As set by CraigStern on the old forums:
"All right folks, there are only a few rules for posting here (as of right now--more may be added later if the need arises):
-- no pornography
-- no hate speech
-- no spamming
-- no flaming
-- no advertising (as of 5-27-11)
Doing any of those things is a bad idea, and will probably get you banned from these forums.
What should you do, then?
-- be polite
-- use proper grammar
-- consult dictionary.com when in doubt about how to spell something
That's all. Now go off and have fun!"
I was wondering, since when you write a really long post, the reply box starts acting up, could you double-post occasionally for the really long posts? It would make things a lot easier.
Wasn't aware of that problem: I think it's worth pointing out to CraigStern about the replay box issue. Otherwise, if it's used sensibly and not too often, I don't see why not. An alternative can be to write half-a-post, post it, then edit it and add extra text to it.
That same reason is why, when I suggested redoing the RTD with all the rules and stats and stuff, that they be separated into several posts
As of right now, you must have 5 posts in order to post in General. This is to deal with the annoying spambots who keep signing up and posting there. Let me know if you have any questions.
How come I still see posts in the General by people who have posted twice?
Er, yes. I changed it to two posts, since I've restricted first posts to Newbie Land, and Introductions is the only place you're allowed to post if you're not a spam bot. It seemed silly to make someone post more than once in Introductions.
unless that person has multiple personality disorder then they need to post more than once in intro if the other personalities want to join.
Okay, update: I've installed a mod to the forums that makes new users answer a simple question when they first sign up. Spambots can't get around this. Since that's in place now, I've removed the post restrictions entirely. :)
I know I sound stupid (but I'm not) but what is flamming?
A term for generally bashing another user. Threatening, cursing, attempting to start a fight, and other unreasonably aggressive behaviors. Rebutting another is fine, but flat out aggression is not.
These rules are fairly simple it would kind of hard to brake them. But it all depends on ones personality does it not?
Quote from: Tastidian on March 27, 2010, 02:30:04 PM
These rules are fairly simple it would kind of hard to brake them. But it all depends on ones personality does it not?
Well if you like to diss people's ideas and make them feel stupid (not metioning any names) then ya it does.
Aye, you would be surprised... but so far, we're keeping it civil, let's hope it continiues to be so!
Quote from: Zackirus on March 27, 2010, 02:32:31 PM
Quote from: Tastidian on March 27, 2010, 02:30:04 PM
These rules are fairly simple it would kind of hard to brake them. But it all depends on ones personality does it not?
well if you like to diss people's ideas and make them feel stupid (not metioning any names) then ya it does
Two silly truthinesses? (if that's the plural of truthiness)
If you can't say something politely don't say anything at all.
- How's that for a rule?
CraigStern is a lawyer so he would never implement that rule.
Not implying that lawyers aren't impolite, but because it would be obvious that rule can easily be bent due to its subjectiveness.
how about:
"If you've been banned and make a new account, you shouldn't announce that you used to be Presentiment. Oops! I mean, you shouldn't announce that you were once banned."
Well that would be counter-productive because it slows mods from banning aforementioned user.
Besides that, Craig said that if Pres came back as a productive member of this society then he would be allowed to stay.
I wonder why WeBing hasn't been banned yet, then?
Quote from: Steelfist on May 16, 2010, 06:17:35 PM
I wonder why WeBing hasn't been banned yet, then?
Ahem: http://sinisterdesign.net/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=145
QuoteOkay, update: I've installed a mod to the forums that makes new users answer a simple question when they first sign up. Spambots can't get around this. Since that's in place now, I've removed the post restrictions entirely. Smiley
A spambot could just go back and answer the questions correctly, and wait to get to the forum before they start spamming.
Good point. But dont they change? Oh no. I think I remember seeing that before. Isnt that the mark of Webing?
what you mean "dont they change?"
close enough
I havn't looked but I think that the questions change.
What is that supposed to mean? Hmm?
So what if they change? If you get one wrong, you just go back and fix it. There's even a back button, and you don't get kicked out. I know from experience.
I'm almost having fun messing with you
Alright. I'm gonna look at that.
Don't have too much fun. I can get a temper.
Don't bother looking at it, I already did, hence the user bob, which I will delete. But my point is, it is very easy for anyone to get on the forum, spammer or not. Getting the question wrong doesn't eject you, so a spammer could just go back, get the question right, and get onto the forum. I really don't know any way to prevent this except to kick the user out if they miss the question once.
By the way, my name is not bob.
Though what if there is a typo and it is an honest person wanting to join? And bob? Really?
Yes, that presents a problem, which is probably why Craig doesn't use my method. I don't know what the best method would be, but spambots can get around the question...
Sorry about bob, he's already deleted. I hope I didn't waste your time by making you check the account registration system.
What if a 3 strike your out method was used? And it's fine. You only made me log out.
Quote from: MikeW781 on April 07, 2010, 06:18:48 PM
how about:
"If you've been banned and make a new account, you shouldn't announce that you used to be Presentiment. Oops! I mean, you shouldn't announce that you were once banned."
I've heard in almost every topic something about Presentiment. Who is he? People here say he used to be a nuisence in the forum. May someone explain please?
He was the only really persistant troll these forums ever had to deal with. People make a huge deal about him, because he was trolling since before the new forums were up, and Im not sure how long he was with the old forums. After he got banned, he came back a few times, and then was either sucessfully banned, or just got bored, and left.
I've added a new rule prohibiting advertising on the forums. Specifically, that means: do not post about things that are intended to earn you money.
So, for example, if you wrote a song or a story, or you created a free Flash game, and you just want to tell people about it, that's totally fine. But if you're selling it (or earning advertising revenue from it), then it's advertising, and it violates forum rules to post about it in a way designed to attract customers/viewers/players.
So, Demon Duck's Maelstrom is fine but Game Crazy Kid's Essay Help is not, right?
Quote from: Idozen Cair on May 28, 2011, 10:28:19 AM
So, Demon Duck's Maelstrom is fine but Game Crazy Kid's Essay Help is not, right?
Right, that's because Duck's game is non-profit, while Game Crazy Kid's offered five dollars per essay.
Edit: And it's not "Essay Help," it's "Writing Your Essays for You."
So... does your rule include free games that may be on Kongregate, where each additional hit may inadvertently earn you $.0035 USD, but for the most part, you just want to share the game with your friends?
Sorry about the hypothetical, but I'd rather this came up sooner than later.
Quote from: CraigStern on May 27, 2011, 06:18:32 PM
So, for example, if you wrote a song or a story, or you created a free Flash game, and you just want to tell people about it, that's totally fine. But if you're selling it (or earning advertising revenue from it), then it's advertising, and it violates forum rules to post about it in a way designed to attract customers/viewers/players.
That may be what you mean, Duck.
Quote from: Demon Duck on June 07, 2011, 09:47:35 PM
So... does your rule include free games that may be on Kongregate, where each additional hit may inadvertently earn you $.0035 USD, but for the most part, you just want to share the game with your friends?
Edit: I just realized it's not, but, I think that because it has the slightest potential to earn you money it counts, but I'm not trying to seem high-and-mighty, and the final decision is up to Craig, because I can't read minds... no pun intended.
So, could you advertise it in your sig, Craig?
Quote from: Demon Duck on June 07, 2011, 09:47:35 PM
So... does your rule include free games that may be on Kongregate, where each additional hit may inadvertently earn you $.0035 USD, but for the most part, you just want to share the game with your friends?
Sorry about the hypothetical, but I'd rather this came up sooner than later.
Believe it or not, I thought about this. Let's re-read what I wrote and parse it:
Quoteif you're selling it (or earning advertising revenue from it), then it's advertising, and it violates forum rules to post about it in a way designed to attract customers/viewers/players.
So clearly, a game where you earn ad revenue is something subjecct to the No Advertising rule. However, it isn't a problem just so long as you post about it in a way that isn't "designed to attract customers/viewers/players."
For example: suppose you just post to brag about finishing the game, or to brag about how well it's doing on Kongregate. You don't post a link, and you don't ask people to go to Kongregate and play the game. Under those circumstances, you're fine.
So lawyering skills DO come in handy! Alrighty. If I ever make a game, I'll follow that rule.