archBOSTON Update: A New Dawn

F-Line to Dudley said:
Plus it gets used as a passive-aggression weapon by mods on certain forums to stifle discussion/topics they don't personally like. Example: making sure the "[x thread]" redirect goes to somewhere low-trafficked, so ancient it's moldy, or barely any more relevant to the sidebar in question so it gets buried and becomes too much trouble to bring up again in a hot thread regardless of relevance. Thread-drift isn't without problems, especially if a board starts falling into a trap of people not doing it in good faith (aB has certainly gone through phases where that's been true). But a good discussion can be coaxed back to the point through gentle encouragement more easily than being settled by an on-staff librarian, which more frequently just kills it. Unfortunately this is a big gateway drug to overmoderation, so you have to choose best practices very carefully and practice self-awareness when curating.
Click to expand...

Good criticism. IMO, based on some of the feedback on here it may make sense to look at things this way:
  • If a digression is limited and closed-ended, leave it be.
  • If a digression is ongoing and on the topic of another thread, redirect the convo to the appropriate thread.
  • If moving off-topic posts would not be too disruptive of the flow conversation in a destination thread, move them to that appropriate thread.
    • OR mods could quote-reply the off-topic posts in the appropriate thread.
 
Last edited:
Holy freakin' cannoli. I have missed out on a lot of drama since I used to post here what feels like a lifetime ago. Things looks relatively nice now, though?

Howdy to all the old members who remember me as the kid asking for advice on entrance essays to architecture school under the username "kennedy."
 
Hey cdohertyk/kennedy! Welcome back! Are you sill doing the line drawings? Those were great.

Also it looks like your old account is still active if you want keep continuity, unless you are looking for a fresh start.
 
statler said:
Hey cdohertyk/kennedy! Welcome back! Are you sill doing the line drawings? Those were great.

Also it looks like your old account is still active if you want keep continuity, unless you are looking for a fresh start.
Click to expand...

I haven't sketched anything in years, unfortunately. I ended up as a writer instead of an architect, which I suppose makes some sense considering my entry to architecture was a text-based forum. Sold my soul to work in advertising 😜

I tried to access it again, but haven't had any luck. It's linked to a very old email account. I might try a few more old passwords though. Shoot me a PM if there's some backend thing you can do to help?
 
kennedy said:
WHAT I GOT IT! Wow. Thank goodness I used the same terrible password for everything back in the day, and that my memory hasn't completely torched itself.
Click to expand...

Welcome back! It's best to lock one of the active accounts to avoid confusion. I'm guessing you'd like to keep the Kennedy account open? Let me know :)
 
George_Apley said:
It's best to lock one of the active accounts to avoid confusion. I'm guessing you'd like to keep the Kennedy account open? Let me know :)
Click to expand...

Yeah, ideally would like to lock or delete the "cdohertyk" account. Already switched my email/password/etc for this one so we're golden for the future.
 
@SkyriseCities could we have a "Policy" subforum under Boston's Built Environment?

As is, there are a few discussions that are scattered across Architecture & Urbanism, Design a Better Boston, and Miscellaneous/General that would have a better home in a "Policy" subforum. This would help unify the discussions, connecting the dots between different proposals, statistics, and outcomes, and encourage deeper threads.
 
etik said:
@SkyriseCities could we have a "Policy" subforum under Boston's Built Environment?
Click to expand...
Excellent suggestion. Some months ago, prior to aB‘s annexation by the Toronto Dominion, I suggested a sub-forum devoted to Historic Preservation in one of the threads briv subsequently nuked. Given the spectrum of important (and divisive) buildings currently in the crosshairs of redevelopment via demolition, this remains a potentially useful venue for discussion and planned public action.

And while I’m here:
SkyriseCities said:
The TOU issue will be addressed next.
Click to expand...

Tick-tock, Edward. Tick-fucking-tock...
 
Last edited:
I think something like this would be satisfactory and fair:

You understand that archBoston.com is an viewership-supported, for-profit business and that you are granting us with a non-exclusive, unlimited, royalty-free license to use, publish, or re-publish your Content as part of of the archBoston.com forums and its direct successors. You retain copyright over the Content.

archBoston.com is authorized to allow fair-use by others of your content, and to allow it to be indexed by search engines. You may describe copyright and license limitations in the archBoston.com forum at the time of sharing, but they shall not conflict with this license and we assume no liability or role in defining, preserving, or enforcing your copyright.
 
etik said:
@SkyriseCities could we have a "Policy" subforum under Boston's Built Environment?

As is, there are a few discussions that are scattered across Architecture & Urbanism, Design a Better Boston, and Miscellaneous/General that would have a better home in a "Policy" subforum. This would help unify the discussions, connecting the dots between different proposals, statistics, and outcomes, and encourage deeper threads.
Click to expand...

Mods, could we please have a look at adding a "Policy" subforum?
 
Issues with existing TOU as I read them.

1. Use of content
2. Change of TOU at any time.

I've made a couple of changes (in red). Take a read and let me know what you think.

Before you do let me better define where I'm coming from.

We do use member photos on UrbanToronto for other purposes beyond the forum. This includes our news stories and newsletters. We also use them in our project database along with all the renderings that we get from members and directly from the city or companies that are building the projects. We credit forum members in the news stores. What we don't do is sell anything to outsiders. We only use within UT and SkyriseCities. Any requests we get from outsiders for photos (I've never been asked by anybody to buy someone's posts!) are directed to the specific photographers in question. They can sell directly if they like. In the 17 years since UT started I've never had one comment about the use of photos. One of the reasons I've not made the TOU a major priority I suppose.

We may build up aB to make it similar to UrbanToronto or SkyriseCities / SRC Calgary / SRC Vancouver etc. That means forum, database and news. That will require repurposing photos. Can't work without it.

So take a read and let me know if you think this works. I know some members are upset that its a business now and not some sort of collective. But that's what it is. I have no interest in raping and pillaging here. I see a small but great community that could be taken to the next level and that will take resources. I did a similar thing with UrbanToronto. Small forum that was built into the premier development site in Toronto. A site that, I may say, has an influence on the development and design industry in Toronto. Its not just a bunch of urban nurds in their bedrooms talking to and at each other.

Having said that read below and let me know what you think.


__________________________________________________________________

The providers ("we", "us", "our") of the service provided by this web site ("Service") are not responsible for any user-generated content and accounts. Content submitted express the views of their author only.


This Service is only available to users who are at least 13 years old. If you are younger than this, please do not register for this Service. If you register for this Service, you represent that you are this age or older.


All content you submit, upload, or otherwise make available to the Service ("Content") may be reviewed by staff members. All Content you submit or upload may be sent to third-party verification services (including, but not limited to, spam prevention services). Do not submit any Content that you consider to be private or confidential.


You agree to not use the Service to submit or link to any Content which is defamatory, abusive, hateful, threatening, spam or spam-like, likely to offend, contains adult or objectionable content, contains personal information of others, risks copyright infringement, encourages unlawful activity, or otherwise violates any laws. You are entirely responsible for the content of, and any harm resulting from, that Content or your conduct.


We may remove or modify any Content submitted at any time, with or without cause, with or without notice. Requests for Content to be removed or modified will be undertaken only at our discretion. We may terminate your access to all or any part of the Service at any time, with or without cause, with or without notice.


You are granting us with a non-exclusive, permanent, irrevocable, unlimited license to use, publish, or re-publish your Content in connection with the Service. The Service as defined here refers only to archBoston and any directly related sister sites such as SkyriseCities. Content copyright will remain with the owner and no content will be sold to any third parties. You retain copyright over the Content.


These terms may be changed at any time without notice but with the proviso that no changes will be made to the ownership of copyright over the Content.


If you do not agree with these terms, please do not register or use the Service. Use of the Service constitutes acceptance of these terms. If you wish to close your account, please contact us.
 
To Ed:

This is pretty much what I feared, but at least you're finally being honest about it. This site is now a content mill. This could all be solved if you simply agreed to ask permission for specific content generated by the community, but I suppose that would be inconvenient for you.

The changes you've made to the ToS do nothing but increase your "non-exclusive, permanent, irrevocable, unlimited license" to that of content use on your sister sites which, as you're surely aware, runs entirely counter to fixing any concerns we've stated.

I think what you've done here is shameful. I'm struggling to think of any other situation in which a person could come in and take over a community group and start using their work for his profit. It's like a bad movie plot from the 80s/90s.

To everyone else:

I registered for archBoston exactly 11 years ago today. I've learned a lot here and aB has kept me connected to Boston -- a city I no longer live in but still love -- in a way that no other site has been able to, and so I'm legitimately saddened to see what's happened here.

I hope that aB is ever returned to the community or arises somewhere else on the web that someone with my contact info will get in touch. Take care, guys, and thanks for letting me hang out.
 
SkyriseCities said:
We may build up aB to make it similar to UrbanToronto or SkyriseCities / SRC Calgary / SRC Vancouver etc. That means forum, database and news. That will require repurposing photos. Can't work without it.
Click to expand...

I'm not in the same fire and pitchfork camp as Justin, but he's right on this point: you could simply ask for permission before using photos. You don't want to commit to that because (and feel free to correct me) it would be inconvenient for you, permission could be denied, and users posting photos might have left the site and would therefore be unable to offer consent.

Since you've done us all a great service (and I mean that genuinely, thank you!) by allowing this site to host photos, a compromise: The language below applies to photos hosted at aB. Management can use those photos across the sites without asking. Management will obtain permission to use photos that are hosted elsewhere.

And folks, look at Airliners.net if you want to see how bad these terms can get. I believe users there give up their ownership entirely when they upload.

SkyriseCities said:
I know some members are upset that its a business now and not some sort of collective. But that's what it is.
Click to expand...

That's not an honest telling. I understand that your position is that because Briv offered you the site (and made no other attempt to sell it or transfer it) the current state of affairs is "what it is" outside of your control. Not true. You could accept the same offer we made to Briv. Propose a price, and if we raise the money we buy it off of you. When we made that offer, Briv deleted months of work we'd put into proposing improvements to the site (or a new alternative) and sold it to you to, I presume, get these ungrateful children off his hands. Briv was a bad actor who neglected and abused the site and the community.

It's not unrealistic that a site like this can be a "collective." It can perfectly serve every purpose I'm looking for as a collective. I'm not interested in the news. I'm not interested in the features. As Justin says, your ambition is to "grow" it primarily by monetizing content that we produce for you, for free. You offer a service on photo hosting, so you're entitled to something in return. What we write or link to or embed should stay with us, and you should ask before you make money off of it (at least - really you should be offering a cut).

EDIT: I'd also add that since I don't take photos, and the most prolific and high-quality photographer on the site is one of the mods now, I'd be happy to defer to @BeeLine on this point.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top