I'm all for editting and warnings instead of deleting, but with warnings come more bannings when people ignore too many warnings and that's bound to happen here.
Recognized Member
I'm all for editting and warnings instead of deleting, but with warnings come more bannings when people ignore too many warnings and that's bound to happen here.
Hello Pika Art by Dr Unne ~~~ godhatesfraggles
The people who post spam might not even notice that you have deleted or edited their posts, so I can't see how that is supposed to act as a deterrent. And if they have noticed it, it probably would spur them on, if they are determined to make a name for themselves as a spammer.
What I'd do is look out for repeat offenders, and then PM them and say something like "It has come to our attention that you've been spamming a lot recently. Examples of this include X (link to post) Y (link to post) and Z (link to post). (Explanation as to why these are bad) We don't expect every post to be on topic, but please try not to go overboard like this in the future. Thanks."
That way the member knows for certain that what they've done is wrong, and also have seen which types of posts aren't acceptable and why. If they continue to do it, you give them a warning. And if they still continue, they deserve a little pink title.
I think this ties in with what Aaron said.Originally Posted by The Man
We've given some people like twenty warnings at Fool's Gold before banning them, and even then we lifted almost all our bans earlier this year. As long as what someone's doing isn't inherently destructive to the board and time-consuming to fix, I don't see why it's too much of a problem. At least, it wouldn't be with a large staff who could actually deal with problem users one-on-one. Some people just really don't understand why what they're doing is wrong, but if you explain it to them on a case-by-case basis they start to get it. I think with that approach you'd end up banning a lot less people.
The "lots of warnings" approach only works with small things like unentertaining spam or mild, debatable instances of flaming, obviously. If someone started calling the entire board racial slurs I'd be a lot less inclined to offer extra chances.
EoFF...more spam that FG? Hahahahahaha
Anyway, I don't think the size of the staff is the perceived problem here. I just think it's that most staffers are content to just delete posts time and again, and members don't even care anymore. "So what if I spam? The worst that can happen is a mod deletes my posts."
Recognized Member
Well, you see, that is one big difference here. Once we ban someone, we don't turn around and then unban them so once they're gone, they're gone. And twenty warnings is far too many and far too much work. But it sounds good to me. With warnings instead of deletions it will be much easier to clean the place up.
Hello Pika Art by Dr Unne ~~~ godhatesfraggles
go read threads in the lounge, or general gaming, or ff1-4. There's places around here to avoid spam. Gen Chat goes in cycles, trust me there's plenty of times when it's dead. And when you're gone for a week or more, don't even try to catch up. You didn't miss anything anyway. Just start going with new threads. If you want the content to be more to your liking, write more of the content.
Raistlin: You haven't visited Fool's Gold in seven months, so your perception of the way the boards actually stack up to one another right now (or, more accurately, a week ago, when the poll was taken) can be considered accurate how?
eest et al: The problem is that General Chat is unreadable right now. I suppose the other forums are largely okay, albeit rife with the "lolz cefiroth rulz wth teh masamuem :smoek:" form of half-assed replies that Fool's Gold has taken upon itself to ridicule unceasingly, but those forums are not what this thread was created to talk about, and to be honest, I haven't looked in them much and don't care about them much. I would submit that if the general chat section to any forum is not interesting, the entire forum is not interesting. Very few people even bother looking beyond the general chat section of a message board unless they're just visiting the board for help, in which case it's questionable as to whether they'll stick around once they've got their answer in the first place. Eyeson is by far the most active board I visit these days, but it's just about gotten itself placed into the same bin as AdventChildren.net, which is the "overwhelmingly active and overwhelmingly unreadable" bin. Which is a shame, because it used to be one of those "refresh-every-five-seconds" boards.
I guess you can shrug this off as "well it's only a few people," but... a brief rereading of this thread suggests that most of the people who have been posting it have actually agreed more or less with the gist of the original post, except Raistlin, who can always be counted upon to provide a dissenting opinion. When Dixie and the readership of Fool's Gold are telling you off for having a spammy General Chat section, and you're a board that's theoretically supposed to be less spammy than Fool's Gold, it sounds like you have an overwehelmingly spammy general chat board. If you want to go on allowing the collective IQ of the board to be dragged through the mud, feel free, but I, for one, won't be participating anymore if the recent trend of uninteresting spam continues.
edit: I should also point out that the last thing I want to see result from my suggestions is more bannings. EoFF already has more than enough of those as it is, for my liking.
Last edited by The Man; 08-15-2005 at 02:37 AM.
man, there are some stupid threads in there right now. Now I challenge everyone who has posted in this thread to go make a new thread in gen chat today. If you want good threads you have to make them.
this is true, but to stem the flow of stupid threads you also have to close them. Or just split out the uninteresting spam posts, which amounts to much the same thing.
As soon as I come up with an intelligent idea for a GC thread, I'll post one.
My my, touchy, aren't we? I see some things haven't changed.Raistlin: You haven't visited Fool's Gold in seven months, so your perception of the way the boards actually stack up to one another right now (or, more accurately, a week ago, when the poll was taken) can be considered accurate how?
That poll(or at least, what the members thought of the poll) was probably comparing EoFF GC to FG GC. Since EoFF has aload more activity, it stands to reason that there would be more spam.
However, there is little to no spam at EoFF outside of GC and Feedback(with less in Feedback now than a while ago). FG has a spam forum, and I know some of the members there - any thread anywhere could get spammed up.
There's no way in hell there's a higher percentage of spam at EoFF than FG.
Unreadable? By what standards? The rest of the board seems to be able to read it just fine.eest et al: The problem is that General Chat is unreadable right now.
Most of the threads are crap, yes. They're not against the rules, they're just crap. I don't care enough about EoFF GC to make good threads to try and get better discussion. The spam is a bit much, but the staff said they'd work on it. Just use the Warn button.
And Aaron, who can always be counted upon to have a differing opinion.I guess you can shrug this off as "well it's only a few people," but... most of the people who have been posting in this thread have actually agreed more or less with the gist of the original post, except Raistlin, who can always be counted upon to provide a dissenting opinion.
Last edited by Shoeberto; 08-15-2005 at 02:40 AM. Reason: Tsk.
Actually, the poll left the question rather open-ended. The exact question, I believe, was "Which board is currently spammier, EoFF or FG?" but the exact wording is open to question as the host of FG does not seem to be behaving at the moment. It would stand to reason, therefore, that the members were comparing the whole of both boards' content. And given from the fact that the percentage of newbies in Fool's Gold's gaming forums posting the kind of content that Big D's current profile scheme is made to ridicule is very low indeed, it doesn't entirely seem misguided to me.My my, touchy, aren't we? I see some things haven't changed.
That poll(or at least, what the members thought of the poll) was probably comparing EoFF GC to FG GC. Since EoFF has a
However, there is little to no spam at EoFF outside of GC and Feedback(with less in Feedback now than a while ago). FG has a spam forum, and I know some of the members there - any thread anywhere could get spammed up.
There's no way in hell there's a higher percentage of spam at EoFF than FG.
Feel free to question the results, but be aware that in doing so you are questioning more than just myself and therefore you cannot dismiss them with a simple "lolz it's aaron again" response.
Judging from the evidence of this thread, I'd have to say you're probably wrong.Unreadable? By what standards? The rest of the board seems to be able to read it just fine.
I seem to remember you arguing last week that users shouldn't have to use the warn button in World Events; the staff should fix the better part of the crap themselves. If that should apply to the World Events forum then surely it should also apply to General Chat. Just a thought.Most of the threads are crap, yes. They're not against the rules, they're just crap. I don't care enough about EoFF GC to make good threads to try and get better discussion. The spam is a bit much, but the staff said they'd work on it. Just use the Warn button.
Ah yes, just because I provide sarcastic disagreement with you I have a stick up my ass. I, too, am glad to see some things haven't changed at all.And Aaron, who can always be counted upon to have a stick up his ass.
Hi kids, take the personal attacks somewhere else. Thanks.
Well, either they thought it was EoFF GC versus FG GC - in which case my reply is "no duh," or they're just idiots. With some of those guys, I think it's a coin toss which it is.Actually, the poll left the question rather open-ended. The exact question, I believe, was "Which board is currently spammier, EoFF or FG?" but the exact wording is open to question as the host of FG does not seem to be behaving at the moment.
Feel free to question the results, but be aware that you're questioning more than just myself and you cannot dismiss that with a simple "lolz it's aaron again" response.
The staff's point is that there's a thousand members posting in GC, and 3 or 4 consistently complaining here. And some of the complaining is about the crap threads, which the staff can't do anything about.Judging from the evidence of this thread, I'd have to disagree with your assessment.
Do you think these arguments through in context, or just wherever they seem to fit? I said that when the entire staff said "I don't check EotW anymore because it sucks." I was saying that the staff cannot depend solely on the members to keep track of flames, etc. All of the mods read GC.I seem to remember you arguing last week that users shouldn't have to use the warn button in World Events; the staff should catch the better part of the crap themselves. If that should apply to the World Events forum then surely it should also apply to General Chat. Just a thought.
Some of us want that stick up our asses.
Hahahahahahahahaha
Posting Permissions
