Foxy, the first one is actually easy to fix. I am sure they, like the rest of us, manage the forum using a web browser. If they just used firefox and turned spell checking on, mistakes like "Popeulate" just would not happen. I actually had more faith in them, thought Popeulate was a real word and went looking for its definition.

The second one can only be fixed by proof reading. I imagine that ain't going to happen, as it would slow things down and be too costly. A cheaper solution is to just fix the problem when it has been pointed out. They don't seem to do that either.

Its possible they are simply not paying attention. I don't know how many full time employee's OLO has, but my guess would be 0. Have you tried to recommending you own post for deletion, ie clicking the X, and asking for it to be changed? Graham has said elsewhere that people often use the X as a means of communicating the with the OLO administrators.

The General Forum is far and away my favourite part of the site and from a social researcher's point of view, one of the most interesting discussion forums anywhere. The reasons why are pretty much the same reasons for not tinkering with it too much.

TRTL's comments show a typical regular's understanding of who's who, what's what and how everything works around here which is learned through experience. Nobody needed extra bells and whistles to make that happen. Participants themselves make it what it is, including to what extent we want to be identified and how seriously we take the whole thing.

The way I see it, we have been offered this space to do whatever we want, within reasonable limits, and in an easy format that a newbie can quickly learn. We largely develop our own rules about what's appropriate, socially-speaking, and our own relationships based on paying attention to what others are saying, rather than who they are in real life. Everything is negotiable, including how much you reveal about yourself.

Who you are is not as important around here as what you think, or what you know, or what you think you know. I wouldn't like to see any changes that in any way suggest it should be the other way around.

The only problem I can see with this is the advantage for sock puppets, but they are eventually exposed as well. PALE for example. And the specialists who descend on hot issues like abortion and climate change.

I'd rather see the users work these things out for themselves than have anything enforced by identity requirements. From that point of view my earlier comment was not contradictory at all. I think it’s better to have people work these things out for themselves rather than having to be told

So, chainsmoker, I am being studied like a rat in a cage. How am I doing?

Joking aside, I agree with all your comments so far. Which is interesting, as I am evidently looking at it from a totally different perspective than you.

As for TRTL's comments, yes its possible the people behind some of pseudonym's here could be even more irritating in the flesh. Then again, they might not - put the person in a different social setting and the behaviour usually changes. Still its no surprise that some like TRTL would rather not risking finding if some are the same in real life as they are here.

TRTL and I will have to disagree on how much of a risk that would be, as unless your a public figure the odds of meeting someone you know is very small. It becomes even smaller still if the rules of engagement at the gathering specifically say its a meeting of nym's, not true names, and it will be considered bad form to reveal anybodies real identity but your own.

As for me, I'm the sort rat who would get his nose repeatedly stuck in the latch in an effort to find out more about the world out there. I am just glad I am not a cat.

chainsmoker: "from a social researchers point of view, one of the most interesting discussion forums anywhere."

I have been trying think of reasons why a social researcher might find this General Discussion forum one of the most interesting. Lots of hypotheses sprang to mind, but none stand out. The clue "The reasons why are pretty much the same reasons for not tinkering with it too much" didn't really help.

Can you give me a hint?

Are errors in general thread titles mistakes made by forum staff Foxy? They are made by the contributors…aren’t they?

Whatever the case, they should most definitely be corrected by the staff.

It reflects poorly on the quality of the forum to have title threads like;

“ Bill Heson: artist or pornographer?” [should be Bill Henson]

‘Popeulate or Perish’? I notice the title thread is now ‘Populate or Perish’! So presumably someone out there in OLOland is monitoring this thread [Suggestions for OLO] afterall…and has made the correction!?

MMMmmm I dunno. We still have; ‘Rape victim's rather seeks papal audience’. (:>/

Foxy, can you confirm that this was an OLO staffer’s mistake and not yours? No criticism intended. Good on you for starting new threads like this. But I’d just like to be sure. Thanks.

"I notice the title thread is now ‘Populate or Perish’!"

Is it?

Sorry, Ludwig, I know you don't need anyone adding to the angst you already feel when it comes to spelling, but I couldn't resist!