15 replies to this topic

[monjardin]

First of all, I whole heartedly agree with the conclusions from this discussion and the subsequent actions taken by Dia, Reedbeta, et al to alleviate the recruitment posting issues in these forums. Additionally, I think the downtime of GameDev.net has proved a huge testament to the success of this policy. There has been a large influx of new forum members as a result, and I have not seen a flooding of recruitment request when I click on the "New Posts" link. I'm probably not alone amongst regulars here who value their time and have better ways of spending it than sifting through such noise.

With that said, we have had the first major flame up over the policy in this thread. Now, I would say the poster was way out of line, but short of meriting banning just as Reedbeta has decided. However, I looked around the web site after reading that thread and must say eb_NY is right about the absence of clear forum rules. I know them from experience--and frankly, anyone should hang around a forum and see how things run before posting in the first place--but to a newcomer there is no obvious way of coming up to speed. Would anyone be willing to write up a summary of our house rules and sticky them into the forums?

Aside from that, I would say that most of the questions I've seen from new members (that may or may not be coming from GameDev.net) have been fairly positive. What do you think?

[Dia]

There definitely has been a significant improvement in the signal-to-noise ratio, which is a good sign. Reedbeta is really the main man behind this awesome improvement. His efforts are much appreciated.

The plan was to post the forum rules as soon as we finalize the implementation of the new policies (especially regarding the moderation of new posts from new members), which is a bit more complicated than expected. When that is done, I'd like to significantly increase the number of moderators (ideally all senior members should be mods) to help out in maintaining an acceptable quality.

I've posted a temporary forum rules announcement in the meanwhile. If anyone has any suggestions about it, feel free to point it out.

[Reedbeta]

So, we're sort of rethinking the new no-recruitment policy. Dia and I agree that recruitment posts from legitimate companies and established projects are things the community could be interested in, so we don't necessarily want to exclude them. The trouble is, how do we define what is acceptable and what isn't in a clear, unambiguous, and non-arbitrary way?

For instance, we are considering allowing recruitment posts if either of the following criteria is met:
1. It is a job posting offering a regular salary (as opposed to "when it's done" profit sharing).
2. It is an established project with at least one major release behind it.

We'd like the community to help us iron out a clear and fair recruitment policy, so what do you guys think?

[monjardin]

Those are sound criteria in my opinion. The two recent paid positions and the Crystal Space request are good examples. Offering a real salary lends a lot of credibility, and a well founded project with a history like Crystal Space is also easily recognizable from the norm. I suppose the only hitch is defining a clear line between respectable open-source projects and the average "I'm making a new MMORPG" request.

Of course, there are non-open-source projects that I would consider respectable as well. However, they don't seem to have to ask for recruits. So, perhaps that wouldn't be an issue. In fact, it seems really unusual that Crystal Space is asking...

In any event, I feel the two of you have displayed good judgment in the past and I am quite happy with your arbitrary decisions. Yet we all know that it's not that easy. So, I'd agree that Reedbeta's two points well founded and sufficient.

[Reedbeta]

Thanks for the support monjardin. Anyone else want to chime in?

[Nick]

Sounds fair. The rules can still be refined if we experience problems with them. But I think these are a very good start.

[eddie]

I agree. However, even if rules are temporary or in flux - I'd suggest posting a sticky topic we can all point to when people ask why their topic has been closed.

[Reedbeta]

Good idea; I've posted a sticky in the Personal Announcements forum about it.

[karligula]

Personally I don't see a problem in having a recruitment forum area... if you consider those kind of posts noise, then just don't go into that forum. It's not rocket science...

As a slightly off topic aside, why do we still have the lounge forum? On the recent forum rules post (I think that's where I saw it) it says that each post must have something to do with game development. But on the lounge forum description it still says, 'A place to talk about anything you want. It does not have to be about game development'. It's just a bit contradictory, that's all.

Peace be upon you, my brothers (and sisters (and individuals of indeterminate gender)).

[Dia]

Are you sure you read it right? The rules explicitly mention that non-game development posts should go to the lounge forum.

[karligula]

AHA! Having just mentioned the description of the lounge, I looked at the description of the lounge, and it's been changed since last time I looked at it... so please disregard that bit of my previous post!

[Reedbeta]

karligula said:

Personally I don't see a problem in having a recruitment forum area... if you consider those kind of posts noise, then just don't go into that forum. It's not rocket science...

The problem though is recruitment posts clog up the New Posts page and the forum history shown on the DevMaster index page...if there were a way to exclude the recruitment posts from being shown there however, that would be pretty much ideal.

[dave_]

Reedbeta said:

The problem though is recruitment posts clog up the New Posts page and the forum history shown on the DevMaster index page...if there were a way to exclude the recruitment posts from being shown there however, that would be pretty much ideal. :)

Not just those pages, they'd appear on search engines too, even if they arent indexed

[Kenneth Gorking]

I believe there is a tag you can put the page-source which will tell search engines not to index it. Can't remember it, but it might be worth looking in to.

[pater]

dave_ said:

Not just those pages, they'd appear on search engines too, even if they arent indexed

Why do you think this would be a problem? If somebody is finding one of the entries in those recruitement posts via google, he was probably really looking for it, so why would you want to hide these pages completelly?

[cypher543]

I'm sure there is a vBulletin mod for hiding certain forums from the New Posts page. If not, it shouldn't be terribly hard to make one.