, but perhaps with some way to turn on restriction temporarily if mods see it’s a big problem.

I have accidentally posted in the updates before but I quickly move it over to discussion.

Agree, in caseof trolling should be restricted.
Ad gloriam humanitatis - For the Glory of Humanity
I want to become an Aerospace Engineer!

Offline gnn_spb

  • Member
  • Posts: 9
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 828
No.
I wonder who and on what basis will restrict access? :)

1. At the first 5 posts of a new user, in the updated thread, show the text with a detailed explanation of why there is no need to write emotions and comments there. As an element of training for beginners.
2. As many have already said, you need to highlight the updated thread in color, in the header or something else. As protection against accidental posting in the wrong place.

Edit: added No.
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 07:44 pm by gnn_spb »

Offline MichaelBlackbourn

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 186
  • Liked: 305
  • Likes Given: 0
Personally I think using sticky topics for historical threads of note is a poor use.  The main threads that are currently active should be pinned to the top.  That would probably help stuff getting mixed up in the shuffle. 

Offline capoman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 996
  • Ontario Canada
  • Liked: 1441
  • Likes Given: 1330
Possibly the only limitation I can see is  minimum number of posts such as 100 posts or something similar. Many of the people making the mistake are new to the forums and don't fully understand the rules as many other forums do not have these types of posting rules. Veteran posters do occasionally make this mistake also (including myself), but usually remove it as soon as they realize the mistake. It's easy to make this mistake due to the number of threads many of us have open due to the limited scope of threads. But I think a certain amount of experience in the forum is the best way to handle this.

Edit: if a new user does have a useful update, they could always post in the discussion area for a veteran or mod to repost in updates.
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 08:17 pm by capoman »

Offline _MECO

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
  • Central KY, USA
  • Liked: 775
  • Likes Given: 447
As someone who has been lurking this forum for quite a few years now (I don't really have anything interesting to say, so that probably won't change) I do feel like part of the issue comes down to just how crowded this specific sub-section has become over the few years.

There's a ton of threads with extremely similar sounding titles to the point where even I have difficulty keeping track of which thread I'm looking at, everything simply moves too quickly with threads constantly jumping up and down the stack every time you refresh the page. I was going to suggest building some kind of colour coded tagging system to make it easy to see the topic of each thread at a glance (I still think that would be useful) but really a easier solution might be to just use the thread sticky/pinning feature more effectively -

What I mean by that is if the most recent Updates & Discussion threads were pinned to the top of the sub forum then they would be fixed into place on the page, becoming fixed points of reference which users would see as distinct from the regular threads that make up this forum - you could have something like:

1: Starship SN11 Test Launch Campaign - UPDATES
2: SpaceX Boca Chica - Production Updates - MASTER Thread (4)
3: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 20 : Discussion
etc

But I'd also make sure that the threads follow the same naming convections as well. I'd also put UPDATES or DISCUSSION in all caps either at the start or end of each thread title, along with the thread no. in a fixed position, for example. So:

1: "SpaceX Boca Chica - Production Updates - MASTER Thread (4)"
2: "SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 20 : Discussion"

becomes:

1: "SpaceX Boca Chica : Production Master Thread 4 : UPDATES"
2: "SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 20 : DISCUSSION"

or maybe just:

1: "Starship Production Thread 4 : UPDATES"
2: "Starship Prototype Thread 20 : DISCUSSION"

Or something of that sort. Any new "official" threads for other topics (Superheavy?) could then follow a similar convention.
Regardless I do think a large amount of the offtopic posting comes from just how busy this subforum is and how much threads jump around as a result, you shouldn't really have to dig for the correct thread when the thread in question is supposed to be the official discussion page for example. Currently I don't think the pins aren't really being used particularly well - I mean half the pinned threads right now are locked due to being years out of date.

And yeah, as a lurker seeing threads constantly delve into off topic arguments has become very disheartening. Unfortunately as this forum continues to become more and more popular this doesn't seem like something that's going to change any time soon - I can't imagine the traffic when SpaceX eventually get to the point of full production orbital flights. The mods have done a great job keeping the forum relatively under control given the circumstances, but at some point I think some large scale rejuggling of the SpaceX section may need necessary to stop the whole thing spiralling out of the control. Perhaps the Starship sub-section has become so busy it needs to be split into multiple subforums, dare I suggest?

Anyway, back to lurking.  :)
Can you blame us? It's a popular board. Starship is the first cool rocket since the Saturn V. Of course we need all these similar threads so that discussion doesn't get too crowded. It's like channels on Discord or something. Too many people talking about the same topic all at once to have it all in a dedicated thread. I think the "stay rigidly on topic!" people need to see that, too. Sure there can be huge derailments, but still.

And I agree with you on the old stickied threads. We certainly don't need those around any more.
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 08:19 pm by _MECO »

Offline abaddon

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3015
  • Liked: 3815
  • Likes Given: 5155
I voted "no", but if there is a technological solution to help as others have suggested (e.g. a warning before posting) I think that would be a great idea to try.

For those who say there isn't a problem or the problem is "backseat mods" - I can only vehemently disagree.  There's a real issue here and sticking your head in the sand isn't going to fix anything.  I just don't like the suggested solution and feel it would be worse than the existing problem.

Offline theebag

  • Member
  • Posts: 40
  • Netherlands
  • Liked: 29
  • Likes Given: 39
Possibly the only limitation I can see is  minimum number of posts such as 100 posts or something similar. Many of the people making the mistake are new to the forums and don't fully understand the rules as many other forums do not have these types of posting rules. Veteran posters do occasionally make this mistake also (including myself), but usually remove it as soon as they realize the mistake. It's easy to make this mistake due to the number of threads many of us have open due to the limited scope of threads. But I think a certain amount of experience in the forum is the best way to handle this.

Edit: if a new user does have a useful update, they could always post in the discussion area for a veteran or mod to repost in updates.

Not sure if a post limit is the way to go. Highly knowledgeable users or actual industry users who don't post often will be left out. In my experience new users will start posting rubish or barely passable posts to reach 100 posts as soon as possible.
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 08:24 pm by theebag »
Floating around the globe.

Offline abaddon

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3015
  • Liked: 3815
  • Likes Given: 5155
No - Absolutely not

If we're going to start gate-keeping here, why not just drop the pretence and make the site read-only except to L2 members and verified aerospace professionals?
No need to be melodramatic; the update threads contain only a fraction of the posts (kinda the point) and discussion threads are open to all, new threads can be created, etc.

I don't want to lock down the update threads either, but commentary like this is inflammatory and unhelpful.

Offline gtae07

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 141
  • Georgia, USA
  • Liked: 314
  • Likes Given: 413
This forum does have the most strict and "precise" (and numerous) rules I have ever seen for a forum.  It's like a condo HOA on steroids.  :)
Indeed... I don't think I've ever seen a forum as relentlessly anal-retentive about "this type of post here, that type of post there, and keep everything strictly on-topic" as this one.  It's part of why I lurked for ten years before making a post.  And to a point I kind of get it--as a nerd and engineer myself, I find myself sometimes trying to make things over-complicated and I'm drawn to systems with lots of complexity--but I think we all need to remember this is a discussion forum, not a design review meeting or flight readiness review.  Discussions among humans tends to wander about, and I often find a lot of value and interesting discussions in "off topic" digressions as long as they're actual discussion and not just bickering. 

If we want to try and keep things "on topic", perhaps there needs to be a little more tolerance for a variety of topics in a given section instead of trying to keep everything that's not "strictly business" in one thread.  Maybe let some of these unwritten "forbidden topics" to have their own threads, and direct people there, if you don't want them clogging up the "special" threads?

Quote
However, when you factor in the plethora of rules in combination of what is likely MANY new members that join specifically out of SpaceX interest...you are going to need more moderation than usual in the SpaceX forums.
Nobody reads the rules.  Not saying it as a complaint; it's a statement of fact.  They're like EULAs, or your car's manual, or the warning labels on household chemicals.  No matter how much you wish they would, they won't.  People are going to come in and post in whatever thread they see something interesting, because that's how forums work.  No need to bite heads off.
It's also quite easy to lose track of what thread you're posting in, especially on a small screen. 

I do like SirBlah's suggestion - simplify discussion vs. update thread titles, and make the update threads stickies. 

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12080
  • IRAS fan
  • The Netherlands
  • Liked: 18041
  • Likes Given: 12042
Voted YES.
The number of concern-trolling m*rons is becoming absolutely horrendous in launch updates threads.No matter how often you tell them NOT to post their idiotic arm-chair 'analyses' in the updates thread, they still do.

It's annoying, it's tiring and worst of all it degrades the quality of this forum.
So, for potentially 'exciting' update threads, such as the launch of Starship prototypes, I would very much like to see a limitation on who can post. Preferably a limitation to NSF staff only.

Offline RonM

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
  • Atlanta, Georgia USA
  • Liked: 2231
  • Likes Given: 1584
I’d say no, but with some exceptions. It should by default NOT be restricted, but perhaps with some way to turn on restriction temporarily if mods see it’s a big problem.

I have accidentally posted in the updates before but I quickly move it over to discussion.

A warning that you're about to post in an update thread would help. That should stop most people from posting in the wrong thread (it would help me).

Offline AJW

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 806
  • Liked: 1314
  • Likes Given: 136
Before draconian measures that will require moderators to manage who can and can't post updates, see if this board technology allows modifications to the posting page to add a second button.  Another simple step would be to add text around the 'post' button reminding users to double check that they aren't posting a discussion in an update thread by accident.  Is it a band-aid?  Sure, but better a band-aid than a tourniquet. 
We are all interested in the future, for that is where you and I are going to spend the rest of our lives.

Offline MySDCUserID

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 371
  • Liked: 55
  • Likes Given: 10
Voted YES.
The number of concern-trolling m*rons is becoming absolutely horrendous in launch updates threads.No matter how often you tell them NOT to post their idiotic arm-chair 'analyses' in the updates thread, they still do.

It's annoying, it's tiring and worst of all it degrades the quality of this forum.
So, for potentially 'exciting' update threads, such as the launch of Starship prototypes, I would very much like to see a limitation on who can post. Preferably a limitation to NSF staff only.


This is unnecessarily harsh.    I'd imagine the bulk of the missplaced posts in the UPDATES thread are purely by accident.  You're in the thread, you see something new that might be worth commenting on, so you hit that reply button.  It's intuitive to hit that reply button.  You know what's not intuitive?   ...Documenting (either by copy/paste or whatever) what the relevant post was that you want to reply to, then switching to a totally different thread that very likely have an unrelated discussion on-going already, then insert your reference and your comment.   The proactive and non-elitist user-friendly way to fix this is:
1). Warn users when they hit that button that it's for updates only
2). Set up a script as part of that warning that automatically starts a new reply in the discussion thread for the user.  Warning asks if you're sure you want to post in the UPDATES thread.  If user clicks "[My Post Isn't an Update] the script takes them to discussion thread and starts a new comment... possibly with the reference to the UPDATES post already populated.
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 08:56 pm by MySDCUserID »

Offline Nevyn72

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 816
  • Australia
  • Liked: 1038
  • Likes Given: 120
Another vote for a warning pop-up before posting here, I think most are accidental or truly don't appreciate the error...

Offline JimOnMars

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Liked: 11
  • Likes Given: 1
Yes.

1 - It's nice to have a few threads that are restricted.  Since moderators can (and do) move posts out, why not just set the thread up that way to begin with?  There is no value in posting something to a thread only to have it removed minutes later.  In the meantime, everyone's notifications are spammed for a post that no longer exists.  What is the value in that?

2 - There are thousands of other threads where people can post unrestricted.  I feel like the 'no' responders are acting pretty entitled when they demand unrestricted access to a site that already gives them posting privileges to 99.9% of it. If they really have new info (like found debris or an image different than the dozens already there) they should be able to send it to a mod. No, you don't need to post right this second.  What happens if your post is delayed?  Does the world stop spinning?  What happens if you have to post in the discussion thread?  Does the world stop spinning?

Online seanpg71

  • Member
  • Posts: 38
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 21
Voted YES.
The number of concern-trolling m*rons is becoming absolutely horrendous in launch updates threads.No matter how often you tell them NOT to post their idiotic arm-chair 'analyses' in the updates thread, they still do.

It's annoying, it's tiring and worst of all it degrades the quality of this forum.
So, for potentially 'exciting' update threads, such as the launch of Starship prototypes, I would very much like to see a limitation on who can post. Preferably a limitation to NSF staff only.


That's not just an Updates vs Discussion thread issue.  I'd rather those get kicked out of the discussion thread too.  I want to see what SpaceX is actually doing in Texas right now and to a lesser degree some discussion of how and why those things are happening.  I don't care about what people think they should be doing differently or uninformed speculation about what they are doing with each strange unidentified dohicky.

If I could wave a wand an make it happen we'd combine the various production and facilities and launch campaign threads so there aren't a billion places to look, but there'd be
A) A tightly controlled thread with infrequent event and announcement type updates for when something big and new is actually changing or happening that people should subscribe to and would want an email for
B) A combined updates/discussion thread that has all the pictures and tweets and some minor informed discussion and interpretation about the specific contents therein so we don't have to keep cross-referencing threads to figure out what people are talking about in the discussion thread
C) A whining and speculation thread where people can argue about how SpaceX needs to redesign their legs and add more or fewer baffles and what that foundation might be for and why it's being set up wrong.

That sounds even harder to moderate though.  And would be a bit subjective.

Offline AC in NC

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2484
  • Raleigh NC
  • Liked: 3627
  • Likes Given: 1949
If they really have new info (like found debris or an image different than the dozens already there) they should be able to send it to a mod. No, you don't need to post right this second.  What happens if your post is delayed?  Does the world stop spinning?  What happens if you have to post in the discussion thread?  Does the world stop spinning?

That's ridiculous.  Mods don't have nearly enough time to cover the quantity of updates SpaceX generates and posting it in discussion doesn't help anything.  IIRC, moving posts is actually a non-trivial PITA

Online DigitalMan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1669
  • Liked: 1169
  • Likes Given: 76
I vote yes, though, to provide clarity on what people are voting for, please define what an UPDATE is clearly.

Offline JimOnMars

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Liked: 11
  • Likes Given: 1
If they really have new info (like found debris or an image different than the dozens already there) they should be able to send it to a mod. No, you don't need to post right this second.  What happens if your post is delayed?  Does the world stop spinning?  What happens if you have to post in the discussion thread?  Does the world stop spinning?

That's ridiculous.  Mods don't have nearly enough time to cover the quantity of updates SpaceX generates and posting it in discussion doesn't help anything.  IIRC, moving posts is actually a non-trivial PITA
Which is exactly what we have now.  Mods don't have time to comb through the update thread every 30 seconds waiting for a non-update, then go through the hassle to move it.  If 100 people send them non-updates for the update thread, they can just dump them into the round file...they don't even have to read them if they don't want to.  Easy Peasy.

Offline AC in NC

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2484
  • Raleigh NC
  • Liked: 3627
  • Likes Given: 1949
Mods don't have time to comb through the update thread every 30 seconds waiting for a non-update, then go through the hassle to move it.  If 100 people send them non-updates for the update thread, they can just dump them into the round file...they don't even have to read them if they don't want to.  Easy Peasy.
They don't do that.  And they couldn't dump them without reading them and accomplish anything meaningful with such a change.

This is precisely the same thing as throngs of people thinking they've got the latest hot new idea that SpaceX has never thought of.  The team has been doing this a long time and the excellent system we have now is the end result of them understanding the trades and creating one of the best systems on the interwebs.
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 10:14 pm by AC in NC »

Offline Joey D

  • Member
  • Posts: 63
  • NJ, USA
  • Liked: 113
  • Likes Given: 49
Which is exactly what we have now.  Mods don't have time to comb through the update thread every 30 seconds waiting for a non-update, then go through the hassle to move it....

Apparently they do.  Or technically there are enough active non-mods reporting posts to mods to take action.  It's actually quite remarkable in how fast posts are moderated in this forum.

If you restrict who can post in a so-called "update thread" then by definition you will not get some legitimate updates from some folks who have them but are not "experienced enough" to be let into the "update thread club."

I am all for making it "harder" to post in an update thread (confirmations followed by immediate temporary ban if you ignore the pop-up confirmations, etc.)  That should cut down on incorrect posts while at the same time not discouraging wide participation.

Offline Faerwald

  • Member
  • Posts: 67
  • Liked: 72
  • Likes Given: 67
No.
There will be times that people not on the list of "elite" members do find something that is worthy of the update thread.

Offline JimOnMars

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Liked: 11
  • Likes Given: 1
Which is exactly what we have now.  Mods don't have time to comb through the update thread every 30 seconds waiting for a non-update, then go through the hassle to move it....

Apparently they do.  Or technically there are enough active non-mods reporting posts to mods to take action.  It's actually quite remarkable in how fast posts are moderated in this forum.

If you restrict who can post in a so-called "update thread" then by definition you will not get some legitimate updates from some folks who have them but are not "experienced enough" to be let into the "update thread club."

I am all for making it "harder" to post in an update thread (confirmations followed by immediate temporary ban if you ignore the pop-up confirmations, etc.)  That should cut down on incorrect posts while at the same time not discouraging wide participation.
A single, solid post (containing actual updates) would qualify you for the "update thread club."  It's exactly the same as we have now, except people's notifications aren't spammed.

Why are the 'No' sayers not complaining that their posts were removed?  I just do not understand this attitude.  Why is it perfectly acceptable for a post to exist for 30 seconds (or some other unit of time) and then be wiped, but somehow it is wrong for a post to exist for zero seconds?  What, really, is the difference?

Offline cartman

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 533
  • Greece
  • Liked: 520
  • Likes Given: 10253
My vote is for a a warning or a checkbox (are you sure this is an update, plz post questions in <link> thread)

Offline PDZiemer

My vote is no.
I primarily lurk on the forum.  I see other issues in the threads that upset me way more than an occasional non-update in the update thread.  There is the constant bickering and arguing that gets started up on a regular basis between people who seem to want to prove that they know more than anyone else.  Arguing over semantics makes me nuts!  But back to the subject at hand.
I think that the suggestion to have a secondary confirmation that the post is going where it is intended to go (update or discussion) is a great one.  In the few cases where I have posted, I have hovered over the post button with trepidation, worrying that I was saying something useful in the right place.  It is one of the reasons that I am so hesitant to post.  I just got a warning that there have been 2 posts to this thread while I was typing, suggesting that I might want to review my post.  A similar warning for update threads might be an easy solution.
I am L2 as if that matters, but I should not have any additional rights to post updates than someone else because most everyone here probably knows a lot more about rockets than I do.  I am just a polymer scientist, not a rocket scientist.  I would rather skim over a few posts that are in the wrong place than to miss something that I want to know because the person who witnessed an event or knew a piece of important information did not have the proper posting rights.
Nothing that can be done will make the situation go away completely, so my preference would be to keep restrictions to a minimum.  Keep up the great work everyone!  I appreciate all that I learn here.

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
I voted yes and only during live events to L2 Members which helps support the site... Other times are fine and anyone can make a mistake from time to time... You can still post it to the Discussion Thread...

Edit to Add:

That’s just pay to win.....
No L2 pays for the servers so that you can say that...
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline Joey D

  • Member
  • Posts: 63
  • NJ, USA
  • Liked: 113
  • Likes Given: 49
A single, solid post (containing actual updates) would qualify you for the "update thread club." 

How does one make a single, solid post to an update thread...if they have not yet made a single solid post to an update thread to "qualify?"  And what happens when subsequent to qualification, they make an erroneous post? 

Quote
Why are the 'No' sayers not complaining that their posts were removed?

Edit: Sorry...I misread your statement..I am modifying my response:
.
The no sayers are not complaining because we understand the reason for the moderation.

But this is not about people not wanting their posts moderated or moved.   This is about potentially taking action (banning some class of member) that can discourage / prevent actual quality posts from being made. 

It's a trade-off worth discussion for sure.  But you must understand that preventing a "class" of users from posting in a thread is in fact a trade-off: you may increase the signal to noise ratio...but you might also decrease the absolute signal.
« Last Edit: 03/30/2021 10:45 pm by Joey D »

Offline JimOnMars

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Liked: 11
  • Likes Given: 1
A single, solid post (containing actual updates) would qualify you for the "update thread club." 

How does one make a single, solid post to an update thread...if they have not yet made a single solid post to an update thread to "qualify?"  And what happens when subsequent to qualification, they make an erroneous post? 

Quote
Why are the 'No' sayers not complaining that their posts were removed?

Edit: Sorry...I misread your statement..I am modifying my response:
.
The no sayers are not complaining because we understand the reason for the moderation.

But this is not about people not wanting their posts moderated or moved.   This is about potentially taking action (banning some class of member) that can discourage / prevent actual quality posts from being made. 

It's a trade-off worth discussion for sure.  But you must understand that preventing a "class" of users from posting in a thread is in fact a trade-off: you may increase the signal to noise ratio...but you might also decrease the absolute signal.

You make a post by sending it to the mod.  Perhaps there could be a special button for this...or perhaps posts to the forum could never show until moderated (automatically for those in the 'club').

You are currently prevented from posting in the updates thread.  Right now.  Your 'class' is not allowed.  What is so offensive that an automated tool pre-filters your 'class' instead of a person filtering the 'class'?

The only difference, at all, in these two cases are: 

1 - currently posts from your 'class' stay up for 30 seconds, or longer.  Discussed system sets this to zero.
2 - every post from your 'class' dings the notifications on that thread.  Discussed system prevents this.
3 - currently moderators delete your 'class'.  Discussed system it is not necessary.
4 - No button currently exists for a person of your 'class' to post to restricted threads.  Discussed system would include this (or moderated the thread.)

You are currently in a class of posters who are not allowed to post (permanently) to the thread.  You seem to be OK with this.  Isn't this classism?

Yes, you can now post for 30 seconds before being wiped.  Hooray!  Viva la revolución!  This is really all you want?



Offline ulm_atms

  • Rocket Junky
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 918
  • To boldly go where no government has gone before.
  • Liked: 1542
  • Likes Given: 734
I just used report to mod because this ENTIRE poll/thread is in the wrong place to begin with.  It has nothing to do with SpaceX or SS.  Anyone see the irony here?  ;)

Offline cuddihy

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1251
  • Liked: 580
  • Likes Given: 935
I had OP, sorry for the meta-posting. Purpose was partly as a sacrificial anode to take some of the non-update mod angst out of the discussion thread. It did that but there's still no shortage of silliness in the discussion threads.
But for the poll  I see we're converging on 50% each way.

Since a change in a successful model probably needs a supermajority, probably best to leave it the way it is, but the idea of a warning button that requires a second verification for an UPDATES thread post seems like it has a lot of support.

Offline Vanspace

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 291
  • Canada
  • Liked: 377
  • Likes Given: 318
I voted yes. For the future, when the problem of flooding Updates with garbage posts will be caused intentionally. I think I speak to the lived experience of a LOT of users when I say that every community site from knitting to kite flying eventually becomes the target of this tactic.

NSF Update threads are useful information because they are generally free from noise and jamming.

Practical Implementation: Have a whitelist of the 100 or so people who regularly have updates to post. They can direct submit. Anyone else who tries has their post automatically redirected to post in the discussion thread. If the material actually belongs in the update thread, it should not be long before somebody on the whitelist notices the fact and moves it. This process handles the majority of cases (should be in discussion) while reasonably handling edge cases with a minimum anybody having to work much.

One of the unique advantages that NSF posses is a rabid herd of OCD Nerds. Any hint of New, Newsworthy or Updated information showing up in the discussion threads always attracts a highly visible reaction like dropping a cow into piranhas. The size of the commotion is a gauge of how much meat the post contains. I note that a number of now regular posters of info-graphics, maps and such got pushed by discussion threads to put them in Updates. Before my time but my understanding is that this same process is how BocaChicaGal was discovered by NSF.

1) The vast majority of good Update posts are from a few users. Whitelist them.
2) The vast majority of what is left should be in discussion. Put them there automatically.
3) If somebody actual has good stuff, move that to Update.  Its pretty easy to tell when it happens. If it happens to the same user a couple of times consider whitelisting them. This way mods get to enjoy helping high quality new contributors while not having to deal with the other type as much. It won't happen often, so let them have this tiny bit of joy in their otherwise miserable mod existence.
"p can not equal zero" is the only scientific Truth. I could be wrong (p<0.05)

Offline chopsticks

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1057
  • Québec, Canada
  • Liked: 1075
  • Likes Given: 164
I just used report to mod because this ENTIRE poll/thread is in the wrong place to begin with.  It has nothing to do with SpaceX or SS.  Anyone see the irony here?  ;)

That's not totally true.. The mis-posts happen mostly in the Starship section.

Offline xor

  • Member
  • Posts: 18
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 5
I voted No.

This is my understanding:

Moderators are doing a fantastic job!
Update threads aren't being DDoSed--most are accidental posts happening in the heat of the moment, including sometimes by experienced posters (whitelisting will not be a panacea).
But this isn't a long lived problem because... mods are cleaning things up quickly!

I'd support an extra dialog of "This is an update thread, are you sure?" though I wonder how that would with Tapatalk or whatever other mobile software that might be in use.

So what's really the pain point if moderators are on top of things? Immediate email notifications

We're talking about changing an otherwise working moderation system to a blind whitelisting system as far as I can tell primarily because of the notification system.

Is there any way to make a better notification system than emails? If not, is that worth special user classes?

I would have added to one or two topics in the Politics section, but I'm not L2. I could have cross-posted it to the party thread or such, but instead I just let it go.

Here's the attitude I have, and I would hope most users do as well: In the unlikely event I'm lucky enough to visit Boca Chica or have exclusive pictures or news about any spaceflight event, I would love to have the honor of posting to an update thread as a useful part of the historical record.

Whatever happens with this, I'm still grateful for NSF and all the contributors here. I've learned so much, and I don't expect that to change no matter what is implemented here.

FWIW, I've mentioned this before in other threads: I really find it incredibly helpful to use the existing notifications to collect interesting threads by turning off all emails by setting it to notify me of "Nothing at all", and ultimately use the Profile - Notifications list as a landing page and read the New threads backwards.

Offline freddo411

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1051
  • Liked: 1192
  • Likes Given: 3411
I voted no

Every so often a newbie like Nomad shows up.   A prescribed system of special, blessed update people will prevent/discourage wonderful sources from participating.   

Less is more

The best moderator is NO moderator

Offline Mark S

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2283
  • Dallas, TX
  • Liked: 395
  • Likes Given: 80
I voted no, with the proviso that each post in an update thread must be confirmed by the poster that it is actually an update, not a question or a comment. A simple checkbox should be sufficient.


Offline JimOnMars

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Liked: 11
  • Likes Given: 1
I voted no

Every so often a newbie like Nomad shows up.   A prescribed system of special, blessed update people will prevent/discourage wonderful sources from participating.   

Less is more

The best moderator is NO moderator

But this isn't the question.

Currently there is a moderator who works his/her butt off to delete all these non-update posts.

Nobody (except a rare few) seem to be asking to get rid of this moderator.  Hip tip...won't happen.

The question is to the manner of deletion.  Either delete before the post (i.e. never let it happen in the first place) or delete after the post.  Many people think that getting their posts deleted within minutes is the best way to welcome new members.  Nothing says "Welcome brother!  Welcome sister!" better than a big, fat DELETE.

Personally, I think that's nuts.  Just me, I guess.
« Last Edit: 03/31/2021 02:21 am by JimOnMars »

Offline freddo411

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1051
  • Liked: 1192
  • Likes Given: 3411
I voted no

Every so often a newbie like Nomad shows up.   A prescribed system of special, blessed update people will prevent/discourage wonderful sources from participating.   

Less is more

The best moderator is NO moderator

But this isn't the question.

Currently there is a moderator who works his/her butt off to delete all these non-update posts.

Nobody (except a rare few) seem to be asking to get rid of this moderator.  Hip tip...won't happen.

The question is to the manner of deletion.  Either delete before the post (i.e. never let it happen in the first place) or delete after the post.  Many people think that getting their posts deleted within minutes is the best way to welcome new members.  Nothing says "Welcome brother!  Welcome sister!" better than a big, fat DELETE.

Personally, I think that's nuts.  Just me, I guess.
.

Sorry I didn’t really mean to get rid of the moderation scheme that is currently used here.

I meant to imply that we should not have barriers for normal people posting into any threads. In other words moderation in a broad context.

Offline russianhalo117

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8744
  • Liked: 4646
  • Likes Given: 768
I voted no

Every so often a newbie like Nomad shows up.   A prescribed system of special, blessed update people will prevent/discourage wonderful sources from participating.   

Less is more

The best moderator is NO moderator

But this isn't the question.

Currently there is a moderator who works his/her butt off to delete all these non-update posts.

Nobody (except a rare few) seem to be asking to get rid of this moderator.  Hip tip...won't happen.

The question is to the manner of deletion.  Either delete before the post (i.e. never let it happen in the first place) or delete after the post.  Many people think that getting their posts deleted within minutes is the best way to welcome new members.  Nothing says "Welcome brother!  Welcome sister!" better than a big, fat DELETE.

Personally, I think that's nuts.  Just me, I guess.
.

Sorry I didn’t really mean to get rid of the moderation scheme that is currently used here.

I meant to imply that we should not have barriers for normal people posting into any threads. In other words moderation in a broad context.
That scheme has failed many times over the years so what exists now will not be changing any time soon.

Offline catdlr

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10670
  • Enthusiast since the Redstones
  • Marina del Rey, California, USA
  • Liked: 7939
  • Likes Given: 7379
I voted Yes.  I would like to see the current "Update" and "Discussion" threads stay as-is but introduced an "Event" or "Live" Thread created just hours before the launch (etc) and when the event ends, manned by NSF reporting staff members with other members with vehicle background/work-related, etc, that could sig-up to the thread to added educational/vehicle information (etc) commentary.
« Last Edit: 03/31/2021 03:54 am by catdlr »
Tony De La Rosa, ...I'm no Feline Dealer!! I move mountains.  but I'm better known for "I think it's highly sexual." Japanese to English Translation.

Offline JimOnMars

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Liked: 11
  • Likes Given: 1
I voted no

Every so often a newbie like Nomad shows up.   A prescribed system of special, blessed update people will prevent/discourage wonderful sources from participating.   

Less is more

The best moderator is NO moderator

But this isn't the question.

Currently there is a moderator who works his/her butt off to delete all these non-update posts.

Nobody (except a rare few) seem to be asking to get rid of this moderator.  Hip tip...won't happen.

The question is to the manner of deletion.  Either delete before the post (i.e. never let it happen in the first place) or delete after the post.  Many people think that getting their posts deleted within minutes is the best way to welcome new members.  Nothing says "Welcome brother!  Welcome sister!" better than a big, fat DELETE.

Personally, I think that's nuts.  Just me, I guess.
.

Sorry I didn’t really mean to get rid of the moderation scheme that is currently used here.

I meant to imply that we should not have barriers for normal people posting into any threads. In other words moderation in a broad context.

But why?

Post, DELETE, Post, DELETE, Post, DELETE, Post, DELETE...why do you want this?

Why is deleting people's posts not a barrier?


Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8831
  • Seoul
  • Liked: 60381
  • Likes Given: 1294
 Everybody is making it too complicated. They just need to make Lar work harder.
Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who couldn't hear the music.

Offline xor

  • Member
  • Posts: 18
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 5
Post, DELETE, Post, DELETE, Post, DELETE, Post, DELETE...why do you want this?

Why is deleting people's posts not a barrier?

Because [organic] forum rules exist whether someone knows them or not and that's part of the process of people learning and eventually contributing.

Lurking for a long time or diving right in, mistakes are part of learning. Yesterday's lurkers may be tomorrow's contributors. Are we really doing them a favor by pre-empting their possible contributions, or is there something else at play?

I haven't seen many made in bad faith.

MHO, being optimistic I suppose.

Offline tyrred

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 917
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 747
  • Likes Given: 20290

I voted yes and I think it should go beyond the SpaceX threads. There is too much opinions and guessing in the L2 threads. The L2 threads should be update only, with a few people that have been registered with the NASA Spaceflight folks as experts for that particular thread having the ability to discuss. Maybe a I have a question button that is closely monitored for abuse.

I don’t come to L2 for opinions and guessing. I come to the L2 area for informed insider updates.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39249
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25187
  • Likes Given: 12104
Suggestion: make clicking on “quote” on an Updates post bring you to the Discussion page by default.

Also, I want to reiterate that posting should only be restricted (and done so temporarily) if triggered by a mod due to too many people wrongly posting in Updates.

It’d also be kind of nice if you could click a button in the updates thread to bring you to the same point in time in the Discussion thread, or possibly some link to quoted posts (like in Twitter where you can see links to quote-tweets of a tweet).
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline the_other_Doug

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3010
  • Minneapolis, MN
  • Liked: 2191
  • Likes Given: 4620
No - Absolutely not

If we're going to start gate-keeping here, why not just drop the pretence and make the site read-only except to L2 members and verified aerospace professionals?

And considering what we've learned recently about one particular forum member who was been shown to not have the industry experience he claimed, I think "verification" would likely end up exposing a few others who have either insinuated or flat stated they have experience that they do not have.  It's easy to state you've been a highly-placed aerospace professional for decades, and getting the adulation from the amazing peoples here that such a reputation merits, when you're just a low-level mechanic who can *sometimes* talk the talk.  Sorta.

On the other hand, one pass at weeding those types out could be useful -- not to stop people from posting, but to require the presentation of a verified CV in order to gain an "industry expert" tag or somesuch.  Sort of like Instagram having "verified" members.  It might surprise an awful lot of people that some of the informally acknowledged "experts" around here may really have never worked on any of the projects they've pretended to work on...

I mean, seriously, who's to know?  Some posters around here are given WAY too much leeway because of their supposed expertise.  I, for one, would like to actually see a few of these people be willing to go through a verification process to be "verified industry experts" in order for the leeway they're given to feel justified.
-Doug  (With my shield, not yet upon it)

Offline Joey D

  • Member
  • Posts: 63
  • NJ, USA
  • Liked: 113
  • Likes Given: 49
The question is to the manner of deletion.  Either delete before the post (i.e. never let it happen in the first place) or delete after the post.  Many people think that getting their posts deleted within minutes is the best way to welcome new members.  Nothing says "Welcome brother!  Welcome sister!" better than a big, fat DELETE.

It is not either/or. It can be both (which is what most of the "no" people are suggesting.)

1) Have some sort of confirmation for "updates" threads:  "Are you sure you want to post to this Update thread?  This is what update threads are for....  Consider posting in the corresponding discussion thread instead by clicking here...".  This is effectively "delete before the post"

AND

2) Mods continue to delete / move posts that are in fact in violation of the rules.  This is "delete after post".

Nothing says "Welcome brother!" by allowing brothers to post to threads when they have no reasonable way to know before posting that their post is in violation of the rules....and THEN they get a "big fat delete."
« Last Edit: 04/02/2021 01:13 pm by Joey D »

Offline rsnellenberger

  • Amateur wood butcher
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 837
  • Harbor Springs, Michigan
  • Liked: 371
  • Likes Given: 55
The mobile site view doesn’t help much - the attached screenshot is of the header for a L2 Update thread, but the big UPDATE flag at the END of the thread title has been elided on my iPhone 12...

Adding a “!!” flag at the beginning of all update thread titles would be quick, easy, and helpful.

(Edit: removed all possibly L2 info from screenshot)
« Last Edit: 04/02/2021 02:22 pm by rsnellenberger »

Offline Rebel44

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 565
  • Liked: 546
  • Likes Given: 2006
My vote is for a a warning or a checkbox (are you sure this is an update, plz post questions in <link> thread)

I agree.

IMO, hard limits (number of posts, whitelisted users, etc.) would inevitably result in interesting updates being completely missed or posted much later (when they might become less useful for some folks).

Offline Moskit

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 138
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 21
Two ideas for "updates" UI change, although not sure if forum engine supports it.
Both are based on people understanding UPDATE ONLY rules but getting caught in the heat of the moment. These could help alleviate the problems before considering more restrictive measures.

- change the page background in "updates" to make them distinct. This would serve as a visual reminder that this is not a discussion thread.

- add another warning (distinct visually from other warnings) before a post is posted "This is an update thread. Are you sure your post is an update?". This could be combined with the idea of a specific group of known good posters who can post without that warning, as it would give them speed/facility and preserve an ability to post by the others.

Offline 1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 366
  • El Segundo, CA
  • Liked: 747
  • Likes Given: 10
Possibly the only limitation I can see is  minimum number of posts such as 100 posts or something similar. Many of the people making the mistake are new to the forums and don't fully understand the rules as many other forums do not have these types of posting rules. Veteran posters do occasionally make this mistake also (including myself), but usually remove it as soon as they realize the mistake. It's easy to make this mistake due to the number of threads many of us have open due to the limited scope of threads. But I think a certain amount of experience in the forum is the best way to handle this.

Edit: if a new user does have a useful update, they could always post in the discussion area for a veteran or mod to repost in updates.

Not sure if a post limit is the way to go. Highly knowledgeable users or actual industry users who don't post often will be left out. In my experience new users will start posting rubish or barely passable posts to reach 100 posts as soon as possible.

Personally, if a change is to be made, I think a post counter is the best way to go. For starters, it's already (at least somewhat) built into the forum.

But secondly, I suspect (but don't know) that the vast majority of update thread offenders are simply newer users who don't know the site rules; and not lurking industry experts. A brief probationary period for new users to get accustomed to the site rules seems perfectly reasonable to me. Better 100 crap posts in a discussion thread than 100 crap posts in an update thread; which then need to be removed.

And honestly, IMO, the knowledge of the experts is far better tapped in the discussion threads. Really, any thread that's not an update thread. With full respect to those who take their time to populate the update threads correctly, we don't really need expert knowledge to repost a tweet, or a post a screen capture from a live feed. IMO, Gems like Nomadd and bocachicagal are comparatively few and far between. YMMV.

I'm not going to vote yes or no. This is Chris' site. I'll abide whatever decision ends up making his workload and the workload of his team easier.

Offline Lar

  • Fan boy at large
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13463
  • Saw Gemini live on TV
  • A large LEGO storage facility ... in Michigan
  • Liked: 11864
  • Likes Given: 11081
Lots of good suggestions.

As of right now I'm not sure we have an easy technical way to implement some of them. I like the big popup but I myself don't know how to do it... (not to be confused with can't be done!!!)

I REALLY like the suggestion to "make clicking on “quote” on an Updates post bring you to the Discussion page by default..." so far no one who's looked at it has sorted out how to do it.
« Last Edit: 04/06/2021 02:35 am by Lar »
"I think it would be great to be born on Earth and to die on Mars. Just hopefully not at the point of impact." -Elon Musk
"We're a little bit like the dog who caught the bus" - Musk after CRS-8 S1 successfully landed on ASDS OCISLY

Offline Johnnyhinbos

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3863
  • Boston, MA
  • Liked: 8095
  • Likes Given: 942
Lots of good suggestions.

As of right now I'm not sure we have an easy technical way to implement some of them. I like the big popup but I myself don't know how to do it... (not to be confused with can't be done!!!)

I REALLY like the suggestion to "make clicking on “quote” on an Updates post bring you to the Discussion page by default..." so far no one who's looked at it has sorted out how to do it.
I had made this suggestion a few years ago. In it I said if there was an established naming convention for threads it was not very difficult.

Eg:

[Base thread name] - Updates & Images

[Base thread name] - Discussion

Quote button uses current thread name in logic. If contains “Update” then post to “Discussion”. And if no associated Discussion then create and post.

Mods could easily ensure naming convention maintained
John Hanzl. Author, action / adventure www.johnhanzl.com

Offline Nomadd

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8831
  • Seoul
  • Liked: 60381
  • Likes Given: 1294
 I think we should just keep screwing around. Tilting the balance to far in the direction of order or chaos is always bad in movies.
Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who couldn't hear the music.

Offline FinalFrontier

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4480
  • Space Watcher
  • Liked: 1322
  • Likes Given: 173
Yes. I don't usually advocate for more moderation but the any time SpaceX does something it's absolutely insane the amount of people we get on site. So the update threads need special protecting.
3-30-2017: The start of a great future
"Live Long and Prosper"

Offline Chris Bergin

I have a much simpler solution. It Will take a bit of time to sort out, but 1) Won't mess with the forum software. 2) Won't mess with how it all looks.

We have a spare section, the "100,000 view post thread" which is defunct as threads get millions of views now.
1) Move all those threads back into their parent sections, which I've been thinking of doing as "Wow, 100,000 views" is no longer a "wow" these days. ;D

2) Move all the update-only threads into that empty section. Call it Starship Updates (or something). Restrict posting to a user group via a profile setting. A bit like how the Space Policy section works by being read-only unless you're a L2 member (and that's worked well). Obvious people in the user group like Future Space Tourist, Mary, etc., etc. We can add more as required.

3) Rename the current section (minus the update threads) Starship Discussion (or something) - and everyone can post in there.

Never again will there be a "new post" alert for a non-update post in the update threads.

Like if you approve!
« Last Edit: 04/10/2021 02:54 pm by Chris Bergin »
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Offline the_other_Doug

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3010
  • Minneapolis, MN
  • Liked: 2191
  • Likes Given: 4620
The only issue is this makes it hard to swivel between the update and discussion threads.  Might I suggest a prominent link at top that's labeled "Want to post to this discussion?  Click HERE" and similar back-links from the discussion threads.

With that, you'd have my vote.  ;)
-Doug  (With my shield, not yet upon it)

Offline Yazata

  • Member
  • Posts: 92
  • Silicon Valley California
  • Liked: 152
  • Likes Given: 461
One of NSF's fundamental challenges is that it seemingly wants to be two different things at the same time.

On one hand it's a board for engineers and industry professionals. That's one of the wonderful things about it since it's hugely educational and enlightening for the rest of us.

On the other hand it's a gathering place for a growing horde of space enthusiasts. Since NSF has started its increasingly popular youtube channel it's attracting lots more of these. We (I'm one of them) are laypeople who are excited by space but typically lack a technical background or employment in the industry.

So, does the board want to grow itself by attracting public participation? Or does it want to evolve into some sort of online trade publication? If it moves in the latter direction, by all means limit who can participate to insiders of whatever sort. But if it wants to expand interest in space, then it needs to take care not to be too intimidating, hostile and dismissive.

Perhaps one solution might be for professionals who want to avoid posts that they consider low quality to make greater use of L-2. That could become the insiders' trade publication arm of NSF, a discussion board within a discussion board so to speak, consisting of nothing but posts of the desired higher standard.

Is it possible for the software to flag certain selected original content providers like Mary and Nomadd and copy their public update posts to the L-2 updates as well? I've seen Nomadd post in L-2 quite often and Chris Bergin often posts Mary's content there, so it's already happening pretty much.

That way both the 'yes' and the 'no' people would get what they seem to want. Updates in L-2 by only a selected cadre, notifications going out only for these -- while public updates remain open to all without telling people attracted by their love of space that in effect they aren't good enough to fully participate. (With the existing mod policies which I think are very good remaining in place of course.)
« Last Edit: 04/15/2021 04:54 am by Yazata »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0