Two Steps Behind

[yavuz]

I always find it constructive to read my posts one more time before I post it. Perhaps some of the users could make the same and take a deep breath before writing another because the last messages here turned into a personal debate which I belive it's not helping anyone. Gene doesn't have to listen to our suggestions as you don't need to make them. If I feel ignored, I do the same. Simple as that.

 

[-GR-]

I am going to give one last shot at this. Out of the other thoughts and opinions others have provided which I thought were quite good IMHO.

The site in particular "The Paracast Community", I understand you had your moderators take a test ride. Did you happen to have your members take a test ride as well? Setting up an imported test site so their accounts were still active and have them give it a go before making the switch?

I understand you may have had good feeback from your other two sites, but they are small and barely any activity(not trying to be rude with that comment) so the opinions are from a smaller consensus. With your larger site you have more people to please and if they are active, they also want to be active in decisions made for the community, not just something that is thrown on their lap.

The opinions and criticism that were given by other people in this thread which again I thought was great IMHO were about how to go about dealing and making things better. Ways to word comments and make them feel that their feedback is appreciated.

Like I said earlier and I should have stopped then.... good luck with your community.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Thank you. I never promised to obey anyone's suggestions, but where I found stuff that I could sink my teeth into, I made further comments or asked questions.

Since it's obviously not possible to mimic the look and feel of the previous forum, it may just be a matter of letting it ride and hoping that the members who question the new forums will come around and adapt. Obviously, I'll be looking into more themes and add-ons to help.

As to inviting them to be participants, if you look at our Talk About the Forum board, you'll see I do it constantly.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

I am going to give one last shot at this. Out of the other thoughts and opinions others have provided which I thought were quite good IMHO.

The site in particular "The Paracast Community", I understand you had your moderators take a test ride. Did you happen to have your members take a test ride as well? Setting up an imported test site so their accounts were still active and have them give it a go before making the switch?

I understand you may have had good feeback from your other two sites, but they are small and barely any activity(not trying to be rude with that comment) so the opinions are from a smaller consensus. With your larger site you have more people to please and if they are active, they also want to be active in decisions made for the community, not just something that is thrown on their lap.

The opinions and criticism that were given by other people in this thread which again I thought was great IMHO were about how to go about dealing and making things better. Ways to word comments and make them feel that their feedback is appreciated.

Like I said earlier and I should have stopped then.... good luck with your community.

One issue with putting the full forum into two modes would be coordinating posts and such. Remember, we had to import 120,000 messages. So would we have had an empty forum with no posts? If they posted, we'd have to zero them out, and start over, right? That's why I relied on the smaller forums to gain exposure.

Even then, would the few objections be sufficient to halt the process, or do you just use those concerns as guidance to move on?

As to the rest: Saying I should have done something, assuming I didn't do things I did do, or did things I didn't do, isn't constructive.

The board is live and functioning. We have to move forward from here and improve participation. Looking backwards doesn't help anyone, nor does expressing the unfortunate nastiness I saw in a few of the posts here from people you know.

 

[-GR-]

One issue with putting the full forum into two modes would be coordinating posts and such. Remember, we had to import 120,000 messages. So would we have had an empty forum with no posts? If they posted, we'd have to zero them out, and start over, right? That's why I relied on the smaller forums to gain exposure.

It's not so much to have a fully replicated site, it is so your current members before the date of the imported backup would already have a login and be able to view the site with content on it.

Even then, would the few objections be sufficient to halt the process, or do you just use those concerns as guidance to move on?

You have to weed through the feedback, of course you are going to get negative opinions and then weigh your options.

As to the rest: Saying I should have done something, assuming I didn't do things I did do, or did things I didn't do, isn't constructive.

The board is live and functioning. We have to move forward from here and improve participation. Looking backwards doesn't help anyone, nor does expressing the unfortunate nastiness I saw in a few of the posts here from people you know.

All of us understand that you have already switched and that isn't constructive. You asked why your participation has dropped since switching so then how you went about switching does affect the answer to some extent.

As has been stated talking to your members and not at them goes a long way. This has been covered and is only going to lead down one path.

You can only go on from the point you are at now, you need to listen to your members, if you can implement something that helps replace what they feel is missing then go that route. If it is something they are missing but is already there you have to show them a way by talking to them, talking them through it, maybe make a video to show them where the options now reside. Make links available on the new style where they might have been on the old style.

The opinions that I brought up were about how you respond to your members, similar to how you respond here to others who are trying to help. We are giving you our honest opinions and if I were a member asking questions and replied to like you have I would move on. You can take that for what it is worth but I am calling it how I see it.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

No, I'm not talking down to our members, as they know full well from being on the forum since 2006. I am simply providing the information they need to understand how things work, and inviting comments as to how things can be changed or made better. They haven't complained about my attitude, ever, and that is not the issue that caused forum participation to slow down since the forum changeover. We've had changeovers before, but to forum designs that were more traditional.

We've always listened to members, and the thread I linked to here has a message where I link to some new forum styles, so members can see some alternatives and see if they prefer a different design.

And do I make a video (and I don't do videos) for the two members who care about the nuts and bolts? Does that really help?

 

[Morgain]

It's fairly simple to change software, but much harder to change the way we as admins talk to our people. That's a big challenge.

As noted by another adviser earlier there are thriving communities using poor software. Software can enhance but not create.
What is irreplaceable is the way we make our members feel respected. This is human software!
My pilot husband sometimes refers to the linkage between the machine and the seat. Among pilots is commonplace that this is what causes most problems.

It is relevant that in over a year on this XF board using two different accounts and actively involved, I have hardly ever seen the kind of talk found on this thread. Accusations of personal attack are very rare here, as is personal attack itself.

We can only wish you luck Gene. Bye.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Well, you've seen it here. It started with your questionable attitude complaints, and went from there. I accept your apology if that's what it is.

 

[whynot]

RATION how many times you tell them XF is better on XYZ feature. They have made their own assessment and they don't think so. They need to know you respect that.

Bullseye.

 

[Deepmartini]

Well, you've seen it here. It started with your questionable attitude complaints, and went from there. I accept your apology if that's what it is.

Morgain has nothing to apologize for. She is an active member of this community and has been very helpful on this board. She gave her time to try and help you. Gene, we want you to succeed.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Morgain has nothing to apologize for. She is an active member of this community and has been very helpful on this board. She gave her time to try and help you. Gene, we want you to succeed.

I do not call mischaracterizing what I said and then telling me what I should have done, after the forum was already up and running, helpful. That's where the personalities got into the picture. Improving things doesn't mean going back through time, sorry.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Bullseye.

Very little of that goes on, actually. It has been rationed. Next!

 

[-GR-]

I do have to apologize to Morgain though because I misspelled her name in my one post. Going to fix it now

 

[-GR-]

Very little of that goes on, actually. It has been rationed. Next!

And I want to thank you Gene, for the feeling I have of wasting 1,000 key strokes that have gone unsung.

 

[whynot]

Morgain has nothing to apologize for...

Shee needs praise for her effort to help.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Shee needs praise for her effort to help.

I'm sorry, I live in a reality where people who are nasty deserve to be called out, not praised.

 

[Morgain]

Gene it doesn't help to use attack language. I appreciate you feel a bit "got at" because you're being told how to do it differently.
It's a tough move to ask for advice. It tends to mean you get some and it may be very different to what you expected.

I think you assumed the issue was software. But being an admin is much more about psychology and communication.
On the thread you gave us as an example of the issue this is what came across loud and clear: you were trying to TELL your members what to think rather than LISTENING to them.
Now a word like "listening" carries a lot of baggage and can weigh in as a guilt trip on leaders. To unpack it, purify it, and make it easier to receive here's the hard evidence. I didn't see you once tell anyone their comments were sensibe, understandable, intelligent, welcome, right, useful etc. What you did was instantly argue against them to get them to accept your point of view. That isn't going to get them to accept yours. It will get them to shut up ... or argue a bit ... or go away. But if they're strong enough to speak up they're strong enough to not just go under to you. They just won't LIKE IT that you haven't expressed clear and definite respect for what they say.

As I said, your reaction was entirely understandable because of your effort and investment. YOU understand how good XF is and it's frustrating if others don't understand something as well as we do!
But that's how it is and we have to work with folks the way they are.

I generally find it takes between 3 and 6 months to carry most of my people with me if I bring in a big change. During that time I'm not only doing software support, I'm stroking egos like mad to ease people into their new seats. A lot of that is tiresome effort for me. Being patient and showing respect for people who when I'm tired just seem silly fussy and awkward is not fun. Who'd be an admin!

 

[Gene Steinberg]

You are trying to have a better dialog. Actually, all I did was explain how the features worked, not tell anyone if they were necessarily better. Indeed, if you read the context of my responses, you'll see that I was always opened to better ways, but tried to cope with what I have.

If it takes 3 to 6 months for the forum to gel, so be it. But we can't look back.

 

[whynot]

I'm sorry, I live in a reality where people who are nasty deserve to be called out, not praised.

Reality is that you want to force your members to like a product they don't like.
Morgain gave you good advice how to do it.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

From the context of my statements in the forum, I was forcing nothing. I was simply telling people how it worked and inviting suggestions as to what we could do to improve things. Period. That's implicit in that thread, including the links to new forum skins.