1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

About your warnings

Discussion in 'Questions and Site Feedback' started by Curtkid, Sep 22, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Curtkid

    Curtkid Guest

    O.K, first off, I'm hoping to join you guys soon, once registration is up, but I got to say this first, I think you guys are a little strict with you warnings, first, you only give people three shots, thats understandable, but to be banned forever, after only three screw ups? Come on, no ones perfict, and you ban them for little thinks ex: Off topic, double post, spam. I'm sorry, I just had to get this off my chest.
     
  2. Sem

    Sem The Last of the Snowmen
    Former Administrator

    Our system is rather fair actually. First warning, meh no biggie, its a warning. Just letting the person know that they did something wrong, and to be more careful, perhaps reread the rules so they know for certain what not to do.

    Second Warning... erm ok, you REALLY should look at the rules and evaluate yourself, see what you're doing wrong, read the rules again, ask a mod.

    If they manage to get third warning, well then they're generally too stupid to follow our very simple system, and thus, not fit for being on the site. We don't like idiots on our site, kthx.

    Welcome to 'Charms, Curtkid. I hope you're not an idiot =)
     
  3. Curtkid

    Curtkid Guest

    No, I'm not a idiot, I'm a rule abiding citizen, and was a member here for a bit, i was Curtis, but I quit(Long story don't ask). But, look at Artise, he made a mistake from time to time. And now, he can never come back! He had over 800 posts, and now he's gone forever. I think your O.K with the three warnings, but I think people should be able to come back after a ban.
     
  4. Sem

    Sem The Last of the Snowmen
    Former Administrator

    If you're a good member, then I wouldn't worry.

    You don't get exceptions from the warning policy if you're able to rack up a certain amount of posts. Artiste was warned before for what he did, and he's seen plenty of people get warned and/or banned for the same reason as he. He therefore had no excuse.

    And if we remove our permanent ban policy, then all the idiots come back. D= We then have to deal with them all over again! Can you say, "Deja vu?" Srsly. We doesn't want that does we, precioussss? >> No, we doesn't.
     
  5. I read the rules, and as someone who would like to become a member when Registration opens up again, I have a few concerns I would like addressed. I figured since it sorta deals with the warnings, it was Ok to post it here.

    First order of Busy-ness:
    I hope no one minds me "lurking" on the boards with this name as a guest until registration becomes active again. You'll know if it's not me posting, because I'm a VERY polite person. If it seems I've said something rude or completely insulting, then it wasnt me!! AIM me at XPushingOBorders if you believe I've offended you to clarify. = )

    Second: As I was reading the rules, some things stated in them alarmed me very much and I wanted to know if they could be addressed. The first concern I had was about reviving a dead topic. I know that you've stated not to resurrect such topics, ubless you have relevant information, but the rule itself almost seems to be written contradictingly. "This is generally acceptable ONLY if there is a new, relevant update, and the thread has only recently died. Threads from early 2006 and back are NOT to be revived unless they have had activity recently." I do not understand why I cannot post in something that has been dead for a few months or weeks if it was not first revived by a mod... what is the case here?

    Third: Off-Topic-ness. How far are you allowed to go before you get warned? I've run my fair share of boards and it was ok for us to get off topic for a few posts (usually 5 or so) before we got ourselves back on topic. Whats the deal here? I know that it was listed that being off topic is a warn-able offense and so I have to wonder how far is the slack here before someone gets punished? I'd like to know before registering (whenever that becomes available) so that I dont get into a crazy dictatorship or sell my soul or something. Hahaha.

    Any light you guys can shed on this would be much appreciated and admired. Thanks you guys!! = )
     
  6. Don't be surprised if the off-topicness is frowned on more here, different forums have different rules.
     
  7. StellarWind Elsydeon

    StellarWind Elsydeon Armblades Ascendant
    Staff Member Administrator

    Let me put it this way.

    When 'charms was started, we had no need to be so harsh - for we didn't have these crazy amounts of useless, moronic n00bs, the kind of which should be fed to the e-Lions (get in the car >>). We could allow ourselves to go with Three Strikes, then you get some time to cool off, restricted to posting in only one board, until we saw an improvement. If you failed after that, BAN'd.

    It worked for years. Then the trainer card maker came along and the proverbial shite hit the proverbial fan. So, we had to make our system harsher. Yes, we ARE harsh, and we are harsh because we demand quality of our posters.

    QUALITY, I must stress, NOT Quantity. That is why your Artiste argument is invalid.

    See, when we can tell in advance that a member is bad news, we tend to keep a watchful eye - or three - on them. Artiste and a whole bunch of little pains in the ass arrived together. Some of them gave us an excuse to sparta-kick them out of the board faster than you could say Yukio Oikawa. Others, like Artiste did their best not to break any rules, but that didn't stop him from being a pain in our collective ass. So we stalked him like a hawk until he tripped and allowed us to finally kick his sorry derriere out of here, and good riddance to bad rubbish.

    Also, I'm amused by you sales-pitching a warning bar that you cannot even provide. It's true that SMF modifications are very diverse, but installing them might be a bit of an ordeal that Alex would not want to go through. We have a working warning system, no need to replace it for one that will use features we don't need.

    Three strikes and you're out. That's how it's been, that's how it's going to be, and if you have problems with that, kindly take them elsewhere.

    As for ye with the name full of redundant X-es and O-s - nothing is wrong with lurking as long as you don't spam the place up like there's no tomorrow.

    Regarding the rule about reviving dead topics - It's quite simply because we said so. We don't want old topics from like 2004 floating up all of a sudden because some mindless n00b decided to reply to them after the question has long since been answered. This happened before.

    Dead threads can be several months old and untouched, and then it is frowned upon to revive them if there's nothing relevant to add. The early 2006 thing (that is soon to change because we're about to enter a new year and so the deadlines need to be moved!) is a time frame from which threads MUSTN'T BE REVIVED NO MATTER WHAT - that goes beyond necromancy and into sheer beating a dead horse. However If a mod or an admin revives a thread from early 2006 that means they have a good reason to. This will almost never happen though.

    (Bear in mind that 'Recent activity in an old thread' could also mean, for instance, a thread that was started in 2005 or something but is still active and getting posts - such as, for instance, the chat log topic).

    Off-Topicness... let me put it this way. Conversations that naturally derail, as long as it's kept intelligent, are alright. However, a post like 'Kittens. Aren't they just fluffy-wuffy adorable?' in a thread dealing with the rise and fall of the Roman Empire is something completely different. If you go TOO off-topic however, expect to be warned.

    Also, if you're worried about entering crazy dictatorships and selling your soul - I'm sorry to tell you that that's pretty much what we are: A soul-consuming dictatorship of doom. Deal with it, kthx. ^^
     
  8. Linkachu

    Linkachu Hero of Pizza
    Staff Member Administrator

    Adding to what Stel said...

    I do not understand why I cannot post in something that has been dead for a few months or weeks if it was not first revived by a mod... what is the case here?

    But you can. Topics that died in 2006 and topics that died in July or August 2007 have a VERY different time-frame, eh? 2006 is over a year ago, hence not 'recent'. A topic a few weeks or month old IS recent, so yeah, it's alright to reply to.

    Relevant info can simply be seen as a relevant reply to a topic that hasn't already been stated. Like Stel said, people lately seem to be reviving topics that have been dead for weeks just to say something that's already been answered multiple times. If someone asked for help on something they're "currently" stuck at (like beating the E4), is giving them advice two months down the road really meaningful? ... Unless they came back two months later and said "I'm still stuck!", I'd say not xp

    That said, topics like "What's your favourite Pokemon?", the Video Topic, the Dream Thread, etc. are open-ended, so replying to them after a few months has passed makes sense. Stickied topics especially can be replied to at any time no matter how old they are because that's what they're there for.

    For 6 month + or so old non-stickied topics, or non-"offical ____ topics", it makes sense to just make new threads for them if new interest arises. People are always changing, and maybe someone's original reply to said topic is totally different now. It's also nice to have fresh starts on topics like those for newer members, and may generate new discussions.

    This is all just my opinion on it o'course, but I'd say it's not that unreasonable.
     
  9. Curtkid

    Curtkid Guest

    Well, I'm not going to force(Nor can I) you guys to change your warnings. I'll still join and watch my ass, and try(and Hope) to never get a warning, I had my say, and maybe, one day you'll guys will cool off and give people a second chance. Do I think you guys are way to stricked, yes, am I going to keep complaining about? No. I'v had my say, your site, your rules, no mater how unfair I think they are, I will leave this alone now. And I hope registration will be up soon.
     
  10. Linkachu

    Linkachu Hero of Pizza
    Staff Member Administrator

    If you think its so unfair, why would you want to join? o.O

    Really, you going on about how unfair/strict the rules supposedly are makes me not want to see you as a member. They're the way they are because of spamming members, and there's been plenty of times now where we all just wished the forums didn't exist BECAUSE of that. We got sick of staring at spamming crap all day, Alex most of all because he pays for the website.

    If you have a problem with it, don't join. If not, stop going on about it. As far as I'm concerned, these rules are perfect for what we need to actually keep this place together, and I don't fancy the idea of giving people who spammed a forth chance (yes, forth. Three warnings = three chances. The fact that people get banned means they blew all three). We don't have the time or energy for it, nor care for the headaches >>

    And this is why topics like these keep getting locked >_
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page