At 6/3/09 01:48 PM, NEVR wrote: Perhaps, but I think there are other reasons for those regulars leaving as well. I don't want to see regs leaving, but if they are set on leaving then there's probably myriad factors involved in their decision.

I agree with this, and I understand what you mean about not liking regulars leaving; I feel the same, especially when I've known them for a while. I know forum mods have been underlined as a factor by users like WilliWowza as to why they're are deciding to stop using the BBS, or use it less often. Those individual users will often point out specific factors pertaining to BBS moderation, but I think there tends to be other things too, like you say. I've found that a user simply moving on in their life, moving onto things where they'll be busy more often, going to places where they'll have less time to use an Internet forum regularly. Yes, I believe there are specific times where what some mods do could possibly be a turn off to some, some of which I've discussed a little myself. I certainly don't think, as I've been saying, that regulars leaving is 100% down to "Nazi moderation" though, and as this thread has shown, not everyone hates the mods by any means. As I and a few others have said, it's really a two way street in more ways than one... erm, two. Ah, you'll get what I mean hopefully.

At 6/3/09 01:51 PM, igott wrote: We're still going to need to control Newfags and Underage Users. All the most of you have done is complain about the bansticks. Maybe the bansticks would be lightened with the decrease of immaturity.

Someone has already said something similar to this, so sorry for not giving credit where it's due here: I think that's one of those things that's easier said than done, at least, the underage users part. I know a lot of people say Newgrounds has changed for the worse in this way, but in my opinion, it's not Newgrounds that's changed: it's the Internet that's changed. There are so many more commerical oppurtunities online compared to what there was in, say, 2001. There's a huge online market for young people, and that's where "even younger" people will catch on. Newgrounds naturally become a popular site for these pre-teens because of its content. I'll admit now that I was twelve when I was first introduced to this place, through a friend showing my a Flash movie.

I do agree though that improving much of the behaviour (in regards to "immaturity" and "maturity") would lower the rate of bans being dished out, of course. Again, I think that's a collective effort, but I also think a lot of the bad things about the threads etc. are exaggerated. I guess I say that because I tend to only remember threads I like. If I'm not interested in something, or see it as downright stupid, I tend to just forget about it. Hmm, personal feeling.

I feel like I'm off on a tangent here, not really knowing what I'm saying. Anyway, hopefully it's something anyway. Yes, I like being serious on the Internet and all that.

At 6/3/09 03:48 AM, crapatflash wrote: I don't think I've ever seen a mod give out a warning before... If it's an obvious attempt at a flame or troll then yeah, ban them, but otherwise you need to be more specific. Having BBS rules open to read I think is pretty pointless. I mean, if you bought a new video game, how many of you would read the instruction manual? You wouldn't, you would just jump right in and get the feel for the controls yourself.

The video game will not ask you if you've read the instruction manual as a term of use. But this BBS will. So by checking the box that says you read and understand the forum rules, you agreed to be bound by them. You guys that seem to think that's no big deal are going to have a lot of problems in life if you don't start taking contracts, terms of service, and any document that requires that once you sign it you be bound to it's terms and conditions seriously.

At 6/3/09 02:28 PM, Fyndir wrote: Jesus, it's like you guys can't recite the rules page from memory.

# Use proper punctuation and grammar.

It's right there, along with other "simple guidelines".

Well i know that. What i'm getting from igott is making anything other than proper english a bannable offense, maybe he meant something else, i don't fully know. I write my posts properly so everyone knows exactly what i'm trying to say.

At 6/3/09 02:28 PM, Fyndir wrote:

At 6/3/09 02:03 PM, Elios wrote:

At 6/3/09 01:51 PM, igott wrote: Also, making grammar a rule.

but there's no rule

Jesus, it's like you guys can't recite the rules page from memory.

# Use proper punctuation and grammar.

It's right there, along with other "simple guidelines".

It's a guideline, I'm saying to make it a rule.

At 6/3/09 01:54 PM, Sammeh wrote:

At 6/2/09 08:48 PM, jmalouin7 wrote:

fighting

fighting

Take it to PM's both of you, or I will ban you both. This topic is NOT for you to take your feud's public.

That goes for anybody I see here since this is the second time somebody has needed to be warned not to feud in public. This is not the "air you're grievances with everyone in public" thread. Use the PM system for that or take a vacation.

Only warning about that.

At 6/3/09 02:42 PM, igott wrote: It's a guideline, I'm saying to make it a rule.

I think the problem with it as a hard and fast rule is that you will scare off people who might get better with time. I agree people shouldn't treat a bulletin board like a chat room or a text message, if we can't read your stuff, and it's a consistent problem, you're stuff is gone, we're already doing that. I don't see where it needs to be upgraded to a rule, and I think it will cause more bans not just for the violator, but for the kind of grammar nazis that feel the need to go around and correct people's spelling, or crap all over their posts saying "I can't read that" as now they could go "good grammer is a rule now, you should be banned" and it's one more thing to backseat mod about.

I think we're good on that being a guideline at present, I think some people start out rough, and they improve, if they're getting banned a lot out of the gate, they may not want to spend that time to improve or ever come back again.

Also, it gets kind of annoying when threads like "Zombie Facts" get overrun with people who are more interested in derailing other peoples' posts than actually going along with the thread and having a good time.

And about the common editing posts concern, I'm pretty sure it's so that someone can't make a useful post and then replace it with some crap after it's been linked to or quoted. Not positive, but I'm pretty sure that's why. However, it would be nice if we could ADD to our posts, like adding on side notes or 'what I meant to say...' or 'I forgot to add...' and stuff like that, so we wouldn't have to worry about double-posting and stuff. I know mods have no jurisdiction over that kind of stuff, but it would be worth PMing an admin about.

At 5/31/09 01:21 PM, Laughingbox wrote: First off, I want to ask the programmers of the BBS. Is there an way for a new "never posted before" user to be forced to see the rules?

Now this would be a bit ridiculous, but you could make a kind of Flash game you have to pass. You'd start off with a button at the side of the screen that prevents you from moving the mouse out, and a copy/paste only password in font 1 to clear Clipboard so users couldn't copy/paste. Then, you'd be given the BBS rules and you'd have to type them out again and hit the Next button. And things like the Windows button, or Ctrl+Alt+Delete, and right-clicking would restart the 'game' so you couldn't cheat. Purely theoretical, and somewhat OCD, but I don't see a reason why it wouldn't work.

I know when i'm about to get banned, every time.

Reminds me of a time when I posted something, and then I was like "crap crap!!" and trying to close the tab before the page finished loading.

Now, let's take a thread that may have either been true or false. However it may be, let's look at the comments. Of the next ten replies, nine are by a different person than the OP. Of the nine, 6 were either +1's, or generally a load of crap that we shouldn't have or shouldn't have to deal with on the BBS. General harassment, unfunny jokes.

Got to page 6, but I can't muscle through any more of this.

At 6/3/09 02:53 PM, Kwing wrote:

At 5/31/09 01:21 PM, Laughingbox wrote: First off, I want to ask the programmers of the BBS. Is there an way for a new "never posted before" user to be forced to see the rules?

Now this would be a bit ridiculous

I think there's actually a little box that you have to check when you first post that states that you agree to comform to the BBS rules, etc. Still, I imagine most people just check the box and don't read the rules, so it's their own fault ifthey get banned after that, really.

At 6/3/09 02:12 PM, SCUD14 wrote:

At 6/3/09 02:09 PM, MultiCanimefan wrote:

You know what would be good? A monthly "BBS feedback" thread, in which users (normal AND mods) leave their opinion on how the BBS experience has been for them that month.

Aah it's hard to explain, but do you understand what I mean?

I do. And to the range of ideas as a whole:

With regards to most of the changes irrelevant to the mods, most of the suggestions rely on trust. As in we need to give the users of the proposed feedback system the benefit of the doubt when they leave their opinion.

At 6/3/09 02:53 PM, Kwing wrote: Also, it gets kind of annoying when threads like "Zombie Facts" get overrun with people who are more interested in derailing other peoples' posts than actually going along with the thread and having a good time.

That's where you need to look at the "who's online?" list, and PMing a mod that is on at the time. You're threads don't HAVE to get overrun, you can PM a mod and have them take care of it before it gets out of hand. STOP ASSUMING MODS READ EVERYTHING OR HAVE TIME TO READ EVERYTHING!! We don't, this forum is massive, if you don't want threads you like to become pits that we have no recourse but to lock or delete, then you need to report when they're getting shit in. If you don't want to do that, live with losing the thread. Harsh? Probably, but it's the truth.

And about the common editing posts concern, I'm pretty sure it's so that someone can't make a useful post and then replace it with some crap after it's been linked to or quoted. Not positive, but I'm pretty sure that's why. However, it would be nice if we could ADD to our posts, like adding on side notes or 'what I meant to say...' or 'I forgot to add...' and stuff like that, so we wouldn't have to worry about double-posting and stuff. I know mods have no jurisdiction over that kind of stuff, but it would be worth PMing an admin about.

I've never seen something like that, what I've seen is either full edit ability, or nothing. There are people who can't be trusted with full edit. To me, I don't do much about double posting, if you post only like twice in a row, and it's not garbage it's all on topic and interesting, I leave it be. If you're going over two, or it's short and crappy, or it gets to be a habit, then I will do something about it. Otherwise I think it's fine, and if you accidentally post the same thing twice, then I just delete the extra post and do nothing beyond that. That's how I personally do it and think it oughtta be done. Sometimes we all do it, long as it isn't habitual or excessive, I don't think it's worth being a hard ass over, so I still don't think a post edit is needed. Again, if people would proof read their shit before hitting the "post it!" button, that would handle problems too.

At 6/3/09 02:56 PM, Fyndir wrote: I guess I'm exactly the kind of person who would end up pissing you all off if grammatical correctness was 100% required and enforced.

You have indeed made my point. Like I say EVERYBODY makes little mistakes from time to time. People who can't communicate properly get corrected good enough already.

Concerning the editing posts feature...

While I whole-heartedly believe that editing should be implemented... I think if anyone deserves a post edit button, the mods need it the most.

I recently viewed a thread where a new user posted about free prescription drugs over the internet. Needless to say, the mod did lock up, but could not remedy the issue of the link still being present.

If mods had an edit button, things like that would be sorted quickly and efficiently.

It would also be awesome to see mods abusing it.

At 5/31/09 11:00 AM, Jonas wrote:

So 4 cereal, here's the simple question...

There's only two things I would like to see here on the BBS that are slowly driving me farther and farther away from here, and leaving the community I love so much.

The first of these is that I would like to see no more rules made without a referendum across all boards. Recently there was a new rules announced totally out of the blue banning another everyday occurrence from the forums. If there was a referendum on all rules made on the BBS, the mature regs would probably get more from the site, or at least that's my opinion.

The second is I would like to see all "ALL<object/idea/page> GO HERE OR BAN!" threads disbanded, and no more created. Since this is a forum for everything and anything within limits, then topics shouldn't be grouped together because it prevents the individual subjects from gaining the publicity they deserve IMHO.

That is all. Thoughts, mods?

The mods haven't really done anything to kill the BBS's fun. The users have.

At 6/3/09 04:29 PM, Frank-The-Hedgehog wrote: Really, I would like the see the banning because the user is posting in a spam thread to stop, there is really no point in it. Isn't deleting the thread itself enough? Banning everyone who posted in it is a little bit overkill don't you think?

We have the option to ban just the OP when destoying a spam thread. The options to ban everyone who posted in the thread are there for when everyone else is making things worse, in which case I think it's fair enough to ban those users too.

The destroy feature is something that should be used less, though, IMO.

i think it would be better if mods couldnt ban for ANYTHING. they should have to choose a category, like blowing a whistle. and they hafta have reasonable cause.

At 6/3/09 04:47 PM, SuperMarioBrosS wrote: ...

This is what's making the BBS un-fun. Far, far too many users (Mods and regulars alike) taking an online forum as seriously as cancer of the brain.

People need to recognise the BBS for what it is: a place to have fun. Now that DOESN'T mean that we need to throw out the rules. A remoival of boundaries would make the place LESS fun for a majority of the users.

But just take into account:
If you're not here to have fun, go elsewhere.

And that is the whole purpouse of this thread- make the BBS more fun again. Being set boundaries does NOT mean we can't act like morons every now and then.

Just to reinforce my point:

At 6/3/09 03:49 PM, NeonFlame126 wrote: The mods haven't really done anything to kill the BBS's fun. The users have.

Exactly. On the other hand, I'd like to direct attention to the thread made by Evark almost two years ago, but it still holds true.

Now, should we bitch about it? No, because we have to improve to a certain extent. The first step towards change is making the first step yourself.

I think that moderators are taking their place too seriously. A short and spammy post is most times the funniest type of post.

In my opinion, mods should try to be more picky when locking threads. Let's take for example that thread reanimator54 made with his "artwork". It obviously failed beyond human logic, but everyone had a lot of fun making that kid pissed, and I think that the BBS would be way more onjoyable if we lived a lot more by the "law of the jungle" (let the noobs be ridiculized until they learn their lesson), in my opinion, if less threads were locked, it would be way more fun.

I know that for someone who has a different point of view, this post is completely retarded, but it's just what would make these BBS more fun.

At 6/3/09 04:54 PM, PortalGun wrote: i think it would be better if mods couldnt ban for ANYTHING. they should have to choose a category, like blowing a whistle. and they hafta have reasonable cause.

Yeah...that's never going to happen, and watch how bad the BBS gets if we can't remove the really bad offenders. You'd be BEGGING for us to be able to ban again.

Maybe the mods should take two days off, let the BBS run rampant, and see how long it is before people are calling to have them and the rules back.

At 6/3/09 06:05 PM, SCUD14 wrote: Maybe the mods should take two days off, let the BBS run rampant, and see how long it is before people are calling to have them and the rules back.

Wouldn't even be a day, and also, we'd have to clean up the mess.

Does anybody have anything else new or constructive to say? Because right now it seems like we're just repeating ourselves on all sides, or throwing out things that simply won't happen in a million years.

Some of you BBS mods are taking this Nazi mod thing way to serious like rig and I'm not talking about banning. I'm talking about posting in General sure its funny when Poozy does it like he famous quotes "Who want some Ban sandwiches" Mods should be appreciated not feared.

And if you have to ban something like "/thread" Please ban M.S paint too it's getting way to fucking annoying that I even stop with M.S paint

I think a warning for the first time you do something would help. Instead of banning off the bat. Also, less bantime if a thread is accidentally spam. As in, the OP had sincere intentions but not the best methods.

At 6/3/09 06:55 PM, Twilight wrote:

At 6/3/09 06:54 PM, Parlux wrote: sure its funny when Poozy does it like he famous quotes "Who want some Ban sandwiches"

No it isn't.

Dear lord no it is not.

I was trying to make a point as In it was funny when he first became a mod. Then other mods try to cash in to the Oh "I'm a mod now and I'm gonna be an asshole for here on out" To make this clear I mean Rig. No I never been Banned by Rig I have nothing against him, but I seen the nazi mod thing more then once (BBR, Eyelovepoozy, Sanjay)

At 6/3/09 05:14 PM, SCUD14 wrote: This is what's making the BBS un-fun. Far, far too many users (Mods and regulars alike) taking an online forum as seriously as cancer of the brain.

I do agree with a large part of what you're saying. I think I should say now that within this thread, I feel as if some of the posts I've made go a bit over-the-top in the stuffy department, and they may even come off as a little bossy when discussing another user's ideas. If anyone has felt like that when reading a post of mine here, then I'm sorry. If that's the case, then I probably need to work on my tone.

I think there's a fine line between taking an online forum super-seriously, uppity even, and letting the whole thing descend into e-anarchy as two extremes, as you go on to imply. As I've said before, I post in this here thread because I like the Newgrounds BBS (I honestly don't think it's "shit" as too many seem to believe; I could do be doing much worse things with my time than what I generally do here, trust me), and when relaitively established regulars/e-friends start to disappear for various reasons, then I'd prefer to get to the bottom of it, like many users and mods alike here have had a crack at discussing. That's what I believe to be the primary intention of this thread anyway: as far as I see it, it's certainly not to bitch to/about other users, that's just pretty painful to read, as usual.

***

Just something while I'm here, I'll bring up something about SuperMarioBroS and the points he made. I've been saying for a long time in this thread that the great, sometimes unforgiving, world of online foruming is turned by opinion, and that's clearly obvious in this thread. Hey, they're important things about ourselves when we're talking to people we don't know and have never met face-to-face. Going by that maxim, your points are fair enough.

I feel though, that you don't do yourself much justice by going out there and addressing specific mods in the way that you do, if you see what I mean. It's similar to that thought of, "You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" in this certain thread, which I'll admit is a little unfortunate at times, but it's reall only fair if you're asking for change at the same time. I do actually remember that "game" you attempted to get going, though not in great detail admittedly. I remember it being complicated, and I wasn't really all that surprised by the lock if I'm honest with you. As for another point: I've got to say, it's better to ignore posts if you believe they're uninteresting, stupid, etc. to you personally, even if they're getting in the way of a potentially good discussion. It's happened to me, sure, but you can't really have everything. I'd love it some of the fundamentals about BBS behaviour could be changed, while still allowing people to have a fun time... but I'm fine with what we've got, if truth be told.

As for Malachy... well, again, this is down to personal opinion, but I think he's a good mod, and he seems to be a decent guy from when I've spoken to him in Stickam once or twice, or in the largely informal Politics forum regulars lounge. I think I was first introduced to him shortly before he was made review mod, and I can't say I've seen him be a major arsehole or anything. That, and he made me laugh once. Just for that, he could be in my good book, yes, I constantly carry around a good book and a bad book.

I think I know how you feel. I had a negative opinion of BadReligionSkater for a while because of a 30-day ban in 2006. Hey, I was being a moron, it was fair enough. I like to think I learnt from it. aviewaskewed is another one, after a comment he once made addressing me. I think he's a nice guy now, from me being a self-proclaimed Politics lurker extraordinaire, and from posting in this thread. I'm betting most "grudges" work their way eventually. Sure, I don't love all the mods now, but I think that might be asking too much. As I've said before, they're a diverse bunch. That's not to say they don't have their shared... ahem, ways though. ;)

Just some thoughts anyway, ehm.

I have an Idea that the admins will never go for but It's a worth a try. A spam forum just post any thing you like (There will be a few rules and if you fuck up once perma banned) the forum will be delete all the threads every 24 hours.

Now you can get all the shit that you wanted to post and get it out of your system.

I personally don't see anything wrong with the BBS. I don't think it's going to change because we will always have our set of assholes, and young users.

I don't remember a time when I really got pissed over something... Oh wait, there was one topic but that was it. I think the moderators are doing an "okay" job, they're not the brightest people around, but at least they try to make this place fun.

I've been banned fairly and I don't think any moderator has treated me like shit. I have problems with attention whoring, I see that way too much around here. The attention whoring and the dick sucking pisses me off. Just a reminder to the ass kissers, "just because you're sucking up, doesn't mean you'll be a moderator." Sure, you can join events but that doesn't mean you'll be one anytime soon.

I am a very quiet person in the BBS and I've been just looking around the BBS lately. The other problem with this BBS has to be the not the regulars, nor the moderators. But the lack of originality in people's topics. I don't give a shit if you've been in a fight with a girl, and lost (which is pretty embarassing, but this is the internet; free shit).

If topics have more "epic" in them, maybe I'll party along, but I will never spam no matter what the other people are doing. Some of you guys might read this, some of you might not. I don't give a shit if you flame me from this statement I made, if you agree "thanks" but if you don't "go fuck yourself."

At 6/3/09 07:14 PM, gumOnShoe wrote:

Its been proposed before, but the reason we had moderators to begin with was to avoid that because the bbs was taking up too many resources.

Can you at lest ban M.S paint spam the bbs would be 5% percent better if that was gone too and thats not a estimate that's hard data

At 6/3/09 06:51 PM, Fyndir wrote: What is the current policy regarding the signing of bans?

Mods don't have to sign any of their bans. I usually sign most of mine, but we do reserve the right not to sign our bans -- sometimes the potential hassle just isn't worth it.