NitrateVille.com

Am I the only one noticing this?

It appears that there are so many silent film groups on Facebook these days, that I can't even begin to name all of the ones that I'm subscribed to.

Assuming (and I could be wrong) that most of the admins of these groups read this Discussion Board, I have to ask is there anyway you all could get together and consolidate things a bit? There appears to be a lot of overlap and very often I find multiple posts in my FB feed where someone has posted exactly the same thing. Heck, I've become hesitant to subscribe to more groups because of this (for lack of a better word) flood.

I'm enthused that FB provides an easy, ready-made facility to reach people and I find it great to post pictures and videos and whatnot. It certainly augments the discussions that I and others come to read on Nitrateville.

Not a biggie. Just wondering if things could be improved...

Thoughts?

Steve

As a subscriber to five Facebook silent film groups, I heartily agree. There are several Clara Bow FB groups also.

The problem is that some people want to be "master of their domain", so they would rather run their own group than be a member of another group. The Silent Film Lounge was originally about silent films, but the admin also like the 1930s so she changed the name. After a dust-up with some nasty trolls, she quit the group and handed it over to others.

"The Silents Majority Goes Wayback" group is run by Diane MacEntyre of the former Silents Majority website.

At least it is heartening that several of the groups have thousands of members. While all of them are not active, it is heartening to know that there is still an audience for silent films and silent film history.

silentfilm wrote:As a subscriber to five Facebook silent film groups, I heartily agree. There are several Clara Bow FB groups also.

I moderate one myself (Nita's been very quiet lately). I had to give up on quite a few of the silent film/movie groups, for the reasons stated--I'd see the same photos repeatedly and it clogged up my newsfeed. There isn't really much substantive discussion of films on FB, either. Well, except for when Louie confesses something egregious, then we all start nattering. I use FB for other things than film, too. Cute kitten photos, for instance.

Steve,

You propose a reasonable suggestion. I'm one of the administrators of these various FB groups. Mine has the catchy name, Silent Films Today, and we have over 1,000 members. I host another group called Lon Chaney Man of 1,000 Faces and has over 700. In both I avoid the same old photos that people post off of Google. Much of what is posted by myself and others are rare or at least not the usual run of the mill images that populate other groups. Of course, we post colorized photos, 3-D photos, and at times even colorized 3-D photos. These are hugely popular, I might add.

But I have no pride of authorship and I'm delighted when others post to keep things current (so I don't have to). That said, I believe that SFT and LCM1,000F are different from the other silent film groups in the sense that I am seeking the younger folks, the newbies, the neophytes, to foster their interest in silents because they are the future of this field, not us (at least not me at 64). The posters tend to be quite knowledgeable but our membership is in a learning mode.

So at the moment I don't see either of my FB groups combining with other groups that are composed of fans who are already authorities on the subject. That's not our audience.

I have no interest in Facebook, and this discussion strikes me as a bit meta in any case... proposing a venue for talking about venues for talking about silents makes me want to go sh! However, from a sociological viewpoint, this sort of fracturing looks pretty inevitable to me; between the individuals who go off to form their own group for what seem to me like good reasons (this board is getting too diffuse and those of us who wish to discuss technical issues without having to look at the illustrated Charles Puffy/Snooky the Humanzee/Mary Sue porn) to be happier elsewhere to those who leave in a huff because their illustrated Charles Puffy/Snooky the Humanzee/Mary Sue fanfic is not getting the respect it deserves....

These are natural and in many respects desirable, I suppose. The problem is that the abandoned groups (when for example, the Hughie Mack/Jean the Vitagraph Dog/Mary Sue fanfictioneers are thrown out of the.... well, you get the idea) leave these corpses on the Internet. Which will remain even should these groups merge.

Bob

Facebook Groups are not all bad. I've helped people learn about lost films, Theda Bara and pointed them to screenings in their area, just in the last couple of days.

silentfilm wrote:Facebook Groups are not all bad. I've helped people learn about lost films, Theda Bara and pointed them to screenings in their area, just in the last couple of days.

They also do a good job of connecting people and disseminating news reports rapidly. I've had good luck on FB putting people with questions in touch with people with answers. And forwarding cute kitten photos.

Frederica wrote:

silentfilm wrote:Facebook Groups are not all bad. I've helped people learn about lost films, Theda Bara and pointed them to screenings in their area, just in the last couple of days.

They also do a good job of connecting people and disseminating news reports rapidly. I've had good luck on FB putting people with questions in touch with people with answers. And forwarding cute kitten photos.

Ditto and I moderate 2 FB groups, Classy Vintage Hollywood which has a small membership. Nice peeps and we post mostly pics, commemorate birthday anniversarys and such, and the We Never Forget Rudolph Valentino group (which is an offshoot of the old mostly defunct Yahoo Group). Not much drama on either group, I am happy to say.

I limit myself to only a few other groups simply because I do not have the time to post/join/play in all the sandboxes. I do more lurking thank anything else.

rudyfan wrote: Ditto and I moderate 2 FB groups, Classy Vintage Hollywood which has a small membership. Nice peeps and we post mostly pics, commemorate birthday anniversarys and such, and the We Never Forget Rudolph Valentino group (which is an offshoot of the old mostly defunct Yahoo Group). Not much drama on either group, I am happy to say.

I limit myself to only a few other groups simply because I do not have the time to post/join/play in all the sandboxes. I do more lurking thank anything else.

Goodreads is sort of a Facebook for readers, which interconnects with Facebook. If you're not interested in joining a group (they have book groups dedicated to every possible sub-sub-sub-genre), they have a recommend button, so you can recommend books to friends who might be interested. (Even cat books.) Their book recommendation algorithm has kept me pretty much buried for the last 2-3 years. Yes, I know it's another front in Amazon's bid to take over the world, and I don't care.

The problem I've found with the facebook groups is that the posts often consist of:

1. recycled photos
2. people complaining that their photos of any actress showing more than a little flesh has been taken down
3. admin re-stating rules about no. 2
4. argumentative people who refuse to accept that there can be more than one opinion on any film/topic/director/actor.

Quite why the flesh issue arises I haven't quite worked out. These are groups about silent film, and these photos are part of that history, and they're hardly pornographic. It's also highly unlikely that kids are going to be visiting silent film sites - and if they do I doubt they are going to be shocked by a half-naked breast.

As for the recycling of photos, well that's an issue that can't really be stopped - and it needs to be remembered than many on these groups are seeing those photos for the first time because they are new or because they are casual fans of silent film rather than people with a deeper knowledge.

As for the arguments, well these seem to happen anyway sadly - whether it be facebook groups of forums such as this one. But it certainly was the same old people causing the same old arguments when I used to frequent the groups.

I'm not sure there's a way around much of it unless even more photos are banned or people are banned or both - or so many rules and regs are introduced that nobody can post anything. They are what they are and they serve a purpose, that's for sure - but I wonder how many people remain active members for long without getting bored and no longer becoming involved in the discussions etc.