I am a very vocal member, this is how I've always done things. It's likely why I'm also not really cut out to be a moderator and have no aspirations to ever be one again--the rule about agreeing with all staff in public never sat well with me.
| Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format |
| Initial D World - Discussion Board / Forums > Announcement Board > Bump Limit Reinstated |
| Posted by: Tessou Jun 18 2012, 09:28 AM |
| As of right now, we have reinstated the bump limit that older members might remember. Attempts to double post too soon after a post will route members to an error screen explaining this fact, along with a copy of what they were trying to post so they can edit their previous post. This was set in light of the recent glut of multi-posts that have required the mod team to go into cleanup mode via merging posts. The bump limit has been set at 24 hours. After that time period has passed, members are free to bump the topic again without restriction. Forum guidelines are being edited to reflect this change. I'm gonna rock your body (till the break of dawn), ///TESSOU/// |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Jun 18 2012, 12:28 PM |
| This is a test of the semi-automated Democracy Probe System. This is only a test. Should this test probe be deleted or altered from its original content, the System will automatically switch out of test mode. Test procedure initiation in 3...2...1. So why did you feel the need to edit my post, Tessou? How about deleting other peoples' posts? Now, I'm totally okay with a person going in and changing their post after making an honest mistake. Go ahead. But to use their staff power to not only edit their post without an edit tag but also change my post, and delete J's post? I believe that's going much too far. Just so you're aware, new Admin, there has been precedent of staff members going back even years to change signatures, avatars, their post content and others' post content so they don't look as silly after making honest mistakes. I should also note that all of the members who have done that are no longer on staff. Am I saying those actions led to their dismissal? No. I don't think that can be proven. However, it is the mindset, the abuse of power stemming from being okay with doing such things that I believe truly proved they were unfit for the badge. So yes, I'm putting this out there in public. I've given at least the courtesy of not naming specifically what incident I'm referring to but I think you already know and since this is meant for you that's all that matters. My point is not to slander you, it is not to make you look like a bad person, it is nothing so petty. This is a warning. I'm seeing the first step in a dangerous slope. Let's not go down that road. It would be better for everyone. This concludes the test of the semi-automated Democracy Probe System. Good-bye. |
| Posted by: Tessou Jun 18 2012, 01:26 PM |
| I would have appreciated a PM instead of this ridiculous post. For those that wish to be informed, I've already imposed a moderator warning on myself and spoke with Perry about it. Your democracy is not in jeopardy. But I do hope you all have the decency to know that stooping to the offender's level is not the right way to act. I've taken my humility pill this morning already. I trust everybody that wants to say they're a more mature human being can act on it, accept that justice has already been carried out, and move on with life. |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Jun 18 2012, 06:07 PM |
| The easiest way to make sure that a politician pays attention to a problem is to make it a public issue. A PM may have been appreciated but a public post is much more effective. I thank you for the response and am glad that steps have already been taken to resolve the problem. I am a very vocal member, this is how I've always done things. It's likely why I'm also not really cut out to be a moderator and have no aspirations to ever be one again--the rule about agreeing with all staff in public never sat well with me. |
| Posted by: kyonpalm Jun 18 2012, 06:39 PM |
| So back on topic (I was waiting for Don to have a chance to reply) does it really need to be 24 hours? When I proposed this idea, I originally thought 3-4 hours, but maybe 6 would be fine too. Does anyone else think 24 hours is a bit too long? |
| Posted by: Wanderer Jun 18 2012, 09:12 PM |
| I think it's too long. [ Post made via Mobile Device ] |
| Posted by: THE_HONDA_CG2 Jun 18 2012, 09:29 PM |
| I think the bump limit is set at a fine time. Wasn't it originally set at 72 hours? 24 hours isn't too long, and it isn't too short. I can't find any justification on making it 3 or 6 hours so unless someone comes up with some perfectly valid reason, I don't see any point in changing it. |
| Posted by: Spaz Jun 18 2012, 10:04 PM | ||
TWSS. If we could still function at 72 hours before, 24's not that bad. |
| Posted by: bROCKoLEE Jun 19 2012, 04:32 AM |
Just outta curiosity, where can I find this 'incident' that prompted such action. I wanna see how crazy of a spree it actually was lol  |
| Posted by: kyonpalm Jun 19 2012, 05:48 AM | ||
I wish I had some "evidence" but I don't. I can tell you, though, over the past two months I dealt with around 10 double, triple, and even an unprecedented QUADRUPLE post (though that one was just someone's mistake) all made anywhere from within 2 hours to 10 minutes. So as for the limit, if you think 6 hours is too short, how about 12 then? I see no reason it HAS to be 24 hours, I think 12 is long enough. Hear me out, think about this: the only real reason we need a post limit is because if you're bumping a thread with a double-post RIGHT AFTER your original post, no one had time to read the first post to begin with, so you may as well have just edited the first post. Right? So then, let's say 6 hours pass. I think people will have read that first post in that 6-hour window, don't you think? Then if you have some relevant information to bump the thread with after that point, it should be fine. If you still disagree about 6 hours, you at least have to agree that 12 is fine. You can't possibly tell me people don't read posts within 12 hours of the original post - it's just factually false, and forum statistics will show otherwise. Hell, chances are you log in MULTIPLE times in 12, maybe even 6 hours. |
| Posted by: Tessou Jun 19 2012, 08:07 AM |
| If you're a mod and want to publicly decry staff decisions, you're going to have a bad time. The bump limit was discussed and shaped yesterday between Perry, Spaz (briefly), and myself, before it was implemented. IDW used to have a 72 hour bump limit and people rarely ever complained about it. I decided that with forum activity as it is, 24 hours should be more than adequate to discourage rapid fire posting (in the same thread). Remember, this is a discussion board, not a chat room. Originally, the 72 hour limit was going to be implemented. Then we discussed adding exemptions for certain members (namely DJs) so they can update their threads whenever they wanted. It only took a few minutes to reduce the limit to 24 hours, and we decided to forego exemptions for any members outside of the staff groups. So, boiling it down. Get rid of the chatroom mentality, use the brand spanking new multiquote feature if you have to quote a thousand posts, and it'll seem like less of a restriction and more like a handy automated moderator. |
| Posted by: kyonpalm Jun 19 2012, 08:30 AM | ||
Are you threatening me? I don't know if you woke up on the wrong side of the bed or what, but I don't appreciate that. I'm just suggesting that 6 or 12 hours might be more appropriate. You want to talk about some mods-and-admins-club "unanimous decision" on 24 hours, you might do well to remember none of the other mods (myself, Honda, sideways, and Lebon... that's a lot of people to leave out) were informed or allowed a say in the process. It's not a big deal, I'm just suggesting what I think to be a better alternative. That's something I was unable to do before this reimplementation suddenly took place, so why do you have a problem with me voicing my opinion when you didn't think you needed to ask me in the first place? For fuck's sake, I'm the one who brought the issue up to begin with. No one else seemed to have a problem with people double-posting within an hour until I finally posted about it after having had no help from Perry on the issue the other three or four times I brought it up in the past. |
| Posted by: Tessou Jun 19 2012, 08:43 AM |
| You have an obligation as a moderator to publicly align yourself with staff decisions. Please take the time to read the moderator guidelines within the staff section. |
| Posted by: kyonpalm Jun 19 2012, 08:49 AM | ||
Fair enough, but my argument that I should have been involved in the process still stands. I suggest you take it to the staff section from here so we can discuss that in the appropriate forum. |
| Posted by: Smikey Jun 19 2012, 10:57 AM |
Maybe all the mods should have been able to have a say in it? |
| Posted by: Lebon14 Jun 19 2012, 12:40 PM |
| 24-hours is OK, imo. Before, it was 72. THAT was ridiculous! |
| Posted by: Nomake Wan Jun 19 2012, 02:32 PM |
| I completely agree with the limit being 24 hours. Why would you need to bump a topic any more than once a day? I mean, say you do a radio show. You post you're doing a radio show. Oops, the next day there's a slot open so you want to do another. Another post... the next day, because it's the next day. There's no reason to have something ridiculous like a 3-6 hour limit. That's basically ignoring the limit altogether. Even in the most extreme example of self-promotion (i.e. having a DJ thread for yourself where no one responds to your posts) 24 hours is perfectly reasonable. |
| Posted by: bROCKoLEE Jun 20 2012, 04:15 AM | ||
No need to give me the actual incident or anything. Just point me to what thread(s) they were in or something so I can get an idea. Was it because of those word games thread? lol Anyway, the only time I've really felt the need to double post (or more) within quick succession is when there's a live event going on or something of the sort. Editing your own post in that case really sucks and takes the thunder out of everything, especially if it's something god damn exciting and you just have to let people know asap. The double post lets you make more noise, thus more people will take notice of said live event and in turn discussion over it will hopefully prosper. If one were restricted, they'd make one post. People would see that initial post and the rest of the exciting edits would go unnoticed there after until someone else finally decides to bump the thread (and who knows when that could be). |
| Posted by: kyonpalm Jun 20 2012, 05:02 AM | ||
Uh, let's see... here's one in Initial D General Discussion by mike962: https://idforums.net/index.php?showtopic=26510&st=7400 That's one that was made within 10 minutes of the OP, as you can see in the public note. |
| Posted by: MattW Jun 21 2012, 10:28 AM | ||
 |
| Posted by: logan510 Jun 21 2012, 06:43 PM |
| This is the best thread ever. Casey |
| Posted by: Smikey Jun 21 2012, 07:31 PM | ||
Oh yeah, is that so Casey?  |
| Posted by: Wanderer Jun 21 2012, 07:49 PM |
| When did that other pic get deleted ? [ Post made via Mobile Device ] |
| Posted by: logan510 Jun 21 2012, 07:57 PM | ||
Yes, yes it is Miguel. Casey |
| Posted by: kyonpalm Jun 22 2012, 05:01 AM |
| Cut it out here. This is the only warning before red flags start getting thrown. |
| Posted by: MattW Jun 22 2012, 07:09 AM |
| where'd my beavis picture go? :C |
| Posted by: Tessou Jun 22 2012, 08:13 AM |
| A mod moved it https://idforums.net/index.php?showtopic=44419. It was reported twice as spam or inflammatory, but as far as I know, no action was taken aside from the post being moved. |
| Posted by: MattW Jun 22 2012, 09:39 AM |
| thats not fun. y'all need to lighten up a bit. |
| Posted by: Tessou Jun 22 2012, 10:37 AM |
| I could move it back, but first I have to check with whoever moved it to make sure they know they're not being undermined. EDIT: It is now back in this thread.  |