Would it be possible for off topic threads to not be shown in the New Posts section at the top. I belong to anther board with an identical format and it was decided off topic threads would not shown there. I have read several posts and I did this at one point as well, that when you click on the new post section, you don't really know what forum its in. Its obvious most are comfortable having the Rants and Raves section and have turned this board into a general board instead of a support tool. For the newbies looking for support, I think it would be a great idea for them to see only the on topic things when they check out new posts and if they want to verture further, they can. Imagine the suprise on many newbies logging in and click on new posts only to see topics on abortion, boy love, religion, etc. Just a thought

To participate in a poll, click the link:

http://www.lapbandtalk.com/showthread.php?t=34851

I can't be the only person on the board that would be willing to donate money to the board to see that it remains ad-free (other than the Google ads). To keep this board from turning into another OH, I would be willing to pay. I am not suggesting that we require people to pay to be members, but I do think that we should see if the members would be willing to donate enough money to keep the board running without having to resort to ad sales.

i am a member of a board where they take donations from members, and in turn those donations give them access to the off topic areas. the rest who do not donate just see the main topic of the board.

If the rants and raves section is such a prominent part of the website, is alex going to be opening up the advertising to abortion clinics, gun salesmen and porn sites? Those issues are talked about greatly in the rant and raves section. Wouldn't their advertisements be relevant throughout the site if the rant and raves section is such a huge and dominant part of the website?

I still don't see what is "huge" and "prominent" about the R&R section. From time to time it gets very active, and one thread or another will appear on the Top 5 a lot (today it's this thread, for example). But I honestly do not see how this in any way detracts from anyone's understanding or use of the rest of the site.

when a thread from the rant and raves section has a title that is offensive to most, and it shows in the new post section or the top 5, it offends people who do not wish to see it. and this obviously happens or people would not be posting that is does or leaving the site. wouldn't it be best, to make the site welcome to all, to make it so those sections that regularly have off topic and possibly offensive post titles not permiate the rest of the site?

But there is already a viable alternative for those people! We don't have to make changes for everyone!

again, currently it is not viable for the people who are not registered, which actually makes up a majority of the people looking at the site on a regular basis. if they are not signed in, or have not registered, they see it all.

The problem Funny, is that many people are missing our point, I think. They seem to think my suggestion was to sensor the R&R section. No where has it ever been suggested that anything be taken away. My philosophy is that if would make it better for even a few guests and newbies (although I tend to think its much larger than that), and doesn't hurt anyone other than having to scroll to the bottom of the screen instead of clicking "new posts" at the top, why not help the few.

again, currently it is not viable for the people who are not registered,

Then they should register. I don't see why we should have to make rule changes to keep people that aren't even members happy.

when a thread from the rant and raves section has a title that is offensive to most, and it shows in the new post section or the top 5, it offends people who do not wish to see it. and this obviously happens or people would not be posting that is does or leaving the site. wouldn't it be best, to make the site welcome to all, to make it so those sections that regularly have off topic and possibly offensive post titles not permiate the rest of the site?

Bolding mine. See, this is what I don't get. The assumption that some thread titles are "offensive" to "most" is baseless. There are more than 14,000 registered members and untold numbers of lurkers. We've only heard from a scant few who are "offended" by thread titles.

Second, "offends people who do not wish to see it" is also a huge leap. There are LOTS of threads I may not wish to see, but I'm not offended by any of them. Seriously, I'm scratching my head on that one.

And last, it seems more than clear that what you think "would be best" is not what everyone thinks would be best. And as we've agreed, it's ultimately up to the site owner and if he feels a change is in order, one will be made.

Everyone shops around among banding sites and hopefully finds one that fits their sensibilities. It says nothing negative about any of the sites that they appeal to different audiences. And there's no reason they have to be mirror images of one another.

i understand your point alexandra. I think neal said it best though. If it even offends a few, why not make it to where it would offend NO ONE? Can you say, that in a business sense, this is flawed thinking?

The problem Funny, is that many people are missing our point, I think. They seem to think my suggestion was to sensor the R&R section. No where has it ever been suggested that anything be taken away. My philosophy is that if would make it better for even a few guests and newbies (although I tend to think its much larger than that), and doesn't hurt anyone other than having to scroll to the bottom of the screen instead of clicking "new posts" at the top, why not help the few.

Neal, try and understand that not everyone agrees that it "helps" people to "protect" them from having open access to the full menu of ideas and options. I know you believe that people still have access to everything, all they need to do is click on various links, etc. Others of us believe that setting up these obstacles is patronizing to newbies or anyone else, and that everyone is fully competent to deal with this site without any form of "guidance" "protection" "supervision" or whatever you want to call it. Many of us believe that this is just not necessary. And I can definitely say that as a newcomer here, I would not have wanted that sort of "protection." I don't think you are in favor of censorship of the site in general. It is the "protection" that many of us believe is not necessary, and indeed, does not make it better at all. In fact, many of us believe that it does not "help the few" at all to "protect" them from something they are perfectly capable of handling for themselves.

But I don't think anyone is questioning your motivations for making these suggestions.

Everyone shops around among banding sites and hopefully finds one that fits their sensibilities. It says nothing negative about any of the sites that they appeal to different audiences. And there's no reason they have to be mirror images of one another.

Exactly. Every site appeals to different people. There are people at OH that think it couldn't be better. I pretty much despise OH. Every site has different perks. Some people like that OH lets people have other people's posts removed from their threads, even when they aren't offensive. I hate it. I personally love the off-topic areas here at LBT. That's why I stuck around. Other people probably don't agree. That's fine. We can't please everybody. Someone being turned off by this board isn't being left without support. There are other boards that they can go to, ones that fit their values better.

i understand your point alexandra. I think neal said it best though. If it even offends a few, why not make it to where it would offend NO ONE? Can you say, that in a business sense, this is flawed thinking?

I think it is indeed flawed thinking. Any attempt to "offend no one" just results in a dumbing-down of content. I see this in the media all the time, and it is, in fact, the most likely thing to offend me. You've heard the phrase "insulting one's intelligence"--that's the perfect example.

If the goal is to "offend no one" a whole lot more than what you're suggesting would have to be done.

it is not restricting anyone from participating in the discussions. it is mearly allowing those who do not wish to look at thread titles, or accidentally stumble into a discussion they do not want to read, that have no bearing on the main reason most people are here.

it is not restricting anyone from participating in the discussions. it is mearly allowing those who do not wish to look at thread titles, or accidentally stumble into a discussion they do not want to read, that have no bearing on the main reason most people are here.

And again, members already have that ability.