Open Discussion: Forum rules?

[imported_Tom Aiello]

Some thoughts:

1) No personal attacks. That means no "you suck!" I think we ought to allow "you are showing bad ethics" or "you have poor judgment" because those kinds of things would have some educational value.

2) No site naming on open forums. I do think we ought to create a "jumpers only" forum where you have to be registered, and known (i.e. we could check references with jumpers we know, and they could vouch for you), to even read.

3) Move advertisements for gear and such to the classifieds forum. Allow advertisements for expeditions, training camps, etc on the main board.

I wouldn't try to ban sexual jokes, or drug talk, or anything like that. I think they add some of our cultural character to this place.

I'll keep thinking on this...

Thanks Mick!

--Tom Aiello
tbaiello@mac.com

[Ray Losli]

This I don't understand.
No one will be able to to say I disagree with you, LIKE: OH...
I think you are wrong, and YOU SUCK....
or say a LEGAL BASE jump site name....

But I can say:

NO RAY, YOU CAN'T SAY THAT.

...Ray Losli...

[stinkydragon]

I think that everyone should hafta wear underpants on their heads whenever posting something with consonants in the main body. It is also imperitive for people to be allowed to say "you suck" when speaking to a monkey, because monkeys are stupid.

[imported_Mac]

>Some thoughts:

>2) No site naming on open forums. I do think we ought to
>create a "jumpers only" forum where you have to be registered,
>and known (i.e. we could check references with jumpers we
>know, and they could vouch for you), to even read.


This sounds like alot of policing and then who then says "he is ok" or "he is not ok" - you may have referees that perhaps "just dont get on with a guy" but as a jumper his ethics and ethos are dead on but because he clashes personally with a guy he then may not end up getting access. Another point is that who then "allows" the access to the board in the end? No disrespect but you and Mick dont know every jumper in the world - and because someone may jump with someone less well known in the BASE / BLiNC society and is dead on with his ethics then again he gets no references what so ever.

You then could get the situation that someone deemed slightly dubious in ethics by one cell of jumpers for some reason or another may in fact have either been incorrectly assumed to be "not worthy" or may have changed??

BLiNC is a very valuable resource but I also think that this "policed" stated ends up increasing the political bul$hit that we could do without.

Just my 0.000000002 worth

:+

[imported_mknutson]

>>Some thoughts:
>
>>2) No site naming on open forums. I do think we ought to
>>create a "jumpers only" forum where you have to be
>registered,
>>and known (i.e. we could check references with jumpers we
>>know, and they could vouch for you), to even read.
>
>
>This sounds like alot of policing and then who then says "he
>is ok" or "he is not ok" - you may have referees that perhaps
>"just dont get on with a guy" but as a jumper his ethics and
>ethos are dead on but because he clashes personally with a guy
>he then may not end up getting access. Another point is that
>who then "allows" the access to the board in the end? No
>disrespect but you and Mick dont know every jumper in the
>world - and because someone may jump with someone less well
>known in the BASE / BLiNC society and is dead on with his
>ethics then again he gets no references what so ever.
>
>You then could get the situation that someone deemed slightly
>dubious in ethics by one cell of jumpers for some reason or
>another may in fact have either been incorrectly assumed to be
>"not worthy" or may have changed??
>
>BLiNC is a very valuable resource but I also think that this
>"policed" stated ends up increasing the political bul$hit that
>we could do without.
>
>Just my 0.000000002 worth
>
> :+


I do see there are postings that are just not really relevant to education. Those are postings that just try to get people up in arms, or are just posted out of bordom.
Should there be a seperate forum aside from the BASE Board that we create so postings like that can live?

[imported_mknutson]

I want to allow everyone to add their 2 cents about the BLiNC Forum rules.
I am working on an official forum rules document, and want to know what everyone thinks should/should not be part of those rules.

Please speak now, or forever hold your peace.

[imported_Tom Aiello]

>>...a "jumpers only" forum where you have to be registered,

>This sounds like alot of policing and then who then says "he is ok" or "he is not ok" - you may have referees that perhaps "just dont get on with a guy" but as a jumper his ethics and ethos are dead on but because he clashes personally with a guy he then may not end up getting access. Another point is that who then "allows" the access to the board in the end? No disrespect but you and Mick dont know every jumper in the world - and because someone may jump with someone less well known in the BASE / BLiNC society and is dead on with his ethics then again he gets no references what so ever.

I'm not really envisioning a setup where real jumpers get denied. It wouldn't be a case of denying people because they were unpopular, or little known. I'm basically looking for a way to screen out reporters and other non-jumpers. I think we could probably find actual jumpers we know who know 90% of the folks who would want to participate in a site discussion forum. Even people in quite isolated regions wouldn't be that hard to find information about. For example, I was recently contacted by a jumper from Turkey, who didn't have any local jumpers around to mentor him. It took me about a day of emails to find some people who knew him.

The other 10%? I'd guess that would be trickier. But what I'd see for them is a little more prolonged email "interview". The only point would be to verify that they really were a jumper. I'd guess that I can pick out 99% of non-jumpers just by having a discussion with them.

I really don't envision a super strict screening process. And I don't think it would be that hard to spot the non-jumpers and keep them out of site discussions.

--Tom Aiello
tbaiello@mac.com

[Nick_D]

No Lock-Down . . .

Since BASE jumping, in general, isn't a big secret anymore (was it really ever) maybe there should be a place whuffos, reporters, and skydivers can sort of eavesdrop on the sport. Most people know the Internet well enough, by now, to weed through the irrelevant stuff. And if they hang around long enough they will gain some amount of insight into the sport.

Now, I enjoyed sitting around the campfire after a day of jumping right next to the object, but I also like hitting chain link fences on a dead run (limp) in the middle of the night. There will forever be two sides to BASE jumping. The legal side, and I dont care if they open a thousand legal sites tomorrow, the illegal side. We have collectively done a pretty good job over the years (with few exceptions) of keeping both aspects of BASE jumping in house.

However, its now probably counterproductive in the long run. It used to be that going before a Judge who had never heard of BASE jumping got you a few laughs and slap on the wrist. Now it seems tolerance levels for anti-social behavior are about zero. So Id rather the Judge had seen, or at least heard, something positive about BASE jumping beforehand.

Also, and maybe more importantly, as BASE jumping expands (explodes) more skydivers will slip through the cracks and enter the sport through a back door. And thats only for now. Get ready, because the day is coming when pure whuffos are going to be banging on that door too. Thats when we are going to find out no one has any real control over this sport. And thats just the way Carl Boenish always said it should be.

If we want a more semi-private way to communicate among ourselves an E-Mail List would work, and might be pretty cool. But by the time these public board-type conversations get to that level someone goes and picks up a phone.

I know one thing for sure, the older I get, the more Im starting to sound like Space . . .

Nick D:-)
BASE 194

[imported_mknutson]

An email distribution group is easy to implement as I already have the software installed, but never got enough interest to keep adding people to it.
There, I see the ability to screen every person in the group before entering.
With the forum, if someone accidentily got access, they would have access to archives as well.
This could be bad.

As far as ratings and reputations, the _NEW_ forum has a fairly detailed reputation if people will just use it. But currently this Forum has reputations, but many people just don't use them. I think it will help heaps to get 80% of the users here to add ratings to everyone they read posting by. This just helps everyone here.

[imported_Tom Aiello]

>No Lock-Down . . .

Is that for all site discussions? Or just legal ones?

Do you think we ought to just bring the whole discussion into the clear? I'm not so sure about that.

--Tom Aiello
tbaiello@mac.com

[Nick_D]

Tom brought up to me the subject of, pure whuffos learning to BASE jump, so heres some "pure speculation" on my part . . .

I spent a lifetime teaching and jumping with first time jumpers. Together with the BASE and rigging knowledge I've gained over the years, and with a good boat crew, yes I, and many others, could static line first time jumpers off the right bridge all day long. Here's the progression.

Bridge First Jump Course:

Would be taught more along the lines of a skydiving tandem jump and last about 15 or 20 minutes. The AFF and S/L first jump courses in Skydiving are lengthy because we teach and drill on freefall and canopy control along with the many problems and malfunctions that are possible. (Here at the bridge we are using round parachutes and longer than normal static lines.) The first jump instruction would basically consist of using a calm Jumpmaster voice to say, "here's how you put on this flotation device, very good, now put your hands in your pockets and look at the horizon, very good, now just step off."

Most first timers are One Jump Charlies who only make that one. So by using rounds that end in water landings there really is no teaching involved. A crack boat crew could have them out of the water and into the boat before their underwear soaked through.

BASE Progression:

If we decide to continue progression more knowledge can be added as needed on subsequent jumps. Stable fall can be taught and evaluated on as many S/L/PCA jumps as the student needs(15-20?). After that, they could progress through hand held and stowed PC jumps, square parachutes, and eventually onto landings on hard ground. Now this wouldn't work downtown at the Flat Iron Building, but it would work on any medium height bridge (not too high, not too low) over navigable water.

Now here's the kicker. Somebody, and maybe somebody with no parachuting background at all, is eventually going to realize there is a market for throwing college kids off objects with parachutes. The carnage that follows may give rise to more folks calling for more regulations and bans and BASE jumping, as we know it, might change forever. The sport could be driven back underground and that's where I'll make my fortune because I saved all those black Jolly Roger flags and I'll be selling them all back to you.

I'm afraid the above scenario might only be avoided if we, the BASE community, do start flicking college students first and set the standard.

So, what's it worth to said college student when they can lean into someones ear and whisper, "yes, I BASE jump."

I'd say about five hundred bucks . . .

Nick D:-)
BASE 194

[K]

Hi Mick and everyone-

Well, first of all, I'm completely taken aback by the fascist trend I see emerging ever more strongly in our society, and I rebel against it at every turn. Moderating and policing our Board, while necessary to weed out the flaming bs and freaky diatribes of the unbalanced, also rubs me the wrong way. I see BASE as one of the last true freedoms in our country, and I hate to see it become regulated in any way, even in discussing it amongst ourselves. At the same time that I revere freedom of speech, I also see the need for us to police ourselves to avoid policing by an authoritative entity not in our control. As long as we control ourselves, especially in the public eye, we can possibly (hopefully) avoid external control.

To me, this means cracking down on the dummies that don't know or don't care about the BASE Ethics that any mentor worth his salt is teaching to the newbie. The dorks that litter, grafitti, break locks, jump sacred sites in broad daylight or otherwise expose BASE sites should be (IMHO) flamed soundly, hopefully to bring them back into line with the image we wish to portray to the public. It's been said that gathering BASE jumpers is like herding cats, and I've had that experience, but what I would like to see is BASE jumpers united under our code of ethics that would show the public and the authorities a group of respectful sportsman that only want to enjoy their sport without interference or penalty. Of course, any type of organization will inherently stifle some of the freedom, but if we're attempting to make BASE more publicly acceptable and less penalized, we may have to make that choice. I see the BASE Board as the one place that we can "get together", so to speak, challenge people's choices, teach each other better ways, forward the sport as a whole by sharing our individual experiences.

The days of BASE in the closet are quickly coming to an end, (sorry, Moe!), and it's up to us as a group to decide how our "coming out" is going to evolve. (Poor Donk, trying in his own way to accomplish this, only to get completely burned in Kansas City). I realize that what I'm saying here isn't directly answering the question of how the BASE Board should or shouldn't be moderated and edited, but how we deal with the Board is an indication of how we want to handle the expose of our sport in general. I truly wish that we didn't bicker, squabble, flame, and fight with each other so much here. We are a miniscule slice of humanity that enjoy an exhilarating and freeing activity, and we are all brothers and sisters. Outsiders come to the BASE Board and see egotistical maniacs attacking each other verbally for this and that. Not quite the image of a group that is going to gain any type of acceptance from the general public.

"Stupid police...why can't they just let a guy have some fun? I often wonder why people are so threatened by BASE jumping. All I can figure is that people are so full of fear, and so reluctant to face and overcome it, that it makes them hate and fear those of us that do. Their own natural survival instinct is so aggravated by
watching us leap in complete freedom, they can't help but have an overwhelming sense of anger and outrage. While their feet are planted firmly on the ground, they see us taking our lives into our own hands and having immense fun in the process; to these
staid and practical humans, what we do is just plain wrong. They have to make us wrong, otherwise their safe and seemingly normal existence is diminished by our freedom and courage. Either we must be the ultimate in crazy or they are the dregs of boring..."

What we do on this Board is in reality what we do in the public eye. We think we're the only ones that read this or care, but we will come under more and more scrutiny with each passing day. Ultimately, I think each person here is responsible for the image they portray, and this image has an impact on BASE as a whole, and we shouldn't really need moderating or editing. But of course, that would be in a perfect world...

Never ask a frustrated writer on caffeine with a soapbox to offer their .02 cents.

Peace,
Karen
BASE#763

[imported_mknutson]

>I want to allow everyone to add their 2 cents about the BLiNC
>Forum rules.
>I am working on an official forum rules document, and want to
>know what everyone thinks should/should not be part of those
>rules.
>
>Please speak now, or forever hold your peace.
>

The biggest help to me would be a bullet list of general items that users should adhere to.

Any thoughts on bullet points?

[imported_Tom Aiello]

> Well, first of all, I'm completely taken aback by the fascist trend I see emerging...

> To me, this means cracking down on the dummies...

Who will do the cracking down? The aforementioned fascists, perhaps?

> what I would like to see is BASE jumpers united under our code of ethics...

And who determines the code of ethics? Again, the fascists?

........

I think the reason we are having this discussion is to try to figure out what our community holds as valuable parts of it's core ethics. And which parts are falling away.

So, is not naming sites one of the parts that is falling away?

What about requiring skydiving experience to learn BASE? Is that one of the parts that is falling away?

I do think that some basic rules of internet ettiquette, which are not part of our BASE community ethic, but rather part of our internet community ethic, are in order. And that those things address the "who reads this" issues.

On the BASE ethics? I'm curious to see which way we are developing. Perhaps Nick is right, and it's time to put the Jolly Roger in the closet for a few years.

Hmmm. Perhaps a poll...

--Tom Aiello
tbaiello@mac.com

[K]

>> Well, first of all, I'm completely taken aback by the
>fascist trend I see emerging...
>
>> To me, this means cracking down on the dummies...
>
>Who will do the cracking down? The aforementioned fascists,
>perhaps?

My point is that we should be policing ourselves to avoid policing from outside sources. When someone breaks a lock to get onto a building, that definitely hurts BASE as a whole and pisses the public off at us. If we tell a jumper to not do that in order to protect BASE, does that make us fascists? Perhaps, but I'd rather have Tom Aiello telling me "don't do that" than the police or a judge.
>
>> what I would like to see is BASE jumpers united under our
>code of ethics...
>
>And who determines the code of ethics? Again, the fascists?
>
We do, of course. This code of ethics is in place in is being taught by many jumpers such as Moe Viletto, Anne Helliwell and others. The jumpers that ignore these ethics or never knew them to begin with are the ones that get threatened with being tarred and feathered. As you rightly point out, the code of ethics is evolving, and we can and should manage this process with the eventual goal of public acceptance and freedom to jump.
>
K