Originally posted by shavixmirIf you think it is draconian to legislate against terrorism you are a fool. The world will never be ideal, stop dreaming start living
Absolutely not!
What a heavy handed approach towards all non-subscribers, just because of one person.
Such draconian measures only serve to whip people up into frenzies. Like anti-terrorist laws, like wars on third world countries, etc. etc.
Tomorrow the mods will clean it up and it will be like a fart in the wind. Just ignore him.
🙂
Originally posted by trawets113I am glad that you enjoy chess, but why is it harsh, to make a non subscriber wait for a short while before they can see their posts in the forum? Surely my idea would, in the long run, make the forums better for genuine guests such as yourself
I feel this is a very harsh approach as most non subscribers do not spam. Also i feel u r neglecting to take in to account tht some people may struggle to afford the fee. For example im a university student, and have limited funds as it is. But i enjoy playing chess. Once i leave uni i will definately subscribe when i have a job and am able to afford the subscription. But i still feel we have a right to our say.
Originally posted by RavelloI agree with you as it happens, but was offering a compromise.
My solution is always the same: DON'T ALLOW NON-SUBSCRIBERS TO POST IN FORUMS!
A subscriber fears the temporarly forum-ban or the subscription/account deletion;non subscribers simply don't care.
It is a shame the damage to the forums by troublemakers is at the bottom of Russ and Chris's priority list. Probably because non subscribers can be seen as a potential market, where as, WE have already parted with our money so our wishes are not important
🙂
Originally posted by SirUlrichThis argument wold seem more feasible if it were a lifetime fee as it used to be. But since every year we become another subscription, and having a track record of paying the site previous subscriptions, I'd say we were slightly more inportant then a potential subscription.
I agree with you as it happens, but was offering a compromise.
It is a shame the damage to the forums by troublemakers is at the bottom of Russ and Chris's priority list. Probably because non subscribers can be seen as a potential market, where as, WE have already parted with our money so our wishes are not important
🙂
I'm against the idea of banning non subscribers from the forums. Maybe a trial period where they could inly post after a couple moves were made in a game. Also I see no reason why they should'nt be able to post in the help or meet opponents threads. On that note I see no reason why a nonsubscriber would need to post in the clan forum, as they really have'nt much they could add to that conversation.
Nyxie
Originally posted by T1000yup-that was the old way, and it got rather confusing if your post didn't appear immediatly...IMO, the current way is better as one night of madness every night in a while is better than consant boredom...
If memory servces, back in the dim and distant days, at one point on the old boards I seem to recall all posts made by people who hadn't made many posts had to be approved by a moderator before they displayed. Not saying it was a good way or anything - just raising it as a bit of nostalgia 😲
Originally posted by SirUlrichIf I may make a slightly altered suggestion:
Seeing the General Forum again filled with foul mouthed rubbish from a non subscriber, why not change the forum mods' guidelines.
All posts by subscribers to be treated exactly as they are now:
eg. . only looked at by mods after alerts are raised.
All posts by non-subscribers to be looked at by mods BEFORE they appear in the forums. This gives tho ...[text shortened]... heard, albeit on a slightly delayed basis.
If this needs more mods I for one will volunteer.
Why not do what you suggested, but only for non-subscribers below a certain number of recs? If someone gathers 10 recs, chances are high that he is not one of those rubbish posters. That way, it could be considered a trial period for non-subscribers.
lol I'm also there if more mods are needed...
Angie 😀
Originally posted by SirUlrichI don't agree on this : admins have taken care in may ways about troublemaker and we can't hassle 'em at every guy who posts rubbish in forums.
I agree with you as it happens, but was offering a compromise.
It is a shame the damage to the forums by troublemakers is at the bottom of Russ and Chris's priority list. Probably because non subscribers can be seen as a potential market, where as, WE have already parted with our money so our wishes are not important
🙂
It was created Robomod,more mods were recruited,the cheat police has been created,the over 13 age limit has been introduced: all we can say but not that Russ doesn't care about trouble makers.
On the issue of non-subs I have my opinion but Russ already made it clear in the past:non subscribers posting in forums are a good marketing for the site and Russ is first of all a business man,so don't expect him to take in consideration a vote about non-subs posting in forums.
- Joined
- 03 Sep 03
- Moves
- 89331
Originally posted by DavidLynxI find it interesting that it was only a FEW MINUTES after YOU asked if somebody could be kicked off for spamming; that the spammer last night started up. Don't you find that interesting?
how about a person can not post again untill after 1 minute. than it will be make the spammers tired to wait so long just to spam another thread, getting rid of all those pages of spam.
Note: when I mentioned this "coincidence" to the spammer. They said that they know you/play with you on IC. Sounds like the old brother/dad excuses used by certain now-banned players of the site.
I hate to accuse falsely, but I think that it is a pretty amazing coincidence...
--tmetzler
Originally posted by DavidLynxconsidering the rubbish you wrote in other threads, you are not exactly improving the situation for non-subscribers.
how about a person can not post again untill after 1 minute. than it will be make the spammers tired to wait so long just to spam another thread, getting rid of all those pages of spam.
How about a button under non-subscribers posts "shut this user up". It should either be that when you click it, that user can't post again for an hour, or when 10 people click the button that person get's a forum ban for 2 weeks... or forever... I don't care
Angie
