How to not make terrible threads and stay not banned
-
- Stabyourself.net
- Posts: 1447
- Joined: 06 Jan 2012, 12:07
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.
- 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.
-
- Stabyourself.net
- Posts: 1447
- Joined: 06 Jan 2012, 12:07
_
_
_
Just a spacer between the rules and posts.
_
_
_
Just a spacer between the rules and posts.
_
-
- Posts: 1594
- Joined: 03 Feb 2012, 08:36
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.
-
- Posts: 104
- Joined: 10 Feb 2012, 23:57
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 spoilerstrosh 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.
-
- Posts: 797
- Joined: 05 Feb 2012, 03:36
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.
-
- Posts: 2996
- Joined: 02 Feb 2012, 21:32
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.
-
- Posts: 797
- Joined: 05 Feb 2012, 03:36
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.
-
- Posts: 1829
- Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 17:24
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.
-
- Posts: 2996
- Joined: 02 Feb 2012, 21:32
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.
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.
-
- Posts: 2095
- Joined: 03 Feb 2012, 00:47
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.
-
- Posts: 2996
- Joined: 02 Feb 2012, 21:32
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.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 964
- Joined: 11 Feb 2012, 02:08
We need ranks. Manual 'ranks'.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.
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.
-
- Posts: 2996
- Joined: 02 Feb 2012, 21:32
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.Jorichi wrote:We need ranks. Manual 'ranks'.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.
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.
-
- Posts: 39
- Joined: 03 Mar 2012, 07:06
These are good rules. I wish more forums were enforced like this.
-
- Posts: 26
- Joined: 18 Mar 2012, 03:16
Might I inquire about why we're not allowed to post new forum games?
-
- Posts: 1829
- Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 17:24
Because Twatter is obviously filled with them.That Communist wrote:Might I inquire about why we're not allowed to post new forum games?
-
- Posts: 26
- Joined: 18 Mar 2012, 03:16
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.
-
- Posts: 4545
- Joined: 11 Feb 2012, 10:04
well I see the forum games as this
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.
seriously I've seen cloned games (I ban you thread)Sašo wrote:TWATTER IS NOT A "POST RANDOM BULLSHIT JUST FOR THE SAKE OF IT" FORUM.
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.
-
- Posts: 307
- Joined: 03 May 2012, 08:24
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.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.
-
- Posts: 185
- Joined: 04 Mar 2012, 19:01
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.
-
- Posts: 1829
- Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 17:24
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.
The first one isn't 100% spam, since it's the person's choice if they want to make it long or short.
-
- Posts: 185
- Joined: 04 Mar 2012, 19:01
People have no creativity in the first one, therefore takes about 5 seconds to post.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.
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.
-
- Posts: 4413
- Joined: 15 Mar 2012, 23:18
'Calvinball [Forum Game]'drone36 wrote: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.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.
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.
-
- Posts: 442
- Joined: 20 Nov 2013, 22:26
I'm hurt- 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.
-
- Stabyourself.net
- Posts: 1447
- Joined: 06 Jan 2012, 12:07
hi hurt, i'm administratorjwright159 wrote:I'm hurt- 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.
-
- Stabyourself.net
- Posts: 2145
- Joined: 01 Feb 2012, 20:19
weren't you listening? He's not dad, he's administrator.
-
- Posts: 2996
- Joined: 02 Feb 2012, 21:32
I would do a do-over but for the administrator this is home :(Maurice wrote:weren't you listening? He's not dad, he's administrator.
-
- Posts: 13
- Joined: 14 Mar 2014, 03:48
Perhaps there can be a whole new sub-forum just dedicated to posting forum games. Here's a good example:LightningFire wrote:Because Twatter is obviously filled with them.That Communist wrote:Might I inquire about why we're not allowed to post new forum games?
http://warbears.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=39
-
- Posts: 1690
- Joined: 08 Apr 2012, 17:54
There's already a Forum Game Sub-Forum viewforum.php?f=17VaultBoy101 wrote:Perhaps there can be a whole new sub-forum just dedicated to posting forum games. Here's a good example:LightningFire wrote:Because Twatter is obviously filled with them.That Communist wrote:Might I inquire about why we're not allowed to post new forum games?
http://warbears.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=39
-
- Posts: 1868
- Joined: 02 Jul 2012, 00:32
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.
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.