TheComposer Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 When there's status like the one of Anger that Legend showed, it's really easy to know that's spam ._. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTW (For The Wynn) Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 Well, aside from that though, it's all about perception. To be honest, there are extremely few useful statuses (if any) and most statuses lack creativity and some even lack coherent thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smesh Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 There are other unnecessary things on the status bar that could be eradicated besides spam ._. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTW (For The Wynn) Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 [quote name='Smesh' timestamp='1295757503' post='4953544'] There are other unnecessary things on the status bar that could be eradicated besides spam ._. [/quote] Stupidity is extremely hard to erase. It's like fighting a hydra. Every time you cut off a head, two more take its place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smesh Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 [quote name='FTW (For The Wynn)' timestamp='1295757574' post='4953548'] Stupidity is extremely hard to erase. It's like fighting a hydra. Every time you cut off a head, two more take its place. [/quote] Temp ban begs to differ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTW (For The Wynn) Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 True. However, I was being general. Temp bans help, but they don't always fix things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smesh Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 Permas do xD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheComposer Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 Stupidity can't really be erased. But inappropriate stuff CAN. Catch someone posting something inappropriate (like Anger's status) then you warn/temp ban them to try and stop them. Spam won't be stopped, that's basically a given, but the inappropriate stuff needs to be put to a stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTW (For The Wynn) Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 Permas solve everything XD too bad it doesn't seem to change it though...oh well, you can't fix stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheComposer Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 The only stuff I want gone is the sexual crap people *COUGHANGERCOUGH* post on the status bar. That's the only thing that's been pissing people off other than people making a new status every 10 min. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Dragon Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 [quote name='Legend Zero' timestamp='1295724336' post='4952105'] I know that flooding is against the rules but how does one go about getting a Mods attention? I've PM'd mods before with links only for it to go ignored. (I also always PM mods who are on) [/quote] Their isn't much you can do side from just go and tell a mod and hope they'll do something about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smesh Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 Orrrr we could just get a mod to patrol it. It's not hard. *status bar on* *sees spam* *punishment* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTW (For The Wynn) Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 But, by that same token, what is and (more importantly), what is not spam on the status bar? Where is the line in the sand, so to speak? Each Mod would give you a different answer. Now, obviously, certain members do spam (Anger, LittleRedLady, myself, etc.), but Composer mentioned Anger's sex-based posts. There's a post by Anbu and a comment from Starrk that should also be up there for the same reasons. Granted, they don't spam the Status Bar like Anger, but shouldn't they be at least verbally warned for doing similar things? I'm not saying they spam overall, they don't. In fact, they're both friends of mine. I'm just pointing out that everyone needs to be up for the same punishment, and obviously repeat offenders should get a greater punishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catterjune Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 I've been PM-ed, told "Person A is spamming the Status Bar" but like... what really constitutes spamming? I think someone posting "I'm boredddd. Ask me a question." is as justifiable as "I made new cards, please look at them." [quote]I'm more concerned about those who post new status every 5 mins. [link][/quote] I don't really see a new status every five minutes. Well, one instance of that. But the rest are evenly spaced throughout the day. That actually kind of seems to be a common complaint. "ZOMG! X is spamming!" *checks. Two messages today. One yesterday* "This is spamming?" [quote]^As you can see this member 3 post but 7,798 points. (#76) Don't you find this a bit excessive?[/quote] If that's what they want to piss away their time on, that's their business. I mean, congrats on the 14,000+ posts and all but clearly that person does communicate and get responses that way. Not to mention what's currently up there on the "Recent Status Updates" thing changes so often. If a link to some porn or whatever shows up, it doesn't stick around very long. I think FTW's post kind of hits the nail on the head. The bigger question would be "what is not spam?" I mean, I do try to give "verbal warnings" or something if I REALLY get harassed enough about it, but I honestly don't see how providing content and being active is something that warrants a verbal warning (or an actual one). I mean, I do take action against posted porn or shock sites or annoying rickrolls or something if they're brought to my attention but I just don't see a reason as to why I should warn others for being active. >_> On a completely unrelated note, I noticed a "Prevent Status Updates" thing on the moderator thing. Does it do what I think it does? Has any other mod ever tested it out? >_> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarbleZone Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 [quote name='PikaPerson01' timestamp='1295767707' post='4953786'] On a completely unrelated note, I noticed a "Prevent Status Updates" thing on the moderator thing. Does it do what I think it does? Has any other mod ever tested it out? >_> [/quote] No idea, haven't tried it out in fear of huge-magnitude repercussions. I'm going to sound extremely ignorant here - is it possible to assign a mod specifically for the status bar? I keep it closed most of the time, only made mine visible during the recent raid, now it's turned off again so most of the time I don't even know what's going on in there. That said, I have always openly disliked Twitter and the sort, though if people want to spend their time talking about how they just took a massive dump, it's their problem and whoever cares about it. Spam is a terribly broad definition when it comes to "status". :/ Of course, if people are posting inappropriate links or content, they should be dealt with in the same manner as if they made a thread for it, other than that it seems to me that modding the status bar is just as impossible as moderating Clubs or Games. The rate at which crap is posted is much too high to be controlled. Also, again at the risk of sounding clueless, is it possible to delete/lock status updates by other people? Namely, could I do it if I tried? Because banning somebody for posting inappropriate content but leaving the content there seems... pointless. I find this suggestion impractical as it is. It's a fantasy to think the status bar can be controlled any more than Clubs, and I'm not even sure what degree of control can be given to a regular mod over that part of the site. Then again, I find the status bar a needless addition and nothing but extra work for us and I'd get rid of it altogether if I could, so my opinion may not be completely valid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend Zero Posted January 23, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 [quote name='PikaPerson01' timestamp='1295767707' post='4953786'] If that's what they want to piss away their time on, that's their business. I mean, congrats on the 14,000+ posts and all but clearly that person does communicate and get responses that way. [/quote] By this logic Ragnarok shouldn't have been banned for flooding, because that's what he pissed away his time on. I do however, understand where you are coming from. Why didn't you try the 'prevent status update' on Adolf/Third Reich? MarbleZone: I thought that Opalmoon did alright containing the C&O section in 09. Well, I guess I should thank the mods you did post and give their insight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catterjune Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 [quote]By this logic Ragnarok shouldn't have been banned for flooding, because that's what he pissed away his time on. [/quote] I'm unfamiliar with who that is. Ultimately I suppose it depends on the nature of the "flooding". But I can't really give a comment since I don't know who that is. [quote]Why didn't you try the 'prevent status update' on Adolf/Third Reich?[/quote] I didn't see any of his status updates until long since he had posted. By then he was already IP banned and such, so no real point in status update banning. [quote]Also, again at the risk of sounding clueless, is it possible to delete/lock status updates by other people? Namely, could I do it if I tried? Because banning somebody for posting inappropriate content but leaving the content there seems... pointless.[/quote] As far as I can tell, there is not. I mean, I think it's just that none of the currently active mods use the Status Bar really. I think only Phantom Roxas uses it frequently-ish. If people ask me to get others to stop spamming the Status, I suppose I'd do it, but all my "verbal warnings" in regards to Status Spam just feel awkward because I don't really think they're all that bad and I don't know why I'm giving a warning. >_> If this is really a big deal to people, then, as FTW stated what do you guys consider to be Not Spam. As members who frequently uses it and such, if you could write the rules for status updates, what would they be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheComposer Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 This is my only point: language that is not accepted on the forum SHOULD NOT be allowed on the status bar. You wouldn't allow someone to use sexual language even in a thread in games or clubs. The people that use that kind of language DO need to be warned. I don't really care if someone makes a lot of status's, as long as they don't break any of the rules like language in those statuses. I think it's kind of easy to tell what language shouldn't be accepted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTW (For The Wynn) Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 Alright, my guess is that there is going to need to be a general vote on what should and should not be considered spam. That's about the only way I can think of that will give any sort of credibility. Obviously, posting links to porn is a good indication of something that is against the rules. But what about the YCM memes that pop up? Are they really spam? Some of them are hilarious for a little while and some aren't. That's all up to what a person views as funny and not funny. Should there be limits to the number of times a person can post per day or per hour? How would that be monitored? Who would monitor it? These are the things that need to be considered. I could go on, but I think you get the point. The biggest question I have though is: Can we all agree to follow these "rules"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madsen Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 I'm bored is legit. It's the status you're in. But support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTW (For The Wynn) Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 [quote name='Blesh' timestamp='1295812662' post='4954900'] I'm bored is legit. It's the status you're in. [/quote] It just gets annoying to see over and over again, and pretty much any status I'm in is spam, including most of my own, but I digress. "I'm bored" is a decent enough status that usually results in the same posts of "Go make a card or join a club." You're fairly right, "I'm bored" is about as legit a status as possible, but it's just annoying at times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend Zero Posted January 23, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 How about this? If you have anything to add then feel free, mods decide if they find these fair. [b][u]Status Bar Rules[/u][/b] 1. Language that is not allowed on the forum is not allowed on the bar, regardless of update or comment. 2. Sexual material; links, language, ect. are not allowed. 3. One member can post a maximum of 4 status per hour. (report to a Moderator at your own discretion) 4. A status update containing spam can be reported to a mod, but mods get the final call. 5. Those who receive two verbal warnings (in one day) from a Mod should get a 10% warn (warnings increase the more offenses) 6. Any mod can be PM'd with offenders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTW (For The Wynn) Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 I like that as a beginning, but what really needs to happen is that 1 mod and 1 mod only needs to be in charge of the status bar. If all the mods have full say as to what happens on it, what one mod might pass over another mod might issue a 10% warning. Basically, one person needs to be in charge overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ярополк Пономарёв Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 [quote name='FTW (For The Wynn)' timestamp='1295759053' post='4953608'] But, by that same token, what is and (more importantly), what is not spam on the status bar? Where is the line in the sand, so to speak? Each Mod would give you a different answer. Now, obviously, certain members do spam (Anger, LittleRedLady, myself, etc.), but Composer mentioned Anger's sex-based posts. There's a post by Anbu and a comment from Starrk that should also be up there for the same reasons. Granted, they don't spam the Status Bar like Anger, but shouldn't they be at least verbally warned for doing similar things? I'm not saying they spam overall, they don't. In fact, they're both friends of mine. I'm just pointing out that everyone needs to be up for the same punishment, and obviously repeat offenders should get a greater punishment. [/quote] I stopped posting sexual stuff. I haven't posted SPAM since Yesterday and no more of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTW (For The Wynn) Posted January 23, 2011 Report Share Posted January 23, 2011 We are grateful to hear you say that Anger, but this isn't just about what has happened, this also has to do with what might happen in the future. What has happened over the last week or so (I'm guessing, I haven't been here) is just an indication that there needs to be a set of rules, albeit perhaps a small set of rules, that at least tell us what is and isn't acceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.