Forum Etiquette

[Sara Bergen]

So what is SSC?

[TommyT]

So what is SSC?

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/

[kregger22]

So with a current project, like "Stadium Parking Ramp Air Rights Development", to make sure I understand what you're saying FISHMANPET & twincitizen, is that the two of you (and maybe others) would prefer not to see people post what they would prefer to see on the build site as opposed to what is currently known?

[FISHMANPET]

That is exactly the case. If you want to post rumors and speculation we have separate threads for that. Project threads are for specific details about those projects, not rumor and speculation on those projects (a little rumor is ok, but not too much, it's an "I know it when I see it" type of situation).

[LakeCharles]

what you're saying FISHMANPET & twincitizen, is that the two of you (and maybe others) would prefer not to see people post what they would prefer to see on the build site as opposed to what is currently known?

Unless you would prefer to see better street frontage on a building or a different route on a transit route, in which case posting about it is encouraged.

[FISHMANPET]

what you're saying FISHMANPET & twincitizen, is that the two of you (and maybe others) would prefer not to see people post what they would prefer to see on the build site as opposed to what is currently known?

Unless you would prefer to see better street frontage on a building or a different route on a transit route, in which case posting about it is encouraged.

You're trying to make some snide remark about the arbitrariness of the rules, but it doesn't matter. Height fetishism for height fetishm's sake belongs somewhere else. This is not the forum for it. If the only thoughts about a building are "it should be taller" or "there should be a taller building here" then there's a great community at SSC for that kind of discussion, and we'd appreciate it if you took the conversation there.

[David Greene]

what you're saying FISHMANPET & twincitizen, is that the two of you (and maybe others) would prefer not to see people post what they would prefer to see on the build site as opposed to what is currently known?

Unless you would prefer to see better street frontage on a building or a different route on a transit route, in which case posting about it is encouraged.

You're trying to make some snide remark about the arbitrariness of the rules, but it doesn't matter.

It doesn't matter because of who controls the site (and they should do as they see fit), but I just want to point out that LakeCharles does, in fact, make a valid point.

[mattaudio]

Not really. Plenty of us on the forum actually work with stakeholders to try and improve the public realm of buildings that are built. There's a purpose to it. If the height fetishists convince a developer to build taller, come back here and maybe they can talk about it. Until then...

[FISHMANPET]

When trying to figure out if commentary like that is worthwhile or not, it might be good when making it to at least think about why you'd like a project to change, or even better, why should someone be willing to pay for it? Changing a transit route will provide X benefits to riders, an improved street frontage will improve the pedestrian experience and is something the city should encourage. A building should be 50 stories tall instead of 25 because... why exactly?

It's fetishism pure and simple. If people just dropped into threads and posted "it should have more windows!" over and over or tried to make a ridiculous claim that all parts of the city should have the same level of transit service as the Uptown neighborhood, we'd get tired of that too. But that's not the usual level of discourse related to those particular topics. However, when it comes to height, that's about all there is. It should be taller. I can't believe it's not taller. They're making a mistake not making it taller. Don't they know it should be taller? That doesn't add anything to a conversation, and those of us who want to have substantive conversations about urban form and urban issues quickly grow tired of it.

If you want to say things should be taller, if you want to worship endless claims of "big things are coming" there's a thread on SSC for you to post in. Nobody here is stopping you from posting there. Nobody here is making you post here either.

[Tyler]

Weird. You guys really think this kind of overzealous moderation makes a forum better? In all my years of foruming, the one thing I have learned is that lax modding = more enjoyment. What's going on here is just another data point in support of this.

[NickP]

I figured it would be good to bump this thread

When trying to figure out if commentary like that is worthwhile or not, it might be good when making it to at least think about why you'd like a project to change, or even better, why should someone be willing to pay for it? Changing a transit route will provide X benefits to riders, an improved street frontage will improve the pedestrian experience and is something the city should encourage. A building should be 50 stories tall instead of 25 because... why exactly?

It's fetishism pure and simple. If people just dropped into threads and posted "it should have more windows!" over and over or tried to make a ridiculous claim that all parts of the city should have the same level of transit service as the Uptown neighborhood, we'd get tired of that too. But that's not the usual level of discourse related to those particular topics. However, when it comes to height, that's about all there is. It should be taller. I can't believe it's not taller. They're making a mistake not making it taller. Don't they know it should be taller? That doesn't add anything to a conversation, and those of us who want to have substantive conversations about urban form and urban issues quickly grow tired of it.

If you want to say things should be taller, if you want to worship endless claims of "big things are coming" there's a thread on SSC for you to post in. Nobody here is stopping you from posting there. Nobody here is making you post here either.

I found this to be very well said. Well done FISHMANPET.
I would like to echo the idea that we think before we post. Sarcasm does not come through well on the net, so if you want it to be taken as such, make it sure it is painfully obvious. This is why I overload my texts with 'lols" "hahas" and emoticons. I want people to know what I type is not meant as an afront to anyone, I'm simply stating my opinion. I think this is why there is so much discord about this site over at SSC. The posters there I find to be making the most noise I thought wrote some things that were really rude. I'm sure this was in response to something they felt was attacking them, which sucks. I don't want anyone to feel attacked at all. If you read something in the forum that frustrates you, don't just respond off the cuff. Step back, take a minute, and think a response out. Be well

[LakeCharles]

what you're saying FISHMANPET & twincitizen, is that the two of you (and maybe others) would prefer not to see people post what they would prefer to see on the build site as opposed to what is currently known?

Unless you would prefer to see better street frontage on a building or a different route on a transit route, in which case posting about it is encouraged.

You're trying to make some snide remark about the arbitrariness of the rules, but it doesn't matter. Height fetishism for height fetishm's sake belongs somewhere else. This is not the forum for it. If the only thoughts about a building are "it should be taller" or "there should be a taller building here" then there's a great community at SSC for that kind of discussion, and we'd appreciate it if you took the conversation there.

Haha. I agree that height fetishism is not particularly helpful to anything. And I think that talking about street frontage can be very important, and transit routes are very interesting to me. I also think that the chance that any of these things are changed due to what we write on this site is about the same, and I was just acknowledging that the rules are indeed arbitrary. I'm sorry I upset you so.

[twincitizen]

Thanks NickP. I tried earlier and couldn't find this thread.
I wanted to move the whole discussion from the "Rumors" thread here, and now I will do so (see above).

Also, I'll quote what I said earlier regarding moderation, staying on topic, etc:

UrbanMSP has threads for:
1. Rumors
2. Mpls-St. Paul Fantasies & Speculation
3. The Skyline
4. Supertalls

Project-specific threads should be kept on topic and discuss the actual project at hand. Is that really too radical of a concept? I can't speak for everyone, but I'd really like to see the individual project threads contain more factual information and less hearsay & off-topic diatribes. Stay on topic, or put it in one of the four "Anything Goes" threads, or create a new one in "Anything Goes" if it doesn't fit. I really don't think we're being too heavy handed here.

[David Greene]

When trying to figure out if commentary like that is worthwhile or not, it might be good when making it to at least think about why you'd like a project to change, or even better, why should someone be willing to pay for it? Changing a transit route will provide X benefits to riders, an improved street frontage will improve the pedestrian experience and is something the city should encourage. A building should be 50 stories tall instead of 25 because... why exactly?

It's fetishism pure and simple. If people just dropped into threads and posted "it should have more windows!" over and over or tried to make a ridiculous claim that all parts of the city should have the same level of transit service as the Uptown neighborhood, we'd get tired of that too. But that's not the usual level of discourse related to those particular topics. However, when it comes to height, that's about all there is. It should be taller. I can't believe it's not taller. They're making a mistake not making it taller. Don't they know it should be taller? That doesn't add anything to a conversation, and those of us who want to have substantive conversations about urban form and urban issues quickly grow tired of it.

If you want to say things should be taller, if you want to worship endless claims of "big things are coming" there's a thread on SSC for you to post in. Nobody here is stopping you from posting there. Nobody here is making you post here either.

I agree that this is very well said. It makes these kinds of decisions less arbitrary.

Perhaps we should have a posing guide somewhat that lays this out and sets expectations appropriately.

For the record I, too, tire of the endless height-mongering.

[Nick]

Thoughts:

• The term "height fetishist" geeks me out.
• "Zero moderation is the best moderation" sounds a lot like Ron Paul saying that heroin should be legal because no one you know will do heroin. It's naive and it severely underestimates the size of the overlapping area in the People With Internet Access/People Who Have Mustard Stains On Their Shirt Right Now Venn diagram.
• I generally agree with Peter, and I think a lot of the issue here is that it gets extremely annoying when people post mindlessly.
• With a few glaring exceptions, I've met the overwhelming majority of the thoughtful posters on the forum. The people who have the most complaints about moderation are anonymous, and that matters to me personally.
• If you think that you're learning more on SSC than on here, by all means, stop posting here.

[Tyler]

As an anonymous and unthoughtful complainer, I'd bet more than a few members of the "inner circle" are at least slightly annoyed as well. And I'm not so much complaining. I'm pointing out that what's going on is a result of bad policy. This is a community I've been a part of for almost 10 years -- I enjoy it and feel strongly about it. So if I think it's being messed with unnecessarily I'll make the point. And, for the record, I didn't advocate zero moderation. Although one board in which I post on does so quite successfully. (http://startingstrength.com/resources/forum/forum.php). Love the border-line personal attacks, though. Mod-power!

[MNdible]

I'm honestly not so sure what the "inner circle" is so put out about here. I'm not pro-height for height's sake, but I also don't think it's particularly ruining everything. I think a bit more live-and-let-live would be a better policy. There's a bit too much us vs. them going on, and it's unnecessarily antagonizing people. If you really want to purify the forum down to the true-believers, you can do that. But I don't think it will be much of a forum.

[Nathan]

I think what this difference is is that urbanmsp strives to be a factual tracker of projects happening in msp. a wiki reference if you will of things going on. each thread is about a specific project and what is known about it. if someone post a rumor in a thread and it's taken for fact by a browser it looks bad on the site. it's not tmz or the national enquirer ( though there are specific threads for that sort of fun).

the problem with desiring more height is that basically everyone wouldn't mind every project being taller or having a more unique design. duh. but after a point of multiple pages in each thread of every building it goes with out saying and it's no longer constructive conversion. if we just post pictures of what we'd rather each project be in every thread or would be impossible to sift through to the relevant information about each project getting built.

and if a rumor comes true, then GREAT we can then update that thread and be joyous.

[go4guy]

From what I recall from the parking ramp development, is that people were only making comments about how it was supposed to be an "iconic" building. That along with differing floor counts from the media is what has sparked the conversation about height. Is that so wrong? What is worse. That, or 2 worthless pages because people b!tch and moan about Stanton's new development having too much parking for their personal preferences. Not the actual guy financing the thing. Something that 200 pages on this forum will not change. So why complain about it? And then of course there is the fact that I was told I should not come downtown because I live in the suburbs and drive a car. How is that useful in any way. Just someone being a prick. I have been following this forum since it took over for Minnescraper, and followed that forum for many years. And I come on here multiple times a day. To see updates on current projects, and to see what may be floating out there for future development....RUMORS!! It is funny that the rule is to put rumors in the rumors thread. But when they are, people get absolutely ripped for them. It is sad the direction this forum has taken.

[go4guy]

I think what this difference is is that urbanmsp strives to be a factual tracker of projects happening in msp. a wiki reference if you will of things going on. each thread is about a specific project and what is known about it. if someone post a rumor in a thread and it's taken for fact by a browser it looks bad on the site. it's not tmz or the national enquirer ( though there are specific threads for that sort of fun).

the problem with desiring more height is that basically everyone wouldn't mind every project being taller or having a more unique design. duh. but after a point of multiple pages in each thread of every building it goes with out saying and it's no longer constructive conversion. if we just post pictures of what we'd rather each project be in every thread or would be impossible to sift through to the relevant information about each project getting built.

and if a rumor comes true, then GREAT we can then update that thread and be joyous.

But the same people who are saying we shouldnt do the whole "It should be taller" are the same people who constantly complained about 222 not being taller. And are now complaining about Stanton's proposal not being taller.