|
Post by Woodster on Feb 1, 2009 11:06:33 GMT
Seeing as the new site is now staring to be built, I felt that it is time be addressed the issue of the rules of the forum. This is your chance to have a say in what you think should be contained in the rule list for the new forum. You can find the current Rules of the Forum here. Perhaps they just need amending, or perhaps some of them need throwing out altogether and replaced. Either way, we're aiming for rules that are less subjective and more objective, and are clearly worded so that everyone (both members and staff alike) know exactly what is expected of them. I will say, however, that I will be getting the final say in this, so any stupid or abusive rules are a definite no-go.
|
|
Kisara Strife
Turk
AVALANCHE Rebel
Because he can't be dead ... T_T
Posts: 2,576
|
Post by Kisara Strife on Feb 1, 2009 12:48:26 GMT
I think I said this to Costa, but I suggested that it should be made compulsory for new members to post in the newbie thread before anywhere else. This would avoid any trolls who only join to argue and create discontentment amongst other members. If this were to happen, then rule 6 would be a moot point.
|
|
|
Post by YACCBS on Feb 1, 2009 15:41:16 GMT
If we implement the Pit, might want to make it clear that while "anything goes" 'anything' does not include illegal material. Probably unnecessary, but that way if something illegal DOES get posted the GA as a site can not be held responsible and all the blame goes to the user.
|
|
|
Post by T. Costa on Feb 1, 2009 19:04:40 GMT
There would, of course, be a few rules for the Pit. At the forums I used to frequent the rules went something along the lines of (No actual threatening of people - venting about something is fine, but saying I AM GOING TO COME TO YOUR HOUSE AND MURDER YOU IN YOUR SLEEEP is not cool. NO ILLEGAL STUFF - We WILL cooperate in the event of a subpoena from a higher court. WHAT HAPPENS IN THE PIT STAYS IN THE PIT. If you allow a Pit argument to leak out into the rest of the forums you will be suspended, and if it happens again, you will be banned). Something along those lines seems okay to me, although you are all free to suggest individual rules you feel ought to be implemented within and without the Pit (which I think we've decided is going to be called the Northern Crater in keeping with the theme of FF7).
Keep in mind that if we are incapable of being mature about the Pit section of the forums we will lose it, so think over your rule suggestions very carefully.
I, personally, liked the idea of allowing members a chance to edit their own posts before we did. I think that a one-hour time frame is a little bit unfair considering we are scattered about the globe from each other. I think we need to discuss what IS a fair time frame.
|
|
Kisara Strife
Turk
AVALANCHE Rebel
Because he can't be dead ... T_T
Posts: 2,576
|
Post by Kisara Strife on Feb 1, 2009 20:14:07 GMT
If a person has logged off, then how about sending a PM saying " We ask you to please edit your post the next time you log-in.". The register at the end normally tells if a person has been on-line in the last 24 hours. If a person logs-on and doesn't change their post, then the mods can step in.
|
|
|
Post by T. Costa on Feb 1, 2009 20:16:59 GMT
That seems like a fairly reasonable thing, except for people who log in once in a great while (For instance, Ronin - not that he's really done much to deserve modding, but still). I think we need to set a reasonable time frame that isn't subjective, but objective. If everyone has the same chance, no one can complain, you know?
|
|
|
Post by Bianka on Feb 2, 2009 5:33:55 GMT
Also, if the person tends to log in invisibly, then we don't see the last time they were online. Ever notice some posters never show up in the "Active Users in the Past 24 hours"? Now I don't know if Wood or Sai can see their identities, but I sure can't. =O Then again, we can always see if the message was read or unread. Just thought of that, hehe. But like Tasha said, some members don't log in all that often. Can't let a steaming pile of mod-worthiness linger for too, too long. Aside from that, I'm mostly bumping the thread so we can see more suggestions. Anyone? =)
|
|
|
Post by Sai on Feb 2, 2009 23:16:11 GMT
Admins are able to see whether or not a person is invisible (I'm pointing a big thumb at you, Good Mengde), so that's an answer to that question. As for a few rules, I think that those who don't post /something/ within a 90 day period should have their accounts deleted. All they do is take up space. If the person wants an account, so be it. I would have nothing against them making another account later if their first one was deleted.
-Sai
|
|
Renolvr
SOLDIER First Class
I've decided that some things are worth the pain.
Posts: 1,312
|
Post by Renolvr on Feb 2, 2009 23:24:20 GMT
That seems fair enough really - while I understand that people have their own personal problems and such to deal with in life, I also understand that accounts that are not being used for a prolonged period of time simply use up space. I see this from both sides, a friend of mine on this has since gone through about three or four accounts. Reason being, between work and personal matters and happenings lately, she's managed to forget her password, to which I had to ask Sai to ask Pied to send her a reminder email or delete the account ( ). Then one of her kids deleted the email that had her password in it, so she ended up making a new one, and I really dread to wonder what she's done this time >_<! I also want to second the pit thing. Whatever's said in the pit stays in the pit. And anything goes within reason.
|
|
|
Post by Mengde on Feb 3, 2009 15:52:40 GMT
I just run in invisible mode because I like my privacy. =p
My big concern: the language filters. Let's be realistic, here. They're about as effective at preventing bad language as a please and thank you. If I really want to post something naughty, all I have to do is throw some random tags in there. "Spotted thingy, sir?" It's easy. I say do away with them altogether and if people don't want their virgins eyes assaulted we can put in a rule asking to refrain from harsh language.
EDIT: Apparently spotted thingy isn't filtered. Um. "sleeper of Bablyon?"
EDIT: Oh, these filters are even lamer than I thought. It didn't catch spotted dick (see what I did there?) when it had a comma next to it, and it let Whore (omg!) of Babylon slip by because the first word was next to a quotation mark.
|
|
|
Post by T. Costa on Feb 3, 2009 19:49:50 GMT
One thing we mods are in a discussion over is what words should and should not be included in the swear filter on the new forums. I don't particularly like it, but the fact of the matter is that we do have a great deal of young people who peruse these forums and I don't want to hear from an enraged parent. Here and now, Proboards would be at fault if a parent became upset over content; when we take over the hosting, since I am hosting, *I* will be at fault. Frankly, I can't afford a lawsuit because Little Precious Suzie saw something that might damage her delicate psyche.
Suggestions would be useful. Obviously, the F-bomb is going to be included (for extremely obvious reasons - there's really no need to be using that word on these forums except, perhaps, in the Pit). Other than that, I'm open to suggestion, and I think most of the mods are too. I am trying to find a workaround to discover if I can exclude certain sections of the new forums from the swear-filter - I think the Pit would be an appropriate place to swear, since it IS the venting forum.
I dislike swear-filters; I find them ridiculous. As I explained to my 15-year-old stepdaughter the other evening, I swore when I was a child, and my parents gave up the good fight when I was about 14 or so, instead expecting that I would develop the necessary tact to tell when it was appropriate to swear and when it was not. I would love to give everyone else on these forums that chance, but the fact of the matter is, it's hard to do so when so many have proven themselves untrustworthy in the past (no one in particular, but I've been hanging out here for over a year and I've seen at least 20 members abuse admin leniency).
I don't necessarily want to force politeness, but rather tact. The public areas of the forum, the ones guests can view, don't need that sort of language. The private, just-GA sections, are a different matter altogether, and that is what this thread is here to discuss.
|
|
piratesrox
SOLDIER Third Class
The use of words expressing more than that of their literal intention! Now that. Is. Irony.
Posts: 712
|
Post by piratesrox on Feb 3, 2009 21:52:25 GMT
Regarding swears, I think you guys need to understand that WANK is a swear word here.
And there will be British users. And Wank is considered as bad as F*ck here.
So when saying a "fiction wank", rephrasing will be needed.
|
|
|
Post by T. Costa on Feb 4, 2009 0:18:21 GMT
A good friend of mine from London insists that "wank" is a fairly mild swear word in Great Britain, on par with "damn," "crap," or "hell" over here in the US. However, the admins will confer on that subject.
|
|
|
Post by sarcastinator on Feb 4, 2009 0:18:26 GMT
Yes, but most Brits are a lot less uptight than Average American Soccer Mom. Actually, pretty much anyone in the Western world is guaranteed to be saner than her.
The newbie favors loosening the language rules in members-only areas. Filters are dumb.
|
|
Kisara Strife
Turk
AVALANCHE Rebel
Because he can't be dead ... T_T
Posts: 2,576
|
Post by Kisara Strife on Feb 4, 2009 0:20:52 GMT
I, for one, don't think the filters are dumb; they ensure a bit of civility in heated debates, but the key is not to constrain the memebrs too much. Imo, "wank" is pretty mild, more so over here in Ireland.
|
|