we should get KwalishKid back too — Benkei
Yes. Hell, get TGW over here too. — Baden

You're an admin over there. Why don't you just unban everyone and let the inmates run free?

I personally don't think anything is wrong with advertisement generating some income for this site. I think a skyscraper add on the left or right would work fine without interfering with the user experience. — Benkei
No way. That's just what we're trying to get away from here. The donations route should be fine. At $49 a month, we only need to pay a couple of bucks each per month to cover the fees. By the time we need to expand and pay more, we'll have more members to pay it. — Baden

I didn't leave because of the fear of advertisements. I left because the new owner had some issues he wouldn't discuss and I was getting less than stellar customer service over there from the absentee owner. I think if Paul would have brought up ads to save the site, we'd have all gotten aboard. It was a reality we needed to deal with.

Having said that, since it seems some really hate ads, what I think we need is a suggested donation amount based upon what we need to continue operating without putting too much stress on any one person (i.e. Jamalrob). Financial situations change, and we don't want to repeat what just happened by just assuming someone is picking up the tab. We also don't want to put anyone in the position of having to beg, borrow, or steal when things get tough, so let's come up with a way to assure financial security. If that means ads for everyone, ads for nonmembers only, membership fees, suggested donations, or whatever will work, I'm in favor of it. But the "it'll work itself out" idea works until it doesn't.

It may only happen once in a blue moon, but I fully agree with that sentiment.

Ad removal for membership seems like a good first attempt.

You're an admin over there. Why don't you just unban everyone and let the inmates run free? — Hanover

I'm very open to suggestions like this. I even thought about banning Porat. Just don't tell un.

We also don't want to put anyone in the position of having to beg, borrow, or steal when things get tough, so let's come up with a way to assure financial security.. — Hanover

Agreed. This is what we should have been talking about with Paul when he was in trouble. Subscription seems the best bet for me. A dollar or two each a month, which won't break any of us, and we can keep this place ad free and ticking over fine.

Oh yes, I'm sure TGW would be thrilled to be legitly, and recognizably posting again. :D

So long as he behaves himself.

So long as he behaves himself. — Yahadreas

Speaking of which, would it be a problem to ban posters who have paid a fee? Would it be like incarcerating people even though they paid their taxes? Or more like breach of contract?

Well, if there was indeed a contract that said that donations or subscriptions provide protection against being banned then it would break the contract to ban them. But otherwise no. Wherever in the world you pay for membership you can be kicked out for bad behaviour or otherwise not following the rules.

Private schools can expel students, too. And they don't get a refund of previous years' tuition.

That makes sense.

I am still seeing every post that someone posts as a "hour ago" or "two hours" ago when indeed it's in real time. Perhaps, this is because my computer has problems. My pc time always needs to be adjusted. If this is a issue that I am only having then I can deal with it. I got this pc for 5 bucks at a garage sale.

One thing that seems a bit lacking here is transparency. I think it was important to the atmosphere at pf that one could see the banned list, the editor of edited posts, deleted posts and threads, and so on. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance and so on.

Perhaps what facilities are unavailable in the format could be substituted for in a thread, ideally only postable to by staff, - moderating events/decisions. I'd also like to see posting guidelines and moderating guidelines. At the moment, 'everyone knows' that the principles are broadly those of pf, but there will be newbies, and it would be good to get these things established before they are needed.

Yes, very good points. Trying to find the time.

Does one have the ability to reverse an edit? If not, that'd be a useful feature. I just accidentally edited over one of my previous posts instead of posting a new comment.

Something that may attract logic folks is LaTeX -style posting. Can we do that now? I am uncertain.

$\forall$

Just thinking that those interested in logic would like to have that.

Yeah, that's been noted. I don't hold out much hope for MathJax as a feature request, to be honest, but I'll add it to the list.

I noticed something that I'm not sure what it is or means or does... yep... I'm not sure.

When going to the 'All Discussions' page, some of the topics are 'highlighted' (normal looking) and other are 'lowlighted' (somewhat dim in appearance).

Is there any reason for that?

Thanks!

Meow!

GREG

... could it be if the OP is online?

Highlighted discussions have new comments that you haven't read yet.

Check it out: http://thephilosophyforum.com/page/useful-hints-and-tips

I don't know if the software will allow it, but come the day when there are uninvited newbies, and therefore spammers of course, it might be convenient to place some restriction on them; either a first post moderation before publication, or else a requirement to be on the site for a half-hour, say (to give them time to read those guidelines and look at a few threads). The latter, particularly, would help to set the tone, and really annoy the spammers, by wasting more of their time than they waste of ours.

The closest thing I can do to that, I think, is set things up so that new sign-ups have to be approved. But that makes things a lot less open than I would prefer. I don't know, what do you think?

Pre-moderation of all posts is an option too, but we'll never go down that route.

Well I expected it wouldn't be possible, but I always thought that it was a bit too easy to sign up and spout off in pf. Good posters tend to lurk a bit anyway. Open is good, but some kind of speed hump? Actually, needing approval would work - you give it every time, but they have to wait a bit. If it's flagged up in advance, most spammers won't bother to sign up.

Yes. I think what I'll do is turn on admin approval for new sign-ups when it becomes clear that we need it, but leave things open for now.

Yes, at the moment the advantage of relative search engine invisibility is that we hover under the radar of most spammers, trolls and other undesirables. Almost everyone here being an invitee, let us enjoy the exclusivity while it lasts.

I love both the reading group and the idea of an article section. Did we decide against blogs? Also.. If there was a place a person could drop ideas of articles they would like to read... that would be cool. Should I just make a thread: "Articles I'd like to see written."? or "Articles I would read." ?

Another thing I enjoy is imagining debates between famous philosophers. Two posters each become a philosopher. . Pedestrian?

I've posted a call for submissions in the new article submissions category. Accepted articles will be published at articles.thephilosophyforum.com, which is a blog.

Also.. If there was a place a person could drop ideas of articles they would like to read... that would be cool. Should I just make a thread: "Articles I'd like to see written."? or "Articles I would read." ? — Mongrel

Good idea. Go ahead and start a thread in the Article submissions category if you want to.

Pre-moderation of all posts is an option too, but we'll never go down that route. — jamalrob

Is there any way to make posting available only after emailed confirmation login? If so the emails could probable be delayed for a while so that they have a chance to just read. I have seen other sites do this.

Yes, that option exists too, although it cannot be delayed. Admin approval for new signups combined with email confirmation should work pretty well I think.

Well I expected it wouldn't be possible, but I always thought that it was a bit too easy to sign up and spout off in pf. Good posters tend to lurk a bit anyway. Open is good, but some kind of speed hump? Actually, needing approval would work - you give it every time, but they have to wait a bit. If it's flagged up in advance, most spammers won't bother to sign up. — unenlightened

One thing that PF had that I think was quite effective was the automatic text speak/spelling detection. When I first signed up I bashed out a reply to someone only to be automatically informed that I should fix up my post. At the time I thought you were a bunch of snobs who I couldn't be bothered with and left. I'm sure plenty of other newbies have had similar experiences.
It's great because it gives a poster information about the quality required without actually making it more difficult to get going. I doubt that's possible here but would be good to at least provide newbies with a condensed version of the posting guidelines when they sign up.
I would be really hesitant to make it harder for people to sign up or have a waiting period. Currently it will be difficult to get more members as we are not on google and even if we don't intend to be, we are in competition with the other forums.
For sure it's reasonable if we get bigger but for now I reckon we shouldn't put barriers in front of people joining.

...for now I reckon we shouldn't put barriers in front of people joining — shmik

Agreed.

I'm not sure about this idea. I think it's too likely to turn people away. If I sign up to a forum I expect to be able to use it right away, not wait a few hours for an admin to finally sign in and approve me. By then I might have left and found somewhere else.

Yes, on reflection you guys are probably right.