Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 22, 2017, 12:32:41 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  The Lobby  |  Topic: What CAP-Talk Was, And What Its Become
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4  All Print
Author Topic: What CAP-Talk Was, And What Its Become  (Read 5460 times)
NIN
VIP

Posts: 4,664
Unit: of issue

« Reply #20 on: September 20, 2017, 09:53:17 AM »

This is a very interesting conversation.  There is one thing I have noticed about CAPTALK (and several other aviation related forums).  Those forums which allow the use of an alias are, in general, less civil and less disciplined than those sites that require the use of a real name.  I wonder how much would clean up if all posters were required to own their comments and use their real name and location.

I grant your point, but aliases also allow for people who hold official positions to join the discussion without seeming to speak for the organization

I join the discussion, and while my user name doesn't say specifically who I am, my signature block does.  I'm not speaking for the organization unless I say I am (which, here, is tremendously infrequently).  When I was hired into my current position, my participation in CAP-Talk was actually mentioned as a positive factor, as in "People have seen what you have to say and they like it."

There is some degree of responsibility when your name is associated with your words. 

As I previously mentioned Reddit, the discussions there can get pretty freewheeling specifically because a massive percentage of people are anon and don't want to get doxxed for what they post. This is probably why the moderation scheme in the better subreddits is pretty heavy. For example: I've had several comments in one of the more "technical" subreddits modded down due to "low effort posting." Consequently, when I make a comment in one of those subreddits now, I work a little harder to make sure my comment or post actually contributes to the discussion at hand and doesn't drag the discussion off topic.  How is that bad?  The mods aren't staunching off legitimate discussion (even that which might be outside the "mainstream"), but they are helping separate the wheat from the chaff in terms of keeping the dialog "on point" and "high quality."  I know when I go into that subreddit, I'm going to read informative and smart discussions about the actual topic at hand, not "No, shut up, you're wrong" or "you're an idiot, read the FAQ" or 400 cat videos.

 Thats a VERY fine line to walk. VERY fine. And it works, most of the time.



Logged
Darin Ninness, Lt Col, CAP
Sq Bubba, Wing Dude, National Guy
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
NIN
VIP

Posts: 4,664
Unit: of issue

« Reply #21 on: September 20, 2017, 09:59:30 AM »

I am loathe to post this here, but it is relevant to the discussion, and this theory has more or less been taken as gospel:

Logged
Darin Ninness, Lt Col, CAP
Sq Bubba, Wing Dude, National Guy
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,996

« Reply #22 on: September 20, 2017, 11:35:26 AM »

The thought struck me this morning that CAPtalk, seemingly, has followed nearly the same arc as many CAP members, even in the
actual time it took to get there, and is now surprised at the result.

Members get little guidance or training, work to do the best that they can in a vacuum, and a small number of those with the time, interest, and inititive
wind up taking the lead, either by design or from a practical perspective. Those members may well assume an inappropriate sense of
"ownership" because of the amount of time and effort expended, which is never discouraged, and even occasionally praised by the leadership.

They are generally left to their own devices, occasionally becoming shiny enough for someone to say "take it easy", or "don't do that again",
but on the mean, because things are working, there is no direction or plan provided.  Commanders like the positive attention they are getting
from the work of the few, and chalk up mistakes to their failure to provide a map.

Occasionally a member pushes things too far, and are disciplined, but because of the mean, their being disciplined, or even terminated,
is noticed more because of the fact that someone actually took action, vs. their actual transgression.

New members, many of whom don't realize the time and effort it takes to reach a level of proficiency and involvement, get frustrated because
they don't have a "full voice" the first day, either because they can't put in the time, or actually aren't all that interested, but really
just want a cool hat, and/or realize griping about being put-upon is easier then rolling up their sleeves and doing the work to get there.

Then one day "someone", decides the ship is way too far off the intended course, despite there being no course charted or communicated,
and then next thing you know, people with 10 years in are simply "gone".

Then the emails start about "retention".

“Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster... for when you gaze long into the abyss. The abyss gazes also into you.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche
Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

HGjunkie
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,616

« Reply #23 on: September 20, 2017, 01:06:55 PM »

I stopped reading CAPTalk a long time ago mostly because of the echo chamber effect (with the same group of people posting in every single thread, it seems like), and like I've seen for years now the general disdain for Cadets with questions. I don't gain anything from this website, nor do most people even respect the discourse that happens here (ungodly amounts of uniform drama is too much even for me). The top 50-ish posting members, with few exceptions, have been on this website for around 10 years now. The post numbers fall off dramatically after about the top 100. There is very little new perspective in these forums, the same tired arguments and discussions, and it's showing.
Logged
••• retired
C1C USAFA
TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 881

« Reply #24 on: September 20, 2017, 02:40:08 PM »

Doesn't every form of social media, though, have that same timeline (albeit different lengths for that timeline)?

It starts off as a small group, progresses to grow into a mass of members, and gets flooded with both a lot of good and a lot of bad (including misinformation, "stupid" questions/topics that could be answered easily through self-study/research, "stupid" questions/topics that really don't belong, not to mention the flood of members of the board who aren't even affiliated with the organization for which the board was intended...and let's not forget the insults and personal attacks).

What's good about this board, though, is that, unlike a lot of other boards, those top-tier lifers don't always hide in the shadows; you guys/gals do bother to contribute---whether keeping us, the masses, informed about what's going on at the top and what we can expect, providing reasoning for certain decisions, or just acknowledging that you hear some of the gripes (and the commendations) to take back to your "offices" for review.

For me, personally, this is like a classroom. I already know a lot of what I see. I have my own questions. I see and hear things I never thought of, and I can take those back to my unit as "try this" or "don't ever do this" efforts. And there's a lot I channel out and skip over.

The best PDO classes are the ones that have always taken the course textbook content, reviewed methodology, and then talked about its practical application from a variety of different experiences and mindsets. That's where innovation is sparked (or shot down). This is like those to me, but on my own time, at my leisure, and can go on for as long as people are willing to contribute, unlimited to a clock telling us to go home.

Personally, I like CAP Talk. I had my first judgments early on. Some stayed true, some were redirected. I've had those classes where someone mentions CAP Talk and you hear someone go "Oh, no, don't." I had someone ask in my first PDO class if I was in the room (and if he's reading this, he knows who he is). I didn't want to respond at first because I had heard those "Stay off of CAP Talk" comments. Frankly, I've come to learn that I could care less of your opinions.

But really, why is CAP Talk different from the other social media boards, like I stated? I don't really think it is. It's like the Reddit of CAP, or RallyPoint, or various military community forums, or those Facebook pages that post the memes where half the people are the Dependapotamuses. It has its ups and downs, but some of the information here is invaluable. As Eclipse said, it's hard to get it for many people back home.

More often than not, it seems most of the people on here are the ones who have some vested interest in CAP, or at least did at one time.

Logged
PA Guy
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 709

« Reply #25 on: September 21, 2017, 02:14:24 AM »

Removed
« Last Edit: September 21, 2017, 02:21:19 AM by PA Guy » Logged
PA Guy
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 709

« Reply #26 on: September 21, 2017, 02:26:46 AM »

I don't participate much here, for a variety of reasons. One big reason is the futility of the discussion.

Sort the user list by number of posts, and you'll see the problem. I can call out names, but I don't think I need to. This forum is absolutely dominated by the same 4-5 voices.

You few high-volume posters have ruined CAP Talk, because you post in every single thread, you're never wrong, and you never stop posting. This can't be a vibrant discussion with hundreds of people when the same 4-5 are shouting at the top of their lungs constantly. Somewhat frequent posters, casual posters, and lurkers all get sick of trying to contribute because they know they're going to face the unending flurry of replies from people who post 20+ times a day.

All this said, it's not that those 4-5 voices are bad people. I think this is what nearly every discussion board of this kind devolves in to. It's pretty much inevitable that you'll have a handful of long-time people who feel that they know best, the occasional drive-by conspiracy theorists, casuals and lurkers, etc.

I'm not convinced that the discussion board as a communication medium is even useful in 2017. If I owned the captalk.net domain, I would be tempted every single day to sinkhole it. Even with improvements to the software and moderation policies, I don't know that this place can be made into something radically different than what it is.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: Yes

Poster since 2005.
Logged
JoeTomasone
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,659

« Reply #27 on: September 21, 2017, 10:12:57 AM »

I started a Facebook group called "Civil Air Patrol Discussion Group" specifically to foster an environment where anyone could discuss things - even the same old things - without condemnation, being judged, or told to "go look it up in the regs, newbie".    Largely, it's succeeded without the need to ban anyone - and only occasionally having to step in and moderate anything - because there are pretty stringent rules.   To use an earlier analogy, very little herding of the strays has been required because the lines are clearly defined and rarely approached, much less crossed.

I agree with many of the posters here - more moderation is needed, especially to restrict junk posts and replies that derail threads.   CAP Talk has the potential to be an invaluable resource, but sometimes it gets very hard to see the wheat through all the chaff.   That's why I don't participate as much as I used to either.
 
Logged
Live2Learn
Seasoned Member

Posts: 466

« Reply #28 on: September 21, 2017, 10:40:55 AM »

This is an interesting thread.  I'm cruious why some commenters state that they [paraphrased] 'see no value' in this board, yet it appears that the same individuals choose not to participate in discussions, nor to contribute topics for discussion.  To a large extent this medium is really a product created by participation.  Absent investment, a.k.a. as THOUGHTFUL posts we get what we get.  Moderation may be helpful to put a lid on ad hominims and other destructive trolling, but moderation does not create content.  Frankly, I see no large problem with frequent posters who offer thoughtful, interesting, and enlightening material.  I expec many 'lurkers' receive some value from the material they read, otherwise why invest the time?   FWIW, I believe frequent posters who contribute substance to community learning are valuuable.  IMHO more of that behavior should be encouraged.  Unfortunately, lurkers who consume, criticize in their safe spaces, and dis the forum off line with snarky comments will always be part of society, whether in social media or in-person social circles.  I suggest that the PTB listen to their concerns, weight the complaints in proportion to content and demonstrated past contributions to other forum conversations.





Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,996

« Reply #29 on: September 21, 2017, 10:49:57 AM »

What does it say about CAP-Talk when, in the midst of a discussion about what it should be, including
avoiding arguments and staying off the tired roads, that literally the next three active threads were:

Whether cadet Airmen should wear service coats, with a veiled comment it was dumb to do so.

Re-opening the NCO debate, again.

A thread drift with an argument about whether a HAA should be secret squirrel or not.

Perhaps there should be a sticky with a code of conduct which includes prohibiting discussion about the 5 or so
very dead and tired subjects until and only if NHQ makes an announcement of an actual change to that respective issue.
Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

dwb
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,314

« Reply #30 on: September 21, 2017, 10:55:15 AM »

What does it say about CAP-Talk when, in the midst of a discussion about what it should be, including
avoiding arguments and staying off the tired roads, that literally the next three active threads were:

Whether cadet Airmen should wear service coats, with a veiled comment it was dumb to do so.

Re-opening the NCO debate, again.

A thread drift with an argument about whether a HAA should be secret squirrel or not.

Perhaps there should be a sticky with a code of conduct which includes prohibiting discussion about the 5 or so
very dead and tired subjects until and only if NHQ makes an announcement of an actual change to that respective issue.

Right, so here again you're illustrating my point.

It's not a "very dead and tired subject" if you're new to CAP, or new to the subject, or new to CAP Talk. It's tired to you because you've been here for 12 years and you've posted nearly 28,000 times.

You don't actually have to participate in every single conversation. Let people discuss what is interesting to them, and you can discuss what is interesting to you.
Logged
TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 881

« Reply #31 on: September 21, 2017, 11:02:17 AM »

Not to mention that those who have been around for 12 years continue to have some opinion on it and seemingly continue to respond.

If it's such a dead topic, why contribute?
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,996

« Reply #32 on: September 21, 2017, 11:04:12 AM »

It's not a "very dead and tired subject" if you're new to CAP, or new to the subject, or new to CAP Talk.

Then spend the time reading what has been discussed, not first-posting with the same question or proposition that
is already indicated 15 times in the same 20-page thread.

Perhaps threads could be closed once a question is answered like many of the tech forums - that negates the
derailing while still providing a KB for new members.
Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

TheSkyHornet
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 881

« Reply #33 on: September 21, 2017, 11:13:22 AM »

It's not a "very dead and tired subject" if you're new to CAP, or new to the subject, or new to CAP Talk.

Then spend the time reading what has been discussed, not first-posting with the same question or proposition that
is already indicated 15 times in the same 20-page thread.

Perhaps threads could be closed once a question is answered like many of the tech forums - that negates the
derailing while still providing a KB for new members.

Closing an old thread, yes, I agree. Don't reignite a thread from 6 months ago.

I see no harm in someone asking for an updated answer though to something that was asked 5 years back. Times change. Regulations change. And perspectives and opinions change.

I personally research the board before any new topic I create. But in today's modern era, most people want instant answers rather than looking it up first.
Logged
etodd
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 853

« Reply #34 on: September 21, 2017, 11:43:26 AM »

I started a Facebook group called "Civil Air Patrol Discussion Group" specifically to foster an environment where anyone could discuss things - even the same old things - without condemnation, being judged, or told to "go look it up in the regs, newbie". 

I follow it and participate some. The big advantage there is that its not anonymous. Makes folks think before they post.
Logged
MS - MO - AP - MP
Live2Learn
Seasoned Member

Posts: 466

« Reply #35 on: September 21, 2017, 11:57:40 AM »

It's not a "very dead and tired subject" if you're new to CAP, or new to the subject, or new to CAP Talk.

Then spend the time reading what has been discussed, not first-posting with the same question or proposition that
is already indicated 15 times in the same 20-page thread.

Perhaps threads could be closed once a question is answered like many of the tech forums - that negates the
derailing while still providing a KB for new members.

I have a different view of threads on a "dead and tired subject".  If I've not read them 'til now they might be very interesting.  Resurrecting them by posting anew may be very relevant, both on technical subjects and non-technical topics.  Personally, I learn from reviewing comments offered while the topic was first discussed.  For those to whom the topic is "old and tired", why do you choose to review the material 'yet again'?  If it's old and tired to you, move on.  We ought not deprive persons for whom the information is novel the opportunity to view it and comment on it, even if we've already expressed our (of course, highly valued) opinion.  I recall an earlier post on this thread, for example, that referred to a Cadet Mom from Texas.  Let her, or the cadet's Dad, uncle, cousin, or whomever draw some benefit from the past discussion.  Another recent thread discussed recruiting, retention, etc.  That thread's underlying message was about the cycle of people through CAP.  IMHO, we should grant the newcomers the opportunity to engage by commenting on older threads.  That freshens them up and bridges the historical context to the present.  Here, and elsewhere I've noticed we may see persons who, rightly or wrongly, believe that "been there, done that" [BTDT] settles a question for all time.  Sometimes I confess I'm guilty of that view myself.  Maybe 'BTDT" isn't really a valid point, since times change.  Technology changes, and people change.  BTDT is highly contextual.  It's surprisingly how often taking another look from a different place in time will yield a different answer.
Logged
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,061
Unit: NAVAIRPAC

« Reply #36 on: September 21, 2017, 11:32:23 PM »

As one of the evil, draconian moderators, I have, in the past several weeks, received requests to reopen a couple of threads. I have done so, with the proviso that there be new content, worthy of the effort. The requestors have, for the most part, accomplished that.

The offer remains open. I, or another mod, will review the request, gather additional info as needed, and approve or deny. The easiest method is to simply report the post you want revived, and it will go to all the mods for action. Make a case for your request in the comments, and we'll give it a look.
Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
Alaric
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 750

« Reply #37 on: September 22, 2017, 08:30:30 AM »

One of my issues with the locking of threads is that the moderators seem to be inconsistent.  There are plenty of ask and answer threads that they let go on an on long after the original question was answered in the second post, others they lock down almost immediately.  Consistency is important, both in the enforcement of rules and what is and is not acceptable behavior.
Logged
Live2Learn
Seasoned Member

Posts: 466

« Reply #38 on: September 22, 2017, 01:34:58 PM »

...I have, in the past several weeks, received requests to reopen a couple of threads. I have done so, with the proviso that there be new content, worthy of the effort. The requestors have, for the most part, accomplished that.

The offer remains open. ... Make a case for your request in the comments, and we'll give it a look.

I appreciate Moderator openness to revisiting some conversations.  Sometimes a 'lock down' seems the only option for containing thread drift.  Other times??? maybe direct action to 'assist' errant posters to mind their manners.   I speculate that "several requests to reopen" may very well be the tip of the iceberg.  Unless it's a big deal I wonder if most of us would just let it ride rather than adding to the thread.  While that might allow BTDT to be less obvious, we may then have multiple threads that cover similar/same ground and create less accessibility to "new" aka 'old' information.  To me that's a strong argument for allowing threads to wax, wane, and drop from lack of interest rather than from a Moderator keystroke.

Here's an example:  On another well modulated forum I ran across a very interesting (to me)  thread on VG's.  That forum's policy is to leave 'em open unless there is blatant disregard for the forum guidelines for decorum, and even then only if chastising the perps (to include deleting posts) proves ineffective.  I noticed the VG discussion of that 3-4  year old dormant thread had  lots of "love 'em"  and a few "don't do nothin' for my plane..." comments, but no conversation of how VG induced stall speed reductions affect handling for crosswind TO/Landing, nor in accelerated stall situations.  The thread came back to life following my query and now (along with more "love 'em" and "don't do nothin' ") comments, it's  enriched with discussions of wing types, the affects of VG's and rigging, and  some other interesting discussion.  How that, and other resurrected threads perform suggest to me that (1)  the 'tired old thread' is new stuff to many; and (2) the 'new' crowd, unencumbered by BTDT, offer a little more insight to the crosswind question that was not previously addressed.  An added bonus is the discussion of the VG induced reduced stall speed implications for  Va and Vtp (for the Members who aren't pilots Va = maneuvering speed, Vtp = turbulence penetration airspeed), etc. 
Logged
Spam
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 949
Unit: GA-001

« Reply #39 on: September 22, 2017, 02:08:27 PM »

It's not a "very dead and tired subject" if you're new to CAP, or new to the subject, or new to CAP Talk.

Then spend the time reading what has been discussed, not first-posting with the same question or proposition that
is already indicated 15 times in the same 20-page thread.

Perhaps threads could be closed once a question is answered like many of the tech forums - that negates the
derailing while still providing a KB for new members.

Interesting points.

My supposition is that newer users are following the path of least resistance. Its harder to go to a pretty sterile one liner search window and then wade through pages of debates and off topics and uniform deviations and counter-insults, looking for the answer, vice just asking. Can't blame them for that, especially younger users with short attention spans.

"Perhaps" the search window icon could be more prominent, and the linked search window could include some text to help new users with the taxonomy of their searches. At present, its just an open one liner.

Short attention spans/impatience/unwillingness to look things up vs. grouchy old folks who've seen it "all" and jump on them, leading to poor forum retention... story of our CAP lives, in a nutshell.

V/r
Spam


Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4  All Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  The Lobby  |  Topic: What CAP-Talk Was, And What Its Become
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.398 seconds with 20 queries.