GS Terms of Use Amendment Voting Thread

That one, and you missed another one as well, but its dead anyway. But as i said b4 im for the idea as well, i hate spamming. But you dont find it ironic? Not even a lil?soulfood4

Oh, all right, but only a little.

[QUOTE="soulfood4"]That one, and you missed another one as well, but its dead anyway. But as i said b4 im for the idea as well, i hate spamming. But you dont find it ironic? Not even a lil?GabuEx

Oh, all right, but only a little.

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.

GabuEx

Heh, I just realized that the suggestion wasn't for preventing posting altogether (the idea I was more in favor of), but just topic creation.

Honestly if it's topic creation, I'd almost prefer it be even a higher level than four -- like six or maybe even eight.

"Who mods the Moderators?"

"Who mods the Moderators?

Jekken6

"Who mods the Moderators?"

Jekken6

The admins.

"Who admins the admins?"

Their managers.

"Who manages the managers?"

The executives.

"Who executes the executives?"

The stockholders.

"Who stockholds the stockholders?"

God.

"Who Gods God?"

...Shut up.

:P

[QUOTE="Jekken6"]

"Who mods the Moderators?"

GabuEx

The admins.

"Who admins the admins?"

Their managers.

"Who manages the managers?"

The executives.

"Who executes the executives?"

The stockholders.

"Who stockholds the stockholders?"

God.

"Who Gods God?"

...Shut up.

:P

[QUOTE="Jekken6"]

"Who mods the Moderators?"

GabuEx

The admins.

"Who admins the admins?"

Their managers.

"Who manages the managers?"

The executives.

"Who executes the executives?"

The stockholders.

"Who stockholds the stockholders?"

God.

"Who Gods God?"

...Shut up.

:P

I know who! The Watchmen.

But Who Watches The Watchmen?

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="Jekken6"]

"Who mods the Moderators?"

soulfood4

The admins.

"Who admins the admins?"

Their managers.

"Who manages the managers?"

The executives.

"Who executes the executives?"

The stockholders.

"Who stockholds the stockholders?"

God.

"Who Gods God?"

...Shut up.

:P

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="Jekken6"]

"Who mods the Moderators?"

Jekken6

The admins.

"Who admins the admins?"

Their managers.

"Who manages the managers?"

The executives.

"Who executes the executives?"

The stockholders.

"Who stockholds the stockholders?"

God.

"Who Gods God?"

...Shut up.

:P

I know who! The Watchmen.

But Who Watches The Watchemen?

[QUOTE="Jekken6"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

The admins.

"Who admins the admins?"

Their managers.

"Who manages the managers?"

The executives.

"Who executes the executives?"

The stockholders.

"Who stockholds the stockholders?"

God.

"Who Gods God?"

...Shut up.

:P

warbmxjohn

I know who! The Watchmen.

But Who Watches The Watchemen?

But who watches the people at the movies?

[QUOTE="warbmxjohn"][QUOTE="Jekken6"]

I know who! The Watchmen.

But Who Watches The Watchemen?

Jekken6

But who watches the people at the movies?

[QUOTE="Jekken6"]

[QUOTE="warbmxjohn"] People at the movies.. Duh.. :P :lol:warbmxjohn

But who watches the people at the movies?

But who watches them?

[spoiler] This could go on forever [/spoiler]

I support all three especially the 2nd one. I hear lots of people complaining about moderations but not knowing why or the reason behind the mod makes no sense.

Moderation reduction for good behavior and level 4 topic creation are winners in my book. I'm getting kind of sick of the "My Brute" threads. I don't even know what they are!

I agree with level 4, but only for OT. For System Wars, it would mean to remove major lulz. The spirit of SW lies in its hilarious absurdity, which would be impossible with this restriction.

level 4 sounds right, it would stop spammers.

I have unpopular views. I feel that a particular mod is just being a douche for the sake of douchery and saying I troll just for presenting my side of the arguement :( clembo1990

all of the above

I agree with all of them. Especially the level 4 thing, Those spam threads are getting annoying.

Trolling/flaming should be more specific.

Also, one should be able towrite whatever they want about inanimate objects without getting moderated. If someones feelings get hurt because someone says something negative about a piece of plastic that you play games on then maybe they shouldn't be on the internet.

Bring back the extra points by reporting someone.

[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.

GabuEx

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.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"]The only thing i would like to see added to the ToU is moderator discretion. 99% of people complaining about moderations actually did break the ToU, even though sometimes they did nothing any of us would consider 'wrong'. If they make a post however, and someone reports it, and technically it fits the definition of trolling, the mods have to take action. That's a problem, if you ask me. Moderators should be able to say 'well... technically this is a violation, but there's no way i'm moderating this'. Look at the context. Look at what was actually said and whether it causes any harm whatsoever. For example, the ToU says that any discussion of reporting people or getting others into trouble is trolling. So saying 'haha i'm gonna report you and you're gonna get banned!' is trolling. Fair enough. But then again, saying 'Guys, this is a suicide thread, please don't bump it to the front page and just ignore it' is also discussion of people getting reported and banned, and you'll get moderated as a troll for saying such. That's where i think moderators need to step in and use some discretion to clear up what's genuine trolling and what isn't. spazzx625

You might to that, but your moderator collective doesn't. Maybe you need to be re-assimilated.

Wow...and I thought we take posting too seriously when we do OTcars. An ToU Amendment thread...what do you think this website is...a democracy?FragStains

Bring back the extra points by reporting someone.

TheJackpotter

All of the Above :) definitely...

IMO, the effort to sanitize GS borders on lunacy. I get the impression that some (if not most) MODs are a bit power-drunk and get overzealous with their moderations.

I can understand moderations for insults, but the "trolling" and "intended solely to annoy" reasons are far too vague and give the MODs far too much discretion. For example, I got modded last week (with a point loss :x ) for only stating the obvious in SW that "This is just another troll thread from cows", which the thread was.

What boggles my mind is how here in the OT and in SW, the same damn topics can get rehashed over & over and the MODs are fine with it. But God forbid someone call the TC out on what easily be considered as "intended solely to annoy" thread, and someone (who was probably waiting on such a response) will snitch on him.

The only thing i would like to see added to the ToU is moderator discretion. 99% of people complaining about moderations actually did break the ToU, even though sometimes they did nothing any of us would consider 'wrong'. If they make a post however, and someone reports it, and technically it fits the definition of trolling, the mods have to take action.

That's a problem, if you ask me. Moderators should be able to say 'well... technically this is a violation, but there's no way i'm moderating this'. Look at the context. Look at what was actually said and whether it causes any harm whatsoever. Ninja-Hippo

I agree with that 100%. I have a difficult time believe people get bent out of shape by some of the "trolling" posts.