ILE Suggestions Box

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

How can we make ILE better?

― Tom, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

"We" = the community as well as the moderators.

Incidentally we can't make any big structural changes to how the forums are run, that's all up to Lusenet.

― Tom, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I think it's dumb when people make "inside" replies. Like "Boy you just really pulled a Hanley! HAHAHA!" or "Shit! Better keep this thread from Ally!" Makes it seem annoying clique-y. Or maybe i just feel left out.

― chaki, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Isn't ILE just the people on it?

― chris, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

yup

― chiznaki, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Yes - so what this thread is asking is what could the people on ILE do to make it better. What would improve the ILE experience, in other words.

― Tom, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

yes and i suggested "we" make it less clique-y.

― chaki, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

But ILE is a clique.

― toraneko, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I don't think its very clique-y. For one, if it were, I wouldn't ever post. More important, the ILE "personalities" are hardly a secret. Most the "in-jokes" are derived from the forum itself and not of personal irl relationships, which makes them not all that hard to decipher. Perhaps we could create an ILE guide. A newbie pack of sorts, like some usenet groups do. I nominate ethan to write it's welcoming statement. (Psst, I said that b/c ethan is sometimes a wee bit abrasive.)

― bnw, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

It's true enough that when a new person posts (i.e. me) no-one acknowledges or welcomes them (except boyofbadgers, who is v sexy for doing so). Not that I mind much, but it could put people off.

― Mark Casarotto, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

If someone says hi I'm new I usually try to say something. If they just slip in through the side door then I usually won't notice unless their first posting is raunchy.

― Tom, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

You know, I never thought of saying "hi". I suppose I could give it a go...

Hi! I'm Mark, I'm a karaoke occasional, I'm bald, I've been known to sexually harass Nick Dastoor in public, and I'm darn glad to be here!

― Markx, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I prefer it if people don't draw attention to the fact they're new, cos after posting for a while it looks like they've been around forever.

― DG, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Hiya Mark! (in Lard voice workings yesssssssss my pretties...)

I think the practise of one person posting three or four posts in a row for express purposes of "statscock" (yawn) positions aint that grand. Of course if you remember something afterwards fine, I quite often do that being a SPAZ, but posting just for an extra position is a little tedious.

― Sarah, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Hijacking of multiple threads by the same two people carrying on a conversation can sometimes be a little tedious.

― RickyT, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'd like to second Mr T there, he's spot on.

― chris, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Thirded.

― Andrew L, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Yes since inevitably conversation is nothing to do with the subject of the thread or even ILE. Just use feckin MSN messenger or something.

― Ronan, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

i was about to post the same thing - the threads which are hijacked and turned into essentially chat-rooms by certain people are particularly annoying

― m jemmeson, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

You can always skip those threads that don't interest you, they're pretty easy to spot.

― fritz, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Yeah but often stuff has an interesting subject and people just take it over and thus kill it. So it shouldnt have had to skipped.

― Ronan, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

The only changeable thing that irritates me is that fucking statistics bullshit - WHO GIVES A RAT'S ASS HOW MANY POSTS SOMEONE HAS MADE? And "statscock"? What are we, in junior high school? Ugh.

― Ally, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

True enough, but they can rob threads of momentum.

― bnw, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

amen.

― fritz, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Ally is top of the statscock. What a loser.

― Ronan, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Who came up with the term "statscock" anyway?

― Sarah, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Kate St. Claire? I think, tho' it could very well be Hanle y.

― Nicole, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

No, it was definitely Miss Thing that came up with it, Hanley wouldn't come up with something that uncouth and obnoxious. He's a bit more clever than "bend over for the statscock!"

― ALly, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Miss Thing? Now there's a slang term I hadn't heard in a while.

― Samantha, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

It showed up on a thread before Kate started the statscock thread, though. I think it was Hanle y actually.

― Tom, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

My suggestion: we (we?) need to tackle what Mr Kogan rightly described a while back - the way that threads stop before they've really started. I can't recall his term for it right now.

― the pinefox, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

i think Anthony owned up to the term, if i remember correctly. the thread title was Kate's though

― m jemmeson, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Anthony said it as an offhand comment first, then Kate used it as a title.

― Graham, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

"Statscock" must be preserved, for I am just now getting some personal momentum behind my "just another blip on the statscock" rhyme.

― Nitsuh, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I hate the term as well, also people vying for it. Also hate the thread hijacking just to chat back and forth bullshit.

― Sean, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Hey Sean, so what're you going to eat for dinner tonight?

― Samantha, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

yep...I hereby pledge to no longer be concerned with stats. I am going to be a more restrained and calm poster from now on. Thank you.

― james, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Samantha, are you trying to trick me into hijacking this thread for personal reasons? It's not gonna work.

Ok, I was thinking about pork chops...

― Sean, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'd love to take credit for it, but it was the fanastically wonderful Anthony who came up with that exact turn of phrase.

God, two days back in the workforce, and I'm already kneeling at the statscock again. Kill me.

― kate, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Yes Sean I was trying to trick you. I'm not one for pork but I'm sure you'll have a lovely dinner anyway. I think I might have enchiladas. . .

― Samantha, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Though Kate did inspire it: That thread.

― Graham, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

>>I hate the term as well, also people vying for it. Also hate the thread hijacking just to chat back and forth bullshit.

oooh, i must have lots of fans here then! :) i have to say, it annoyed some people, so yeah i probably shouldn't have done it (as far as i'm aware, it only happenened when i was drunk and bored ONCE anyway), but i think you are over-reacting a little. it doesn't kill a thread, its easy enough to ignore the BS and just post and read what you wanna. Sheesh, can none of y'all skim-read or sumpin? and as for the statscock, mostly (being the operative word) people only talk about it on the statscock threads. so, the word is "juvenile", big fucking deal, everyone is juvenile.

i don't have any actual complaints to make about ILE. i just wanna reiterate though that the thread-hijackings were a one-off.

― di, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'm not particularly annoyed but I must say it does kill a thread. Completely.

― Ronan, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

only if you let it

― di, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I think Di and Menelaus have lots of interesting stuff to say and also I have been guilty of sabotaging some threads I'm sure. Sorry and I think it's good that this has been pointed out.

― Maryann, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

thanx M, its probably cos you know us though.

― di, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

i know it's been discussed many times before but whats the point of taking over a thread when you can just e-mail back and forth? or use AIM/ICQ or another p2p program..yeah you can skim over the banter but it can be annoying and kill threads (many examples of this).

― kevin enas, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

it's not the chatting which is a problem, but the fact it takes over the thread, makes it hard to post anything on the original subject, and also keeps the thread high up in the New Answers list, so everyone has to keep checking it to see what's new...

moan moan moan etc!

― m jemmeson, Thursday, 1 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

STEVIE T STARTED THE BEND OVER AND OPEN UP FOR THE STATSCOCK!!!!

Argrgrgrhrhhrhahahahahahahahahahahahhahaahhahaahahhahahahahaaa REPEAT TILL FADE HA HAHA HA HA HA ah, fetch me my watercolours!

― Sarah, Thursday, 1 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Sarah, you reckon they mean us when they talk about people having clique-y conversations that noone else gets? I wonder just how annoying it is? Did I tell you I cleaned the loo last night? Frankly, a disturbing experience. The point is, Actually, I dunno. I just like the sound of my own voice. Do I annoy everyone?

― alix, Thursday, 1 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

to-day I got email spam inviting me to look @ pics ov people making it w/other species. Really. This pisses me off so much, and I would blow up thee car ov those responsible, were I able to find them. Email spam = SUX0R.......

― Norman Phay, Thursday, 1 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Errrr....how did that wind up in here? That was supposed to go in the "Spam" thread (?????) Still fucked off abt it though.

― Norman Phay, Thursday, 1 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'm not entirely comfortable with the ILM/E split, frankly. Not sure why.

But really it's Frank's point, by way of the pinefox, that we ought to be thinking about. I'm not sure that 2-word chat posts are to blame for this. If you don't like the turn of convo post your invaluable thorts and we will all give a listen. (I mean if we're not allowed to hijack threads with 2 word posts about how drunk we got last night, how are we ever to climb the mighty stats pole?? Eh?? :) stats obsession obviously juvenile but GOOD for me because it gets me writin. two-word answers can be just as valuable as hyooge paras)

― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 1 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

things i like as a reader:
—cliques i'm not part of (eg alix and sarah talking abt laundry in the bath; allyworld)
—threads being hijacked/long hermetic impenetrable conversations
—when two no-longer related sets of conversation/argt are going on at the same time, overlapping strangely
—radical and/or stupid attempts to push the envelopes of the english-whatever language
—up to a point (and probably further than you'd think or approve) creative deadpan nastiness (i r punXoR and that stuff's ingrained, so sue me)

― mark s, Thursday, 1 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

most threads tend to go off subject anyway, in some kind of weird organic development. I quite like the veritable potpourri of conversation one can dip into

― Menelaus Darcy, Thursday, 1 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Honestly, I like the inside jokes. It makes it more of a game trying to figure out what people are saying. As long as it's not ALL inside jokes, e.g. "I R pulling a Hanley trying to bend over for the statscock. Blurrilaz!" And I totally agree with Tracer that the ILM/E split is weird. It's kind of like a barrier that separates the would- be regulars from normal regulars. I hesitated posting to ILE at first, because I thought it was only regulars. I would have no problem merging the two boards, although then there might be too many threads.

― Vinnie, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

ILE was created back in about June, because of all the non-music related stuff being posted on ILM...

― m jemmeson, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Was that sarcastic, mark?

― Ally, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

ILE would be better if some certain people on this board didn't take themselves so damn seriously. honestly, i am sick to death of people around here psyching out at others over the very things they are guilty of themselves. i think there are some certain "big personalities" on ILE who get jealous when anyone else makes a lasting impression, i guess they feel like their so-called territory is being invaded. lighten up, you know who you are. if your shitty that your no longer the most gravitational person on ILE, then perhaps you need to get a life.

― di, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

ally: no, it wasn't — i wanted to stick up for stuff i liked which was getting a bum rap

― mark s, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Id like to wipe out butt mucious.

― Mr Noodles, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

oooh, flame war ahoy. That ought to keep the lurkers entertained

― Menelaus Darcy, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I STARTED STATS COCK !

― anthony, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

master!

― Menelaus Darcy, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

hi. i decided that i dont really care. i dont know why i posted that shit in the beginning of the thread. you guys do whatever the fuck ya want. lifes too short. i like it here.

― chiznaki, Friday, 2 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

ally: no, it wasn't — i wanted to stick up for stuff i liked which was getting a bum rap

Good, that's what I hoped you'd say. That's one of the reasons why I like you loads, mr. mark - you're just like "I like this this and this and that's all there is to it" and move on with your life.

― Ally, Monday, 5 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.