Forum Creation: Newbie Forum. [Was: Hi Forum]

[TheCotMan]

Re: hi forum

The (subjectively, possibly substantially through attendance) most successful period for this forum remains end of 2002 through 2004. Subjectively in the matter of actual technical discussion, project undertaking and social interaction that resulted in friendships that extended through cons.

This period is also notably the most brutal in new user treatment, slightly preceding the year or so of unnecessary rampant flame wars. The rules currently in place were a compromise between asshattery that led to the flames and controlling the fire to make productive members have a reason to stay and read/post. The rules (as the one enforced) were a visible presentation of what was previously kept as tribal baseline. They were modified to this so that new people entering the forum could be lazy and not be blindsided by the culture without lurking for a period of time to discover that for themselves.

Something on forum statistics.

I've been looking back through the history of the forums, and found some items of interest.

(All these statistics include all posts)
From 2001 through to 2003, the forums saw some months with the greatest numbers of posts, but had the smallest user-activity in the history of the forums. User activity is a measurement of how many distinct people were using the forums.

What this says, is that though there were many more posts created per month on the busy months from 2001 to 2003, the number of people responsible for those posts were very small. This is also the time when "Politics and Religion" was Active.

In 2004, one or more of the mods made an observation:
Nearly half of all posts across all forums are accounted for in /dev/null.

Combining the two pieces of information above, a picture emerges:
A small group of very active people were using the forums to communicate with each other, but very few if any lurkers or other participants came to or remained on the forums. Additionally, what was judged in the early days as, "useless content," comprised nearly half of all contributions by forum members.

A review of posts in /dev/null during this period, nearly any active member on the forums took an opportunity to gang-flame anyone that did something stupid, including new people who had never posted anything, and in some cases, just flamed by other users only hours before for doing something that was undesirable.

This lead Chris to provide this post (which I copied over to the rules space.) It was a reactionary response to seeing a gang-like mentality among new users to pounce on anyone, anytime they saw someone being flamed in /dev/null or elsewhere.

By 2004, a common theme on the forums was, "Don't expect to get praise or accolades for any contribution on the forums; a lack of being flamed by other users is the closest thing to a compliment that you will get here."

Around 2005, a waiting period was added to address 2 issues:
1) Migrate "encourage" to "force" when it comes to new users lurking (let them wait and lurk and read the rules before they posted)
2) Defense against spamming.

Both of these were accomplished to great success, but at a great cost -- the number of new users that would wait for the period to arrive so they could post new threads (3 weeks, or 1 week for *replies* to existing threads) was too long. Of course it took 2 years for us to gather data to come to this conclusion.

Next we added /dev/random as nearly immediately available to new users after only 24 hours of waiting. New users could post new threads and replies to existing threads in /dev/random, and this was less restrictive than the rest of the forums. After 24 hours, users could reply to existing threads in other forums, but not create new threads, and after 7 days, create new threads on nearly any forum. We also extended a policy added during Defcon which allowed posting new threads in the contests/events space and other forums sooner than usual.

This was a success, in that we saw a growth in user activity of about 15 to 20% in 2008 over 2007, and continued to have increasing user activity in addition to this increase in posting. What I conclude from this is rather profound:

The increase in the *quality* of content (desired information) has caused an increase in the number of members we have who started lurking, and coming back on a regular basis.

Some might say that this is because of the dedicated forums for contests and events, but that has been in place for a little over 3 years, and alone did not has such an impact the previous 2 years.

(Incidentally, the idea to have dedicated forums for each contests or event came about because of a moderation problem, where new users were unable (due to lack of search skill or laziness) to find "the" thread for the contest or event that interested them.)

We've added more, like the concept of non-moderator "contest/event leader/organize" so contributors could control content and use our forums if they wished, and if they didn't, Defcon people could discuss the contest or event anyway.

We continue to make changes, but almost every change we apply is a change to attempt to provide a solution to an existing problem.

So, here is my simple question:
"What problem are we trying to solve by adding an, 'introduce yourself,' forum?"

With that answer, I would then ask this:
Are there other solutions that might be able to do that better?
What are the consequences of this decision in two spaces:
* Opportunity cost in what we are *not* able to do with the same time & resources
* What harm is caused by this?

I'm not saying 'fuck the newbs' .. but there is an extent where primary focus leaves creativity and subversion in trade for coddling and extraordinary concern for user feelings over the interweb. Many of the 'seasoned' members have large gaps in understanding and social grace, but have learned over a few years how to successfully interact and learn without being total douches. This is a skill softened or lost by treating others with too much unearned respect.

Have we gone too far with what we have done?

In many ways the forums and Defcon at large are bearing more toward trade show / trade fair mentality, catering to the lesser denominator and straying from the raw hacker mindset. It's not necessarily a bad thing, but something to keep in check to avoid completely losing the niche that makes it special.

Such is a risk when there is a desire to focus on *just* including more people, not focusing on retention of an existing base and add more "hacker-types".

We have had a couple discussions over the years on what the purpose of the forums should be. Do we focus on hacking and tech and there is a section for the con, or do we make it all about the con and assume there are other, better, forums for aspiring hackers to learn tech? Is it an info spot to plan and organize and talk con, or is it something more? I want to make it about the community.. a community that helps put on the con as well as share knowledge and and hang out between cons.

We have had such discussions about the forums in the past, and we have tried to encourage technical discussions, they mostly seem to fizzle or approximate something like what you see on slashdot.
The conclusion I came away with on this, is the forums will be what the members decide to make them into with what they choose to post. All that I and the rest of the mods can do is provide an opportunity for members to have a space to discuss the kinds of things that Defcon Forums would be good for discussion, and see what happens.
We had a "Wireless" forum for a while, but it was used less and less until it wasn't used at all. I've tried other similar forums here for technical discussions, but they never really went anywhere.
Two years in a row, I pre-populated forums about all of the presentation topics so people could discuss them as part of Defcon content, but we had almost no activity in those spaces.
Two years, we pre-created forums for media content discussion for people to provide comment after or while watching videos from Defcon, but that also has had almost no activity.

"You can bring a horse to water, but you can't make it drink."

The users will use the forums for what they want to use them for, and we can provide the people with what they want, or not, on a case-by-case basis.

... if the forums were like they were back in the time period you discussed (in relation to brutality) I don't know if they'd be any more active. I think there were many other factors that you may be discounting.

That is an interesting assertion, but isn't quite true, except for a very specific definition of "active." I believe I understand what converge, and by you tacit complicity in the thread of discussion both claim when converge references activity on the early forums.

I would like to counter-claim that the the early days of the forums were not as active as the later years forums when activity also includes lurkers or uses "total number of active logged-in users" as a measurement of activity.

I will admit that there were more total posts made in the first 3 years, but when one considers half of those posts were "/dev/null" quality, and we eliminate those posts from the count, we find that the present day forums are more active by post count than the early forums.

I don't think anyone is espousing a coddled nature towards the newbs throughout the forum. I believe what is being discussed is a specific area where they can "be newbs". As an experiment I think it is very good idea. As TheCotman said, it could be a user subscribable forum with the new users subscribed by default and limiting their posting there for the first Seven (?) days. At most it would be a midway point between their non-existence and their first steps into the "real forums".

Ok, but then how does that differ from /dev/random?

It was created to be a more open space. The idea to allow flaming is how it really works, as it is a throw-back to the old days, and by *allowing* flaming is truly is a community support forum! In this way, the community can decide what they will tolerate, and what they won't and they can use social interaction to police such a space on their own.

In this way, if the community wants to be nice to newbies, welcome newbies, encourage newbies, train newbies, be helpful and supportive to all people new to Defcon, they *can*! Heck, the Community could decide to open up Tech Support in /dev/random if they want. Can you see the Devilish simplicity of /dev/random? It really can become what the community want it to be. ]:>

When we remove the, "it is ok to flame," in that space, then we (the mods) end up having more work, and a kind of work that might put Defcon in a negative light, as we "silence," anything that is, "disagreeable."

If I renamed "/dev/random" (as it is with all of its rules) to "Social Lounge" but kept the rules the same, and referenced it as a place for people to introduce themselves, would that satisfy you and other supporters of this idea, and if so, why? If not, why? (Do you realize that the name "/dev/random" was the community voted name for it? Ahhhh yes! :-) Community suggestions for a name, and then voted upon by people from the community, and in a forum that is primarily community supported.

..and this is where I think the disconnect happens because the strongly abrasive take the 'sold out' standpoint to identify their feeling of disturbance, while the side vested in providing a quality experience for many has to compromise as little as possible to actively avoid that visual. But its not the visual that is lacking; not the number of vendors, nor the schwag sales, nor the number of company men that show up versus pimple faced kids with emo hair cuts and duct-taped LCDs. My hypothesis is that the perception pivots on raised levels of control or structure.

Really? Is this the perception of control in the sense of *organization* and having things run more and more smoothly as time moves forward?
Or, maybe you mean control in the literal sense, of an establishment that has rules, regulations and has become, "the man," instead of an entity fighting against the man?

This is an interesting hypothesis, so I would like to hear more.

I think the forums have weathered the last 6+ years pretty decently overall. My overall list of observations leans my opinion that broadening the forum audience through over-tolerance does not work. Thorn, Chris and others may be able to supply alternate data, but attempts that I've observed on other forums to include people that did not really belong posting .. exponentially deflated the interest of those that were posting.

By lowering the bar, we have seen an increase in what I would call, "less interesting," and, "more social," discussions, and almost no technical discussions anymore. In some ways, I have less fun now on the forums than I did 3 years ago, but I also have more work now and less time to play on the forums.

Participation drop of regulars results in a vacuum that compounds the affect against itself and translates into similar descent for the actual con. Eventually you end up with an endless pool of people showing up and saying 'LOL HI, isn't defcon cool??'. No substance.

Yes. This is not desirable. Why can't people use their Defcon Blog to introduce themselves? Really. If people are *that* interested in a new person, they can click and find out about them.

Yah it is certainly not to discount those factors, particularly the situations that brought some of the core members to move on. The correlation I establish is that the timeframe was absolutely wrought with new members, some that had attended Defcon for considerable time and others that had not. I posit that the heavy handed approach did not negatively affect participation, but kept the right people interacting and the wrong people bumping around the internet trying to figure things out.

I'll disagree with this. I attended Defcon long before the forums, and when I joined and posted a technical question about an existing thread, I was immediately flamed, and I assumed that there was nothing of value on the forums. Instead, I remained on multiple technical mailing lists and answered questions or lurked until I came back to the forums in 2004.

One of my friends who was with me at my first Defcon also had a similar opinion about the forums, "The forums are a way for people that know each other at defcon to socialize between defcons, and if you aren't one of them, you're not, 'in.'"

In most venues that I choose to visit, the respective venue's forums exist to show that sufficient numbers of monkeys with typewriters/keyboard won't necessarily provide the complete works Shakespeare, but instead lots of flung poo.

There are rules, and we have quite a few, but we also have a summary. We have a waiting period. The rules act as a kind of IQ test for new users, and when users choose not to follow them, we have two conclusions:
1) They did not read them for any number of reasons from laziness to lack of interest to disinterest in learning
2) They choose to break the rules even though they read them

Do you want people at Defcon who have a disinterest in learning?

Do you want people at Defcon when they disobey your security goons who tell them rules exist on room occupancy, or clear hallways because the fire marshal has complained?

In the last year we have seen some pretty awesome activity, so the correlation may simply be coincidence and those other factors far more important to the collaboration that occurred.

But this area has long existed. TheCotMan built an amazing trough of permissions gates that move new members around from barely being able to touch the forums to full posting privs. The Social forum exists and in some cases gets utilized.. it is highly unmoderated but often ignored. iirc, all new members get their digs in there, while pre-existing members have to opt-in to the potential thread spew that it can cause (though has certainly yet to do so).

This idea was not mine, but as you say, a collaboration of ideas from you, other mods, regular and new users on the forums. The automatic stages f advancement have also been refined through time as we find they are excessive, or insufficient.

At least once each year, I or someone else creates a thread to ask our users for ideas on how to improve the forums. In this way we are able to become benevolent dictators. Not many people know this, but the idea for a newbie or sandbox area from one member is what eventually lead to /dev/random after many people's ideas were also included.

Not necessarily that it is just bigger (which may assist the effect), but that the overall attitude of attendees is shifting from the hacker mindset to a more traditional show up and attend class persona. Those leading the charge to try and bring cool things to the con often buy into the more traditional means of spreading their trade.

Like at Defcon 10? When one of the presentations included people visiting empty chairs to deposit full color folders with company logos, and lots of glossy advertisements claiming how great their widget was.
However, I've not seen that happen again.

On the counter side to this, why should a change in the population matter to me, so long as I am able to do the things I want to do and see the people i want to see?

Yes, I know you are not saying these are bad things, but instead are commenting on observations you've made, and reactions you've seen, but unless these things change their experience, why should these matter to them?

Even something as adhoc as the offsite bbq falls prey to permits and their restrictions, as well as a repeatable and particularly predictable format. With exception to a few late developed surprises, I can already tell you what will happen at the next Defcon. I could have told you at the last Defcon and likely the one before. I think that incremental stagnation is playing into the control/structure factor that solidifies the hypothesis.

To some extent, this is true of almost everything we do when brought to the most general points.

For example, why watch or read the news today? They say that anyone that has not learned from history is doomed to repeat it, so isn't present day news just a repeat of older events but only with new players? :-)

No speakers one year maybe.. that will keep 'em guessing!

No speakers would be like canceling defcon.

Hey everyone! DT just canceled Defcon! I have proof in that quoted content! ]:>

Now, how this all comes back to the forums to me is simple. How do we build the DEF CON community?

Free solid gold jet packs that run on the disembodied souls of orphaned children and a BFG for everyone with lots of ammo!

Seriously? Find out what drives the members of the community and then determine which of things you are willing and able to provide them which will encourage more to attend.Birds of a feather flock together.

I don't know what motivates others major contributing attendees, except time to see friends, and party, but this is just a guess.

How do we get more people involved in our hacking community? If the con is the big social gathering of the year, then the forums should be some ongoing place for people to grow their ideas, plan their contests, tell stories about what just happened or just hang out.

I'm not sure that is the question that people are trying to solve in this thread. Though it smacks of elitism, I think the item of contention is really, "how do we get more of the *right* people involved with Defcon?"
Anyone care to disagree that this is the real question being asked as the primary item of contention in this thread?

And if that really is the primary item of contention, what describes, "right people," and who defines them?

Oh yeah. With that question, things could get really interesting now. ]:>

[Dark Tangent]

Re: hi forum

With exception to a few late developed surprises, I can already tell you what will happen at the next Defcon. I could have told you at the last Defcon and likely the one before. I think that incremental stagnation is playing into the control/structure factor that solidifies the hypothesis.

That there will be speakers on a stage, a network, open spaces, and people doing stuff. And music and parties? By that definition all conferences suffer your slow death hypothesis unless they radically reinvent themselves. No speakers one year maybe.. that will keep 'em guessing!

The things you are pointing out are things I have thought about for years. It is a trap of growth. You do something people enjoy, they tell other people, more people show up. At some point the original people no longer like it because it's no longer the same. The experience is different. In the case of DEF CON we also have other factors, the growth of the internet, the .com bubble and bust, people getting real jobs and careers.. watching your hobby become a profession. The next new hot thing isn't computers and networking as much as it is using them to create new advances in bio or nano engineering, etc. I am trying to steer the content more into hardware and robotics because that is an area that is growing and people who want to be exposed should see how simple it can be to learn something new.

Now, how this all comes back to the forums to me is simple. How do we build the DEF CON community? Of course we don't want lame posts or r0d3nt speak, how k-rad would that be? But I want to focus on building for future glory, not trying to reclaim 'the way it was'. That only got to exist in a specific time and place.. and that is in the past. I'd like to spend my energy on helping to create an environment for it to happen again and again in the future.

How do we get more people involved in our hacking community? If the con is the big social gathering of the year, then the forums should be some ongoing place for people to grow their ideas, plan their contests, tell stories about what just happened or just hang out.

[converge]

Re: hi forum

I'm interested in this perception, because it is something I try hard to prevent.

The thing is, I'm not certain this is something that can be sheltered by the conference. You and others have done well to accept new ideas and cater to every possible avenue that makes the con more interesting. More importantly, you put up .. and clean up after all the loose ends and craziness that can happen, albeit less frequently than the 'mighty days of yore'. A lot of people like to hop on the OMG IT SOLD OUT bandwagon .. its an easy cop-out. I think the underlying perception retains validity, but resolution rests squarely with the attendees.. particularly those senior to the conference(s) and the community at whole.

.. think most 'hacker' cons now have sponsors that hang banners, get logos ... So the content side of DEF CON is very much alive and growing. The contest areas...

..and this is where I think the disconnect happens because the strongly abrasive take the 'sold out' standpoint to identify their feeling of disturbance, while the side vested in providing a quality experience for many has to compromise as little as possible to actively avoid that visual. But its not the visual that is lacking; not the number of vendors, nor the schwag sales, nor the number of company men that show up versus pimple faced kids with emo hair cuts and duct-taped LCDs. My hypothesis is that the perception pivots on raised levels of control or structure.

We have had a couple discussions over the years on what the purpose of the forums should be...

I think the forums have weathered the last 6+ years pretty decently overall. My overall list of observations leans my opinion that broadening the forum audience through over-tolerance does not work. Thorn, Chris and others may be able to supply alternate data, but attempts that I've observed on other forums to include people that did not really belong posting .. exponentially deflated the interest of those that were posting. Participation drop of regulars results in a vacuum that compounds the affect against itself and translates into similar descent for the actual con. Eventually you end up with an endless pool of people showing up and saying 'LOL HI, isn't defcon cool??'. No substance.

I think there were many other factors that you may be discounting.

Yah it is certainly not to discount those factors, particularly the situations that brought some of the core members to move on. The correlation I establish is that the timeframe was absolutely wrought with new members, some that had attended Defcon for considerable time and others that had not. I posit that the heavy handed approach did not negatively affect participation, but kept the right people interacting and the wrong people bumping around the internet trying to figure things out. In the last year we have seen some pretty awesome activity, so the correlation may simply be coincidence and those other factors far more important to the collaboration that occurred.

I don't think anyone is espousing a coddled nature towards the newbs throughout the forum. I believe what is being discussed is a specific area where they can "be newbs". As an experiment I think it is very good idea. As TheCotman said, it could be a user subscribable forum with the new users subscribed by default and limiting their posting there for the first Seven (?) days.

But this area has long existed. TheCotMan built an amazing trough of permissions gates that move new members around from barely being able to touch the forums to full posting privs. The Social forum exists and in some cases gets utilized.. it is highly unmoderated but often ignored. iirc, all new members get their digs in there, while pre-existing members have to opt-in to the potential thread spew that it can cause (though has certainly yet to do so).

Maybe it's that DefCon is getting bigger and drawing more of mainstream crowd that you're talking about? I'm really unsure about what exactly you mean when you say it's catering more towards the lesser denominator... Maybe an example?

Not necessarily that it is just bigger (which may assist the effect), but that the overall attitude of attendees is shifting from the hacker mindset to a more traditional show up and attend class persona. Those leading the charge to try and bring cool things to the con often buy into the more traditional means of spreading their trade. Even something as adhoc as the offsite bbq falls prey to permits and their restrictions, as well as a repeatable and particularly predictable format. With exception to a few late developed surprises, I can already tell you what will happen at the next Defcon. I could have told you at the last Defcon and likely the one before. I think that incremental stagnation is playing into the control/structure factor that solidifies the hypothesis.

Mind you I'm not trying to rock the boat, recommend a particular course of action, or in any way discount any of the efforts that have been put forth to make Defcon better to date. I'm simply stating observations.

[DaKahuna]

Uorw]

See, I have to disagree whole heartily. There are many reasons for my disagreement but I will focus briefly on the two major ones in my mind.

A) You have many people who attend DefCon from all different hacker focuses. I think that the DefCon forums could/did/can be a convergence of many different hacker types that other forums aren't able to facilitate.

B) When this forum began focusing more on the con and less on the community of hackers and community of people that attended the con, I believe it dropped off significantly.

I think you missed my point completely. DefCon is about all of the differnt hacker types and that is what this forum should be about. I do not believe it should be a place where someone comes and post "teach me to hack" type questions and expect to be spoonfed answers. Nor do I believe it should be a place where someone comes and ask questions specific to an application or an Operating System.

Rather, as I must have unsuccessfully conveyed in my original post, it should be a place where people come and exchange ideas an opinions relative to the CON - what works, what does not work; perspecitive on the venue; perspective on specific talks or subjects, etc.

So with regard to it being about the people, the people are to CON to me and not vice versa.

Hopefully that clarifies that I think we are in violent agreement.

[HighWiz]

Re: hi forum

Saw this thread a couple days ago and abstained from comment at the time, but .. a couple observations to consider.

The (subjectively, possibly substantially through attendance) most successful period for this forum remains end of 2002 through 2004. Subjectively in the matter of actual technical discussion, project undertaking and social interaction that resulted in friendships that extended through cons.

This period is also notably the most brutal in new user treatment, slightly preceding the year or so of unnecessary rampant flame wars. The rules currently in place were a compromise between asshattery that led to the flames and controlling the fire to make productive members have a reason to stay and read/post. The rules (as the one enforced) were a visible presentation of what was previously kept as tribal baseline. They were modified to this so that new people entering the forum could be lazy and not be blindsided by the culture without lurking for a period of time to discover that for themselves.

I've given this a lot of thought, and converge you do make some very interesting observations. Though I will say that Correlation does not imply causation, if the forums were like they were back in the time period you discussed (in relation to brutality) I don't know if they'd be any more active. I think there were many other factors that you may be discounting.

I will say that while I don't think it was the level of brutality that kept things 'alive' there are a few other things that happened on and to the forums that lead to a decline in "forum regulars" or general activity. However, I do view these as two separate topics so I don't want to get too far off topic and hijack this thread.

I'm not saying 'fuck the newbs' .. but there is an extent where primary focus leaves creativity and subversion in trade for coddling and extraordinary concern for user feelings over the interweb. Many of the 'seasoned' members have large gaps in understanding and social grace, but have learned over a few years how to successfully interact and learn without being total douches. This is a skill softened or lost by treating others with too much unearned respect.

I don't think anyone is espousing a coddled nature towards the newbs throughout the forum. I believe what is being discussed is a specific area where they can "be newbs". As an experiment I think it is very good idea. As TheCotman said, it could be a user subscribable forum with the new users subscribed by default and limiting their posting there for the first Seven (?) days. At most it would be a midway point between their non-existence and their first steps into the "real forums". I think by viewing it in that regard (at least to me) it doesn't destroy or hinder the respect matrix.

In many ways the forums and Defcon at large are bearing more toward trade show / trade fair mentality, catering to the lesser denominator and straying from the raw hacker mindset. It's not necessarily a bad thing, but something to keep in check to avoid completely losing the niche that makes it special.

Maybe I have a different perspective since I'm an every-other-year attendee, but I don't see it becoming that. I will grant that being back at major hotel/casino has changed the dynamic and that the AP did foster more of community spirit. Some of my favorite con moments and the best debauchery in my recent memory happened in the QC, and not having that definitely makes things different.

Maybe it's that DefCon is getting bigger and drawing more of mainstream crowd that you're talking about? I'm really unsure about what exactly you mean when you say it's catering more towards the lesser denominator... Maybe an example? Either way, I don't want to get off on too much of tangent as with the "hay-day of the forums" discussion i think this may be best left as a separate topic.


Or maybe all my ramblings above were incoherent and only I understood what I thought I meant.

In my opinion the forum should be all about the con. As you said "there are other, better, forums for aspiring hackers to learn tech" but this is the one and only place dedicated to Defcon itself is this forum.

See, I have to disagree whole heartily. There are many reasons for my disagreement but I will focus briefly on the two major ones in my mind.

A) You have many people who attend DefCon from all different hacker focuses. I think that the DefCon forums could/did/can be a convergence of many different hacker types that other forums aren't able to facilitate.

B) When this forum began focusing more on the con and less on the community of hackers and community of people that attended the con, I believe it dropped off significantly.

Blah Blah Blah, Waa Waa Waa... A bunch of stuff from xor.


xor

I barely even read your posts anymore (SNR). I'm sure you have some very good things to say (maybe?), but there is also a lot of crap that comes out. Maybe you make yourself laugh which is good, but I don't know who else is laughing with you. On the good side, I'm not nearly as "harsh and brutal" as I used to be or else I'm sure I would have flamed you right off this forum. (You're not a newb so you should know better...) Now I just don't fucking care unless you saunter into my cross hairs.

[xor]

Re: hi forum

Here is a perfect example of people offering too much information about themselves:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2008...ver_breas.html

So where it does it stop at the Hi Forum.

Hi I'm so and so and here is a picture of me breast feeding my baby.

Extreme.... yes, just furthering making my point with current news.

xor

[Chris]

Re: hi forum

The vendor area has not grown since we moved to the Riv

Actually...the biggest Vendor area we ever had was DefCon 10 and it has grown smaller since then. At the move to the Riv we slightly increased our floor space over Zeus (the last room the Vendors were in at the AP) but did not increase the number of Vendors...in fact I think we reduced the number by 2 but don't quote me on that because I'd have to go back through my archives to make sure I am 100% correct there. Either way, the Vendor Area has significantly decreased in size since DC 10 (it was way too big then and we had too many Vendors...most selling variations of the exact same things).

I also have no intention to increase the number of Vendor tables at Con in the foreseeable future. I think we actually have it pretty close to right since we moved to the Riv with a decent balance of selection, variation, and breathing room.

Additionally, although in the past couple of years we have provided vendor space to some corporate entities, it should be noted that we are very clear with them that they aren't "sponsors" but rather that we are providing a place for them to offer products or services that may be of specialized interest to our attendees. Walking a thin line? Perhaps...but I think it works right now.

Didn't mean to thread hijack, but just piggybacking on what DT mentioned.

[xor]

Re: hi forum

I actually have a lot of sympathy for n00bs with bad impulse control. We were all that way once. I personally think the new member announcement is just fine for that sort of thing.

Main Page

Welcome to our newest member ########

Who is going to actually read the Hi Forum anyway. If I see someones name and want to find out something about them I just right click and lurk their profile. Steven Rambam I think states it all when it comes to stuff like that. I'm paraphrasing here; given the opportunity and the nature of the web people will inevitably share WAAAY TOO MUCH INFORMATION about themselves. The old just because I can that means I should mentally. I think we should encourage & educate prudent disclosure of personal information. Sometimes the process of education is painful. Usually the most well learned experiences are. I'm a better smarter web user for having my arse handed to me on occasion.

On the other hand storage is cheap. Back when storage was a lot of money I could definitely see folks getting upset with newbie space wasters(no offense TheCotman).

I'll support either decision, but honestly don't see the need. Thorn was just following the stated and unstated group conscious.

xor

[DaKahuna]

Re: hi forum

We have had a couple discussions over the years on what the purpose of the forums should be. Do we focus on hacking and tech and there is a section for the con, or do we make it all about the con and assume there are other, better, forums for aspiring hackers to learn tech? Is it an info spot to plan and organize and talk con, or is it something more? I want to make it about the community.. a community that helps put on the con as well as share knowledge and and hang out between cons.

In my opinion the forum should be all about the con. As you said "there are other, better, forums for aspiring hackers to learn tech" but this is the one and only place dedicated to Defcon itself is this forum.

[Dark Tangent]

Re: hi forum

In many ways the forums and Defcon at large are bearing more toward trade show / trade fair mentality, catering to the lesser denominator and straying from the raw hacker mindset. It's not necessarily a bad thing, but something to keep in check to avoid completely losing the niche that makes it special.

I'm interested in this perception, because it is something I try hard to prevent. I think most 'hacker' cons now have sponsors that hang banners, get logos on the con web sites, try to co-opt the content, etc. This is something we have never had. The vendor area has not grown since we moved to the Riv, and we have added more tracks of speaking and interactive contests - the most ever, actually. So the content side of DEF CON is very much alive and growing. The contest areas, things to the TOOOL guys and the Hardware Hacking Village have inspired new interest. I learned long ago that you can't please all the people all of the time.

We have had a couple discussions over the years on what the purpose of the forums should be. Do we focus on hacking and tech and there is a section for the con, or do we make it all about the con and assume there are other, better, forums for aspiring hackers to learn tech? Is it an info spot to plan and organize and talk con, or is it something more? I want to make it about the community.. a community that helps put on the con as well as share knowledge and and hang out between cons.

[converge]

Re: hi forum

Saw this thread a couple days ago and abstained from comment at the time, but .. a couple observations to consider.

The (subjectively, possibly substantially through attendance) most successful period for this forum remains end of 2002 through 2004. Subjectively in the matter of actual technical discussion, project undertaking and social interaction that resulted in friendships that extended through cons.

This period is also notably the most brutal in new user treatment, slightly preceding the year or so of unnecessary rampant flame wars. The rules currently in place were a compromise between asshattery that led to the flames and controlling the fire to make productive members have a reason to stay and read/post. The rules (as the one enforced) were a visible presentation of what was previously kept as tribal baseline. They were modified to this so that new people entering the forum could be lazy and not be blindsided by the culture without lurking for a period of time to discover that for themselves.

I'm not saying 'fuck the newbs' .. but there is an extent where primary focus leaves creativity and subversion in trade for coddling and extraordinary concern for user feelings over the interweb. Many of the 'seasoned' members have large gaps in understanding and social grace, but have learned over a few years how to successfully interact and learn without being total douches. This is a skill softened or lost by treating others with too much unearned respect.

In many ways the forums and Defcon at large are bearing more toward trade show / trade fair mentality, catering to the lesser denominator and straying from the raw hacker mindset. It's not necessarily a bad thing, but something to keep in check to avoid completely losing the niche that makes it special.

[TheCotMan]

Re: hi forum

Traditionally they way "Hello" rooms work is you get to say hello, introduce yourself, and maybe talk about the stuff that interests you. People can respond with "Cool, I'm into that too" or whatever, but there is no conversation beyond <hello> <nice to meet you>

Let's check to see if enough mods are willing to support it. (This may take some time to find out.)

If there are only a few,it can be made a user-subscribable forum like All-Social, but All-Newbie,and we can auto-join all new members to that usergroup. This will let registered users choose if they want to see such content, and join the All-Newbie group too. Then those mods that want to support it can be subscribed to that usergroup too.

It should probably be at the top if it does come into existence, just below the general defcon announcements.

[Dark Tangent]

Re: hi forum

Traditionally they way "Hello" rooms work is you get to say hello, introduce yourself, and maybe talk about the stuff that interests you. People can respond with "Cool, I'm into that too" or whatever, but there is no conversation beyond <hello> <nice to meet you>

Helping new people is good, but it *is* a Hacker convention.

"When in Rome do as the Romans."

Why not expect this of new people as well?

Let's assume there is a "Hi Im New" forum for new users and that the mod are fine with yet another exception to the rules.

Then what? Are other discussions allowed in the "Hi I'm New" forum? Which rules would exist there?

[TheCotMan]

Re: hi forum

It's not the "system" that's getting blamed. It's the community of people that are involved in something that fail to do their in part helping out the new people. As I said though, if that's the stance everyone wishes to take... That "it's not our problem" if they don't have a positive avenue or a place that provides it. Then I'm fine with that... And I'll leave it there.

Helping new people is good, but it *is* a Hacker convention.

"When in Rome do as the Romans."

Why not expect this of new people as well?

Let's assume there is a "Hi Im New" forum for new users and that the mod are fine with yet another exception to the rules.

Then what? Are other discussions allowed in the "Hi I'm New" forum? Which rules would exist there?

[Chris]

Re: hi forum

A couple of thoughts on this. First, I really do think this is one of only two forums I have ever visited that frowns on the "Introduction" post so strongly. Most web forums even have an introduction area set aside specifically for this purpose. Personally, I like the way we do it. I can tell if someone is new without them telling me.

DT, back in the olden days when we had to walk uphill to the forums both ways in the snow (aka before you were around much ) we were MUCH more brutal on people that posted in violation of the rules. I think Thorn's response was both perfectly in line, and appropriate.

Second, who the fuck posts on a forum without having lurked for a while to get a feel for the tone of the forum? Without reading hundreds of posts to determine both what is acceptable etiquette there and what the consequences are for stepping out of line? I am a member or moderator on several other forums for varying topics of interest to me and before joining each of them I read page after page of posts (not a big deal, if I am interested enough in the topic to join the forum I should be interested enough to read through some posts there), looked at what had happened to people that were in violation of the forum policies and what types of things got the established moderators up in arms, and searched for posts with specific topics of interest to me. If people aren't willing to do this (how about using that waiting period we have in place if you just have to sign up immediately) then honestly not only do I not have sympathy for the reception they get, but I don't have any use for them as forum members either.

Harsh? Maybe, but I have never been accused of catering to other people's feelings.