Originally posted by PeachWhich might be less of a problem in 5 years time...but, yeah, I guess it is better if KMC runs slow than if I can look up thread post counts once in a while 🙁
It's not a question of space, really, but rather how much the requests tax the server. It could cause the site to run slower.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Which might be less of a problem in 5 years time...but, yeah, I guess it is better if KMC runs slow than if I can look up thread post counts once in a while 🙁
Heh, yeah 😛
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Do you think Raz would consider increasing the size of Avatars?
They're already large enough, I'd think...
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Hmm maybe... I dunno, just think they should all be increased a little...esp the ones for new members.
64x64 and 100x100 are basically standard avatar sizes anywhere online. Not many sites have things smaller than or larger than that.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Yeah, maybe one could do away with the year and 2 year thing.Then again, it's quite a nice feeling to get the bigger avatar, finally.
I like the one year and two year thing. It's a little reward for having stuck around the site a while 😛
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
I can't help but feel there is a Cabal on this forum against certain a certain person... we need an inquisition (Yes, this is an official suggestion).
I don't understand, could you explain what you are saying (big words frighten me), please use Basic English or slightly more elaborate German.
Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't understand, could you explain what you are saying (big words frighten me), please use Basic English or slightly more elaborate German.
Inquisition (Inquisitorial system) is a common legal procedure where the tribunal is actively involved in determining the facts of the case. Inquisition can also mean a systematic procedure used by Catholic and Protestant Churches to prosecute alleged heretics (using inquisitorial procedures), and historical movements orchestrated by the Catholic Church. I referred to the latter, as a Catholic you know.
Anyway I am not the only one to notice...
I see.
Well, I have an unrelated suggestion, as, maybe the Mods could consider that one specific offense that regulars get often banned for is mayne mot all that horrible to warrant a ban. I am talking about the "publicly disagreeing with a mod" thing. I have seen multiple people banned like that (including myself), and I do agree that in some cases that is very justified (one might make such a case about my ban regarding that, obviously not I, as I am jaded), but I also believe that sometimes such a thing could be handled in a different fashion, which would just as well shut up the disturbance, and not create mass bannage, which does happen at times. As I said sometimes it is justified, when it is outright trolling, and or trying to really bait a mod, but in other cases a situation like:
Mod: Everyone get back on topic, this is an official warning.
Member: Dude, I wasn't off-topic, I was discussing this and this and that's how it relates.
Mod: No, it was off topic, if you reply again you will get a 4 day ban
Member: Really, I didn't go off-topic I think this is totally unjustified.
Mod *ban*
could be averted by something like
Mod: Everyone get back on topic, this is an official warning.
Member: Dude, I wasn't off-topic, I was discussing this and this and that's how it relates.
Mod: I sent you PM regarding it, please lets not continue it off-topic here, though.
Member: Ok
Everyone happy.
Just an idea though, please no bannies me cry
Originally posted by Bardock42
I see.Well, I have an unrelated suggestion, as, maybe the Mods could consider that one specific offense that regulars get often banned for is mayne mot all that horrible to warrant a ban. I am talking about the "publicly disagreeing with a mod" thing. I have seen multiple people banned like that (including myself), and I do agree that in some cases that is very justified (one might make such a case about my ban regarding that, obviously not I, as I am jaded), but I also believe that sometimes such a thing could be handled in a different fashion, which would just as well shut up the disturbance, and not create mass bannage, which does happen at times.
Its really a matter of authority. If you let someone undermine your authority publicly- or even allow it to perceived that they have- it would cause your authority to diminish- the more you allow it to happen the worse the state of affairs will get. Its very much like a school. If the teachers aren't treated as if they have absolute authority then the kids will play up and there is more disruption. That's why even our discussing what Mods should and shouldn't do is a tetchy subject- because we really shouldn't have opinions on it, from the perspective of someone who wanted their work to go on with minimal resistance that is.
Originally posted by Bardock42
As I said sometimes it is justified, when it is outright trolling, and or trying to really bait a mod, but in other cases a situation like:Mod: Everyone get back on topic, this is an official warning.
Member: Dude, I wasn't off-topic, I was discussing this and this and that's how it relates.
Mod: No, it was off topic, if you reply again you will get a 4 day ban
Member: Really, I didn't go off-topic I think this is totally unjustified.
Mod *ban*could be averted by something like
Mod: Everyone get back on topic, this is an official warning.
Member: Dude, I wasn't off-topic, I was discussing this and this and that's how it relates.
Mod: I sent you PM regarding it, please lets not continue it off-topic here, though.
Member: OkEveryone happy.
Just an idea though, please no bannies me cry
Well, your scenario would go something like this:
Mod: Everyone get back on topic, this is an official warning.
Member: Dude, I wasn't off-topic, I was discussing this and this and that's how it relates.
Mod: I sent you PM regarding it, please lets not continue it off-topic here, though.
Member: I wasn't off topic. Why retreat to PM? Don't want to face the fact you were wrong publicly?
Mod: Stop it go to PM, final Warning.
Member: I was right blah blah
Mod: Banned
Sock Account Member: You shouldn't have banned him etc etc etc
And its a vicious circle.
(I've seen that happen many-a-time.)
Just look at the aforementioned Cabal...it spirals because Mods are often too accommodating (understandably ofcourse) and give people time to become martyrs.
Yes, GMG pretty much said it. There has been for a while a group of posters who, basically, felt themselves to be above the rules of the site and that mod authority could be ignored or subverted by complaints, whining and group pressure.
Allowing people to answer back to mods in public is where this kind of thing starts. It will not be tolerared any more.
Besides, as GMG says, it doesn't go the way you say. In recent cases. you say it is a matter for PM only, and the complaints in the public thread still continue.
So I am afraid experience has simply shown your idea not to work, bardock. But perhaps more importantly the principle of respecting the authority of a mod is something we are now being very firm about, because being lax there caused massive disicpline problems in some areas.
It is not as if it has not been made exceedingly clear that all issues should be taken to PM. There is no excuse for not doing so.
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Its really a matter of authority. If you let someone undermine your authority publicly- or even allow it to perceived that they have- it would cause your authority to diminish- the more you allow it to happen the worse the state of affairs will get. Its very much like a school. If the teachers aren't treated as if they have absolute authority then the kids will play up and there is more disruption. That's why even our discussing what Mods should and shouldn't do is a tetchy subject- because we really shouldn't have opinions on it, from the perspective of someone who wanted their work to go on with minimal resistance that is.Well, your scenario would go something like this:
Mod: Everyone get back on topic, this is an official warning.
Member: Dude, I wasn't off-topic, I was discussing this and this and that's how it relates.
Mod: I sent you PM regarding it, please lets not continue it off-topic here, though.
Member: I wasn't off topic. Why retreat to PM? Don't want to face the fact you were wrong publicly?
Mod: Stop it go to PM, final Warning.
Member: I was right blah blah
Mod: Banned
Sock Account Member: You shouldn't have banned him etc etc etcAnd its a vicious circle.
(I've seen that happen many-a-time.)
Just look at the aforementioned Cabal...it spirals because Mods are often too accommodating (understandably ofcourse) and give people time to become martyrs.
But that's kinda my point. It is always "If you have a problem, go to PM , now bacl on topic", I've never seen "I explained it to you in a PM, please don't derail the thread anymore".
I think a lot of the talking back, just comes from the very degrading nature of the warnings, that are being given out. I believe many posters have a problem with the way the supposed final post is delivered. I'm just saying, that maybe, a more friendly tone, would actually help the issue more, since, obviously, usually the Mod is obviously right and the thread shouldn't be derailed...
Mod: Everyone get back on topic, this is an official warning.
Member: Dude, I wasn't off-topic, I was discussing this and this and that's how it relates.
Unfortunately, my experience is that being nice and friendly while telling people off for breaking rules makes it more likely for them to think that they can walk over you and get away with it in the future.
Also, the PM thing doesn't work because people can just not read it or delete it or ignore it entirely. I know that's what I tend to do when I get random PMs from people I don't know ermm If you're told "Stop being off-topic or you'll get an official warning" in a thread, you can't deny that you were warned.
Originally posted by PeachOh, I agree, that a firm warning in public is a necessity, I am just wondering whether the ensuing argument is necessary, and if someone needs to get banned for that, or whether there would be more civil ways. Like, I'd assume that for many it is more of a "but I get the last word", which I think can be averted without actually giving them the last word (or even, what does it matter to let them have the last word, since afterwards, exactly what you wanted would likely happen, i.e. the discussion would go back)...I am mostly talking about GDF and related forums, which I think would probably work, I don't know if other forums have very other types of posters, which maybe, really just want to troll.
Unfortunately, my experience is that being nice and friendly while telling people off for breaking rules makes it more likely for them to think that they can walk over you and get away with it in the future.Also, the PM thing doesn't work because people can just not read it or delete it or ignore it entirely. I know that's what I tend to do when I get random PMs from people I don't know ermm If you're told "Stop being off-topic or you'll get an official warning" in a thread, you can't deny that you were warned.
That's actually my point, there's a difference between people that want to troll, and people that have a severe problem with authority, except for that are actually quite valuable posters though.
[edit] Weird, I am sure I posted a short reply to Ush. But it doesn't seem to be there, well, I think my last post also covers mostly what I wanted to say to him.