Tripleshot Cycling

Some on the board are leaning toward using this juncture to take the forum private (ie. changing admin permissions so members would need to register with the forum in order to view posts, not just to draft and submit their own posts.)

The benefit of continuing to have a protected, internal place to discuss things freely likely outweighs the slight admin hurdle of requiring members to register and sign in, and the loss of our forum as a marketing tool for curious non-members (especially given our new use of social media.) We'd likely only check membership for new forum registrations.

If you have thoughts about this, please share here, thanks! And please vote by noon on Sunday, March 20... (you must be a registered user of the forum and signed in to be able to vote.)

First, thanks to the exec for thinking about this. I enjoy the forum, and found it developed my sense of the club. For eg, the annual discussions about ride etiquette seemed repetitive, until I realized the fact we COULD talk about it every year was the actual benefit, even if the issues and solutions weren’t new. That was kinda profound for me, and has only become more-so in the age of algorithms that deliberately provoke.

So yes to keeping it. I would like to hear pros and cons of public vs private before voting. I can see we need a place to chat amongst ourselves, but also like that we could be consulted by others.

Thank you Management for continuing to think constructively about efficient communication among members. My vote is to keep the forum as is.

I don't think the quality of our communication will improve by requiring registration to "read." Rather, I think there is some evidence to show that writing improves when the writer thinks it is accessible to all. I assume that the club will continue to remind me that this is a family friendly site and that moderation will be equally onerous in either scenario.

My devices generally keep my login info so that is only a very small inconvenience. Nevertheless, aiming for fewer obstacles to communication is always better in my mind.

Either way, I look forward to being able to parse the posts (that will move from Spond to the forum) based on my current priorities and promise to now start reading all posts on Spond.

Thank you again for all the time and energy you devote to make this club fantastic .

Mikael

Wise, helpful words from two of our wisest and helpful-est! I'm hopeful that if enough people share perspectives, as these two have, members will have a full accounting of the costs and benefits of the proposed change.

Thinking about things a bit further, we've had a few instances of spammy DMs from questionable users, and there have been some illiterate and scammy posts selling crap. But I don't know of any serious privacy violations like identity theft etc. There were concerns at one point about discussing VCL race tactics on the forum and whether other clubs/teams benefited from that access.

One observation is that our substantial growth has increased relative anonymity for everyone in the club. Probably none of us knows all of us anymore. This has certain impacts. It may make it harder to rely on familiarity to guard against just anyone showing up to events discussed on the forum. It also means some members won't change their approach to posting on the forum whether or not public access is restricted, since we're big enough that even posting in Spond feels "public".

With Spond so entrenched as it is, I doubt that the club membership is now going to go in significant numbers to the Forum. Why not leave things as they are now and see how things play out. Throwing up barriers to the Forum is not helpful to get buy-in, at least in my humble, but obviously correct, estimation . Besides which, I don't remember "speaking freely" as ever being an issue before with the forum. Also, some folks would presumably like to sell shite on the Forum to the broader community. How is that going to work if we go dark?

As Lister has wisely pointed out/suggested, I too will hold off on my vote until gaining from other’s perspective (but hopefully not miss my chance to vote by some distraction!).

For me, this feels like an administrative issue that won’t have a huge impact on the club’s well earned personality or culture. So, if it’s being recommended by our Executive (I’m not saying that’s the case here but rather if it were - the distinction is important) I would very likely vote just to support the recommendations of the Exec. But I don’t believe that’s the case here - at least yet.

Is there not a way for TS to offer the public (and members) access to either a part of the website that remains public (eg. Buy and sell … general announcements; rides; behavioural - sort of code of conduct - expectations of riders and ride leaders; etc) while the more important or delicate conversations could be managed privately? And while I personally will not be joining FaceBook or Twitter anytime soon, are these not examples of more common places the public and prospective new members would look to for information about us? Does TS not already have a presence in those locations that could be maintained at reasonable cost or effort?

While I don’t intend to add administrative burden to volunteers or the club, could we not even consider having 2 websites - one public, one private - where all but the sensitive stuff gets managed internally. I guess if it ever really came down to it, the club does have access and manner to reach out to each member individually as per our profiles … DMs, cell #s, personal email addresses etc.?

So far I’m inclined to vote in favour of this proposed change, but would welcome more perspectives to help shape my decision.

Rolf, just following up James's post.

I voted "no", but it's a soft no. Personally, I think the Board is trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. That said, I have my trust in you and the Board and I'm sure we'll all be happy with whatever. All I would ask is that you not put us in a position where we have to be jumping back and forth between platforms to keep up with the Club. Nowadays, my go-to place is Spond, and unless there's a link in Spond that takes me to the Forum, I never go there.

Fondly yours, JT

Rolf, not to be a pain, but if the club exec has indeed discussed this at some length, I'd like to know how those wise and thoughtful people came to the leaning that taking the forum private may be in our collective best interests.

I'm leaning toward status quo myself, but am definitely open to hearing any sound rationale for privatizing. I'm guessing it's at least partially around a general desire for more "privacy" online, but I also suspect there's more to it.

If you're all worded-out for now (heavens, that'll be the day!), maybe another exec member can enlighten us as to the pros for privatization.

Claire and JT raise good points.

In my “other life” for the last 16 years I’ve belonged to a 4200+ member National Professional Association and it is not uncommon for us to have the opportunity to vote on a range of issues 5 - 10 times a year (including the election of reps to our volunteer boards). Administrative issues that get forwarded to us in a relatively blahzay manner, earn a very low voter turnout whereas issues pertaining to contract negotiations and such not only get more dissemination and publicity but often achieve a 90% + voter turnout - understandably so.

Often (but not always) our Association will say, we recommend this manner of voting but still need your approval. We also always have the option to “abstain” which for me personally, means I have full confidence in my reps to make the decision on my behalf and/or don’t feel informed enough to make a judgement on the matter at hand.

I personally almost overlooked the Spond post that included the “announcement” of a vote on this issue that is scheduled to close on March 20th … I think we can all see how many Spond members have even paused to be recorded as having seen the post so if voter turnout is important to here, there are still ways to achieve it.

Worded out? What's that mean? In no particular order and in responsive stream-of-consciousness:

1. The board has not discussed this issue at length, nor given it a ton of thought. So I have no more to offer than what's already here! Some directors discussed it at a meeting earlier this week and agreed that IF we were to make this change, NOW-ish would be a good time to do it (ie. BEFORE we try to steer a whole bunch of new eyeballs back to these soothing shades of blue.) Some of us also thought it sounded like a good idea. Others may completely disagree with any changes (and I encourage them to pipe up!) But I'm sure we're ALL appreciating the deep thinking going on here. The outcome at this point is far from certain...
2. I've already tried to set out some of the reasons to make a change. Some of our members are sensitive about having even their first and last names being associated with virtually anything online. I'd like to respect that. The value of privacy is something that's sometimes hard to define or identify until its lost. In the past, we've listed member names as attending a special event and clearly indicated when they'll be out of their house for a day-trip, for example. Over the years some of us have shared a TON of information on the forum and it's easy to imagine all this personal data being put to nefarious use. (But maybe I'm just trained to expect the worst in people.) Privacy legislation also puts various obligations on the club to protect members' personal info — but I'm not getting any further into that right now.
3. I will point out again that while the forum used to be the only dynamic way for non-members and the general public to get a sense of who we are and what we do (with apologies to our perfectly sufficient but static website), over the past two years we've developed a strong and vibrant online presence through our social media accounts that gives prospective members a vastly improved idea of Tripleshot Cycling, replete with pictures and video, sounds and colours etc.!
4. While the feedback and discussion here provide helpful input to guide the club in this and other decisions, doing a quick poll of membership on a topic likely to elicit contrary opinions contributes other kinds of value. In the interest of transparency, here are some of my other motivations in posting this poll.
   1. It encourages new members who haven't used the forum before to get registered as forum users so they can participate.
   2. It's giving us some key data at a key moment in time. Something Spond does that the forum doesn't is give you a viewing number, ie. how many people have seen a post. In contrast, while the forum indicates post "views", it counts every time a page is opened — ie. every time a member visits the page, no matter how many times they may return. So the forum's "total views" is a misleading stat if you want to understand how many members you're reaching with your messaging. From the vote total on Sunday, we'll have a rough idea of how many members have made the effort to either sign up for or return to the forum and engage. This will be essential in establishing a baseline for our future communications planning.
   3. It's getting some of our most prolific communicators back in the habit of hitting their forum bookmarks and burning up their keyboards a bit. (Tell me you aren't feeling a little nostalgic nestling back into this c. 2002 technology?!)
5. Dear, sweet, irked Johnny. If you haven't been picking up the club's protracted apology for indeed suggesting members "jump back and forth between platforms" for the time being, then I'll make it more explicit: we're sorry! In mitigation, it hopefully won't be forever as we're still looking for that unicorn of a platform that would address all our ride-planning and communications needs in one place. We continue to welcome any and all suggestions of the same! Also, our intention for now is to always cross-post club announcements to both the forum and Spond, meaning you should always be able to get the basics from just source.
6. Finally, I love James' idea of going mostly private on club discussions but keeping certain parts of the forum (like classified ads) open to the public. While I haven't confirmed the admin controls would allow it, I deeply regret not first researching this and then including it as an option in the voting. It's this sort of obvious compromise that can completely sink engagement in a completely binary poll.

I know this discussion is about privatizing the forum but I have to link it to Spond. I have liked the ride sign-up feature within Spond vs a sorting in the parking lot format. I tend to like to know what I’m getting into before I show up. For gravel it has provided a place to set a route ahead of time which is important. I think it is also better for new club members who don’t have a known network of like minded ride partners that can unintentionally form in any club regardless of efforts to counter this. I also like the one stop shopping that Spond currently provides. Checking Spond and a forum would be a pain. Conversations will likely continue to take place in both locations so there is a good chance of missing something. I suspect pre-set chat groups can be established within Spond as exist in the current forum. I understand however there may be an issue with retention and searching within Spond (?).

Now, if the forum does became the venue for discussions, I don’t personally have any issue with keeping it public. How private is a forum with 300+ members. I may be a bit more careful on what I post as far as personal travel plans, etc. I used the forum to get a sense of the culture of the club that led to my ultimately joining. My first ride was a Great Trail Ride I saw being discussed and kinda snuck into. Heck, there were even club members kissing on that ride (I’ll let you figure that one out). What a close knit group! Somehow the irreverence and pattern of digital images on the gravel forum spoke to me and I haven’t looked back

If there is a public facing and private aspect there should be something on the public site that shows current updates and demonstrates it isn’t dormant.

Heartwarming, Andy!

Andy B. wrote: ↑Wed Mar 16, 2022 5:43 pm I suspect pre-set chat groups can be established within Spond as exist in the current forum.

Unfortunately, they can't. On Spond we're stuck with one uncategorizable, unthreadable, unsearchable, monolithic series of Posts, presented in an unchangeable LIFO format. Go try to find a Post from as recently as Christmas! You'll realize how much information we're effectively flushing forever. It's one of the big reasons to come back to the forum.

As for the kissers, it was caught on film! https://vimeo.com/452073880/f2a1a7ace3

Hey Rolfster, thanks for the input but are you sure you don't want to change professions?

As a new member, but a slightly longer time "watcher from the sidelines", I appreciated the publicness of the forum and I'm certain that I wouldn't have joined if it was not visible to non-members. I, too, like to know what I'm getting into before I sign up. Not only can you get a sense of the culture of the group, but you can also estimate if your skills match the skills of any of the groups.

Yes, the website has a description of the group levels, but it doesn't offer the same qualitative information as an unstructured discussion and there's no opportunity for serendipitous information being shared on a static and formal website. Now that I am a member and I have signed up for the forum, this is no longer a factor in my consideration. Yet, the need to sign in every time (for yet another website that day) will definitely dampen my enthusiasm for using the forum.

On the other hand, I can also appreciate a desire for privacy, especially for those who are in public-facing jobs. Those who are concerned have the opportunity to use a handle on the forum that is not obviously linked to their name, correct?

Yup, apparently there is nothing in TS not documented on video.

ABSTAIN

Please show my vote in the Abstain column, Thx.

I voted for the status quo.. But it is a pretty soft vote. I don't discount the privacy benefit of a closed forum. Although as others have pointed out with 300 members some discretion is still needed in posting even to a "private" forum.

I did read some forum posts before joining and it did give me a bit of a feel for the club, which was nice.

I'm so old, I remember when Lister posted here more than Rolf. I love the forum. Yes, it uses tech from the time of dial-up 300 baud modems, but it's so valuable. I hope it lives on.

As for private? I don't think it is necessary. I like the idea of people finding the forum, reading along, then deciding to join the club.

Spond? It's fine. It's likely here to stay in some form.

Can we use both? I hope so. I see John's point about jumping back and forth. Not ideal, but maybe we will come to some sort of agreement on what goes where?

Eric

Abstain.
I’m for a public viewable website with a members only section.

Thanks very much to everyone who voted in this poll — and especially to those who shared their thoughtful input above. We're all the richer for it!

There are no immediate plans to change the status quo. However, the board continues to discuss the issue and explore the consequences of both of these choices and the availability of compromises (e.g. only making certain threads private and keeping some public.)