Forums for Social Groups

I've added a new feature, it's to help people make the forum what they want and to give you the keys to moderate some areas of the forum.

So... what is new?

Well, if you are a regular user (been posting for more than a few days) and you have started a Social Group... and if that Social Group has more than 5 members... then you can now create your own forum for that social group.

Further, the owner of the social group becomes a moderator of the forum and can also set privacy options for the forum (i.e. trixie chics could choose to have a 100% private forum only viewable by other trixie chic social group members).

The benefit of this is that as long as there is a demand for a new area, you can just create it. Not just that, but you get to police it too. You can create forums for any social group with more than 5 people... so the power to create a forum for Brighton is in your hands, as is a forum for Stolen Bikes, or Bike Polo.

Why bother? Well if you have forums you can start setting forum subscriptions so you get email updates when posts are made to your forum. So if there are a whole load of threads specific to brighton, and new ones will always be made... put them all in a Brighton Social Group Forum and you just subscribe to the forum for updates.

Then there's the control. How about a forum for the hardcore bike polo members? And then only those who you permit to join the social group get access to the forum... and only those who can post in the forum can vote on polls that affect you (why let people vote when they don't turn up all the time?).

The purpose of this isn't to dilute the main forums, and I don't think it will. It's to give you control of the forum so that you can adapt it to fit needs that are currently unfulfilled or that I perhaps wouldn't choose to accomodate at the global level.

Let me know what you think.

And er... oops!

I've just created a Cambridge Forum by accident as I was testing that it works.

fc9k, you appear to be a moderator now. You'll notice that in that forum you now have tons more things you can do (like double-clicking a thread title to edit it, or double-clicking a lock icon to open/close threads).

Ah well... if you don't want a forum for that group let me know and I'll delete it :)

Then there's the control. How about a forum for the hardcore bike polo members? And then only those who you permit to join the social group get access to the forum... and only those who can post in the forum can vote on polls that affect you (why let people vote when they don't turn up all the time?).

Sounds good. But a little clique-ish.

This thread just reminded me of the social groups. I'm only a member of one!
HA!

;191659']Sounds good. But a little clique-ish.

Erm, is the whole forum not a clique?

no, we're inclusive of new members. we don't flame noob's for asking stupid q's or idiots doing stupid stuff!

Erm, is the whole forum not a clique?

Must've missed that memo. Am I a member?

You're our leader.

Well, after VB of course.

And er... oops!

I've just created a Cambridge Forum by accident as I was testing that it works.

fc9k, you appear to be a moderator now. You'll notice that in that forum you now have tons more things you can do (like double-clicking a thread title to edit it, or double-clicking a lock icon to open/close threads).

Ah well... if you don't want a forum for that group let me know and I'll delete it :)

I wield so much power now. Awesome ;)

Spliters

i fucking hate the peoples front of judea

;191672']Must've missed that memo. Am I a member?

Wikiepedia:

A clique (IPA:/'klɪk/ in America, /'kliːk/ elsewhere) is an exclusive group of people who share common interests, views, purposes, patterns of behavior, or ethnicity. A clique is a subset of individuals from a larger group, who are more closely identified with one another than the remaining members of the group, and who exchange something among themselves, such as friendship, affection, or information.
By virtue of the defining thing that all members of the forum share... an interest and probable participation in cycling specifically fixed-wheel and single-speed bikes and the social life that members of the community have created around said bikes and cycling... we (the whole forum) are a subset of society... a clique.

Any further subsets that are comprised of more than a few people are also cliques. So the hardcore few who play the most polo... you're all in a clique of polo players, those who attend the beers most frequently... you're a clique too.

It's dumb to deny the obvious, we are defined by our actions, participation, interests and expression. The grouping of people who share interests has happened forever, both by themselves and by others observing. We all belong to many cliques, and empowering cliques to get more out of what they're doing is no bad thing (this whole forum does that simply by existing).

I dislike the negative perceptions of cliques... elitism, lock-out, social hierarchy... but it's incredibly hard for any of us to deny the existence of, nor the benefit of, cliques. The word clique does not have to infer any level of not being welcoming, friendly and embracing new members into the fold. But also, when the cliques do grow it is inevitable that other cliques will grow within them.

don't you mean the popular judean people's front?

VB is a member of the 'we speak sense and use impartial sources to back up our point of view' clique.

What a cunt.

Wikiepedia:
By virtue of the defining thing that all members of the forum share... an interest and probable participation in cycling specifically fixed-wheel and single-speed bikes and the social life that members of the community have created around said bikes and cycling... we (the whole forum) are a subset of society... a clique.

Any further subsets that are comprised of more than a few people are also cliques. So the hardcore few who play the most polo... you're all in a clique of polo players, those who attend the beers most frequently... you're a clique too.

It's dumb to deny the obvious, we are defined by our actions, participation, interests and expression. The grouping of people who share interests has happened forever, both by themselves and by others observing. We all belong to many cliques, and empowering cliques to get more out of what they're doing is no bad thing (this whole forum does that simply by existing).

I dislike the negative perceptions of cliques... elitism, lock-out, social hierarchy... but it's incredibly hard for any of us to deny the existence of, nor the benefit of, cliques. The word clique does not have to infer any level of not being welcoming, friendly and embracing new members into the fold. But also, when the cliques do grow it is inevitable that other cliques will grow within them.

Agreed. I am in the bike polo clique. I've made a few friends from there, had some good times, and we all share the common interests. I was using the term clique-ish in the wrong way lending itself towards exclusivity when in fact polo is inclusive.

As for the whole forum being a clique, I disagree. It's so widespread now and multi-community. Apparently there's a member named singlespeed_pp , I'm safe to say we have never met and judging by his screenname I'd go so far as to say we do not have the fixed wheel in common. The amount of other members to this forum, active, participating or not does not sum up to the definition of clique. Community, yes but not a clique.

Excellent. surely only a matter of hours before the 'We love Nimhbus' social group is well under way.

Excellent. surely only a matter of hours before the 'We love Nimhbus' social group is well under way.
must be big to accomodate you and your ego ;)

Set up our little ghetto for Brighton types

Excellent. surely only a matter of hours before the 'We love Nimhbus' social group is well under way.

All sorted.

don't you mean the popular judean people's front?

Fuck off! We're the People's Front of Judea.