Once again, these boys knocked it outta the park. I love it.

These changes seem to be excellent. I especially approve of the clear articulation of the guidelines.

I still need a clear definition of trolling!

Looks good from what I’ve seen so far.

Who chooses whether a question is categorised as “Social”... does the asker or moderator?

I need to live with it a little before I know, and see what effects it actually has in practice—if it facilitates good exchanges or stifles them—but I am very happy to see strong guidelines on language and a clear position against some of the worst behavior we’ve seen around here lately.

Unfortunately it isn’t usually rules that make a community work but culture. So I’m reserving judgment for the moment.

I’m lovin the changes, but I should be in bed. Instead I’m up wondering “what’s up with Fluther”.

Oh cute! They have created a section for questions asked by your “favourite people” under “Just for You”.

@Rachienz, that feature has always been there. That’s what your fluther is for, or was origiinally. Filtering questions just from your fluther has been an option all along.

I am still actually hoping for an option that lets me block some questions from view. But maybe the new arrangement will make that less of an issue.

@Rachienz The asker decides where to place the question. If a mod disagrees with the asker’s choice to put the Q in the General section, it will be returned to the asker. At that point, they can either edit to make it appropriate for the General section, or choose to move it to Social.

@Jeruba – LOL, shows how much attention I was paying :)

Although, I thought that previously “Questions for You” mixed in questions asked by your favourite in addition to tags on your profile?

I don’t like that accessing the questions asked by your fluther requires an extra click now.

Also, perhaps there should be an option to choose which tab (general, social, etc) you’d like to be default.

Overall, it’s good.

I really like the updated guidelines (especially the writing standard and the mention of showing respect), and I love that I can now click on the General/Social/Meta tabs from within a question, rather than having to return to the main page to see the tabs.

@augustlan

Ah, I hadn’t even noticed that yet. Handy.

Thanks for your patience guys, this is all great feedback. If you’d like to talk directly, PM me or email richard@fluther.com.

It’s definitely some new shoes that Fluther is going to have to grow into; but as the blog post says, it’s all about allowing the asker to choose what type of answers they want to see on their question.

If you haven’t read it yet, take a look: http://blog.fluther.com/announcing-fluther-sections/

I’m Richard, one of the staff here.

Laws are only as good as the enforcement behind them.
As long as them lazy moderators make sure that social Qs stay in the social section, shucks, I think it’ll be swell.

I’m Sarcasm, one of the moderators here.

@Rachienz, yes, “Questions for You” was (is?) based on your profile and the questions you have been answering. The filter for seeing only questions from your fluther was a link or a tab you clicked, maybe on the main page or maybe on your profile page, I forget. I seldom used it. I use “my fluther” for other purposes, mainly communication but also just to show interest—not necessarily friends or favorites, just interest.

Oh—I don’t like it that it now says “your favorite people.” That is presumptuous! Every time someone asks how we decide who to add to our fluthers, there is always a variety of responses, and several people say it is not about favorites or “buddies.”

@Jeruba That ‘blocking’ feature is still planned—well, at least a way to filter out specific types of questions that don’t interest you. A few things need to happen before we can implement that.

About the “Your Fluther”, it was the lowest-used tab (other than active and orphans), so we shuffled it around to an area that made more sense.

@andrew, thanks for the update. Speaking only for myself, I can’t imagine how you could determine which questions fit a “type.” For me the only effective filter would be one that allowed me to decide whose questions I don’t want to see because that is the best predictor of type; for example, teen angst, deliberately provocative, religious.

I just read through all the new guidelines and am pleased overall. I particularly like the “writing standards”.

Like @Jeruba, I’m withholding judgement until I see it’s effects over time. I’m hopeful though and would like to thank Bendrew, Tim and the Mods for making the effort.

It all depends on how it is enforced.

There is one thing I don’t like. When you click remove on a question under
just for you, you get bumped up to the top instead of remaining where you were.

Also, how do you tell what kind of question it is under “just for you”?

I’m not a fan of change, but at least it’s not a major change, yet!

I like the change. It should separate the wheat from the chaff. ( Although sometimes chaff is fun.)

Now I can know ahead of time whether the asker will appreciate me failing to be funny!

I love it. Perhaps my Fluther fan-geek is showing, yet I am really excited about this. I love having the Meta tab be more acessable (sp), love the separation of joke/serious just love it. I’m excited to see how it works out in the next little while. Hopefully this will become ‘normal’ to us quickly and everyone can find the type of interaction they are seeking.

Another bang up job, guys. It looks great so far. so excited!

Lots of hard programming work here, guys. Kudos to you! I’m in @Jeruba ‘s “reserve judgment until I see how it plays out camp,” but I think it will potentially accomplish what you are looking to achieve.

I don’t see anything about blocking a USER. THAT’S what I’m waiting for!

Fluther 5.0! It’s all good.

Shows how well I pay attention. I didn’t notice it ‘til you pointed it out, Chels.

From what I see, I like. “I like it ah lot” (Jim Carrey “Dumb and Dumber”).

I need to read the new guidelines. I’m still trying to figure out the new layout, just to get adjusted. It’s going a lot slower for me now, which I dislike.

Guidelines are good, not a fan of the “split screen” though. It’s much for convenient to have a single page view.

I like it. I especially enjoy the guidelines section. Very well organized and very clear.

Great job guys!

btw @chels very nice “look what my BF did” question :p

I like the guidelines too and I also like the information about who the mods are. Great work!

Eeehhh…

Change and I don’t get along. I’m sure I’ll get used to it.

I’m one of those people that often throws a one-liner or something in, especially if it’s getting a bit heavy, so I am fully expecting to forget and be modded a lot :\

The only change I’m aware of is no joking on the first answer. That seems stupid to me—I’m not joking.

I am not keen on having to click different tabs to see if a new question was added, mostly because while I’m at work I’ll just do a quick refresh to see if new questions have been asked. Is there perhaps a way we could choose to have all the questions displayed in a master list, and so there isn’t confusion, maybe where it says “asked by” blah blah it could also include which section it’s in?

I would <3 that.

@thriftymaid That’s always been the policy.

@janbb I had not had answers removed until after the (this is hard for me to say with a straight face) “townhall meeting.”

I will be in the social section for the rest of my life. See you there ^_^

@poofandmook I’m not liking that, either! Too much clicking & moving around. That should have been left alone. Can’t say that I’m liking this…........

I’m still getting used to the changes but I certainly don’t hate them.

There is a whole lot going on now. I guess I’ll just have to get used to it.

The new improvements are excellent and it makes Fluther just that much more outstanding than it already is.

I’m completely underwhelmed.

Do I need to include disclaimers for Meta answers now, too? I haven’t even read the meta guidelines; wouldn’t that be like ‘guidelines on writing guidelines’?

I love the new changes, they’re awesome, and helpful. (:

To be honest, I’m not wild about it. It looks pretty much the same, and now I’m even more tempted to make jokes. Who’s going to make me a sandwich now? Anyway, put me down for a “reserve judgement”, too.

Also, like @Ivan said, it’d be nice to be able to set the Social section as one’s default.

What changed?

@Fiddle_Playing_Creole_Bastard Nothing. Go make me a sandwich.

Wait, I can make jokes here, can’t I?

I think it would be cool if it showed what section the questions in our recommended questions were asked. For example: “Asked by J0E in Social”

@bob_ YOUR UNHELPFUL COMMENT WILL SOON BE MODERATED AS IT ADDS NOTHING TO THE DISCUSSION AT HAND. ALL OF YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US.

@Fiddle_Playing_Creole_Bastard Please don’t shout.

@Fiddle_Playing_Creole_Bastard That’s okay. Now where’s my sandwich?

There is nothing I dislike about Fluther but I am not pumped about the change.

I love it – I am also very pleased with the way they presented it. Thank you Fluther Gods.

I especially like the bar at the top of each question I click on that tells me what category it is.

For people that still want all the questions in one place use the RSS feed.

http://www.fluther.com/feeds/newborn/

But I do wish that the feed was longer. 24 instead of 12 would be nice.

At first, I wen’t HUH? when I came to Fluther today. I liked the former simplicity of choosing All, or Your Fluther, or Just For You, but I’m getting used to all the new options.

But what’s the difference between Social and General? General implies EVERYTHING combined. So shouldn’t it be Social vs. Informational?

Be careful what changes you make! Please don’t Answerbag Fluther!!!

I’m quite fond of it.

I love how there’s a bar on top so now you can go from a question back to the meta section. But I’m sort of afraid to answer questions now. Looks like they’re crackin’ down.

Personally, I really like it. I consider myself one of those who would prefer a site with serious answers to serious questions, and am glad that the front page will reflect that more than it has in the past year.

@bob_ Sorry that @Fiddle_Playing_Creole_Bastard is a Creolean bastard, and that he never made you that sandwich, so here’s one.

Let’s put it this way:

Of all the changes that might have been made to improve Fluther, including more, better and / or faster servers; a working search function (talk about not liking jokes; the ‘search’ function on Fluther is as good a joke as has ever been perpetrated on the site); threaded conversations within responses; an ability to ‘float’ highly-lurved responses (or users) to the top of the pile; functions to allow bookmarking of one’s own or others’ “best answers” or other favorites; an ability for others besides the original questioner to tag and/or categorize questions (and responses); some cross-linking functions that would allow the system to look up and link to “earlier similar” questions and responses; and some of the suggestions mentioned in ChazzMazz’s Q from earlier today… “a complete crackdown on humor” was not even on my radar to even break into the Top 50 “needed improvements”.

Here’s to another non-fun day on Fluther. w00t

@CyanoticWasp “a complete crackdown on humor” ??? If that’s the case, I’m outta here.

<sigh> There is no such thing as a crackdown on humor. There is, however, a realignment such that the “general” section is for questions requiring real (read:serious) answers. The “social” section is pretty much for everything else. Furthermore, even within the general section, humor is allowed (and valued), as long as it is associated with real answers and doesn’t completely distract from or derail the question asked.

I’m getting a headache

That’s a nice sentiment, @shilolo, but not borne out in reality. Not in my reality, anyway.

And I still think that putting “Best Joke Ever?” into the “General” category where one-liners are (purportedly) banned is… a pretty good joke.

@jbfletcherfan: already there.

@CyanoticWasp Yes, I hear what you are saying, but I think after you’ve had a chance to let the changes sink in, you’ll realize that they are subtle, at best. Indeed, if Ben and Andrew want the site to be a venue for serious answers while simultaneously allowing a community to form and be maintained, then this seems like a reasonable compromise. The past year has seen too many people grow frustrated with their inability to get real answers to questions when the majority of quips are simply jokes or inane banter.

By the way, some of your suggested comments are in the works, from what I understand, and some are already there (i.e. look at the siblings on the right side to see similar questions).

@poofandmook LOL…I hear ya’. :-/

@CyanoticWasp “Best Joke Ever?” was moved to the Social Section. Remember that we didn’t manually categorize the existing 83,000 questions. ;) If you see a question that you think is in the wrong section, please flag it and let us know.

@shilolo A “reasonable compromise” is fine. But for THIS member, when you start making it a text book site with no personality, friendship or comraderie, it ceases to be a place that I’ll stay. I don’t know if I’d be missed, & I really don’t care. I have my closest friends here elsewhere. But I see this going in a direction that I don’t like.

@jbfletcherfan It sounds like you’ll get a lot more out of browsing questions in the Social section, which is the exact same guidelines and rules as Fluther previously had (all we’ve done is made them easier to read!). If anything, we’ve relaxed them a bit – we’re now permitting poll-style questions as long as they have a good description and use correct spelling and grammar.

There’s a pretty even split between people that are looking for serious answers to serious questions, and people that are looking to connect with other people and have a good time.

The whole point of having two sections is that it lets you, as the person asking a question, choose which group you think your question is going to be best answered by.

I hope you don’t leave Fluther, and that you have the patience to try things out for a little while and see how you feel about it once it’s had a chance to grow into the new shoes.

@richardhenry Thanks for this explaination. The social section is where I’ll be. Thanks. :-)

@jbfletcherfan Glad I could help! We’re still working on making the changes easier to understand, I just pushed out some tweaks to the text in a couple places.

Thanks for your patience. :)

@richardhenry Sure. :-)

I am not a big fan of change myself but I, like many others here, am reserving judgment. I’m worried that big changes like this will increase complaints because a) some users will think that fluther will cave to demands not saying this is true, I’m just saying this is a possible interpretation and b) some people will be unhappy that their specific changes weren’t made.

I’m also worried that “social” will quickly become synonymous with “really stupid crap” and we’ll have a much harder time digging through the bad questions that just squeak by under the guidelines to get through to the genuinely interesting social questions.

Also, I’m wondering about the state of discussions that morph until they have almost no resemblance to the original question. What is the fate of those?

I hope I don’t seem caustic but I need to ask a lot of questions in order to understand something new. :)

Well I just logged on and saw the new updates. I like the separation of “general” and “social.” Great way to break it down and give everybody what they’re looking for. One of the best things about Fluther is the social aspect, but sometimes it can get in the way of serious questions. So yeah, good balance here. Let’s see how it goes!

Well, what concerns me, is stuff like @jbfletcherfan. “Social is where I’ll be.” But what if @jbfletcherfan could have really given a good answer on the general section? Dividing them up will divide the members up, and people could be missing out on some great questions/answers.

I don’t understand, so all hypothetical questions belong in social? I don’t think they are always “social” questions..they need serious answers. I think I’m going to worry when I make a question now, and if it goes in the correct spot. A mod can easily move it, correct?

@casheroo No, that’s not the intention. Almost any question could be asked in either section, and it’s up to the asker to decide what type of responses they want. Sorry if the blurbs are unclear, we’ll definitely be refining them.

If you haven’t already, check out the new Fluther Help pages. They explain things pretty well. If anything is unclear, please tell me so we can fix it.

I too tend to like the simpler, earlier days, but I have always had problems with change. I’m a slow learner; just when I get it, here comes the next generation.

@gailcalled .. I don’t like change, either. I say if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

I like the changes. There is a wonderful sense of community here, and now you all have a place to take it that won’t interfere with the primary purpose of the site. I think new members will find that if they want to get a serious answer or genuine help, they can do so without feeling like their thread has been derailed. And then if they want to join in the camaraderie that is the fluther, there’s a place for that, too.

@richardhenry

Okay, I acknowledge that no one had the time to go through more than 80,000 questions to categorize them after the fact.

Why not acknowledge on your part that the “default” position is “put them in the no-fun section”. Ben and Andrew have a well-known aversion to “funny” answers, and as founders their opinion carries a lot of weight. Now, apparently they’ve recruited you (and other mods) into that camp.

My understanding was that Fluther was never meant to be the Encyclopedia Brittanica or even Wikipedia; humor has a leavening place in Fluther… and it doesn’t have to be “someplace after fourth place” in the responses. When the humor goes, I’ll follow it.

@CyanoticWasp I’m a moderator, and a user. I didn’t really like joke quips long before I became a moderator, because (especially when they come first) they frequently destroy any chance of a meaningful answer/dialogue as everyone else “gets into the act”. This subtle change allows for the best of both worlds. Serious answers when desired (i.e. the general section) and serious answers + fun/community in the social section. Why is that so bad?

@shilolo
That’s apparently a common perception about ‘humorous’ answers. I’m not the only one who disagrees with that, however. This change ain’t subtle.

And what’s going wrong with the preview now and the ability to select user names with the ”@” typeahead? Now that’s broken.

I’m not opposed to all change, but the changes today have been unhelpful.

@CyanoticWasp It’s not a perception, it’s a reality. I still don’t see why this is so dramatic? If you want to simply “mess around”, go to the social section. If you have a serious answer (with some wit/humor thrown in), go to either one.

@CyanoticWasp We haven’t changed anything to do with @replies or the preview section. If you’re having trouble, try clearing your browser cache.

People seem to be making too much out of relatively small changes. But this is the way it always is with change. Trying to convince those set in their opinions is like talking to a brick wall. People will either like it or they won’t.

Either way it’s a small enough change where it shouldn’t really impact the way you interact on the site. Maybe you have to take an extra second to click on the tab that reflects your mood at the time you browse… small price to pay for people actually getting valid answers to their questions.

@Fred931 Um, say, don’t you have some pastrami lying around?

I find all the further categorization unnecessary but I feel completely neutral about this.

Here’s something that might need a little fine-tuning:

“This question is in the General Section. One-liners and off-topic responses will be removed.”

“One-liner” means something that may not be clear to all our users, especially those who are English learners. There’s nothing wrong with a brief response, right? What we don’t want is jokes, wisecracks, and smart-ass remarks.

After using it for a day, I’m liking it. What attracted me to this site was good discussions I wasn’t getting elsewhere (like on facebook). This gives me the option of talking about goofy stuff, or actually keeping things focused. Lots of great threads get derailed by jokes or arguments, and this appears to sharpen and divide things more cleanly to my liking.

Unless it’s a sensitive subject that I really don’t want any BSing about, I’ll probably just post all my questions in social. Nothing wrong with that. I’m getting the hang of it lol

Overall, I really like it. As much as anything, this should keep us from offending new users that come here with serious questions and don’t understand the nature of the community. I think that when we would be witty on their serious questions, they often felt like we were picking on them rather than helping. We will no longer have to wonder if our humor will be appreciated by the OP, since the category indicates the acceptance of humor.

The only thing I don’t really like is that “just for you” does not directly send me to questions from my fluther. I understand that it was a link that was not often used, but I don’t understand why we now have two links that take us straight to questions for us (the “questions for you” link and the “just for you” link). I won’t use the “just for you” link to see the questions for me, because the link that we already have for that lights up whenever there are questions for me. Since I think it is superfluous to have two links within a couple inches of each other that take me to the same place, I would prefer if they switched “just for you” to send me directly to questions from my fluther, with the questions for me as the secondary tab.

You know…after using it since yesterday & getting the hang of the different tabs, I gotta say that I’m kinda liking it, too. did I just say that? ;-)

@jbfletcherfan Oh, say it ain’t so, Squirrel! You were sounding so good and grouchy yesterday.

@janbb: I got up this AM and was less enticed to check in. Aditionally, Milo now has to send his bon mots by PM. It’s difficult to find a delicate balance.

Here are my two scents: At first I was intrigued by the changes. Then, I felt sad about the strict guidelines of general because I like some banter and horseplay. But, after 24+ hours of seeing how the changes are affecting the quality of questions and responses, I think the changes are excellent! Personally, I’m experiencing a shift in my thinking regarding how I approach and interact with Fluther now because of the changes and how the changes are affecting others. I’m taking “general” questions more seriously now, and I’m feeling less of an impulse to post questions.

@janbb Never fear, honey, I can be snarky on a moment’s notice. ;-)

@prolificus I agree. I’m okay with the mechanics of this, just not sold on being so restricted by the seriousness of it.

@gailcalled But how will he send his bon mice? Tell him to be more social and he can post as much as he wants.

By the way, I consider Meta home base and will continue to exercise my great wit and wisdom here. If mods have a prob with that, PM me and we’ll discuss.

I am still feeling things out. Have had a busy few days elsewhere so I haven’t had a long Fluther session yet. I want to see how it plays out and how I can balance my wisdom and wit on both sides, but I think I’ll be able to adjust.

@janbb – smiling big at your exercising your “great wit and wisdom.” If Meta is your home base, who’s on first and what’s on second?

@prolificus No – What’s on first!

@janbb – If what’s on first, and who’s on second, then WTfreako’s on third?!! :)

LOLLLL…you guys need to take it on the road.

@jbfletcherfan: I don’t know. That routine sounds familiar

@jbfletcherfan: I feel the same way. Did you and I somehow merge brains?

@gailcalled – Abbott and Costello ~

All right, it’s growing on me. I kinda like it. /grumblegrumble/

@prolificus: Note that ”Who’s on first, what’s on second and ^^ I don’t know is on third.”

Sigh… As time rolls by.. I’m noticing that I’m not checking into Fluther as frequently as I did prior to the changes. While I appreciate the maturation of the general questions, the compartmentalizing has taken the wind out of my sails and has made reading/responding on the same level as reading the news – something I do when I want to intake info, not blow off stream.

I don’t like it. I wish there was some different name for the social section to indicate that serious answers are appropriate there. As it stands, anyone without a deep understanding of the place will think its just for goofing around. In fact, I think the term “general” would be more appropriate for the social section. The general section might be called “relevant information only” or something like that.

I also think we should be able to filter our questions so we don’t have to look at types of questions we aren’t interested in. Not by topics, I mean, but by fluther section. I think that the section of the question should appear with the question, itself, to facilitate identification, if we don’t have those filtering mechanisms, or if we want to see them but aren’t interested in them.

I think this change was a solution in search of a problem. It limits creativity. It discourages innovative thinking. It creates an atmosphere of uncertainty, since you have no idea whether a mod will consider something on topic or not, or whether you’ll be flagged for bringing something in from an unexpected direction.

“A solution in search of a problem.” A striking thought, @wundayatta. But I tried it on and it doesn’t quite fit. There was definitely a problem that needed to be dealt with. As I see it, the tone and atmosphere changed, the quality of discussions changed, and the changes were causing disaffection among those who helped sustain the positive culture we had had, which was therefore eroding fast, over a period of just a few months. Again, I emphasize: this was my perception and interpretation. But there was more than a rumble, there was an outcry, so people were seeing something amiss. So something had to be done.

I am guessing here (if I really knew, I wouldn’t dare say this—I can say it only because I am guessing), but I think this might describe what we’re seeing:

Here’s the problem. And here’s a change we can make. Let’s see if this change helps solve the problem.

In other words, I don’t think these changes were devised for the purpose of solving the culture problem. I think they were in the works or available for use and were implemented with the hope that they would mitigate the problem. But they were not in fact created in order to address it.

I see this as an instance of doing stuff just because we can and not because we should, which is a trap we’ve fallen into with our science and technology many times over the generations and the centuries.

The more fluther gets broken down, labeled, and compartmentalized, the more it is fragmented and structure-driven, the less it looks and feels like the place we joined. The less of what attracted us older members is here. And that’s all right if the point is to move on, appeal to a different audience, let the old go. But if that is not the aim—if the aim is to sustain what was good and not retire it and replace it—then moving away from the model seems counterproductive to me.

@Jeruba The more fluther gets broken down, labeled, and compartmentalized, the more it is fragmented and structure-driven, the less it looks and feels like the place we joined. The less of what attracted us older members is here. And that’s all right if the point is to move on, appeal to a different audience, let the old go.

Do you really think this is generational? I hope not. But perhaps you are right. Several old heads have left lately, and I know of at least one more who sounds like they are about to leave. I wonder if young people are more likely to think that the way to solve problems is to clamp down than people with more experience? No, that’s pretty silly. There are plenty of elderly dictators.

In any case, I am finding the atmosphere around here increasingly chilly. I never thought I’d say anything like this (because I hate the idea of retiree communities in warm places), but perhaps it’s time to move to Arizona or California or something.

By “older” I wasn’t referring to chronological age at all.

@poofandmook Maybe so. I love cats. LOL :-)

Does anyone have a avatar photo of a jellyfish in handcuffs and tied up and duct taped?

snort

@OneMoreMinute tell us vhat ve vant to know… und no funny business!

@CyanoticWasp: Oh my goodness. If you’re going to constantly bitch and moan about it, why are you still here if it’s so freaking terrible? Goodness gracious. You can dislike something without taking every possible opportunity to shove it in people’s faces… do you think you’re just “sticking it to the man” or something? All you’re doing is making yourself look like a petulant child.

@poofandmook – woah.

@CyanoticWasp Nye undt Commundant! If I can’t do my funny business, I feel funny, then in three days, I smell funny!

@wundayatta I can sympathize with your reluctance to embrace change, but some of your complaints are just not valid. See how others handle it.

And so we see why Utopian communities never last forever.

Because principles can express ideals but people can’t embody them?

@Jeruba You just won Jeopardy!

@poofandmook oh, gosh, did I give the impression that I’m upset about anything? I can’t imagine why. Fluther is… well… it’s the best of all possible sites is all. It’s positively Panglossian.

And no, I’m not defining the term for those who don’t read or won’t look it up.

@CyanoticWasp: Pipe down and eat your pantagruel.

That @gailcalled is nothing if not candide!

@gailcalled & @janbb you two tend to your own gardens.

I think I may just have to go and do that.

Panglossian: Everything is always for the best in a Panglossian world.

@CyanoticWasp @janbb: Mais, ou sont les neiges d’antan?

The best part of the new Fluther™? No thinking is required!

@CyanoticWasp: Je pense, donc je suis une méduse.

@CyanoticWasp Ah ha that explains why all the so-called ‘jokers’ or ‘humourists’ are having such a hard time. Come on, people, pick up the gauntlet. Turn on your thinking caps. Improve, don’t just give up.

@CyanoticWasp: Are you blind? Did I say that? I’m not overly thrilled with the changes. But I’m sick of going to threads and everything you say is a whiny, bitchy reference to how horrible it is. Again, I ask you, why the heck are you still here if it’s so horrible? If I hated it as much as you apparently do, I would find another hobby.

I’d like a seperate tab for questions about mental illness.

I’m happy that it might put a kibosh on the arguements that sometimes take over a question. I think I’d like general subject-type tabs.

So far, so good. Compared to many users here, I have been modded very little. Not trying to brag, it’s just the truth. So I doubt that all of a sudden all my comments will be getting removed and I’ll have more to complain about. But I’ll come back to this question if I do. ;)

I think it’s fine now, though I am seeing a lot more removed comments lately. I’m not sure if that’s a sign that it’s not working…

Oh, now even my Meta answers get modded? People can attack me directly and I can’t even say boo about it? Well, what the hell, it’s only a few keystrokes, right?

@poofandmook I do it to piss you off. Guess it’s working. Besides, I wrote an answer once, and not too long ago, I think, that wasn’t bitchy or whiny. I’ll look it up later.

@CyanoticWasp: Oh, well that’s a relief. I’m glad to see you’re using your time constructively.

@CyanoticWasp: Jeez man, you sure do whine a lot. Is there really any reason you like to stick around? Are you still mad that fluther pulled an April Fool’s prank on you?

I think the deterioration of this thread is an excellent example of why Fluther made the recent changes