"No Deleting and Reposting Statuses" Rule

[Blake]

I want a discussion on this.

 

The idea behind the rule was to prevent people from making a status, deleting it, and posting a new, different status, with the logic that a typo can be fixed in the comments.

 

However, this feels like it's jumping through hoops to prevent a fairly niche scenario with maybe 1-2 realistic offenders.

 

I suggest that we remove the rule as a whole, and I would like the community and staff's input on this.

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

As you probably know I didn't want not allowing deleting for typos in the first place so I'm totally for getting rid of that. :P

But people please don't just abuse this and claim you're deleting something just because of a typo if it's not that.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

The initial rule is stupid regardless

 

The timer was put in place so people don't spam statues all the time

 

If you delete your status to type a new one, you're not spamming your status. And it won't bump out anyone else given that it'll just replace your old, already visible status

 

I don't know why mods make stupid pointless rules for no reason

[I Hate Snatch Steal]

I want a discussion on this.

 

The idea behind the rule was to prevent people from making a status, deleting it, and posting a new, different status, with the logic that a typo can be fixed in the comments.

 

However, this feels like it's jumping through hoops to prevent a fairly niche scenario with maybe 1-2 realistic offenders.

 

I suggest that we remove the rule as a whole, and I would like the community and staff's input on this.

Sounds fine to me

[Sleepy]

I'm guilty of deleting and re-posting due to mistakes in almost half of my statuses. I want to think it's not a huge offence since I don't usually make statuses very often.
I would much prefer if statuses could be edited instead. Making a status from the front page is a single line with limited view and no capacity to hit ENTER even with shift pressed, just to name a situation....

I don't think correcting down in the replies with an extra post is very ideal. The original status is what is in sight so most people passing by wouldn't really bother seeing if there's a fix, much less if the status ends up having activity. 60+ replies won't have a lot of people scrolling back up.

These are non-deal-breaking nitpicks of course....
I think somebody flooding in some way ought to be noticed by somebody and be apparent, although I can understand mods wanting a specific set of parameters against people potentially going "under what regulations are you doing this?" against any measures taken. Then once defined, it'd take somebody pushing as close under the established limit of tolerance as possible on a consistent basis to start complicating things. Next thing you know, the whole thing becomes political debates about acting on established parameters or being tyrannical or IDK.


-------

Anyways. . .
I think it's fine to remove it.

 

[Phelphor, of the Deep]

As you probably know I didn't want not allowing deleting for typos in the first place so I'm totally for getting rid of that. :P

But people please don't just abuse this and claim you're deleting something just because of a typo if it's not that.

You and others know who are the trolls are that would abuse it (spamming out 2-6 status updates) vs the peopld who may fix a typo once or repost a status (Only a few times after a extended time period )

 

I re post a status updates but i did not abuse or try to spam in an attempt to troll. Mods can clearly who abusing and deal with it. I know a guy who spam and got in trouble for abusing status updates vs someone just fix something.

 

The key point is three things; the fequency of times AND the speed of each status updates AND the time between each status updates.

[mido9]

You really are the most unlucky person when it comes to this, black, I used you as an example in my own thread and since then you fumbled maybe five times since then.

[Hallohallo]

While I actually like this rule, I wouldn't mind getting rid of it.

 

Instead, if someone starts abusing/spamming status updates, they should get banned from posting more for a certain amount of time.

[Catterjune]

The initial rule is stupid regardless

 

The timer was put in place so people don't spam statues all the time

 

If you delete your status to type a new one, you're not spamming your status. And it won't bump out anyone else given that it'll just replace your old, already visible status

 

I don't know why mods make stupid pointless rules for no reason

 

I'll tell ya then!

 

I don't know if the way YCM worked has changed (and I don't use the Status Bar much anyway) but from when the status bar first came out I believe you could fill it up with spam, all just one person having all five spots.

 

I believe it was then adjusted so that it would auto-remove and replace your latest status.

 

FOR EXAMPLE: If users A, B, C, D and E were the only ones posting in the status bar, even if A posted a new status every 5 minutes, it would still only show ABCDE, with A as the top poster usually.

 

This worked okay for a while until we realized there were more than 5 members on this site, so we decided to make a rule for 20 minutes to avoid spamming and advertising stuff.

 

Problem is that you could then game the system by continuously deleting and reposting the same status.

 

So if our imaginary YCM was now A through Z, A could post a status, then B, then C, D, E, then F would kick them off the status updates. A could then just delete his status and post a new one, kicking off B. Then G, H, I, J would post and K would knock off A, until A deletes and posts a status again and... etc etc.

 

It was a legitimate concern on YCM because of stupid spammers spamming their waifu war polls and terrible fanfics and create-a-card nonsense that only a very small niche actually cared about.

 

Dunno if YCM has changed much but that's the way it worked when the system was introduced. If it's changed, by all means change the rule. IDC

[Blake]

As far back as I can remember, YCM has always made it so that only your most recent status shows up on the bar. But maybe I'm forgetting day 1 stuff.

 

The rule in question is new. It was implemented in 2018. Before now, there was no rule against deleting a status to repost another, only the time limit.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I'll tell ya then!

 

I don't know if the way YCM worked has changed (and I don't use the Status Bar much anyway) but from when the status bar first came out I believe you could fill it up with spam, all just one person having all five spots.

 

I believe it was then adjusted so that it would auto-remove and replace your latest status.

 

FOR EXAMPLE: If users A, B, C, D and E were the only ones posting in the status bar, even if A posted a new status every 5 minutes, it would still only show ABCDE, with A as the top poster usually.

 

This worked okay for a while until we realized there were more than 5 members on this site, so we decided to make a rule for 20 minutes to avoid spamming and advertising stuff.

 

Problem is that you could then game the system by continuously deleting and reposting the same status.

 

So if our imaginary YCM was now A through Z, A could post a status, then B, then C, D, E, then F would kick them off the status updates. A could then just delete his status and post a new one, kicking off B. Then G, H, I, J would post and K would knock off A, until A deletes and posts a status again and... etc etc.

 

It was a legitimate concern on YCM because of stupid spammers spamming their waifu war polls and terrible fanfics and create-a-card nonsense that only a very small niche actually cared about.

 

Dunno if YCM has changed much but that's the way it worked when the system was introduced. If it's changed, by all means change the rule. IDC

Seconding Black

 

Say You're Person E and and A-D are before you. If you delete your status and type a new one, you become the new A and everyone moves down one. If you post a new A or delete your old A, you just replace your old post. It's impossible for one person to have 2 statuses show up