Forum Upgrades

[Daystar Clarion]

A lot more than one would expect. We clear them out pretty regularly.

Low content rule

Talking about that rule, you ever thought about putting a automated system for it? I see a lot of people not getting the correct punishment for a low content post because nobody bothers to report them, for example fappy did one in this thread and nothing happened, even though it was breaking the rule. I would find it for you, but I'm on an iPod and it's laborious browsing through this site.

OT: I like it, but I think I prefer the old style. Change the grey to the good ol blue and this style would be amazingly awesome.

Good thing I'm a ninja.

I don't really like automated systems because people often end up getting the short end of the stick when there's no one there to evaluate the fairness of a call.

But, the low content rule shouldn't be a subjective thing, which it is now. For example, I got suspended for a post with about 8 words that was answering the thread question, I got suspended because my favourite video game line was shazbot from tribes. Whereas people posting posts with less words get off a lot of the time. I've seen daystar clarion (example) only post a picture and about two words yet he gets off the hook. That's why if we had an automated system there won't be any exceptions, if your post has less than 5 or so words you will get some sort of wrath. I think it would work better, because a rule about the number of words in a post should not be subjective.


But

I've never posted a picture with just 2 words and not received mod wrath for it.

That's why I always post at least one sentence with every post.

 

[ToastiestZombie]

But, the low content rule shouldn't be a subjective thing, which it is now. For example, I got suspended for a post with about 8 words that was answering the thread question, I got suspended because my favourite video game line was shazbot from tribes. Whereas people posting posts with less words get off a lot of the time. I've seen daystar clarion (example) only post a picture and about two words yet he gets off the hook. That's why if we had an automated system there won't be any exceptions, if your post has less than 5 or so words you will get some sort of wrath. I think it would work better, because a rule about the number of words in a post should not be subjective.


But

Steam forums has a thing where you have to post 5 characters at the minimum.

People just dodged the system by typing "5char" at the end of ever post which brought mod wrath on them and just increased the mods work.

. That's what the flag/report button is for, an it'll be much easier to see who,s bcheating the system. The automated system would lessen the mods work, and discourage some of the blatant favouritism that happens now. No longer would someone be able to just post an image because they're a forum celebrity, and no longer would there be different mods taking the rule differently. Also, the steam forums are a placebos mass scumbaggery, were not. So there would be much less people cheating the system.

 

[Mamzelle_Kat]

I personally am quite happy with the changes. As another user mentioned, the load time is MUCH better.

The design is just better. Fine, gray is not exactly my favourite colour, but I think the new look complements the website layout really well. I mean, next to the homepage, the forums looked dated!

 

[Hagi]

I'm not sure if it's the lack of contrast with the grey bars in between or a change in background color but the current forum seems very, very bright.

I've already went to settings and set it to "darker" but I still find it a bit too bright for my tastes.

Would the be a possibility for a wider range of background colors as well as an option to change they grey bars in-between to a different color?

That'd be great in customising the forum so every can select what's easiest on their eyes.

 

[ToastiestZombie]

snip

I've seen you just post that damn "there's the door" image loads. But my point is, an automated system would abolish any favouritism that the forum has, and make the low content rule q much less subjective thing. It's much better than relyinnon the report button and the chance a mod sees a post that we have now.

 

[Kungfu_Teddybear]

snip

I've seen you just post that damn "there's the door" image loads.

Always with at least one sentence after it. I've been here over 2 years now and I've never seen Daystar post anything that could bring down the mod wrath for a low content post. If he posted only the picture he would have got a warning. I've had a warning for only posting a picture before because it adds no discussion value to the current topic.

Saying that, even though I didn't argue about the warning, in my defence that thread I posted the picture in (it was Bender's This thread is bad and you should feel bad picture) had no discussion value. It was something about Yahtzee riding a horse to the moon or something really stupid.

 

[ToastiestZombie]

snip

I've seen you just post that damn "there's the door" image loads.

Always with at least one sentence after it. I've been here over 2 years now and I've never seen Daystar post anything that could bring down the mod wrath for a low content post.

Ok, daystar might not be a good example. But I still think an automated system of sorts would be good because unlike the other rules, the low content rule should not be ansubjective thing. And am automated system would make it so Noone gets away with it. I've seen low content posts that are on the first page of a ten page thread that haven't had mod wrath because nobody saw it or nobody bothered to report it. Mods are always goin to miss things, and an automated system for the low content rule would make it so that No one is missed and no one who posts what could be considered a good post gets mod wrath because of a personal opinion. If we had an automated system then five words or less means you will get mod wrath, no exceptions. Or just make a minimum word count, so nobody gets punished an there are no low content posts

 

[The Escapist Staff]

But, the low content rule shouldn't be a subjective thing, which it is now. For example, I got suspended for a post with about 8 words that was answering the thread question, I got suspended because my favourite video game line was shazbot from tribes. Whereas people posting posts with less words get off a lot of the time. I've seen daystar clarion (example) only post a picture and about two words yet he gets off the hook. That's why if we had an automated system there won't be any exceptions, if your post has less than 5 or so words you will get some sort of wrath. I think it would work better, because a rule about the number of words in a post should not be subjective.


But

Steam forums has a thing where you have to post 5 characters at the minimum.

People just dodged the system by typing "5char" at the end of ever post which brought mod wrath on them and just increased the mods work.

Further, content isn't easily limited to character count.

For example:
"Esse Quam Videre"
Three words that carry a great deal of meaning. To be, rather than to seem. It evokes notions of authenticity, person-hood, existence, and perspective.

"I reeeeallly reeeally super duper like that so much! zomg!"
10 words that carry very little meaning.

 

[ToastiestZombie]

But, the low content rule shouldn't be a subjective thing, which it is now. For example, I got suspended for a post with about 8 words that was answering the thread question, I got suspended because my favourite video game line was shazbot from tribes. Whereas people posting posts with less words get off a lot of the time. I've seen daystar clarion (example) only post a picture and about two words yet he gets off the hook. That's why if we had an automated system there won't be any exceptions, if your post has less than 5 or so words you will get some sort of wrath. I think it would work better, because a rule about the number of words in a post should not be subjective.


But

Steam forums has a thing where you have to post 5 characters at the minimum.

People just dodged the system by typing "5char" at the end of ever post which brought mod wrath on them and just increased the mods work.

Further, content isn't easily limited to character count.

For example:
"Esse Quam Videre"
Three words that carry a great deal of meaning. To be, rather than to seem. It evokes notions of authenticity, person-hood, existence, and perspective.

But all of that is subjective. And and no oft has everbeen warned because they've written a hundred wot post that says nothing that hasn't been saiid. You r argument isn't good, because something that carries meaning to one person won't carry meaning to another. Word count is something you can see, and something that can't be debated. What if you ha no idea what that meant, then the post holds no meaning.

"I reeeeallly reeeally super duper like that so much! zomg!"
10 words that carry very little meaning.

 

[Hazy992]

I like the new layout personally. Only thing I'd suggest is changing the grey bars above people's posts to blue as it fits with the site's theme and adds some contrast.

I'd also suggest moving the report button back under people's avatars so people don't accidentally report someone when trying to quote them. Other than that I like it

snip

snip

See personally I'd get rid of the low content rule altogether. Posts like 'LOL' or 'This' or just an image would be covered under the lack of discussion value rule anyway, but sometimes you can add to the discussion with just a few words. It also stops people putting in junk into their posts to avoid low content (which I think detracts from the discussion value). Just my opinion

Also Toastie, you shouldn't name drop. Singling people out isn't very nice. Just say you saw a user who did that or something.

 

[The Last Nomad]

It seems to be a change from the old simpler forums to a more complex type like almost ever other forum board site. What with the customisation level of avatars. But the new look is unlike every other forum I've ever seen. Particularly the big fat ugly grey bar between posts.

All of this I will have to wait and see if I like it...

HOWEVER, the thing is all too white. Its hard to see the different greys without tilting my screen to a weird angle. If that was improved I'd have no complaints.

 

[ToastiestZombie]

I like the new layout personally. Only thing I'd suggest is changing the grey bars above people's posts to blue as it fits with the site's theme and adds some contrast.

I'd also suggest moving the report button back under people's avatars so people don't accidentally report someone when trying to quote them. Other than that I like it

snip

snip

See personally I'd get rid of the low content rule altogether. Posts like 'LOL' or 'This' or just an image would be covered under the lack of discussion value rule anyway, but sometimes you can add to the discussion with just a few words. It also stops people putting in junk into their posts to avoid low content (which I think detracts from the discussion value). Just my opinion

Also Toastie, you shouldn't name drop. Singling people out isn't very nice.

. I take that back, I do kind of have something with daystar that bugs me. But now is not the time to speak about it. O would go edit mynpost, but I'm on this damn iPod an doing that would be a pain.

 

[Hazy992]

I take that back, I do kind of have something with daystar that bugs me. But now is not the time to speak about it. O would go edit mynpost, but I'm on this damn iPod an doing that would be a pain.

Fair enough. It's just people might take it personally even if you don't mean it to be taken that way.

EDIT: Think you could make people's titles slightly bigger? I think that'd look better

EDIT 2: What actually is it about Daystar that bugs you so much?

 

[lapan]

It will probably take a while to get used to. The grey bars could use some downsizing maybe.

 

[The Escapist Staff]

But, the low content rule shouldn't be a subjective thing, which it is now. For example, I got suspended for a post with about 8 words that was answering the thread question, I got suspended because my favourite video game line was shazbot from tribes. Whereas people posting posts with less words get off a lot of the time. I've seen daystar clarion (example) only post a picture and about two words yet he gets off the hook. That's why if we had an automated system there won't be any exceptions, if your post has less than 5 or so words you will get some sort of wrath. I think it would work better, because a rule about the number of words in a post should not be subjective.


But

Steam forums has a thing where you have to post 5 characters at the minimum.

People just dodged the system by typing "5char" at the end of ever post which brought mod wrath on them and just increased the mods work.

Further, content isn't easily limited to character count.

For example:
"Esse Quam Videre"
Three words that carry a great deal of meaning. To be, rather than to seem. It evokes notions of authenticity, person-hood, existence, and perspective.

But all of that is subjective. And and no oft has everbeen warned because they've written a hundred wot post that says nothing that hasn't been saiid. You r argument isn't good, because something that carries meaning to one person won't carry meaning to another. Word count is something you can see, and something that can't be debated. What if you ha no idea what that meant, then the post holds no meaning.

"I reeeeallly reeeally super duper like that so much! zomg!"
10 words that carry very little meaning.

Well that's why we have an appeals system. It gives people an opportunity to explain themselves.

I'm telling you, making it about post count only encourages people to write random things down such as "adding content to avoid moderation", which will actually encourage spam rather than discourage it.

 

[ToastiestZombie]

I take that back, I do kind of have something with daystar that bugs me. But now is not the time to speak about it. O would go edit mynpost, but I'm on this damn iPod an doing that would be a pain.

Fair enough. It's just people might take it personally even if you don't mean it to be taken that way.

EDIT: Think you could make people's titles slightly bigger? I think that'd look better

EDIT 2: What actually is it about Daystar that bugs you so much?

I don't know really. I think it maybe the fact that people hold him in high acclaim, even when he let's his ego get the better of him. For example the brovengers thread had no discussion value whatsoever, but people were fine with it because it was a daystar thread. I just don't like celebrities and favouritism in any site, so of course daystar gets on my nerves but he is one funny lad, so I don't hate him that much.

 

[Hazy992]

I take that back, I do kind of have something with daystar that bugs me. But now is not the time to speak about it. O would go edit mynpost, but I'm on this damn iPod an doing that would be a pain.

Fair enough. It's just people might take it personally even if you don't mean it to be taken that way.

EDIT: Think you could make people's titles slightly bigger? I think that'd look better

EDIT 2: What actually is it about Daystar that bugs you so much?

I don't know really. I think it maybe the fact that people hold him in high acclaim, even when he let's his ego get the better of him. For example the brovengers thread had no discussion value whatsoever, but people were fine with it because it was a daystar thread. I just don't like celebrities and favouritism in any site, so of course daystar gets on my nerves but he is one funny lad, so I don't hate him that much.

His ego? Are we talking about the same Daystar Clarion here? Daystar's repeatedly said he doesn't want people holding him in such high regard and he doesn't like the idea of forum celebrities. He's one of the most modest people on this site. You're just hating him for being popular, it's not his fault people like him.

As for the Brovengers thread it did have discussion value as a forum game which is why it was moved there. If this favouritism you keep claiming exists actually does exist the mods wouldn't have moved it.

 

[ToastiestZombie]

Well that's why we have an appeals system. It gives people an opportunity to explain themselves.

I'm telling you, making it about post count only encourages people to write random things down such as "adding content to avoid moderation", which will actually encourage spam rather than discourage it.

They do that anyway, I've seen that done quite a lot. The low content rule itself encourages it, not how it's moderated. Also, can I appeal my suspension. I got suspended for saying shazbot was my favourite line from a game in a thread asking that question, I feel that I shouldn't of got it because I answered the question an added to the discussion. Yet because my personal choice of favourite game line was a short one I got the mod wrath. Also, before you say it was because I didn't explain why; there had been loads of people before my post and after just saying what their favourite line was and nothing else. It's like giving someone mod wrath for saying jaws was their favourite film in a favourite film thread, and not giving mod wrath to someone who said star wars episode 4: a new hope.

 

[Kungfu_Teddybear]

I take that back, I do kind of have something with daystar that bugs me. But now is not the time to speak about it. O would go edit mynpost, but I'm on this damn iPod an doing that would be a pain.

Fair enough. It's just people might take it personally even if you don't mean it to be taken that way.

EDIT: Think you could make people's titles slightly bigger? I think that'd look better

EDIT 2: What actually is it about Daystar that bugs you so much?

I don't know really. I think it maybe the fact that people hold him in high acclaim, even when he let's his ego get the better of him. For example the brovengers thread had no discussion value whatsoever, but people were fine with it because it was a daystar thread. I just don't like celebrities and favouritism in any site, so of course daystar gets on my nerves but he is one funny lad, so I don't hate him that much.

His ego? Are we talking about the same Daystar Clarion here? Daystar's repeatedly said he doesn't want people holding him in such high regard and he doesn't like the idea of forum celebrities. He's one of the most modest people on this site. You're just hating him for being popular, it's not his fault people like him.

As for the Brovengers thread it did have discussion value as a forum game which is why it was moved there. If this favouritism you keep claiming exists actually does exist the mods wouldn't have moved it.

Yep, I have to agree. Daystar is in no way egotistical, and thinking otherwise is ridiculous. He's popular because he's an awesome guy, he's witty and he makes people laugh. End of story.

Also, Hazy, I'm the most modest person on this site. That is why I am The Modest Brovenger. I'm so modest it hurts.