We created this discussion forum on Archinect as a tool for our community to share information and communicate with like-minded people. The intention is to discuss issues related to architecture and design, but non-related discussions are welcome as well. We consider our forum a social environment where like-minded people can communicate in an enjoyable, educational, and productive manner.
If you notice any activity that is not allowed per the policy outlined here, please send us an email
describing where (as precisely as possible).
We are seeking volunteer moderators! If you are interested in helping us build a more productive forum, please contact us via email. You must have an existing Archinect account with a sufficient posting history.
"posting a discussion to the wrong forum category"
This is by far the most minor concern on the policy at this point, but is mostly in reference to users who post 'random tangent' posts to categories that are clearly not 'random tangents'. For example, if a user posts a series of political threads and selects the "Professional Practice" category in an effort to direct the conversation to users who are not interested in discussing politics.
In this case, the watchmen pay for the privilege to watch, and moderate. Those unhappy with it can pony up the $ and effort to launch and maintain their own website and forum.
"•thread hijacking (intentionally changing the subject of a discussion thread"
many time, the thread itself naturally suggests a change of subject, or a particular nuance overtly takes over. how exactly would one determine whether a ramification of the thread falls within the subject or not? i think that is quite a difficult rule to instate.. the "radius", so to speak, of the thread would have to be determined..and that would require that this rule be broken up into smaller more objectively determining rules.
also with regards to trolling, how is it defined exactly?
if we take the instigator of this thread at her/his word: http://www.archinect.com/forum/threads.php?id=96018_0_42_0_C
then i am deemd to be a troll
but i do not deem myself a troll and i deem this thread to be a case of defamation and slander. are there such rules to prohibit defamation? please work on it and thanks
oh there:
•libelous comments or gossip about real people, companies or organizations
ok why have you still not removed that thread Mr. Archinect?
you also include the following:
"hurtful comments directed toward individuals or groups"
ok....when?
- naturally, most discussions will evolve. thread hijacking is considered to be a deliberate, and unwelcome, change of subject for the benefit of the commenter alone.
trolling - the moderators will determine what is trolling. as mentioned above, the member will be first given a warning via email (to his/her email account associated with the Archinect account)
libel - an anonymous screen name on an internet discussion forum is not a real person, and it is not considered libel when another member criticizes that screen name.
in general, Archinect has the right to remove any comments or posts, or to warn or suspend anyone's account that is considered to be disruptive to the overall intention of the forum. the policy listed above is to help our members understand our guidelines. the policy will likely be amended over time.
there are obviously too many ways to interpret these guidelines, so this thread will not be open to members questioning every possible interpretation. if a member has a question about any of these rules, please send them to us via email and we will be happy to answer your questions.
good policies. I'd recommend one more: duplicate accounts (people who are suspected of posting under more than one username, generally for the purpose of being obnoxious). I know that's not really enforceable for obvious reasons but prohibiting it may be helpful.
This is a welcome improvement. However, I wonder a few things:
1) re: "libelous comments" -- I worry a little about this one because heretofore this forum has been one of the only legitimate places on the web where we can find feedback on people's experience with specific firms. Yes, we must take it with a grain of salt, and I'm sure we all do; in any case, it's usually pretty easy to separate those attempting to give a balanced and helpful portrait of a firm versus those who merely have an ax to grind.
I think we would all lose a valuable resource if people started being afraid to give their own assessments of their experiences with firms, contractors, products, etcetera.
In fact, since this rule is not very clearly defined, it could conceivably even apply to product reviews -- for which archinect is inordinately helpful. I can't turn to Dwell or Architectural Record for a truthful and voluble assessment of a certain product -- but I certainly can here, and that is extremely valuable to me. I've used this forum for product feedback numerous times.
2) re: "thread hijacking" -- I find this is one thing that makes archinect fun and unexpected. It's part of what gives archinect its intimate, conversational tone, but more importantly, often the wanderings of the conversation end up taking us to a completely new idea that wouldn't necessarily have been arrived at if we'd all stuck to the original post. With the new google thread search capacity, I feel it is sufficiently easy to find information about a particular subject you're looking for, without the need to keep threads strictly on topic (as was more necessary when all an information-seeker could search was the thread title). I can't really think of a strong reason that threads should be kept strictly on-topic -- unless you're merely using this rule as another weapon in the war on trolls; in which case, frankly I don't think it's necessary. The other rules sufficiently cover troll behaviour and the addition of moderators will already go a long way toward cutting down on spurious posting. Which brings me to point 3...
3) Should we have a rule against frequent and spurious thread posting? I think this is the main thing that is bothering everyone lately -- the propagation of thoughtless or intentionally provoking threads gunking up the entire discussion board page. This is much more of a nuisance to me personally than thread-hijacking or posting in the wrong category.
4) Can we add more thread categories? The original set never seem to fit what I am posting about.
let us be free...wackos come and go.....even in cyberspace....then there are those chinese hacking google...save us from ourselves.
As far as porno goes....come on Hugh Hefner...is ancient news...and our purtian life style is long behind us. If you don't belive me take a look at Bill Clinton, John Edwards, and all those nasty Republicans...whom I can't remember except for....oh I will never remember his name but he was ancient and chasing after a stripper in Washington DC. Censorship is what has ruined the printed media of today, and the TV media. The net should always be a free wheeling place where ideas can be tossed around no matter what they are. Even if I guy wants to talk about the rotten apple he keeps in his desk door for inspiration. ya, let us be free.
Nowhere is it written that the Internet MUST be anarchy, no matter how much a few want it to be that way. I applaud this effort and hope it brings back a discussion environment that leads to learning and growth among the larger crowd who visit here. Good work, Paul.
I always thought the Internet was supposed to be chaotic in its totality, not that any one moderated blog or forum has to be chaotic. Some order conducive to real discussion is always a good thing, in my opinion.
As long as this doesn't turn into Dezeen... the site where it's only ok to leave comments if they are gushingly congratulatory. Sometimes a project sucks and it really is ok to say so. Not everyone is a winner.
Mr. Archinect,
calling someone a name, troll or whatever, is an accusation ... not a criticism;. when i criticize you, Archinect, I do not call you a tyrant for wanting to enforce certain regulation..i simply state my issue with them. another instance of criticism would be my pointing out that obviously there is a lack of discrimination between what accounts for criticism and what does not in you assessment of posts, as verified by allowing the aforementioned thread to continue without editing..and that this gives us reason to worry that the people who are meant to judge according to their discrimination cannot discriminate well.
secondly...i am a real person. an anonymous screen name is not answering your posts but the person using it. by encouraging a cleavage between the real and the cyber through double standards, Archinect is naturally undermining the potential of its own domain to engender its own contribution to reality. The only difference between my using tammuz and their using Stephen Ward or Orhan Ayyuce is extra-traceability to a real time person outside archinect...otherwise, my posts are always intra-traceable withing archinect since i use the same email account in spite of name change. therefore, i constitute myself, until i wish to stop doing so, as a complete identifiable person within archinect. the person who calls me a troll is not accusing only the sum of my posts but my cyber person as well. this is libelous!
On a final note, i don't do this because i'm against your regulations per se..but, in spite of the guise of objectivity and fairness, Archinect does have its moral assumptions. i won't even care to start on pornography.
This is very simple! Why over analyze all of this. If you don't like the rules, move on, make your own website and if we like it people will come!!!!!! It is very simple.
I understand that there is a lot of recent graduates (kids) looking around and coming to this website and totally ignoring the rules (we didn't' even have rules before all this shit) and now suddenly all this crap.
How stupid do you have to be to have your account closed. Senior contributors (just look at the posts number) will tell you to STOP (maybe not literally) but you should listen and just SHUT THE FUCK UP and participate in a mature way.
The most problematic is the first point on being "hurtful" or "prejudiced". I think that most readers can differentiate for themselves which comments to take into consideration. It is like the ratings system..if you only allow the good comments..( i.e, not "hurtful", or "prejudiced" - everyone has a different perspective on things, including those who censors..), we get a very watered down forum, and only further establishes the fact that right now, architectural discussions i limited to those aged 60 and up, an what those 60 year old architects used to do when they were 20. I generally agree with non-solicitation.
I am looking for help with creating an original exhibition on the work (and previously little known work ) of the esteemed Architect Ludwig Mies van der Rohe.
It's totally for fun and doesn't pay a darn thing.
Sounds like more of a search for collaboration than an employment solicitation. Perfectly suited for the forum. The only condition is that you tell us about the exhibition when an announcement is ready ;)
Thanks. it's going to be at the museum of the college where I am the warden. Well, I am the former inmate who is the warden of the Architecture program. I'll write something up.
Eh , --- this mean there be a serious tone, I think it will become a boring scene unless someone are apointed legal pray. They did it before and they will do it again. Romans newer learn..
Archinect Discussion Forum Policy
account suspension:
- racial, prejudiced or hurtful comments directed toward individuals or groups
- impersonation
- posting or linking to pornography, or any other form of media deemed offensive and inappropriate
The following is not permitted and will result in a warning, then possible account suspension:We created this discussion forum on Archinect as a tool for our community to share information and communicate with like-minded people. The intention is to discuss issues related to architecture and design, but non-related discussions are welcome as well. We consider our forum a social environment where like-minded people can communicate in an enjoyable, educational, and productive manner.
If you notice any activity that is not allowed per the policy outlined here, please send us an email describing where (as precisely as possible).
Questions regarding this policy may be directed to archinect@gmail.com
We are seeking volunteer moderators! If you are interested in helping us build a more productive forum, please contact us via email. You must have an existing Archinect account with a sufficient posting history.
Hear, hear!
"posting a discussion to the wrong forum category"
what? grounds for dismissal... or is this like a mail fraud loophole?
"posting a discussion to the wrong forum category"
This is by far the most minor concern on the policy at this point, but is mostly in reference to users who post 'random tangent' posts to categories that are clearly not 'random tangents'. For example, if a user posts a series of political threads and selects the "Professional Practice" category in an effort to direct the conversation to users who are not interested in discussing politics.
good stuff. full approval.
Word. Nice job.
Who watches the watchmen?
THANK YOU!!!
Totally agree!
Like minded individuals eh?
Excellent policy and thank you for making this post so prominent.
In future I will try to refrain from too much swearing, too, but imagined steamy scenarios involving Brad Pitt may still show up from time to time.
brad pitt?
are you intentionally changing the subject of a discussion thread?
In this case, the watchmen pay for the privilege to watch, and moderate. Those unhappy with it can pony up the $ and effort to launch and maintain their own website and forum.
"•thread hijacking (intentionally changing the subject of a discussion thread"
many time, the thread itself naturally suggests a change of subject, or a particular nuance overtly takes over. how exactly would one determine whether a ramification of the thread falls within the subject or not? i think that is quite a difficult rule to instate.. the "radius", so to speak, of the thread would have to be determined..and that would require that this rule be broken up into smaller more objectively determining rules.
also with regards to trolling, how is it defined exactly?
if we take the instigator of this thread at her/his word: http://www.archinect.com/forum/threads.php?id=96018_0_42_0_C
then i am deemd to be a troll
but i do not deem myself a troll and i deem this thread to be a case of defamation and slander. are there such rules to prohibit defamation? please work on it and thanks
oh there:
•libelous comments or gossip about real people, companies or organizations
ok why have you still not removed that thread Mr. Archinect?
you also include the following:
"hurtful comments directed toward individuals or groups"
ok....when?
- naturally, most discussions will evolve. thread hijacking is considered to be a deliberate, and unwelcome, change of subject for the benefit of the commenter alone.
trolling - the moderators will determine what is trolling. as mentioned above, the member will be first given a warning via email (to his/her email account associated with the Archinect account)
libel - an anonymous screen name on an internet discussion forum is not a real person, and it is not considered libel when another member criticizes that screen name.
in general, Archinect has the right to remove any comments or posts, or to warn or suspend anyone's account that is considered to be disruptive to the overall intention of the forum. the policy listed above is to help our members understand our guidelines. the policy will likely be amended over time.
there are obviously too many ways to interpret these guidelines, so this thread will not be open to members questioning every possible interpretation. if a member has a question about any of these rules, please send them to us via email and we will be happy to answer your questions.
thank you!
Archinect
good policies. I'd recommend one more: duplicate accounts (people who are suspected of posting under more than one username, generally for the purpose of being obnoxious). I know that's not really enforceable for obvious reasons but prohibiting it may be helpful.
This is a welcome improvement. However, I wonder a few things:
1) re: "libelous comments" -- I worry a little about this one because heretofore this forum has been one of the only legitimate places on the web where we can find feedback on people's experience with specific firms. Yes, we must take it with a grain of salt, and I'm sure we all do; in any case, it's usually pretty easy to separate those attempting to give a balanced and helpful portrait of a firm versus those who merely have an ax to grind.
I think we would all lose a valuable resource if people started being afraid to give their own assessments of their experiences with firms, contractors, products, etcetera.
In fact, since this rule is not very clearly defined, it could conceivably even apply to product reviews -- for which archinect is inordinately helpful. I can't turn to Dwell or Architectural Record for a truthful and voluble assessment of a certain product -- but I certainly can here, and that is extremely valuable to me. I've used this forum for product feedback numerous times.
2) re: "thread hijacking" -- I find this is one thing that makes archinect fun and unexpected. It's part of what gives archinect its intimate, conversational tone, but more importantly, often the wanderings of the conversation end up taking us to a completely new idea that wouldn't necessarily have been arrived at if we'd all stuck to the original post. With the new google thread search capacity, I feel it is sufficiently easy to find information about a particular subject you're looking for, without the need to keep threads strictly on topic (as was more necessary when all an information-seeker could search was the thread title). I can't really think of a strong reason that threads should be kept strictly on-topic -- unless you're merely using this rule as another weapon in the war on trolls; in which case, frankly I don't think it's necessary. The other rules sufficiently cover troll behaviour and the addition of moderators will already go a long way toward cutting down on spurious posting. Which brings me to point 3...
3) Should we have a rule against frequent and spurious thread posting? I think this is the main thing that is bothering everyone lately -- the propagation of thoughtless or intentionally provoking threads gunking up the entire discussion board page. This is much more of a nuisance to me personally than thread-hijacking or posting in the wrong category.
4) Can we add more thread categories? The original set never seem to fit what I am posting about.
Oh I submitted this without seeing Archinect's (Paul's?) comment above. I guess I will send in an email.
let us be free...wackos come and go.....even in cyberspace....then there are those chinese hacking google...save us from ourselves.
As far as porno goes....come on Hugh Hefner...is ancient news...and our purtian life style is long behind us. If you don't belive me take a look at Bill Clinton, John Edwards, and all those nasty Republicans...whom I can't remember except for....oh I will never remember his name but he was ancient and chasing after a stripper in Washington DC. Censorship is what has ruined the printed media of today, and the TV media. The net should always be a free wheeling place where ideas can be tossed around no matter what they are. Even if I guy wants to talk about the rotten apple he keeps in his desk door for inspiration. ya, let us be free.
Nowhere is it written that the Internet MUST be anarchy, no matter how much a few want it to be that way. I applaud this effort and hope it brings back a discussion environment that leads to learning and growth among the larger crowd who visit here. Good work, Paul.
I always thought the Internet was supposed to be chaotic in its totality, not that any one moderated blog or forum has to be chaotic. Some order conducive to real discussion is always a good thing, in my opinion.
As long as this doesn't turn into Dezeen... the site where it's only ok to leave comments if they are gushingly congratulatory. Sometimes a project sucks and it really is ok to say so. Not everyone is a winner.
Let's hope this doesn't turn into cyburbia!
Mr. Archinect,
calling someone a name, troll or whatever, is an accusation ... not a criticism;. when i criticize you, Archinect, I do not call you a tyrant for wanting to enforce certain regulation..i simply state my issue with them. another instance of criticism would be my pointing out that obviously there is a lack of discrimination between what accounts for criticism and what does not in you assessment of posts, as verified by allowing the aforementioned thread to continue without editing..and that this gives us reason to worry that the people who are meant to judge according to their discrimination cannot discriminate well.
secondly...i am a real person. an anonymous screen name is not answering your posts but the person using it. by encouraging a cleavage between the real and the cyber through double standards, Archinect is naturally undermining the potential of its own domain to engender its own contribution to reality. The only difference between my using tammuz and their using Stephen Ward or Orhan Ayyuce is extra-traceability to a real time person outside archinect...otherwise, my posts are always intra-traceable withing archinect since i use the same email account in spite of name change. therefore, i constitute myself, until i wish to stop doing so, as a complete identifiable person within archinect. the person who calls me a troll is not accusing only the sum of my posts but my cyber person as well. this is libelous!
On a final note, i don't do this because i'm against your regulations per se..but, in spite of the guise of objectivity and fairness, Archinect does have its moral assumptions. i won't even care to start on pornography.
and of course, until you stop letting me do so.
This is very simple! Why over analyze all of this. If you don't like the rules, move on, make your own website and if we like it people will come!!!!!! It is very simple.
I understand that there is a lot of recent graduates (kids) looking around and coming to this website and totally ignoring the rules (we didn't' even have rules before all this shit) and now suddenly all this crap.
How stupid do you have to be to have your account closed. Senior contributors (just look at the posts number) will tell you to STOP (maybe not literally) but you should listen and just SHUT THE FUCK UP and participate in a mature way.
Cheers!
I feel kind of weird saying this, but the poop is right, LOL.
what about the troll feeders? they are guilty too. if no one feed the trolls, they wouldn't grow and reproduce.
holz buildings post are better than pono....way better!
i for one welcome our new insect overlords
HEAR HEAR! THANK YOU archinect!
this is not about censorship as much as it is reigning a few people in...b/c some people don't seem to get it.
The most problematic is the first point on being "hurtful" or "prejudiced". I think that most readers can differentiate for themselves which comments to take into consideration. It is like the ratings system..if you only allow the good comments..( i.e, not "hurtful", or "prejudiced" - everyone has a different perspective on things, including those who censors..), we get a very watered down forum, and only further establishes the fact that right now, architectural discussions i limited to those aged 60 and up, an what those 60 year old architects used to do when they were 20. I generally agree with non-solicitation.
What? Not even close!
See this link: How Old Are You?
nonarchitect, please.
no more "pimping architecture"
Why are comments to news posts now to be "reviewed by moderator?"
- from this thread
I am looking for help with creating an original exhibition on the work (and previously little known work ) of the esteemed Architect Ludwig Mies van der Rohe.
It's totally for fun and doesn't pay a darn thing.
Is this something that's kosher to post?
Thanks!
Sounds like more of a search for collaboration than an employment solicitation. Perfectly suited for the forum. The only condition is that you tell us about the exhibition when an announcement is ready ;)
Thanks. it's going to be at the museum of the college where I am the warden. Well, I am the former inmate who is the warden of the Architecture program. I'll write something up.
Thanks!
So basically, I'm fucked, or better yet, maybe I can file for unemployment.
Eh , --- this mean there be a serious tone, I think it will become a boring scene unless someone are apointed legal pray. They did it before and they will do it again. Romans newer learn..
Wow, I leave for a years, drop by to see if things are still the same in these parts and look, Archinect has rules now!
The times they are a changin'.
[EDIT] I leave for a year [/EDIT]
Apu
Tell me about it
Is it just me, or are there a LOT of recent posts in various threads that violate these two sections of the criteria:
• trolling (disruptive behavior leading to a general disapproval from other community members or moderators)
• thread hijacking (intentionally changing the subject of a discussion thread)
thank and happy new year 2011
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.