How to not make terrible threads and stay not banned

If it doesn't fit elsewhere, it should go here
User avatar
Sašo
Stabyourself.net
Posts: 1421
Joined: 06 Jan 2012, 12:07

Post » 17 Apr 2012, 07:51

TWATTER IS NOT A "POST RANDOM BULLSHIT JUST FOR THE SAKE OF IT" FORUM.

- Discussions of pretty much anything ARE allowed. THAT's what this forum is for.
- Forum games ARE allowed, as long as they're not counting threads or threads that would end up with each one making a post 3 words long. And no, just because it's 4 words, that doesn't make it okay. If it takes less than 10 seconds to make a post in this thread, it's a bad idea for a thread.
- Threads that have no purpose (here's a good example) will get you banned.
- Threads where you post solely pictures are allowed, as long as there's not a million of them (read as: ONE IS ENOUGH.)

How to not irritate people:
- For the sake of everyone's health, try to refrain from using reaction faces where completely unneeded.
- While ponies are very much allowed on this forum, do not post them in irrelevant threads where they have no place. This won't be actively enforced, but seriously. You don't need to post them in every single thread. Though this should be more a forum wide rule but whatever.


If you have additional suggestions (and that does not include changes to existing rules), feel free to post them in this thread. Irrelevant replies will be deleted so the thread is kept clean.

User avatar
Sašo
Stabyourself.net
Posts: 1421
Joined: 06 Jan 2012, 12:07

Post » 17 Apr 2012, 07:59

_



_




_




Just a spacer between the rules and posts.
_

User avatar
trosh
Posts: 1594
Joined: 03 Feb 2012, 08:36

Post » 17 Apr 2012, 08:33

maybe reaction videos sould be linked instead of [youtube]'d ... it's not as practical but seriously when someone quotes half the universe to answer with a big ass video I feel bad about the thread.

User avatar
HeroKing
Posts: 104
Joined: 10 Feb 2012, 23:57

Post » 17 Apr 2012, 09:40

trosh wrote:maybe reaction videos sould be linked instead of [youtube]'d ... it's not as practical but seriously when someone quotes half the universe to answer with a big ass video I feel bad about the thread.
agreed. if not linked, then at least put in spoiler tags. that was one rule we had on an old forum i went to, where if an image was "too big" it had to be in spoilers

User avatar
RWLabs
Posts: 795
Joined: 05 Feb 2012, 03:36

Post » 19 Apr 2012, 01:34

Don't forget clone threads. Someone may copy an old thread instead of bumping it. Forum games could go by the name of "Round [#]" if that particular thread has too many posts, but other ones shouldn't be even alive.

Camewel
Posts: 2996
Joined: 02 Feb 2012, 21:32

Post » 19 Apr 2012, 02:32

I disagree with the whole multiple rounds forum games thing. If the old topic becomes unusable, let the game die. It would be nice to have some rule on bumping too, like no posting in a topic a week or so old unless you have something of actual value to say, but that's going off topic slightly.

User avatar
RWLabs
Posts: 795
Joined: 05 Feb 2012, 03:36

Post » 19 Apr 2012, 05:53

Adding onto Camewel's idea, how about we have an autolock to block out the thread revivers? (This is bold coming from a guy who got a warning for doing the same thing). Instead of a normal lock, it could say "This thread is too old to be posted in." Perhaps it takes about 1 month for it to be locked? By that time no one can even see it under the new threads.

User avatar
LightningFire
Posts: 1829
Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 17:24

Post » 20 Apr 2012, 00:05

I don't think Camewel's idea is a good one, because, what if, for some reason, no one posts in any thread for a long time, then they ALL get locked? And I think I know the reason for the useless topics, like 'Useless' or 'xXxrenhoekxXx', the reason is that in the index page, in the bottom of Twatter, it says: 'If it doesn't fit elsewhere, it should go here.' And those threads don't fit anywhere, so they post it here. So you should change what it says there, to avoid more useless threads.

Camewel
Posts: 2996
Joined: 02 Feb 2012, 21:32

Post » 20 Apr 2012, 01:18

Labs, your idea sucks. There's a reason I added the whole 'unless you have something of actual value to say' bit.
Oh, and LF, if no-one posts in any threads for a month, then the forum is utterly dead so you may as well lock every topic. Just saying. Oh, and you're wrong on the other bit, it's not like people wouldn't post useless threads if Twatter was marked as 'misc chat' or something else.

User avatar
rokit
Posts: 2095
Joined: 03 Feb 2012, 00:47

Post » 21 Apr 2012, 21:35

I think in twatter a person should be able to lock their own thread. So if the person makes something utterly useless and he realizes it he can lock it himself, or delete it.

Camewel
Posts: 2996
Joined: 02 Feb 2012, 21:32

Post » 21 Apr 2012, 23:54

What is a person starts an argument, realises they're losing and just deletes it? Or someone controlling a popular thread by threatening to delete it? No, only trusted people should be able to do that.

User avatar
Jorichi
Moderator
Posts: 964
Joined: 11 Feb 2012, 02:08

Post » 22 Apr 2012, 00:05

Camewel wrote:What is a person starts an argument, realises they're losing and just deletes it? Or someone controlling a popular thread by threatening to delete it? No, only trusted people should be able to do that.
We need ranks. Manual 'ranks'.
Saso and Maurice can choose who may do this and who may not. It would be allot of work for them, but if they see someone pass by and think "that guy looks like a reasonable fellow and won't abuse the function" then they can give them that 'ability' by 'promoting' them to that 'rank'.

Idk, just a thought.

Camewel
Posts: 2996
Joined: 02 Feb 2012, 21:32

Post » 22 Apr 2012, 00:17

Jorichi wrote:
Camewel wrote:What is a person starts an argument, realises they're losing and just deletes it? Or someone controlling a popular thread by threatening to delete it? No, only trusted people should be able to do that.
We need ranks. Manual 'ranks'.
Saso and Maurice can choose who may do this and who may not. It would be allot of work for them, but if they see someone pass by and think "that guy looks like a reasonable fellow and won't abuse the function" then they can give them that 'ability' by 'promoting' them to that 'rank'.

Idk, just a thought.
If you mean something like giving individual people different privileges, like giving one person only the ability to lock threads, giving one person only the ability to ban people and delete posts, this seems like a bad idea. There could be moderator ranks though, such as moderators being able to lock topics and administer warnings, smods being able to give temporary bans and delete posts and admins (which I really doubt there will be any more of without the unlikely case of stabyourself growing to a party of three happens first) can permaban people and delete topics and edit posts and promote people and generally wreak havok keep the forums under control. It wouldn't be a bad idea, as currently dumb stuff is left to run wild at night-time GMT when Maurice and Sašo are sleeping. I bet if they both were preoccupied with something for a few days loads of dumb stuff would happen with the forums unmoderated.

User avatar
liquidMountain
Posts: 39
Joined: 03 Mar 2012, 07:06

Post » 24 Apr 2012, 11:01

These are good rules. I wish more forums were enforced like this.

User avatar
That Communist
Posts: 26
Joined: 18 Mar 2012, 03:16

Post » 10 Jul 2012, 10:02

Might I inquire about why we're not allowed to post new forum games?

User avatar
LightningFire
Posts: 1829
Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 17:24

Post » 10 Jul 2012, 18:57

That Communist wrote:Might I inquire about why we're not allowed to post new forum games?
Because Twatter is obviously filled with them.

User avatar
That Communist
Posts: 26
Joined: 18 Mar 2012, 03:16

Post » 12 Jul 2012, 04:46

There is no such thing as being filled, twatter could have an infinite more, and we could post on the ones we liked, personally, I think the rule is quite stupid, as twatter is nothing but forum games, and random discussion.

User avatar
renhoek
Posts: 4545
Joined: 11 Feb 2012, 10:04

Post » 12 Jul 2012, 05:36

well I see the forum games as this
Sašo wrote:TWATTER IS NOT A "POST RANDOM BULLSHIT JUST FOR THE SAKE OF IT" FORUM.
seriously I've seen cloned games (I ban you thread)
and there was literally a "pointless game" where you just posted pointless posts.

There's a line between having a bit of fun and complete bull shit.

User avatar
Polybius
Posts: 307
Joined: 03 May 2012, 08:24

Post » 12 Jul 2012, 09:02

That Communist wrote:There is no such thing as being filled, twatter could have an infinite more, and we could post on the ones we liked, personally, I think the rule is quite stupid, as twatter is nothing but forum games, and random discussion.
Well, even if you could make another forum game, what would it be? All the forum games will eventually be ideas that are taken, making your future forum-game a repeat of one of the dead ones(when it could have been avoided), making twatter nearly completely useless, besides discussions that arent useless. you see the problem there? Thats why people only post a few times in a forum game then leave it for good, then the thread dies when a new forum game with NEARLY THE SAME RULES replaces it(ALL that is avoided with the rule).Although, its not as restricting as you think, you can post discussion threads that are interesting, and entertaining for people.That don`t waste people`s time, like random post threads.

User avatar
Filio
Posts: 185
Joined: 04 Mar 2012, 19:01

Post » 14 Jul 2012, 21:01

Just going to mention that several forum games are breaking;
If it takes less than 10 seconds to make a post in this thread, it's a bad idea for a thread.

User avatar
LightningFire
Posts: 1829
Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 17:24

Post » 15 Jul 2012, 02:48

There's only 2 as much as I know. This one and this one.

User avatar
Filio
Posts: 185
Joined: 04 Mar 2012, 19:01

Post » 17 Jul 2012, 15:12

What about these? And several others that may be old and waiting to be bumped.

I may just hate forum games.

User avatar
LightningFire
Posts: 1829
Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 17:24

Post » 17 Jul 2012, 17:29

The second one is just stupid, and the third one isn't even a forum game.
The first one isn't 100% spam, since it's the person's choice if they want to make it long or short.

User avatar
Filio
Posts: 185
Joined: 04 Mar 2012, 19:01

Post » 20 Jul 2012, 05:31

LightningFire wrote:The second one is just stupid, and the third one isn't even a forum game.
The first one isn't 100% spam, since it's the person's choice if they want to make it long or short.
People have no creativity in the first one, therefore takes about 5 seconds to post.
And I'm not sure why I linked the third one, possibly because it's a thread about posting hate and it turned into people hating others.

EDIT: By the way, THIS was made exactly to break one of the rules if nothing else.

User avatar
LightningFire
Posts: 1829
Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 17:24

Post » 20 Jul 2012, 18:15

Filio wrote:By the way, THIS was made exactly to break one of the rules if nothing else.
That's the exact reason as to why I stopped posting there some time ago. People should read the rules more carefully before even creating a thread.

User avatar
TurretBot
Posts: 4396
Joined: 15 Mar 2012, 23:18

Post » 29 Aug 2012, 01:53

drone36 wrote:
That Communist wrote:There is no such thing as being filled, twatter could have an infinite more, and we could post on the ones we liked, personally, I think the rule is quite stupid, as twatter is nothing but forum games, and random discussion.
Well, even if you could make another forum game, what would it be? All the forum games will eventually be ideas that are taken, making your future forum-game a repeat of one of the dead ones.
'Calvinball [Forum Game]'
That's what it would be. This is not a repeat of any previous forum games.
What's wrong with that? The rules, which lock up even the most original forum games.

User avatar
jwright159
Posts: 442
Joined: 20 Nov 2013, 22:26

Post » 17 Feb 2014, 21:44

- While ponies are very much allowed on this forum, do not post them in irrelevant threads where they have no place. This won't be actively enforced, but seriously. You don't need to post them in every single thread. Though this should be more a forum wide rule but whatever.
I'm hurt

User avatar
Sašo
Stabyourself.net
Posts: 1421
Joined: 06 Jan 2012, 12:07

Post » 17 Feb 2014, 22:27

jwright159 wrote:
- While ponies are very much allowed on this forum, do not post them in irrelevant threads where they have no place. This won't be actively enforced, but seriously. You don't need to post them in every single thread. Though this should be more a forum wide rule but whatever.
I'm hurt
hi hurt, i'm administrator

Camewel
Posts: 2996
Joined: 02 Feb 2012, 21:32

Post » 17 Feb 2014, 23:02

go home dad

Maurice
Stabyourself.net
Posts: 2143
Joined: 01 Feb 2012, 20:19

Post » 18 Feb 2014, 00:18

weren't you listening? He's not dad, he's administrator.

User avatar
jwright159
Posts: 442
Joined: 20 Nov 2013, 22:26

Post » 18 Feb 2014, 01:05

I'm a pony so erase the last 4 posts

Camewel
Posts: 2996
Joined: 02 Feb 2012, 21:32

Post » 18 Feb 2014, 02:12

Maurice wrote:weren't you listening? He's not dad, he's administrator.
I would do a do-over but for the administrator this is home :(

VaultBoy101
Posts: 13
Joined: 14 Mar 2014, 03:48

Post » 10 Apr 2014, 12:09

LightningFire wrote:
That Communist wrote:Might I inquire about why we're not allowed to post new forum games?
Because Twatter is obviously filled with them.
Perhaps there can be a whole new sub-forum just dedicated to posting forum games. Here's a good example:
http://warbears.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=39

User avatar
Flutter Skye
Posts: 1690
Joined: 08 Apr 2012, 17:54

Post » 10 Apr 2014, 13:43

VaultBoy101 wrote:
LightningFire wrote:
That Communist wrote:Might I inquire about why we're not allowed to post new forum games?
Because Twatter is obviously filled with them.
Perhaps there can be a whole new sub-forum just dedicated to posting forum games. Here's a good example:
http://warbears.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=39
There's already a Forum Game Sub-Forum viewforum.php?f=17

B-Man99
Posts: 1868
Joined: 02 Jul 2012, 00:32

Post » 07 Jan 2015, 05:33

I think that replying to threads and/or mention users that break the rules when the incident has gone unreported should warrant a ban or a warning or whatever.
Sorry to be an ass to those that did this but it can't do any good to have a whole conversation ( re: this which had 3 replies before I reported it) stringing from a shit thread theorizing who the spammer is or calling them out. They obviously are aware that they are spamming.
When the guy with a 103 fever is reporting clear as day rule breaking when it's already been the topic of discussion all over the place, it seems like a problem to me.