Good criticism. IMO, based on some of the feedback on here it may make sense to look at things this way: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.
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
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 knowWHAT 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.
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.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
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.
Tick-tock, Edward. Tick-fucking-tock...The TOU issue will be addressed next.
Mods, could we please have a look at adding a "Policy" subforum?@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.
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.
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.I know some members are upset that its a business now and not some sort of collective. But that's what it is.