|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Jan 18, 2013 19:16:03 GMT -8
Hey, can the avatars be bigger now? That's correct. Avatars can be uploaded to a maximum size of 150x150.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2013 19:22:21 GMT -8
Hey, can the avatars be bigger now? That's correct. Avatars can be uploaded to a maximum size of 150x150. That is an awesome change in size.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2013 20:03:41 GMT -8
- Photo & video posting... I think we need ask all members to self police the photos & videos that they post such that they understand that quality, not quantity, is what is important. I am seeing way too many repetitious photos of the same ship, and worse, photos of ships way off in the distance. Perhaps a bit of 'Shipspotting type' rules would be a good thing.
- I am not trying to be offensive to some members but frankly some (in most cases new) members simply post too frequently. Perhaps we need a 'five posts maximum' per day rule for new members for their first year. Perhaps this would encourage them to save posts for things they see as important.
I agree with your quality rule about the photos and video. But I do not agree with your other rule about photos and video. I totally disagree with your posting limits.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jan 19, 2013 20:08:33 GMT -8
I totally disagree with your posting limits. haha, we came very close to setting that rule, one evening in June 2012. Setting that type of rule is always a possibility, but it depends on the self-control of the forum members to police themselves concerning the quality of their posts. Theoretically, that's what the age-limit for joining the forum is for, because younger people tend not to have their self-awareness and self-control ability fully developed, because that's all part of "Growing up". If we get another situation that merits it, I'd implement that rule; it's a good idea. But it's not needed until it's obvious that it's needed. But we've gotten close a few times, in the past year. The old proverb is: "Rules are for people who lack self-control"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2013 23:16:16 GMT -8
- Photo & video posting... I think we need ask all members to self police the photos & videos that they post such that they understand that quality, not quantity, is what is important. I am seeing way too many repetitious photos of the same ship, and worse, photos of ships way off in the distance. Perhaps a bit of 'Shipspotting type' rules would be a good thing.
- I am not trying to be offensive to some members but frankly some (in most cases new) members simply post too frequently. Perhaps we need a 'five posts maximum' per day rule for new members for their first year. Perhaps this would encourage them to save posts for things they see as important.
I agree with your quality rule about the photos and video. But I do not agree with your other rule about photos and video. I totally disagree with your posting limits. For the posting limits for new members, I would agree with you if you changed it to the first three month of joining this forum with a 25 post limit per month.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Jan 19, 2013 23:56:07 GMT -8
You are aware that is significantly lower than the suggested 5 posts per day... 25 posts/month = approx 0.9 posts/day
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 9:19:01 GMT -8
You are aware that is significantly lower than the suggested 5 posts per day... 25 posts/month = approx 0.9 posts/day I guess you could do five post a day on mine.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 9:51:31 GMT -8
I will share my point of view on WCK's irritants: re-posting limits: as long as it is applied to new members, then I am also going for this one. 7 posts per day until 1 month/when moderators feel like it's ok/reach of 50 posts (Deckhand). Should though exclude threads like New members or equivalents. That is 210 post after the first month which is 160 post over your 50 posts. You would reach 50 post in the first seven days. My math to get those was: 7X30=210, then I did 210-50= 160, and to find how many days I did 50/7=7. You should maybe re-think your numbers SolDuc.
|
|
SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Post by SolDuc on Jan 20, 2013 13:27:34 GMT -8
I will share my point of view on WCK's irritants: re-posting limits: as long as it is applied to new members, then I am also going for this one. 7 posts per day until 1 month/when moderators feel like it's ok/reach of 50 posts (Deckhand). Should though exclude threads like New members or equivalents. That is 210 post after the first month which is 160 post over your 50 posts. You would reach 50 post in the first seven days. My math to get those was: 7X30=210, then I did 210-50= 160, and to find how many days I did 50/7=7. You should maybe re-think your numbers SolDuc.Yes, you can get 50 posts in the first seven days. And yes with 7 posts per day you can get 210 posts per month. I don't see how the 160 matters anyways. But post count is not the most important for new members. The most important is to find your spot and to be well integrated in the forum, not to limit your post numbers. And also why did you put my name in bold?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 14:07:04 GMT -8
That is 210 post after the first month which is 160 post over your 50 posts. You would reach 50 post in the first seven days. My math to get those was: 7X30=210, then I did 210-50= 160, and to find how many days I did 50/7=7. You should maybe re-think your numbers SolDuc. And also why did you put my name in bold? I don't know why I did your name in bold. I have change it.
|
|
SolDuc
Voyager
West Coast Cyclist
SolDuc and SOBC - Photo by Scott
Posts: 2,055
|
Post by SolDuc on Jan 22, 2013 15:24:41 GMT -8
For some reason the Feb 2013 flagship is only showing up in the "announcements" box at the top of each board and not in the forum flagship board.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 11, 2013 19:39:33 GMT -8
Question, what has happened to fotopics. It seems to be down, does anyone know whats going on? Also photo's taken by BC Ferries fan who put pics on this site, where can I find them. I really enjoyed looking at these pictures and seeing the historical stuff on them including the modern day ones. Photos that WCFF members may have on Fotopic are currently accessible as per the following email that I received:
Some members may want to retrieve photos from there that they otherwise have lost due to hard drive crashes or some other calamity. JST
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Mar 1, 2013 9:09:03 GMT -8
I had a question regarding copyright: I found a design of the Alaska Class day-boat design (page 72 of this PDF document) which I did a screen-grab of, and I want to modify the design to make it look less ugly. Would I be able to post it on here or would that be a copyright violation? I just want to know so that we don't get in trouble . Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 1, 2013 10:25:59 GMT -8
I had a question regarding copyright: I found a design of the Alaska Class day-boat design (page 72 of this PDF document) which I did a screen-grab of, and I want to modify the design to make it look less ugly. Would I be able to post it on here or would that be a copyright violation? I just want to know so that we don't get in trouble . Thanks! I think that it will be ok, if you: 1) make it clear that it is your own modification (ie. make a short text-note about that in the corner of your photo) 2) make it clear that yoru modification is non-commercial in purpose. ......and of course acknowledge where the original came from.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Mar 1, 2013 10:56:18 GMT -8
I had a question regarding copyright: I found a design of the Alaska Class day-boat design (page 72 of this PDF document) which I did a screen-grab of, and I want to modify the design to make it look less ugly. Would I be able to post it on here or would that be a copyright violation? I just want to know so that we don't get in trouble . Thanks! I think that it will be ok, if you: 1) make it clear that it is your own modification (ie. make a short text-note about that in the corner of your photo) 2) make it clear that yoru modification is non-commercial in purpose. ......and of course acknowledge where the original came from. Okay, I'll make sure to do that. Thanks for the info!
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Mar 22, 2013 8:27:22 GMT -8
Here are some excerpts from an interview with Chris Creamer (who has a very popular sports logo website, with an active discussion board), by Paul Lukas (UniWatch blog & ESPN writer). They are the kings of the sports logos and uniforms world. There are issues that are common to our ferry internet world, so here are a few excerpts. ------------------------ -------------- From here: www.uni-watch.com/
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Sept 22, 2013 16:23:49 GMT -8
Some moderators (like Kahloke and Mike C) are just moderators, but other staff members are "global moderators" (like Low Light Mike and Scott (Former Account)). What's the difference between a moderator and global moderator? To the rest of us, they seem to be all the same.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 22, 2013 16:36:24 GMT -8
What's the difference between a moderator and global moderator? The main difference is in administrative permissions. Global Moderators have more permissions (allowing them to do more types of admin or member edits and changes) than do the regular moderators. We also get paid more. (no, just a joke.)
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,078
|
Post by Nick on Dec 10, 2013 13:49:33 GMT -8
I find this interesting. The first solid news about the route9/17 newbuild project comes out, and there are a grand total of 5 posts about it. Meanwhile, on someone's facebook newsfeed yesterday there were over 30 replies in a fairly heated discussion about this same news report. Yesterday's discussion on facebook had some good points to it, but isn't this a much better place for these kind of discussions? Especially since all of the participants were members of this forum.
A while ago there was some discussion about the lack of activity around here, and that this has become a photo board first, discussion board second. I'm starting to think that there might be something to that idea.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Dec 10, 2013 14:02:51 GMT -8
I find this interesting. The first solid news about the route9/17 newbuild project comes out, and there are a grand total of 5 posts about it. Meanwhile, on someone's facebook newsfeed yesterday there were over 30 replies in a fairly heated discussion about this same news report. Yesterday's discussion on facebook had some good points to it, but isn't this a much better place for these kind of discussions? Especially since all of the participants were members of this forum. A while ago there was some discussion about the lack of activity around here, and that this has become a photo board first, discussion board second. I'm starting to think that there might be something to that idea. I know that I stole some time from my working morning yesterday, in order to post the news story, and then to find and post the BCF news-release. And then of course to read the stuff and add some of my own reaction, after I'd quickly cut/pasted it. All done here on this forum, and done as promptly as I was able to. And I was happy to see some comments regarding the likely ability of Seaspan to have the capacity to build (or not build) the ferries, in light of Coast Guard commitments. I'm clueless about any Facebook discussion; I didn't see it, so I'm likely not on that friends list (or I'm not getting all newsfeed updates, which is my settings choice). If there was other good discussion, then I'm also disappointed that it didn't end up on this forum. I work hard to give a place on this here forum for that kind of discussion.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Dec 10, 2013 14:21:07 GMT -8
I find this interesting. The first solid news about the route9/17 newbuild project comes out, and there are a grand total of 5 posts about it. Meanwhile, on someone's facebook newsfeed yesterday there were over 30 replies in a fairly heated discussion about this same news report. Yesterday's discussion on facebook had some good points to it, but isn't this a much better place for these kind of discussions? Especially since all of the participants were members of this forum. A while ago there was some discussion about the lack of activity around here, and that this has become a photo board first, discussion board second. I'm starting to think that there might be something to that idea. You can't really force discussion to happen - it takes place organically. The 39-comment Facebook post yesterday was, I think, a rare and unique instance that doesn't happen often. A lot (most?) of us use social media to share thoughts on issues we hold close. All of that being said, those kinds of discussions that take place outside of the forum, detract from the forum itself - I.e. those who shared on Facebook and met resistance might not be as motivated to share again.
|
|
Nick
Voyager
Chief Engineer - Queen of Richmond
Posts: 2,078
|
Post by Nick on Dec 10, 2013 14:30:49 GMT -8
All of that being said, those kinds of discussions that take place outside of the forum, detract from the forum itself - I.e. those who shared on Facebook and met resistance might not be as motivated to share again. This is the point I was trying to get across. I feel that the discussion on facebook yesterday may have exhausted a lot of the ideas that would have otherwise been brought up here, where it would have been read and responded to by a much wider (interested) audience. I understand that discussion is organic, and you can't necessarily "herd it", but it would be nice if some of the people who spoke up yesterday might do so again, so that maybe we can get some new players. For those who weren't part of it, the discussion centered on the debated ability of Seaspan to build this contract.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Dec 10, 2013 14:35:35 GMT -8
All of that being said, those kinds of discussions that take place outside of the forum, detract from the forum itself - I.e. those who shared on Facebook and met resistance might not be as motivated to share again. This is the point I was trying to get across. I feel that the discussion on facebook yesterday may have exhausted a lot of the ideas that would have otherwise been brought up here, where it would have been read and responded to by a much wider (interested) audience. I understand that discussion is organic, and you can't necessarily "herd it", but it would be nice if some of the people who spoke up yesterday might do so again, so that maybe we can get some new players. For those who weren't part of it, the discussion centered on the debated ability of Seaspan to build this contract. I'm interested in seeing those points moved over here to this forum, assuming that those people are interested in further discussion on the topic over here. If they're not interested, then so be it. -------------- I use this forum, including our Voyager pages, to keep up to date in the ferry world. - More than once in the past year, I've posted a comment on some issue, only to be responded to that my info was out-of-date because I wasn't aware of something new that had been discussed on a group-trip or via some other social media. So even for me, who practically spends all day online at this forum, I miss out on various news and happenings.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Dec 10, 2013 15:22:38 GMT -8
I'm on Facebook too, but I don't really check it much. The only time I go on there is when I get a FB notification in my email. I check this forum at least once per day. That being said, I would prefer that people use this forum rather than Facebook to discuss ferries. That's what we're here for!
Regarding discussion versus photo-posting, I enjoy discussing stuff on here more than posting photos. I still post photos to this forum, but only if I have absolutely nothing better to do, or if there's just a few of them. I do upload my photos to Flickr usually within a week after I take them, but I don't always get around to posting them here. If you want to see my photos, click on the "My Flickr" link in my signature below.
|
|
|
Post by Scott (Former Account) on Dec 10, 2013 17:32:01 GMT -8
If I recall correctly, that discussion on Facebook began due to a comment from a non-member.
It then went from a civilized discussion, then abruptly changed into a personal attack when another forum member joined in.
|
|