Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Jack_Bread]

You mean "Finally..."
Unless something's going on in the DF section...

[Jackrabbit]

I hate how I joined right before THE WHOLE FORUM WENT TO HELL.

Hopefully we'll live through it. I've got stuff going on on this forum. This forum was the first I ever joined and the most I ever post on. Frankly, this forum rules and I hope to see it continue.

[Leafsnail]

Hmm, having joined after the demise of VN, I can't say I'm too attached to it.  Some of the things in there are amusing, but some are plain disturbing, and I'd understand completely if Toady wants to distance himself from that.  I don't think I should comment on individual users, but most seem sorry for what they've done, so I guess if it doesn't happen again there shouldn't be a need to ban anyone.

I'm not sure about having player moderators though, it's probably not a good idea.  It can be isolating to be a player mod, and can cause problems.  Ah well, handle it how you will.

[Areyar]

Only noticed the VN forums after I went to look where the damn penguins came from... and they came from hell!
Soon after it got closed down.
Didn't give a damn about it: very few interesting threads.

I like the GD forum though.
Here you can get to know some of the baywatchers when nothing interesting is happening in the DF-related forums.
Discuss things that you care about personally, shared interests, etc. Without polluting the DF with DF unrelated stuff.

Threads about crap, or flamefests, I feel could be deleted as soon as nobody posts on it for a week or so, but that may require active moderating on content.
Automatic deletion of old threads is an option for some subfora, as necromancy is generally frowned upon anyhow.

I'm absolutely not in favour of more liberate banning and deleting. I've seen it happen on other forums and it does not increase forum health.
Banning is a very final solution and not even effective, as offenders are more than able to create a new account and continue their destructive habits.
Rather a temporary lockout would be an option for misbehaving lots.

[IndonesiaWarMinister]

Emm...

I'm sorry, guys, for my actions.
Yeah, some of it maybe a /bit/ borderline.

I'll /try/ to stop.
Still, I wasn't even doing anything... ?

Well, except trying to roleplay as Remilia. But that, eh. To that I have no answer.

((Also, sorry for being foreign, crazy, different faith, and homo-phobic <- I hate humans))

[dibujante]

Just posting to cast my vote for a mod team that hands out bans like apples laced with rat poison on halloween

[IndonesiaWarMinister]

Just posting to cast my vote for a mod team that hands out bans like apples laced with rat poison on halloween

.

>:<

[Armok]

Really, one should only do reversible things, mutes rather than bans, (a year long mute is basically a ban anyway, and lets it be undone if there has been a mistake) locking and hiding rather than deleting. If such things are absolutely necessary.

[Leafsnail]

Well, VN could just be put into cold storage (a forum which noone other than mods can see) rather than be deleted.  Happens on most forums.

[dibujante]

Really, one should only do reversible things, mutes rather than bans, (a year long mute is basically a ban anyway, and lets it be undone if there has been a mistake) locking and hiding rather than deleting. If such things are absolutely necessary.

Nah, I'd be cool with paid membership and off-the-cuff bans. Donation = membership until you screw it up, then you need to donate again

[Heron TSG]

The rate of suggestions would slow to a crawl. at first I only joined to suggest wheels.

[Zangi]

Really, one should only do reversible things, mutes rather than bans, (a year long mute is basically a ban anyway, and lets it be undone if there has been a mistake) locking and hiding rather than deleting. If such things are absolutely necessary.

Nah, I'd be cool with paid membership and off-the-cuff bans. Donation = membership until you screw it up, then you need to donate again

So its pay to make things good?  Doesn't sound like a good policy in my opinion.
I can see people seeing it like that...

[dibujante]

Really, one should only do reversible things, mutes rather than bans, (a year long mute is basically a ban anyway, and lets it be undone if there has been a mistake) locking and hiding rather than deleting. If such things are absolutely necessary.

Nah, I'd be cool with paid membership and off-the-cuff bans. Donation = membership until you screw it up, then you need to donate again

So its pay to make things good?  Doesn't sound like a good policy in my opinion.
I can see people seeing it like that...

No, it's not like that - if people pay a token sum for something, they value it more. Rule-breaking decreases substantially once people suffer financially (even if it's a token sum) for it.

[Leafsnail]

That will seriously hurt donations though.  You aren't likely to pay donations for something which already charges a subscription at any cost.

[Sowelu]

Yeah let's not do the SA model.  Ever.  In my experience, instead of giving people something at stake, it just gives them a sense of entitlement--the moderation would have to be seriously hardcore to deal with that.

As for banning proxies--just remember that, to a server, a proxy looks EXACTLY like just a different computer connecting to the server.  There's no useful way to tell if someone is using a proxy, unless you really want to start playing with slightly cutting edge physical-computer-identification techniques...which you don't.