GS Terms of Use Amendment Voting Thread

Ok this is the second incarnation of a thread concerning proposed amendments to the Gamespot Terms Of Use agreement. It is time to vote on the most beneficial suggestions to clarify/alter the ToU.

A few weeks ago I made a thread encouraging all GS users to come forward and present any constructive criticism and potential amendments to the GS ToU, there were some good ideas passed around, but some ideas had more community support than others. Those three most supported proposals are in the poll, but they are not already set as the proposals to be presented to GS Legal (The people who made and control the ToU). There is still an opportunity for your suggestions to be heard, that is if you have any ideas on how to make GS better for Users, Mods, Admin, basically every user. We need to come to a consensus as a community if we expect our suggestions to be taken seriously.

However, please remember if you have an idea that you feel would make GS forums a better place for the community as a whole please present them, as they can still recieve enough support to make the cut to be presented to the GS legal by nocoolnamejim. Remember complaining is quite futile if you are not willing to present some potential changes.

Disclaimer: There is no gaurantee that these changes will come, but as nocoolnamejim said "Nothing ventured, nothing gained".

Just bring back people who were banned, but still were cool. jaydough

[QUOTE="jaydough"] Just bring back people who were banned, but still were cool. Neon-Tiger

Just bring back people who were banned, but still were cool. jaydough

[QUOTE="jaydough"] Just bring back people who were banned, but still were cool. Neon-Tiger

[QUOTE="Neon-Tiger"]

[QUOTE="jaydough"] Just bring back people who were banned, but still were cool. jaydough

[QUOTE="Neon-Tiger"]

[QUOTE="jaydough"] Just bring back people who were banned, but still were cool. warbmxjohn

The first one. I'm on a final warning, and I'm hoping that a month of so of good behavior will redeem that final warning :)

The first one kind of already happens. Nothing actually gets removed from moderation histories in case we need to refer to something, but I probably wouldn't take something into account that happened like over a year ago when determining what punishment is appropriate.

The second one... good luck with that. :P

The third one I honestly don't know why we don't already do something like that. We prevent people from posting images until like level three or something, but we don't make people wait a while before making topics, which doesn't make much sense to me.

I support all three measures... also, what I would like to see is rather than permanantly banning people, having a more long term suspension each time a user has stacked up a considerable amount of moderations... such as a month, or two month suspension...it would save a lot of bannings (a few good users have gotten banned that many would rather have kept in the community)...

The3rd one sounds like a great idea.

but I probably wouldn't take something into account that happened like over a year ago when determining what punishment is appropriate.

GabuEx

I got modded March 21st 2009 for a blog I wrote in October 2007 :x And I don't even know what was wrong with it :|

Level 4 requirement is a little shakey how about a post count instead? I've seen level 20+'s here with less than 1k posts.

The first one kind of already happens. Nothing actually gets removed from moderation histories in case we need to refer to something, but I probably wouldn't take something into account that happened like over a year ago when determining what punishment is appropriate.

The second one... good luck with that. :P

The third one I honestly don't know why we don't already do something like that. We prevent people from posting images until like level three or something, but we don't make people wait a while before making topics, which doesn't make much sense to me.

GabuEx

The Level 4 is a good idea, could rid us of much of the fad spams and ads. The first one makes sense, I don't know if they would do it or not, many mods are based on past offenses. I would like trolling defined a bit better, but I'm still learning. Again, what has to be remembered is almost all mods come from complaints that users make. I think we do a fairly good job of "policing" ourselves.btaylor2404

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

but I probably wouldn't take something into account that happened like over a year ago when determining what punishment is appropriate.

I_pWnzz_YoU

I got modded March 21st 2009 for a blog I wrote in October 2007 :x And I don't even know what was wrong with it :|

Looks like it was a censor bypass, which is probably why it was taken down (those get taken down basically because we don't want them up anywhere). I imagine the date was likely a factor in why you didn't get any punishment for it, though.

The second one... good luck with that. :P

GabuEx

I dunno, but people get quite irked when "moderators discretion" pops up on the moderation in question.It seems to be very vague.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

but I probably wouldn't take something into account that happened like over a year ago when determining what punishment is appropriate.

I_pWnzz_YoU

I got modded March 21st 2009 for a blog I wrote in October 2007 :x And I don't even know what was wrong with it :|

I dunno, but people get quite irked when "moderators discretion" pops up on the moderation in question.It seems to be very vague.

-Misanthropic-

Moderator discretion isn't really synonymous with "we modded you because we felt like it" (a common misconception). I generally use it when the explanation just doesn't exactly fit one single option. The moderation is still based on the Terms of Use.

I would love to have a way to make trolling more cut and dried, but I really don't see at all how you could do that. It is by its very definition subjective and needing interpretation; you can't show a message to a computer and have it tell you if the intent behind it was to annoy or inflame.

The third one I honestly don't know why we don't already do something like that. We prevent people from posting images until like level three or something, but we don't make people wait a while before making topics, which doesn't make much sense to me.

GabuEx

I definitely agree. That can't help but prevent not only ban dodging and trolling accounts from flourishing, but spam accounts would be minimized as well.

Though really, I think for the real benefit to be realized, it would need to be implemented on all of the main boards, and therein lies the issue. When you want your community to grow, having that kind of restriction making an assumption on the intentions of new accounts would cause a lot of new legitimate users to go elsewhere in the meantime.

Moderator discretion isn't really synonymous with "we modded you because we felt like it" (a common misconception). I generally use it when the explanation just doesn't exactly fit one single option. The moderation is still based on the Terms of Use.

GabuEx

Well yeah, I never had that in mind... a mod that does that shouldn't be a mod in the first place... as a solution, would a PM from the mod in question containing a written explanation of the offense caused solve the "Moderator discretion" problem?

On the flipside, that could cause personal animosity from users towards certain moderators I suppose.

The no posting until you get to lvl 4 is a great idea. Now that I think of it, I can't believe that's not already happening.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

The third one I honestly don't know why we don't already do something like that. We prevent people from posting images until like level three or something, but we don't make people wait a while before making topics, which doesn't make much sense to me.

m0zart

I definitely agree. That can't help but prevent not only ban dodging and trolling accounts from flourishing, but spam accounts would be minimized as well.

Though really, I think for the real benefit to be realized, it would need to be implemented on all of the main boards, and therein lies the issue. When you want your community to grow, having that kind of restriction making an assumption on the intentions of new accounts would cause a lot of new legitimate users to go elsewhere in the meantime.

m0zart

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

The third one I honestly don't know why we don't already do something like that. We prevent people from posting images until like level three or something, but we don't make people wait a while before making topics, which doesn't make much sense to me.

m0zart

I definitely agree. That can't help but prevent not only ban dodging and trolling accounts from flourishing, but spam accounts would be minimized as well.

Though really, I think for the real benefit to be realized, it would need to be implemented on all of the main boards, and therein lies the issue. When you want your community to grow, having that kind of restriction making an assumption on the intentions of new accounts would cause a lot of new legitimate users to go elsewhere in the meantime.

[QUOTE="m0zart"]

Though really, I think for the real benefit to be realized, it would need to be implemented on all of the main boards, and therein lies the issue. When you want your community to grow, having that kind of restriction making an assumption on the intentions of new accounts would cause a lot of new legitimate users to go elsewhere in the meantime.

omfg_its_dally

All they'd need to do would be to censor "http://" or "www." until level four and that could solve it I suppose.

[QUOTE="omfg_its_dally"][QUOTE="m0zart"]

Though really, I think for the real benefit to be realized, it would need to be implemented on all of the main boards, and therein lies the issue. When you want your community to grow, having that kind of restriction making an assumption on the intentions of new accounts would cause a lot of new legitimate users to go elsewhere in the meantime.

-Misanthropic-

All they'd need to do would be to censor "http://" or "www." until level four and that could solve it I suppose.

[QUOTE="omfg_its_dally"][QUOTE="m0zart"]

Though really, I think for the real benefit to be realized, it would need to be implemented on all of the main boards, and therein lies the issue. When you want your community to grow, having that kind of restriction making an assumption on the intentions of new accounts would cause a lot of new legitimate users to go elsewhere in the meantime.

-Misanthropic-

All they'd need to do would be to censor "http://" or "www." until level four and that could solve it I suppose.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

The third one I honestly don't know why we don't already do something like that. We prevent people from posting images until like level three or something, but we don't make people wait a while before making topics, which doesn't make much sense to me.

m0zart

I definitely agree. That can't help but prevent not only ban dodging and trolling accounts from flourishing, but spam accounts would be minimized as well.

Though really, I think for the real benefit to be realized, it would need to be implemented on all of the main boards, and therein lies the issue. When you want your community to grow, having that kind of restriction making an assumption on the intentions of new accounts would cause a lot of new legitimate users to go elsewhere in the meantime.

Though really, I think for the real benefit to be realized, it would need to be implemented on all of the main boards, and therein lies the issue. When you want your community to grow, having that kind of restriction making an assumption on the intentions of new accounts would cause a lot of new legitimate users to go elsewhere in the meantime.

m0zart

I don't think there'd be a problem if people were only barred from making new threads (as opposed to posting entirely) until they reached a certain level. Quite frankly I don't think anyone should be making new threads the moment they arrive at a forum; everyone should take a while to get acquainted with the way things go first before diving in too deep.

I suppose I could see the lone exception being the person asking for just a one-off piece of help, though, and I dunno what to do there.

I find it ironic that all the mods are talking about ways to reduce spam yet while they type ppl are spamming on OT lolsoulfood4

Yeah I know :lol:

I find it ironic that all the mods are talking about ways to reduce spam yet while they type ppl are spamming on OT lolsoulfood4

[QUOTE="soulfood4"]I find it ironic that all the mods are talking about ways to reduce spam yet while they type ppl are spamming on OT lolwarbmxjohn

I don't think the Terms of Use needs any amendments. Things are fine as is.

make me a mod u wont regret it muhaahaha

[QUOTE="warbmxjohn"][QUOTE="soulfood4"]I find it ironic that all the mods are talking about ways to reduce spam yet while they type ppl are spamming on OT lolsoulfood4

Yeah I feel only OT and SW should have topic creation restriction until lvl 4 or 5 even. Those boards are frequented by trolls much more than people sincerely searching for help. What help is a newbie gonna get in SW or OT? But other boards will have new users needing to make a new topic in search of assistance, which GS can be really useful for.

warbmxjohn

The level 4 requirement is a good idea, maybe even level 5 or 6 would be good too. But it couldn't affect all the forums, or new users won't be able to ask for help in the Welcome Newbies forum.

[QUOTE="soulfood4"][QUOTE="warbmxjohn"]They can't be everywhere at once. You did report the spam before cracking on the mods right? warbmxjohn

Oh crap, I didn't see the "all of the above" option until after I voted :/

Anyway, I support all of those. Making the definition of trolling more specific would be nice because as it stands the "report abuse" button gets used way too much by people losing an argument and trying to make the other guy go away. The level requirement should definitely be applied to the whole site (to understand why look no farther than the General Gaming Discussion forum and the constant spamming of "my brute" topics that has been going on for the past week or so now). And the mod history wipe should have been implemented on this site from the start.

I find it ironic that all the mods are talking about ways to reduce spam yet while they type ppl are spamming on OT lolsoulfood4

If you're referring to the thread that I just removed, I don't think that's ironic; it's the prevention of such threads that is exactly why I support that idea. :P

[QUOTE="soulfood4"]I find it ironic that all the mods are talking about ways to reduce spam yet while they type ppl are spamming on OT lolGabuEx

If you're referring to the thread that I just removed, I don't think that's ironic; it's the prevention of such threads that is exactly why I support that idea. :P