Feedback: Social Groups

[felix]

(So as to avoid poluting the NicoNico SG any further)

Originally Posted by NoSanninWa

I'm curious. How should this be different from the thread:
http://forums.animesuki.com/showthread.php?t=55967

Originally Posted by Cats

It's simple, the thread doesn't show you the people that use it just the people that are aware of it.
Or I might be wrong, Asami would need to confirm it.

Having a social group on things like this might eliminate needless chatter (which is creative sometimes) leaving the original thread accurate and precise.

Originally Posted by NoSanninWa

Does it really? People who aren't members of the group, can still post here. >NoSanninWa points at self<

Originally Posted by Asamidori

Just a gathering of people that actually visit and uses that site. Like Cats stated, some people visits the site but doesn't post in the NicoDou thread. There are also times when maybe people want to gather together to create something based on things originated from Nico, but since it may or may not be related to Nico itself, they can use here instead. (The Ryuuseigun Utatte Mitta Project I suggested comes to mind. Though we ended up deciding to upload it to Nico when it's finished. Post #396 in the NicoDou thread.)

NSW, I cannot post in a SG unless I am a memeber of it. (me no moderator )
Social groups are like threads where people who do not like it or have no knowledge of it do not enter, or are unlikely to enter.

The purpose of SG (in general; it may be something else for Vb) is to have good, friendly debates betwean people who share the same point of view on the subject. On the average forum thread you find just about anybody...

That's why I think SGs are not a problem to moderate. Small SG groups should be unlikely to suffer from vandalism while those which are big or important enough to have such nuisances can simply opt for the private SG option. In theory and in most of the implementations I've seen SG moderate themselvs. But we'll just have to wait and see if SG here are noisy enough to cause trouble.


---------------------------
This thread is not limited to the above mentioned SG, please feel free to debate/discuss any other issues or concerns, or any questions you may have concerning the feature.

[Sorrow-K]

I'm being a spoil sport and putting social groups on the table. Is there anything in the current set of social groups that can't equally be posted about in the forums? Since it just seems like an excuse to have insular little cliques to me. Case in point: I can't look at the pictures in the digital photography group without joining. If there were a digital photography thread on the forums, I could readily browse the images without having to label myself a photographer (which I'm not, but I'm always willing to learn) or jump through whatever other hoops groups may choose to have.

Point being: seems to me that social groups aren't anywhere near as powerful or flexible as regular forum posts, but happen to be way more exclusive and/or elitist.

[Deathkillz]

Well, thats only if you set up the option for an elitist group, if the options are free then anyone can see the pictures even without joining so it depends on the maker of the group.

The way it is now, I think it is rather fun to have a "small" den where a group of fans can hang around. The rules aren't as strict as in the main forum because it isn't a place where there is a strict topic guidlines to follow and because it is reletively "small" now, it is managable with only the single thread. I dread to think what will happen when it becomes "large".

Only time will tell how well this works out, but I must admit that so far it is fun (and for the record, I dam social networking so that says a lot ^^).

[Ledgem]

Originally Posted by Sorrow-K

I'm being a spoil sport and putting social groups on the table. Is there anything in the current set of social groups that can't equally be posted about in the forums? Since it just seems like an excuse to have insular little cliques to me. Case in point: I can't look at the pictures in the digital photography group without joining. If there were a digital photography thread on the forums, I could readily browse the images without having to label myself a photographer (which I'm not, but I'm always willing to learn) or jump through whatever other hoops groups may choose to have.

Point being: seems to me that social groups aren't anywhere near as powerful or flexible as regular forum posts, but happen to be way more exclusive and/or elitist.

That's strange, because when I created that group I chose the absolute most open settings possible... must be a limitation of the groups.

Edit: Images are a setting you can't change. I have the photographers group set to "Public" (as opposed to moderated or invite-only), and then there are three options: an option to enable albums, to enable messaging, and "Users must join to view the content" (that last one is disabled for that group). Hmm...

I'm wondering about how useful the groups could be, myself. I thought it would be useful for art groups, because you can have an ongoing discussion while the images are separated (as opposed to getting lost on a few posts back). However, as the group grows larger it'll eventually be the same as a very large thread - new people might feel shy about joining in. It seems to be more social than the regular discussion threads, so it seems like a place where people can be spammy/silly and not have to worry about it. In a way it's nice, in a way it isn't. If we didn't have the general discussion forum then social groups would definitely take the place of that, I think.

On the other hand, it feels like the groups are already getting a bit cluttered - I mean, it seems that there are three groups dedicated to White Devil/Nanoha(?) stuff. Clearly I'm not in the know about the difference between those groups, but how many do we need? Same to the Bleach and Soul Eater groups - what discussion takes place there that can't take place in the threads and forums dedicated to those series? In what way are you showing that you're a fan of those series that you can't show by listing them in your favorite series or currently watching profile fields, or by using them as an avatar/signature? But of course, the same could be said for the photography - why not just post in the photography thread

I guess I initially considered that the social groups would be a way to bring hobbies besides anime onto the forum, such as photography. Sure, there are other forums for such hobbies, but it's a nice way to further connect with members here when you find that you have more in common than just anime or even particular anime/manga series.

I guess as time goes on we'll see if and how this feature fits into the forum. As of now it's very unoptimized, and there's a good deal of overlap between this feature and the way that the forums have been set up already.

[Kyuusai]

Chalk me up as another who twitches when faced with not being able to view images without being a group member.

Also put me in the same group as those who find this almost-but-not-quite superfluous and think that it's cute now but ultimately won't scale.

But, in the meantime... Off to join some groups.

[NoSanninWa]

Originally Posted by Cats

NSW, I cannot post in a SG unless I am a memeber of it. (me no moderator )
Social groups are like threads where people who do not like it or have no knowledge of it do not enter, or are unlikely to enter.

Oh! Thank you. It had completely escaped my overly elite snobbish attention that non-moderators couldn't read or post in social groups. Sadly I'd never seen them before.

Originally Posted by Sorrow-K

I'm being a spoil sport and putting social groups on the table. Is there anything in the current set of social groups that can't equally be posted about in the forums? Since it just seems like an excuse to have insular little cliques to me.

There are times that is a good thing. For instance, the new character fanclubs there would work better as insular social groups than as threads. We had to ban such threads due to shipping of their concern, but if properly ghettoized by needing membership, then they might be safe.

Case in point: I can't look at the pictures in the digital photography group without joining. If there were a digital photography thread on the forums, I could readily browse the images without having to label myself a photographer (which I'm not, but I'm always willing to learn) or jump through whatever other hoops groups may choose to have.

That may be a good reason to remove that group. This is a learning experience for us as to what we should and should not allow. It's kinda exciting to open the box and see what comes out to eat us!

Point being: seems to me that social groups aren't anywhere near as powerful or flexible as regular forum posts, but happen to be way more exclusive and/or elitist.

Point taken. I think there are bad and good lessons both for us to learn about this "feature."

[Xellos-_^]

one question on Social Groups

is it possible to have more then one moderator (creator) to keep a eye on the group to make sure it doesn't get out of control? I like to add a few mods to the groups i created but i didn't notice anyway i can give someone mod powers in the group.

[Aoie_Emesai]

Humm... it's an interesting topic but I do hope this doesn't bring out and eliteism in any of us.

*checking what social group im interested in now*

found one though not too interested but It brought up a question I saw up earlier.

*How come the images shown are viewable to members only. For someone like me who don't have too much interest in joining every group, but is a "enthusiast of creativity and art" would like to see the images.

[NightWish]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

...is it possible to have more then one ... creator

Nope, the groups are not that flexible. Additionally, the full gamut of moderation functions may only accessible to members of the forum staff; creators may not always have access to all the options, hence the report links and such.

[Solace]

Well, there is an indirect way to see an image from a group. Each image tells you who it belongs to, so if you follow the profile you can see it in their albums. A bit of a pain but it's doable.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by NightWish

Nope, the groups are not that flexible. Additionally, the full gamut of moderation functions may only accessible to members of the forum staff; creators may not always have access to all the options, hence the report links and such.

ah well, something for you guys to keep in mind for the next upgrade.

[NightWish]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

ah well, something for you guys to keep in mind for the next upgrade.

Keep in mind we have no direct control over the features offered, we can only restrict access to those made available by the forum software developers (Jelsoft). In other words, I can keep it in mind all I like for the next upgrade, if Jelsoft don't provide it you won't get it Very occasionally we can build a work-around modification, to provide a feature or change something, but that should not be relied upon...

[felix]

Originally Posted by NoSanninWa

Oh! Thank you. It had completely escaped my overly elite snobbish attention that non-moderators couldn't read or post in social groups. Sadly I'd never seen them before.

You are able to read. Even if it's private you are still able to read it's posts...

Originally Posted by Aoie_Emesai

*How come the images shown are viewable to members only. For someone like me who don't have too much interest in joining every group, but is a "enthusiast of creativity and art" would like to see the images.

I believe Xellos/Ledgem tiked the Users must join to view the content option when creating the group.
But I'm not sure if that's the cause... I can only specualte.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Cats

You are able to read. Even if it's private you are still able to read it's posts...



I believe Xellos/Ledgem tiked the Users must join to view the content option when creating the group.
But I'm not sure if that's the cause... I can only specualte.

ah nope, i have the Users must join to view the content untiked.

[felix]

I see, then it's a design nuisance. >_>
* goes to bash Vb dev

I'm sure a plug-in to it will come really soon on vb.org, it's a pretty dumb and easy to fix thing.

[Deathkillz]

So far, all the groups I've see have the option for "you must be in the group to view the content" unticked. But certainly when they do start ticking that option, it may turn out to be an elitist "club members only" kinda thing (which is not something I think is right). Well, I can see the content so there's no problem on my side O.o

[Xellos-_^]

i don't have a problem accessing the images on groups i am not a members of.

[Aoie_Emesai]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

i don't have a problem accessing the images on groups i am not a members of.

Humm... not so for me. Specifically Ledgem's Photography United social group images are what I wanna see most ^^

[Deathkillz]

Originally Posted by Aoie_Emesai

Humm... not so for me. Specifically Ledgem's Photography United social group images are what I wanna see most ^^

Really? Well I can see it fine even without being a member. Glitch?

[NightWish]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

i don't have a problem accessing the images on groups i am not a members of.

Originally Posted by Aoie_Emesai

Humm... not so for me. Specifically Ledgem's Photography United social group images are what I wanna see most ^^

Originally Posted by Deathkillz

Really? Well I can see it fine even without being a member. Glitch?

I must admit, I am unable to reproduce Deathkillz/Xellos-_^'s results myself. Staff can see all content, but when using reduced privileges I need to be a member of the group to see the full sized image. Thumbnails work fine, but clicking produces a "you must join" error (which, while undesirable, is what I would expect, given what I've seen of the forum's code). Xellos-_^ or Deathkillz, which group and which image, specifically, have you proven this with?