Are there member excluded forums here?

[Billy Jingo]

Meaning that there are places where unwanted members are not allowed?

[Hondo]

Meaning that there are places where unwanted members are not allowed?

If there are, and you are one of the unwanted members (I'm just spitballing here, of course...) then why would they tell you?

[Billy Jingo]

If there are, and you are one of the unwanted members (I'm just spitballing here, of course...) then why would they tell you?

If you were in charge? Spite.

[Administrator]

Meaning that there are places where unwanted members are not allowed?

Well, yes and no.

As anyone might expect, the Mod Shop is exclusive to mods and admins. That's private information (what there is of it), and a lot of it is just techno-babble anyway. FWIW, nothing really happens there, and never has (even pre-crash).


Different forums have different permission levels. Most are open to anyone, whether logged in or not. The "Hearts and Prayers" form is visible only to those who are members in good standing (that is, they have gone through and completed the registration process) and who are logged in. It's not visible to web crawlers or lurkers. The reasoning for that is that some people feel uncomfortable sharing that kind of personal faith issue with the whole world, and it seems to be pretty unanimously-supported, from what I can tell.

Today, I have set up a new forum, the Family Room. We had something similar before, and it was set up on auto-promote permissions, which is to say that once someone had X number of posts (500, I think), they were automatically granted permission to that forum. The idea was that if someone had stuck around long enough to make that many posts, they could be presumed to respect the forum and what it was for: not broadcasting one's personal issues to the entire internet. This did, however, cause some consternation amongst some who felt that was not really "secure" enough, and that's a fair criticism. So, the Family Room will not have an auto-promotion, but instead I will add people "manually." The mechanics and logistics of that have not yet been determined.


Now, all of that having been said, everyone has always had the option to request any sort of forum they want (within reason), and that includes private forums. Pre-crash, we had two: a conservatives-only area, and a women-only area. The conservatives area didn't really get a whole lot of traffic, honestly, and I'm told that the women's forum didn't, either (I purposely did not spend any more time there than absolutely necessary, and indeed specifically brought on a female mod for the primary purpose of keeping order in that forum). Since neither got a whole lot of traffic, I didn't resurrect them when building the new board. BUT, the same rule and policy remains in place: if someone wants to set up a private forum specifically for left-handed midget rodeo clowns, then I'll be happy to do so. If you want to set up a forum dedicated to kiddie porn, then I'm afraid I'm just not going to accommodate you on that. Sorry.

This is not really about "keeping unwanted members out;" if someone is truly an "unwanted member," then I'll just get rid of them. To date, that has never happened in just slightly more than four years that NEIP has existed. It's about privacy: some people are just more comfortable talking about something with just people that they know. Like I said, I stayed out of the women's forum before, but I would have to surmise that whatever was discussed in that forum was much the same as whatever secret stuff women talk about when they go to the bathroom in pairs: whatever it is, they don't want to talk about it in front of someone else (most specifically, in that case, males).



So yes, there are "private" forums (well, a "private" forum at the moment, excluding the mod area), but no, none are there to "keep unwanted members out."

[Hondo]

If you were in charge? Spite.

You know me so well...

[phillygirl]

As for the privacy of the "hearts and prayers" forum...I had requested that early on, as usually it was for prayers/good thought requests that people were making due to an illness or death of a loved one. It wasn't that I was not comfortable with discussing faith issues there, but the personal nature of the requests, I thought, deserved privacy. I recall Frosty specifically asking if someone like him was welcome there, and I indicated that, at the time, even though he was an annoying cousin, he was still family and my only request was that it be registered members. We're a small forum here and mostly I've felt comfortable with the "regulars" being able to read that forum, it was to avoid the lurkers that I asked for the privacy. This seems to be the same set up here now and I've not hear any complaints over the past 2 or so years that it's been set up that way.

[Gingersnap]

You know me so well...

Now that's funny!

[Frostbit]

I recall Frosty specifically asking if someone like him was welcome there, and I indicated that, at the time, even though he was an annoying cousin,

Would it be incest if we were cousins?

[gary m]

Would it be incest if we were cousins?

Not if both of you move to Kentucky.

[Frostbit]

Not if both of you move to Kentucky.

Cue the banjo music

[phillygirl]

Would it be incest if we were cousins?

Why do you ask these questions...just to irritate me?

[Frostbit]

Why do you ask these questions...just to irritate me?

Of course. It's what cousins are made for.

[scott]

If you were in charge? Spite.

Oh brother.


I have no say in how this site is run. I flip switches to fix software problems and I set up backup operations. This is Adam's board and his rules.

[gary m]

Why do you ask these questions...just to irritate me?

Just dont tell him about that incident with you, Hondo, the tequila and the goat.

You will never hear the end of it.

[Billy Jingo]

Oh brother.

That was a joke. I do not believe that Hondo would seriously do anything to me out of spite with the possible exception of making out with that chick who played Starbuck in Battlestar Galactica.