Request for comment. Forum Rules Draft DocumentFollow

OK, but I bought premium so I could use the advanced search for FFXI stuff. I didn't find the OOT til I stopped playing FFXI for the most part.

That makes sense, I will add it in the next draft


I have moved that section around several times, and I do see your point, but I am not sure I want to move it at this time. Someone who is reading the entire document will probably read the whole section anyways, someone looking for a specific section will likely use the content menu at the top to find the relevent section.



Spelling errors should be fixed in next revision, Some of the karma section is worded specifically the way it is by comittee, so we'll see if I can make those changes. The karma system instructions may be included by a link to that section in the forum FAQ. I'm not sure yet.



I see your point there also. I'll take a look at that and make some changes. Generally the first offense will be a "don't do that" warning, with us pointing them at that rule, so their technical understanding of it may or may not be relevent.

Glad you liked the layout by the way.


Not sure, I'll play with it both ways. Thank you for the input!

While this is a good idea in principle, it's used inconsistently and poorly. Going through the WoW forums for a minute, this thread about Sci-Fi writer Arthur C. Clarke's death was locked and users were redirected to the Asylum (because that would have been such a good idea), as well as this one about Gary Gygax, the famed founder of D&D.

I think the assertion that they're off-topic isn't really accurate. Even ignoring the number of people who got into Sci-Fi/Fantasy (and thus, say, World of Warcraft) because of Arthur C. Clarke, you'd have a really hard time arguing that Gary Gygax and DnD isn't completely on-point to WoW players. Most forums are full of cliques, and directing people to the OoT forums would have been a mistake... much less the asylum.

This isn't so much a request for a change in the way the rule is worded, but a recognition that what you consider off-topic probably isn't.

The terms of service does that already, this may be added to that at a later date. I would like that to happen, but I do not know if it will.

That is the terms of service text. It was designed to combat people posting information like Mob X drops Uber_weapon_01 when in fact it is actually Mob Y and they are deliberatly trying to feed us false information. It used to be a big problem. I cannot alter the terms of service section without going through Allakhazam and whatnot, so I may or may not be able to do anything about that.


I will consider that, I am not sure it is necessary though. let me think about it.



I'll see if I can't find a good site to link to for that. Good idea.



I think the available admin actions are covered at the bottom of the document adequatly, but I will look into adding possible specifics.

Yes, depending on severety. If a newbie is being an ***, and they get yelled at, so be it. If they are trying to learn and get yelled at, we'll probably yell at the yeller and or nuke the post.



Depends on severity. It would depend on the severity, how much provocation was involved to get it to that point, etc. Some people also have thinner skins than others, and probably shouldn't be posting in an interactive forum.


Yes, depending again on provocation, severity, etc. It would be on a case by case basis. For example, someone who goes out of their way to **** people off, who then whines when said people start rating him down into oblivion, aint going to get much admin help...

The draft itself looks pretty spiffy!

I have a comment on the whole "treating newbies nice" bit. I think I've mentioned this before, but due to the way the two "common" forums are linked, many users of this site aren't necessarily aware that the OOT and Asylum are not game specific. I think I suggested splitting that box into a "${game} forum" and "site/common forums" sections so as to make this a bit more clear at one point, but nothing happened and that was a few years ago...

The problem is that a WoW player sees a list of WoW forums and OOT and Asylum. A FFXI player sees a list of FFXI forums and OOT and Asylum. An EQ player sees a list of EQ forums and OOT and Asylum. A Shadowbane player sees (coffee!)... you get the point.

Those game specific players may not even be aware that there are other game forums. Many people get sent to this site from other game specific sites, forums, posts, guild sites, etc. Thus, it's not uncommon for people to wander into OOT and ask what appears to be a game specific question. That's because due to the way the forums are listed, it may appear to them that the OOT is for "off topic stuff about <mygame>". So someone asking about fanzines related to a specific game, or asking what games other then <mygame> people play, or any of a number of other topics may think he's following the rules and have absolutely no clue that he just stumbled into a land mine. If he's not aware that there are multiple games served on this site (and why would he?), he's not going to likely realize that "OOT" means "not specific to any game at all".


It's a reasonable mistake for someone to make, and one that happens quite often IMO. Folks should be aware of this before laying down the hammer of painfulness on the poor newb. Not sure if there's a way to mention this in the rules (in a more concise way of course), or if there's some better way to address this. Just figured that if you're looking at rules and such that I'd mention it...

I'll show you my imaginary numbers of how many it attracts if you show me your imaginary numbers of how many it drives away.

It is not as if language is a problem on the gaming forums, so creating a rule specifically to handle it seems silly, especially when it can be dealt with using the first part of your new codified set of 'arbitrary rules', if and when it becomes a problem in limited and isolated cases.

How much is excessive ?

http://common.allakhazam.com/images/uf/fatalillusiontw/87366415847f6461aa5589.gif

for example, would that be considerd too much ? I dont mean the words, just the actual flashiness . I just loaded it as an example, I have quite a lot of animated avatars




Edited, Apr 30th 2008 6:30pm by fatalillusiontw

Good point, I will work on that section




The list of potential actions is at the bottom. I really don't want to rigidize that section because it really is situational. It depends on the poster, whether or not they should know better, how effective we think a given measure will be, etc. Someone might get a 1 day mute for a first offense of something where we might consider a longer one for someone who has a habit of doing that. Or maybe a brand new poster who didn't know better might get a 1 time warning. It really varies, and the last thing I want to do is to be forced to give someone a certain penalty for something when a lesser one would probably suffice.

If unfiltered words become a problem, they will get filtered.

Sometimes we move them to direct traffic to other forums too...

I'd say the "with admin discretion" part covers that. I wanted to link our ruleset with something official.