Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes

6 (14.6%)

No

35 (85.4%)

Total Members Voted: 39

[KharBevNor]

Add something to the rules of the forum so that people with less than, say, 100 posts cannot make new threads.

[Dliessmgg]

Restrict it to not comic discussion & I'm new.

[Aurjay]

think 100 is kinda steep. Also comes off as kinda elitist. Not all people that have joined recently are morons. For instance Nockiemomma started a crochet thread under the hardly used arts and crafts section. I think the forums need new life and to try and stray away from oh hey we know everyone type mentality it has now.

[McTaggart]

Maybe it's because I barely venture into a lot of the sections here, but I haven't really seen this be an issue. Sure there's that one thread in the music forum right now but it's not really that big a deal.

Unless I missed an incident where a bunch of threads were made and got deleted or something.

[LeeC]

Its not really out of hand for new people to make new threads, the only time it did seem to get out of hand (imho) was in the "QC Discussion" section during the whole Dora/Marten breakup week.  But that is to be expected.

[onewheelwizzard]

100 does seem kinda steep to me.  20-30 makes more sense.

[axerton]

I think we just need to find some way to enforce lurking for a fair while before posting - either new threads or new posts.

[the_pied_piper]

I agree that 100 is a bit steep but 10 doesn't seem too harsh to me. It gives people a chance to get the feel of the boards first and it could keep the spambots from starting new threads too.

I also think there should be a daily limit on posters with less than 100 posts though. Again, 10 would seem fair to me. This might be seen as cliquey and ornery but there seem to be a fair few forumites who end up posting 20+ times in their first day and then get driven away because they obviously haven't got a feel for the forum communities yet.

[benji]

 I don't really see this as neccessary. It's not like most of the forums have a huge number of threads started by new members. It happens ocationally, but not often enough for me to worry about it. The only place where it seems to happen somewhat regularly is comic talk, and the threads started by new folks there seem of about the same quality as those started by regulars there.

[snalin]

Is it just a foregone conclusion that every established member makes good threads? I'm not going to accuse this board of elitism, I never felt that it was a problem when I joined, nor now. It's not that new members gets hated on unless they deserve it, but if we don't give people a chance to try to make posts or threads, we're not really going to be able to accept them into the community at all. We tried this in the DISCUSS forums, and the result seems to be that new posters just try to discuss here instead (see "fuck the police" thread). If people can't access the off topic section, they'll just go off topic elsewhere, probably in comics discussion, and then those guys will get mad at us, and that'll just make some poor mod's day a fucking shithole.

And you are aware that there's some very active posters that's never posted outside of the comics discussion, right? I counted 10 people in this WCT with more than 500 posts (some had many more than me), out of which I've seen 3 before, and one of them (Akima) has only recently been showing up a bit in DISCUSS. If we enforce a rule like this, we should realize that there's a completely separate (and probably much more accepting) community sharing the same boards, and if they can only post up there to begin with, they'll probably never drift down to what seems to be the isolationiststic boards down here.

Also, the mechanics works pretty well already, if new poster makes a bad thread it usually gets so much hate that we'll never see the guy ever again. Of course, most of the new posters that make threads that I see is someone spamming online boards to join their "free" mmo, or something like this thread (again), and we can see from the responses to that that not only does these threads get killed, but they also let posters get an outlet for their pent up hateful sarcasm, so I'm in favour. It's better that we get these regular outlets to hate on when we've have a bad day than the drama that happens when people here take it out on each other.

[sean]

why dont we just do what we've(i've?) always done and act like cocks to people who are new/stupid?

[Blue Kitty]

Never seen it as much of a problem

[JD]

You could simply ignore them.

[Slick]

I guess there was that one irritating guy a little while ago but it wasn't that big of a deal?

[Blue Kitty]

Then again, through a quick perusal of the QC Discussion forums I saw the, "Well. Lookit that!" thread about another thread called, "on the carnal relations of Marten Reed"

[pwhodges]

I saw the, "Well. Lookit that!" thread

Clip, clop.. clip, clop.  I'm on my high horse!

[valley_parade]

You could simply ignore them.

What are you, an elementary school guidance counsellor?

[benji]

Then again, through a quick perusal of the QC Discussion forums I saw the, "Well. Lookit that!" thread about another thread called, "on the carnal relations of Marten Reed"

Est trashed the actual "Carnal Relations" thread, but most of the people who are talking about it have at least 100 posts.

[Blue Kitty]

But they are fairly new, at least I think they are.  I have the QC Discussion minimized at all time.  Sure, this blocks me from the Welcome threads, but I stopped doing those a while ago (i felt I was just saying the same thing over and over again and it stopped being fun and started being work)

And Paul I'm not calling you out, I think you're in the right in that thread. Those people did some weird shit and they got called out on it, then they made a thread to bitch about it.

[Lorden]

I dunno, but most people who end in here are long term readers of the Girliest nerdiest webcomic, not a 4chan-like trolls who need to killed with fire (or restricted via meaningless rule).

With all that said, Im still a newfag, so I could be talking out of my ass right now.

[Dazed]

Clip, clop.. clip, clop.  I'm on my high horse!

I prefer to think of it as the reasonable, well-adjusted, not-incredibly-creepy horse, but yeah.

I don't know how you post in those threads and get out alive, good on you though.

[pwhodges]

And Paul I'm not calling you out

I didn't think you were; just joking about the "high horse" response to me.  I have exchanged some private messages which got my view over more forcibly.

[Scandanavian War Machine]

not a 4chan-like

newfag

[benji]

But they are fairly new, at least I think they are.

Okay, that seems to be true. But the guy who started it is here. He's had about 150 posts, but he actually joined 4 years ago.

[pwhodges]

He'd only made six posts before this September, so he felt new then; we can't see how much time he spent lurking in the previous four years (which is longer than I've been here).

[benji]

Yeah, but there's no filter that would catch him. He's posted over 100 times and been a member for 4 years. The best way to solve such a thing actually happened. A mod took care of it. I guess I still don't see the point. Do people feel that the QC slash fic writers are overrunning the rest of the boards?

[KharBevNor]

The forum I was largely thinking of was the music forum actusally.

You have to be careful with forum rules or standards. I think this rule would make less work for moderators. It's not so much about excluding new people as trying to get them to smoothly integrate in to our community.

[Lunchbox]

We do get spam now that we have registration open again, but since there's usually a moderator online it gets dealt with pretty quickly.
Also I agree with snalin, it works itself out. New kids can be annoying to start off with but they usually learn pretty fast.

[calenlass]

and goddangit they are stealing our jobs

[nockiemommy]

Or, gee, here's a thought ... Why not send a message to new posters who are viewed as posting inappropriately, and remove said post/thread?

Yeah, under-100 poster here. And the proposed rule does come off as elitist. As the original poster of the aforementioned 'Lookit that' column, I do apologize if my sleep-deprived lunatic thread stomped on any toes. I didn't intend for it to be an irritant, though, admittedly, I'm not sure what I intended it as. It DID, however, get people talking about the inappropriateness of a few locked threads, and get people talking about WHY they were locked.

All in all, I'd say it turned out good. But whatever. I'm new, so apparently, I don't know what I'm talking about.

[Scandanavian War Machine]

I've been here for like five years and I have no fucking idea what I'm talking about either so I wouldn't worry about it too much

I actually don't even know what this thread is about



....something about immigrants shooting all the rap jobs, or something, right?

[Inlander]

I think this rule would make less work for moderators.

Honestly, there's not that much work for us on this forum. And this forum moves pretty damn slowly, I think we can live with a new thread being created by someone who doesn't know any better every couple of days. Maybe we could all even work a little harder to make those threads into something interesting!

[Ăśde]

Forum rule: everyone must post one tit.

Here is mine:



NOTE: Googling tit with safesearch off is not a good way to find nature photos.

[Jimor]

Yeah, I don't see a problem either. I know there's something like this in effect for DISCUSS, but that helps avoid people who google their pet topic just to randomly jump into forums to spout their dogma (geek points to anybody who remembers an infamous usenet poster who'd regularly reply to Thanksgiving meal discussions with Armenian genocide rants). The spam bots seem to split evenly between creating new threads and attaching to old ones, so no real help there.

[Scandanavian War Machine]

I've actually been really impressed with our spambots lately.

It's kinda funny how us loosing the ability to register new users works pretty much just like time dilation in that we have more or less stayed the same but the world has advanced leaps and bounds around us.
Seriously, look at these fucking chat bots. They use what is usually passable grammar and spelling, and actually write up full responses that are usually relevent to the subject at hand, creating a decent illusion of "realness" for pretty much the first time that I've seen.

Hell, some of them actually had me convinced that they might not be bots at all, but rather REAL people pretending to be some kind of advanced chatbot for....I don't know....fun? Profit? I really have no idea why someone would do that, but hey, to each his own.

[Buttfranklin]

Or the spambots have evolved into real persons 

[StaedlerMars]

Spam bots. That's what they do. They just drive around listening to the raps and shooting all the jobs!

[JD]

Then again, through a quick perusal of the QC Discussion forums I saw the, "Well. Lookit that!" thread about another thread called, "on the carnal relations of Marten Reed"

Marten fucking his couch was winning for a while.

[scarred]

Man, I went into that forum when the breakup happened jut out of pure curiosity. Completely forgot how horrifying it can be.

And that was even before jeph started spamming tentacle porn.

[David_Dovey]

What happens when someone with more than 12,000 posts makes a shitty thread?

[sean]

we tell them their thread is shitty then derail it with horse porn or something?

[Alex C]

think 100 is kinda steep. Also comes off as kinda elitist.

On the one hand, I see your point. On the other, I want the proles up top to know their place.

[Patrick]

I don't know how one would enforce this, but how about a rule that you have to read at least 20 threads, spread out between the boards, before you can even make a post here.

I mean shit, that's not exactly unreasonable. And it's going to be more educational, for better or worse, than just a 100 posts rule.

[tania]

i think everyone should just have to post a photo of themselves in the photo thread so we know whether or not they're hot

[ackblom12]

Can we start a poll and choose to either stroke their ego or destroy their self confidence with gusto?

[SilentJ]

The way I see it, no matter what rules people decide to put into play, people will find a way to break it/defy it out of ignorance.  I think what we've got now is probably as good as it's going to get.  New people don't have much leeway about stepping out of line before 20, 30 different people let them know they've done so.

[SWOON! at My Gravitas]

Besides, people with relatively low post counts are supposed to be terrific in bed.  This is just something I heard somewhere

[Cernunnos]

Honestly, this may be a fairly sedate little corner of the internet, but if you can't handle a few new people making a few inane threads, or threads about music you think is bad, the problem is yours. I'd argue that in the past few months it's been pretty boring around these here parts and that's partially because of this insularity and complacency. I can't claim to be helping very much when it comes to that but at least I'm not being a snobby jerk to anyone who doesn't know the mysterious unwritten rules of the qc subforum secret society.

[tania]

i think everyone should just have to post a photo of themselves in the photo thread so we know whether or not they're hot

oh wait i guess this means everybody would have to leave except me

[SirJuggles]

Besides, people with relatively low post counts are supposed to be terrific in bed.  This is just something I heard somewhere

Huh. 518. Well, I guess mediocrity is alright for some.