News threads creating clutter

[Great Argus]

You're the one who is getting heated over the fact I post like this on threads (which I haven't been doing a lot for this exact reason) so just stop complaining about it. I might do it every so often but it's not going to be a frequent occurrence.

I'm not heated at all, I'm laughing that once again we're circled back to you getting mad and defending yourself over things multiple people have said are not necessary. Made the more humorous that this conversation has all come about by you randomly popping into this thread three months later to randomly defend yourself. We keep telling you we don't care, just drop the small stuff, but you keep doing it and so keep ending up at odds with most of us.

I'm not here to fight but I also want to say if you think I'm cluttering the USA section, sorry you feel that way. That being said, I will continue doing these posts probably not as frequently and I will probably reflect and do even more slight changes, but I'm not going to 100% do everything everyone says unless I am told by a staff member I am forbidden to post news in the current way that I am.

Ever get the impression that people constantly complaining about you and your posting might be a consideration that you need to change up how you post? You are 100% single-handly causing a lot of clutter in the USA subforum especially, and had a significant hand in the creation of this thread itself. May I also remind you that you ended up being the final nail that has stopped new tag and gallery creations til further notice for creating excess clutter. As I quote Simon himself, "While I appreciate your enthusiasm - you really are creating a lot of work for people (including me) and a lot of unnecessary clutter on the site."
Quote from here, as I can't directly quote it for some reason.
Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute News [Smithsonian National Zoo]

As I said:

I should clarify that claiming we “agreed minor news wouldn’t be reported on” is an exaggeration as no formal agreement was made - but people at the time nonetheless took the points on board and learnt from my mistakes - as evidenced by the fact we largely refrain from reporting on minor news in the Australasian forum.

Though it’s not enforced by anyone, I have noticed people are quick to pull up new forum users who post trivial news - but as long as this is done is polite manner, I see no issue. I myself also use the report function.

New forum members take a little while to figure out the site usually. I was more alluding to your taking it upon yourself to openly scold and correct Jambo in the Aussie elephant thread over an unofficial site rule that seems to have been created by yourself. Given that you also double posted the same birth announcement and have taken over that thread from the disappeared op seems to imply you take said unspoken/unwritten/unofficial rule very seriously - especially as you are the op for many of the Aussie population threads and are thus holding a monopoly on a massive amount of posts instead of sharing the responsibility with others from the region.

 

[15399]

I want to point out that I only report on the animals age either if it's a big thing (50th, 100th) or when they pass away. I probably shouldn't have recorded the Kunekune pig death at the Virginia Zoo (I'm guessing that's the example you're referring to) until something more newsworthy came in so that's on me entirely.

People aren't asking you to "wait until something more newsworthy came in". In fact, that is the complete opposite of what people are asking you to do, as it ignores both of the main critiques you are receiving, from myself and others:

1. Posting news that doesn't need to be posted/isn't important.

2. Posting news significantly later than they occurred.

While ideally I'd wish you stop posting these tidbits at all, if they are to be shared, then post them when they happen/when you find out. It's completely irrelevant to post the births and deaths of goats and pigs last year, or even last month. If these are to be posted, they should be posted promptly, and with brevity (or ideally not at all).

 

[TeaLovingDave]

Quote from here, as I can't directly quote it for some reason.

That'll be because the thread is locked. But yeah, if @Smaggledagle is "not going to 100% do everything everyone says unless [he is] told by a staff member [he is] forbidden to post news in the current way that [he does]", he should perhaps take Simon's post (and this one) as an indication that he needs to calm down and pay heed to the advice of others.

 

[Zoofan15]

I was more alluding to your taking it upon yourself to openly scold and correct Jambo in the Aussie elephant thread over an unofficial site rule that seems to have been created by yourself. Given that you also double posted the same birth announcement and have taken over that thread from the disappeared op seems to imply you take said unspoken/unwritten/unofficial rule very seriously - especially as you are the op for many of the Aussie population threads and are thus holding a monopoly on a massive amount of posts instead of sharing the responsibility with others from the region.

It was a guideline jointly agreed between the population thread authors. We’ve found it helpful in maintaining our population threads, but I’ll contact @Simon Hampel via PM to seek his advice on whether he’d like this discontinued for the concerns you’ve raised. I do see your point.

 

[TeaLovingDave]

I do see your point.

I suspect his point is somewhat based on the fact you classify anyone posting news of *any* sort as a breach of the "guideline".

Preferring that formal updates of the threads themselves are restricted to those managing them is one thing - demanding that no one post any information before you can is entirely another and quite apart from anything else, means that accuracy of the thread is solely based on your ability to notice new information as/when it happens.

 

[15399]

I suspect his point is somewhat based on the fact you classify anyone posting news of *any* sort as a breach of the "guideline".

Preferring that formal updates of the threads themselves are restricted to those managing them is one thing - demanding that no one post any information before you can is entirely another and quite apart from anything else, means that accuracy of the thread is solely based on your ability to notice new information as/when it happens.

What you're saying is certainly the norm for any North American population/holders threads. Whoever is the "owner" of the thread posts the actual population updates/formal lists, but anybody can (and has) post pertinent information.

 

[Zoofan15]

I suspect his point is somewhat based on the fact you classify anyone posting news of *any* sort as a breach of the "guideline".

Preferring that formal updates of the threads themselves are restricted to those managing them is one thing - demanding that no one post any information before you can is entirely another and quite apart from anything else, means that accuracy of the thread is solely based on your ability to notice new information as/when it happens.

What you're saying is certainly the norm for any North American population/holders threads. Whoever is the "owner" of the thread posts the actual population updates/formal lists, but anybody can (and has) post pertinent information.

Myself and the other population thread authors have contacted Simon, but @akasha has also suggested following the North American guidelines (formal population list update made by the author only; with births, deaths etc. updated by anyone), so unless there’s any objection that seems the best way forward.

Compared to the US forum, it’s not hard at all to notice information (only a handful of threads are updated each day); but our old rule/guideline meant news/opportunities to post were being monopolised, which I can now see is an issue.

 

[Great Argus]

Myself and the other population thread authors have contacted Simon, but @akasha has also suggested following the North American guidelines (formal population list update made by the author only; with births, deaths etc. updated by anyone), so unless there’s any objection that seems the best way forward.

The Australian population ones, you mean? Because you certainly didn't include all of us.
Worth noting the North American guidelines are just based on common courtesy - nobody's enforcing anything.

 

[Smaggledagle]

That'll be because the thread is locked. But yeah, if @Smaggledagle is "not going to 100% do everything everyone says unless [he is] told by a staff member [he is] forbidden to post news in the current way that [he does]", he should perhaps take Simon's post (and this one) as an indication that he needs to calm down and pay heed to the advice of others.

Noted but if someone doesn't mind making a list of what exactly gets on everyone's nerves when I do post something that would be quite helpful.

 

[Great Argus]

Noted but if someone doesn't mind making a list of what exactly gets on everyone's nerves when I do post something that would be quite helpful.

Seems to me you already have a pretty good idea per the quotes below, particularly anything you put in tiny text. You just seem to prefer ignoring it and trying to find ways around it. Enough of us have told you numerous times what doesn't need posted, why should we write you a list? Over and over in arguments you very clearly know what it's over but you defend it against all comers.

I request one because I think the facility looks interesting and at some point, I will make a thread on it, not necessarily that I've visited that and took pictures of it.

Yeah I'm kinda changing how I'm doing news, (this actually started in like late September to October) but for "minor news" (animal births that are either domestic or unspecified amount, like frogs or fish, random transfers/acquisitions, exhibit additions/removals, etc) I have been keeping a list so when some bigger piece of news comes up I will attach the smaller piece of news as well.

If you don't want to read the tiny text at the bottom, just don't read it? I have been moving away from using that and reporting that sort of news altogether, but sometimes I do add a small text to a temporary exhibit or something else that I think is kinda important and if you don't want to read it, just don't read it, it's that simple

 

[Smaggledagle]

Seems to me you already have a pretty good idea per the quotes below, particularly anything you put in tiny text. You just seem to prefer ignoring it and trying to find ways around it. Enough of us have told you numerous times what doesn't need posted, why should we write you a list? Over and over in arguments you very clearly know what it's over but you defend it against all comers.

I'll keep it in mind

 

[JVM]

Based on this and a few previous threads, it seems clear that zoochat relies a lot on unwritten standards for population threads and news threads and I think it would be best if those rules were formalized, in the same manner as the gallery rules were some years ago after a period in which some things were not explained clearly and openly. I think this would be helpful for everyone involved rather than these awkward 'we agreed informally' situations that no outsider will be able to understand quickly. Zoochat is gaining new members every single day, some of whom only follow certain zoos, and not all of them will know what was agreed upon elsewhere.

"Does anyone care what I'm posting?" seems like an extremely unclear standard to me that can be incredibly subjective. It would be easier to say 'no birthdays', 'no goats', and set clear standards.

I think part of the complication is many zoochat users seem to want to use the message board as an open-source database of species list, populations, and major news (understandable!) and other discussion distracts from that and becomes frustrating since there is no way to filter it out. (Understandable in this context!) It does not help entirely that the subscription function only notifies you of the first new post until you view. I personally wish there were more zoo-specific discussion threads but too many of those would cause the same kind of clutter to say, the Recent Threads list.

 

[Great Argus]

Based on this and a few previous threads, it seems clear that zoochat relies a lot on unwritten standards for population threads and news threads and I think it would be best if those rules were formalized, in the same manner as the gallery rules were some years ago after a period in which some things were not explained clearly and openly. I think this would be helpful for everyone involved rather than these awkward 'we agreed informally' situations that no outsider will be able to understand quickly.

I would like to point out only the Australian population threads are subject to a variety of rules - North America and Europe have only one, that being let the original poster do the main updates. For the most part we have not had a problem in the NA section and we all get along. Additionally I will point out we have only heard from one member of the Australian group - we do not know if everyone agrees with the innapropriately enforced rules.
As far as news goes, that has mostly become an argument due to one certain member taking it upon themselves to post just about anything and in massive quantities. They have been told numerous times by many people to please rein it in, to mostly deaf ears. There has been some change - but mostly begrudgingly and very slowly.

"Does anyone care what I'm posting?" seems like an extremely unclear standard to me that can be incredibly subjective. It would be easier to say 'no birthdays', 'no goats', and set clear standards.

Official restrictions like this would be generally detrimental and difficult to moderate in full. One would like to hope that when more than a dozen people have implied something is unnecessary, the person posting it would understand and honor that, additionally saving themselves the time of writing, copying links, and posting it to the forum.

I think part of the complication is many zoochat users seem to want to use the message board as an open-source database of species list, populations, and major news (understandable!) and other discussion distracts from that and becomes frustrating since there is no way to filter it out. (Understandable in this context!) It does not help entirely that the subscription function only notifies you of the first new post until you view. I personally wish there were more zoo-specific discussion threads but too many of those would cause the same kind of clutter to say, the Recent Threads list.

As I see it, there are two reasons discussion has been dropping off, at least per the NA section. I think both do apply forum wide in some capacity.

One is the high rotation rate of threads - in the USA section in particular they are rotating forwards and dropping back very quickly due to aforementioned heavy posting by a certain member in particular. It's become very hard to stay on top of a lot of zoos because it's constantly changing up and disappearing. The drop down menu to pick a facility is a pain due to the sheer number of places on it; particularly as a good quarter of them are empty as proved earlier in this thread.

And second, there is a distinct trend of experienced and knowledgeable members posting less or leaving entirely. I will not name any names due to leaving them their privacy, but I know many that are drifting off the site or are posting quite a bit less. There are a few that have left altogether. It seems the biggest factor is in fact other members, many of those who have left being tired of the spamming or rude behavior. The rampant speculation is causing problems as well, particularly in the European subforum. I have heard it said being a Zoochat member is actually a job liability at many European zoos due to leaks and too much attention. And so as the experienced and professional members continue to go silent and leave, so too will good discussion...

 

[15399]

Based on this and a few previous threads, it seems clear that zoochat relies a lot on unwritten standards for population threads and news threads and I think it would be best if those rules were formalized, in the same manner as the gallery rules were some years ago after a period in which some things were not explained clearly and openly. I think this would be helpful for everyone involved rather than these awkward 'we agreed informally' situations that no outsider will be able to understand quickly. Zoochat is gaining new members every single day, some of whom only follow certain zoos, and not all of them will know what was agreed upon elsewhere.

"Does anyone care what I'm posting?" seems like an extremely unclear standard to me that can be incredibly subjective. It would be easier to say 'no birthdays', 'no goats', and set clear standards.

I think part of the complication is many zoochat users seem to want to use the message board as an open-source database of species list, populations, and major news (understandable!) and other discussion distracts from that and becomes frustrating since there is no way to filter it out. (Understandable in this context!) It does not help entirely that the subscription function only notifies you of the first new post until you view. I personally wish there were more zoo-specific discussion threads but too many of those would cause the same kind of clutter to say, the Recent Threads list.

And second, there is a distinct trend of experienced and knowledgeable members posting less or leaving entirely. I will not name any names due to leaving them their privacy, but I know many that are drifting off the site or are posting quite a bit less. There are a few that have left altogether. It seems the biggest factor is in fact other members, many of those who have left being tired of the spamming or rude behavior. The rampant speculation is causing problems as well, particularly in the European subforum. I have heard it said being a Zoochat member is actually a job liability at many European zoos due to leaks and too much attention. And so as the experienced and professional members continue to go silent and leave, so too will good discussion...

To add on to this, everyone has a breaking point. Some of us who are knowledgeable and add insight to discussion may not have left or stopped posting, but as frustration builds up the desire to do so becomes more and more. I can only speak for myself, and no one else, but I know I have noticed a general decline in the site quality lately, and while I think Zoochat is a great site with a lot of great users and strong potential, the more and more frustrated I've become at this thread the more I've considered stepping away from Zoochat. The big ones for me are the endless speculation in certain threads, news postings that aren't relevant, and a general repetitiveness of everything (how many times have we seen posts about "african" leopards in US zoos, for instance?) While I don't see myself leaving anytime soon, as I still find the galleries and some of the discussion interesting, and I can find out about legitimate zoo news from here as well, but I won't say it hasn't been tempting to stop posting as much or leave entirely. Right now, my policy is generally asking myself "does what I have to say add value?", and if I think it adds value I will post it. Hopefully it sparks discussion or adds on to the discussion happening, and I think usually it does. I could very well, if the site continues at its current trajectory, not post when I have valuable things to add, and limit myself to a much smaller scope (I love the Zoo Chat Challenge, for instance, and appreciate some of the "database" style here's every zoo in the country with x species). It's especially heartbreaking when we occasionally hear things like what @Great Argus mentioned about European zoos is that there are zoos considering Zoochat a liability or looking down on the site as a whole. As people who love zoos, and care about them, it's a real shame that some continue to leak sensitive information and destroy the site's reputation amongst zoos, as members should want Zoochat to be a site that has a good reputation, especially amongst the zoos and similar facilities we all claim to love so much. When you see these sorts of posts about zoochat users breaking zoo rules, posting sensitive info or backstage photos, or generally giving the site a bad reputation amongst zoos, it really makes me (and I assume other members as well) really question the value of being a member of this community, and in the end if it's worth it.

 

[TinoPup]

"Does anyone care what I'm posting?" seems like an extremely unclear standard to me that can be incredibly subjective. It would be easier to say 'no birthdays', 'no goats', and set clear standards.

The easiest way for me to quantify this is, Is it actually news? Birthdays and goat-related things both fall under an umbrella of stuff that is extremely common-place in zoos and happens at least several times, daily. I've seen a goat be born at a zoo, but it wasn't even mentioned on the facility's socials, because they have 50+ other goats. Livestock stuff, especially, happens all over the country outside of zoos. If baby goats are an interest to you, you're better off contacting your local 4H or FFA. This is also where being a local comes into play. It's like regular news as a whole - something might be news to a small town, but is it that relevant state-wide, yet alone nationally? Smaller things can be notable at zoos that are frequented by several members here. I'll use Smithsonian as an example - bringing in ostrich, and then switching what exhibit they were in, wasn't really news, but was worth mentioning as there's at least a half dozen of us who go there several times a year. But is a new ostrich, or even an ostrich moving exhibits, news if it's a facility no one has been to in the first place?

 

[Great Argus]

I can only speak for myself, and no one else, but I know I have noticed a general decline in the site quality lately, and while I think Zoochat is a great site with a lot of great users and strong potential, the more and more frustrated I've become at this thread the more I've considered stepping away from Zoochat

You're not the only one. I agree the site quality has dropped considerably in the last year or so especially, and I know several members who share that sentiment. I increasingly find myself questioning whether it is worth posting on this site.

It's especially heartbreaking when we occasionally hear things like what @Great Argus mentioned about European zoos is that there are zoos considering Zoochat a liability or looking down on the site as a whole.

Word has it some of them will outright fire you for being a Zoochat member due to clashes with members of this site. Makes us all look bad whenever it happens. Many of them have taken action against known Zoochatters - Chester banning known ZC members from bts tours and special events for a long time being one such example. The recent instance of a young member pretending to have been a keeper and having connections at a zoo here in the states could have caused problems - also don't forget the member who bragged about their blatantly breaking the rules at an aquarium and being disrespectful to the staff. This is not acceptable behavior and it reflects on all of us to some degree.
I am also reminded of this rather contentious thread over what the guidelines were for sharing information from zoo staff and volunteers:
Sharing news from zoo staff
There was no good consensus (though for myself I think there should have been) but it is worth remembering that leaks and speculation is what is causing a lot of the rift between ZC and zoos... My understanding is there has long been occasional problems of this sort as might be expected, but it seems to be considerably increasing in severity.

When you see these sorts of posts about zoochat users breaking zoo rules, posting sensitive info or backstage photos, or generally giving the site a bad reputation amongst zoos, it really makes me (and I assume other members as well) really question the value of being a member of this community, and in the end if it's worth it.

This is becoming a question for myself and many of my acquaintences on here, and I'm sure others as well - helped along with rude behavior by some members that is largely going unchecked. I suspect some of the disappearances I have noted are due to them finding the site a nuisance or a liability. I have gone on hiatus from the site in the recent past due to frustration with other members - at one point also alongside @TinoPup and @IndianRhino. My bird holder threads are due for an update, but they are in the air (no pun intended) as I debate whether I see enough value in the site to go through the massive effort of updating them.

As a whole I want to stick around and continue contributing, I like the concept of the site and I've made quite a number of friends on here. But I cannot deny increasing frustration with other members that seem to have little regard for common courtesy and that continue to post spam or unnecessary content. If more of the reputable members continue to drift away from the site, sooner or later I probably will too...

 

[JVM]

There seems to be a switching between 'this is because of one specific problematic member' and 'there is a widespread problem' in this thread, and I can't account for both possibilities, so I will simply accept I am not an active enough user (or perhaps too active in the same one or two places) to fully understand the problems the rest of you are referring to. My bad for derailing the original topic and I will withdraw.

 

[lintworm]

There seems to be a switching between 'this is because of one specific problematic member' and 'there is a widespread problem' in this thread, and I can't account for both possibilities, so I will simply accept I am not an active enough user (or perhaps too active in the same one or two places) to fully understand the problems the rest of you are referring to. My bad for derailing the original topic and I will withdraw.

Both

There are some general problems that occur on a regular basis (and discussion of which dates back at least a decade) of which in the here and now a few specific members are the worst culprits. Knowledgeable members departing, overenthusiastic teenagers and needless speculation are not new to the site. That doesn't mean it is not worth discussing it on a regular basis, as they are valid concerns. A problem is that once the old culprits have either left or adapted, new ones pop up on a regular basis...

Cluttering news threads is one thing and while certainly annoying, it is not harmful directly and should be easy to fix. Though indirectly it will stop other people from posting. What annoys me much more is the needless speculation, especially in the Australasian forums, with spillovers to other continents. Several members seem to see themselves as surrogate studbook keepers/curators in a real life version of zoo tycoon. Such speculation is what I find most annoying and I feel brings the value of the site down significantly.

Zoochat is still the best platform for sharing views on zoos online for enthusiasts and I do love to share some of my views. But recently I am wondering whether it is worth the effort if it feels like you are mostly writing for a silent majority. Creating value on a site like this takes time and I have another pet project lined up for an interesting thread, if I choose to invest the time in it. It is not the likes that make a site like this worth posting, far from it. The reason I still post here is because I like discussing zoos on a respectful and deeper level than is possible elsewhere online. That doesn't mean you need to be an expert to post (frankly most of us aren't, including me), but at least be aware of your own limitations and don't try to make yourself look smarter than you are. Something with Dönning-Krüger...

 

[Zooplantman]

I scratch my head at the assertions here "that nobody cares about x or y..."
It seems that the great majority of members are lurkers. We do not know what they care about. The great majority of active posters would fit in a small tour bus.
Who is the Forum for then?
As to which guinea pig at which zoo had a litter: not my interest but obviously it is of interest to someone. I have not found that scrolling past such posts ruins my quality of life
Perhaps each zoo can have a thread "For Cognoscenti Only" and another for "Hoi polloi" so we don't need to be exposed to each other,

There is no need to mold the Forum to fit my personal preferences.
That said, I agree that lengthy speculation within news threads about what a particular zoo ought to do or might some day do seems a waste of time to me. I'd like all of that to live in Speculation threads. Let members speculate and play "General Curator" but let it happen separate from News. And the second guessing of management decisions by members with no experience or understanding of the issues feels downright insulting to the zoo professionals. I would not legislate about it but it does color how I see such members.

 

[Great Argus]

I scratch my head at the assertions here "that nobody cares about x or y..."
It seems that the great majority of members are lurkers. We do not know what they care about. The great majority of active posters would fit in a small tour bus.
Who is the Forum for then?

It is true that the great majority of members are indeed lurkers. However I see three main likely reasons as to why so many lurk regularly. Casual interest in the site but not enough to post is probably quite common. Intimidation between the deluge of posting and frequent squabbles over it could be a reason. Or as one I'm well aware of at present - finding the site not worth contributing to or a liability. This latter reason is increasingly a murmur of debate among many of us regular posters. The forum is for both the posters and the lurkers - we have no idea what specifics the lurkers are interested in, but they are part of the site all the same. However, it is the posters that keep the site interesting - without them the site is nothing. Equally can we really even tailor posts to lurkers?

As to which guinea pig at which zoo had a litter: not my interest but obviously it is of interest to someone. I have not found that scrolling past such posts ruins my quality of life

Domestics don't seem to get much love on here, and understandably - that's not really the focus of the site. While petting zoos are a distinctive part of many zoos, most the posting members here aren't particularly fond of them it seems.
Reporting news on domestics mostly just is additional information to scroll through that many of us just aren't fond of. I saw a post from just this morning that was a whole long list of average farm news. It's disappointing to click on a thread and it's "baby goats were born," or some such information.

There is no need to mold the Forum to fit my personal preferences.

No indeed, individual molding should be avoided - but if multiple people are frustrated and asking for some change, the group/community preference ought to be considered I should think. Much of the criticism in this thread is being leveled at a few certain members that continue to irk parts of the community. Some of these arguments keep happening over and over again, it's frustrating. If numerous people are asking to tone it down a bit, the least one could do is acquiesce a bit - it's posting news links, not creating some big thread relaying their travels or opinions.