Best Ever Albums

Re: Limiting User Abilities

albummaster — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 03:40:19 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 04/30/2013 07:40

The BEA site rules govern behaviour on the site. Most people should not need to modify their behaviour at all. Anybody that has been banned permanently has had repeated warnings and has ignored them, or has broken the site rules. The site rules are designed to protect the site from being gamed, and also to maintain a safe environment on the site for a decent level of discussion.

Re: Limiting User Abilities

ShaneSpear — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:18:42 GMT

Author: ShaneSpear

Posted: 04/29/2013 21:18

martintho wrote:

Interesting times. and i understand that a couple or more have left the building, Magenta being one. but why is rfnaples banned for the time being? and jman.? i'm sorry if i have missed out on something here, but i have really tried to find out. i miss information here on the forum publicly about what has happened. what can cause a ban? for how long a period are they banned? etcetera. don't we need complete opennes regarding these questions? it also scares me. i myself have devoted a substansial percentage of my miserable life to this site. it has helped me get an overview over the music i have listened to during the last six decades. i am hoping to complete this work here before i die. losing access would be a disaster for me. how can i avoid this. who can ban me?

Anybody who's been full time banned has received numerous warnings. Like a lot of numerous warnings. Jman is only on a short term ban, and even he has received numerous warnings. Nobody's being banned on a whim, and (to my knowledge) no mod has ever banned anybody, so it always comes from the man himself, and it's honestly up to him if he wants to go into any details about it.

Your account will be just fine.

Re: Limiting User Abilities

martintho — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:11:24 GMT

Author: martintho

Posted: 04/29/2013 21:11

Interesting times. and i understand that a couple or more have left the building, Magenta being one. but why is rfnaples banned for the time being? and jman.? i'm sorry if i have missed out on something here, but i have really tried to find out. i miss information here on the forum publicly about what has happened. what can cause a ban? for how long a period are they banned? etcetera. don't we need complete opennes regarding these questions? it also scares me. i myself have devoted a substansial percentage of my miserable life to this site. it has helped me get an overview over the music i have listened to during the last six decades. i am hoping to complete this work here before i die. losing access would be a disaster for me. how can i avoid this. who can ban me?

Re: Limiting User Abilities

albummaster — Sat, 27 Apr 2013 03:02:30 GMT

Author: albummaster

Posted: 04/27/2013 07:02

Jackwc wrote:

Some users don't necessarily warrant "banning" perhaps, but they certainly abuse certain facets of this website, such as the creating new threads privilege. Particularly in the suggestions forum.

So perhaps a system should be put in place to limit certain users' functionalities to prevent such... things... or perhaps just a general "post cap" for such users, only allowing them to post such and such times a day.

To be honest, personally I'm not in favour of restricting people's ability to create new threads. unless they are spamming. On the suggestions forum, there have been many great (implemented and not yet unimplemented) ideas which have really helped improve the site, and I wouldn't want to risk losing out on these due to a cap on the number of posts. Yes, some ideas can be a bit tenuous, but even a 'bad' idea can trigger a thought process or debate that leads to something better.

I've read through the posts on this thread and there are quite a few circumstances where a cap would place too many restrictions e.g. when running/voting on tournaments or taking part in games. The idea of a chat box has been suggested before, and is one of those things that is on the 'to do' list. It might help to take small talk away from the forums, but I doubt it very much.

The problem is not the lack of a chat box; it's individual people and how they contribute to the site. Each person on the site can help improve the quality of discussion simply by keeping their replies on topic and writing in a mature way. If people can't do this, and they persistently carry on like they are, then I think we might have to say goodbye to some of the worst offenders. I think the majority of people want this, and I think we'd all much rather have people here that contribute to a better site than some others that are attempting to bring the site down.

Re: Limiting User Abilities

Jasonconfused — Sat, 27 Apr 2013 01:59:58 GMT

Author: Jasonconfused

Posted: 04/27/2013 05:59

Just take away my right to post. I don't want to, but I'm addicted. Just make it so I can't. Please.

Re: Limiting User Abilities

Anonymous — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 23:10:12 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 04/27/2013 03:10

ptaylor1989 wrote:

You're right. Ignore is the solution

Well, I think you know what an actual solution might be. This is not it. Limiting users' abilities? Sounds nice, what's next, ban someone who says something you don't like? Alright, i know it won't go that far obviously, but as far as I see it, these two situations are interchangeable (mainly because they both restrict users). There's another solution that doesn't restrict the users of the website, and I have already recommended it (chatbox). Defago seems to also agree. Of course, that might not exactly work, but there's no point in not trying it. I'm sure there are other solutions than doing something this extreme, and I'm sure someone as intelligent and devilishly handsome as yourself can think of one.

Re: Limiting User Abilities

ptaylor1989 — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 22:59:29 GMT

Author: ptaylor1989

Posted: 04/27/2013 02:59

Happymeal wrote:

All you're gonna do by limiting posts is get me pissed (this was the facetious part of my statement)

Ok, that's not truly the situation here. What's going to happen is this. People are still not gonna give a fuck and post whatever the fuck they want, they will just post less because of the fucking limit. Because of this, less meaningful conversation will happen. The limit is not a good idea because this will happen, it's human nature, and that trumps idiotic ideas.

You're right. Ignore is the solution

Re: Limiting User Abilities

HigherThanTheSun — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 22:33:33 GMT

Author: HigherThanTheSun

Posted: 04/27/2013 02:33

Saoirse wrote:

Agreed that if you have a problem with spamming or endless chit-chat from particular users, don't constantly spill out your frustrations or pick fights with other users in all the forum threads as that will only excarbate the spamming problem. In all honesty though I just sympathize too much with those who just quit bothering to wade through the static forum mess and decided to move on, there just is little the forums are offering these days beyond pages upon pages of backwards-moving chit-chat.

^I was trying to write something like this but then you posted and I thought I'd just second it^

Don't think I'm the only one who finds the forum far less enjoyable than I used to, and no you can't just skip over threads because every thread has the same problem, you have to sort through loads of shit to find one interesting post and it feels like a massive chore.

I'm not talking about just one user either it's half the people on the forums these days. People used to have great discussions here about loads of stuff, now it seems as soon as one is getting started it gets killed off by a load of of one line back and forth posts between the usual suspects that drive away anyone who actually wanted to contribute something decent.

I think a chatbox might be a massive help with it though and I hope AM considers it.

Re: Limiting User Abilities

Anonymous — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 22:17:45 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 04/27/2013 02:17

Agreed that if you have a problem with spamming or endless chit-chat from particular users, don't constantly spill out your frustrations or pick fights with other users in all the forum threads as that will only excarbate the spamming problem. In all honesty though I just sympathize too much with those who just quit bothering to wade through the static forum mess and decided to move on, there just is little the forums are offering these days beyond pages upon pages of backwards-moving chit-chat.

Ill still run the tournament, and I hope that all the new games that have started will give the forums a shot in the arm, but otherwise I have no plan to contribute because it's just inevitable any interesting topic will eventually be derailed by a bunch of pointless squabbling while everybody just point fingers on who to blame when things get out of hand. Yes, ignore is an option, but unfortunately it's coming to the point where that would pretty much ignore every topic brought to light. The static state of the forums is kind of all of our faults, and until I can find some positive way to help move it forward there is no point in just continuing to keep dragging the negativity out even more .

Re: Limiting User Abilities

Anonymous — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 22:15:35 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 04/27/2013 02:15

I only said that fart thing to bring a little humor to the subject. Humor for myself, really...

Re: Limiting User Abilities

Anonymous — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 22:07:47 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 04/27/2013 02:07

ptaylor1989 wrote:

Come on Happy. Defago is making a point that you should approve of so why trivialize his comment. You are making the problem we are all discussing crystal clear. The problems are the users who make no sense and derail each conversation.

Now JMan and you (and unfortunately myself included) will discuss farts for a few more posts until we get back to the problem Albummaster is far too familiar with. As the janitor of this site, he has to sift through a shit ton of crappy posts. It wastes his time, and prevents better suggestions from getting the attention they deserve.

Back on topic: this is why we should limit posts, in an attempt to train users to value their posts.

Re: Limiting User Abilities

Anonymous — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 22:05:14 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 04/27/2013 02:05

Mercurydylan89 wrote:

Romanelli is da man! Very well said.
Damn why didn't I think of all that?

Answer: Many of us are awesome, but he's the number 2 guy on BEA. He's da almost awesomest. He's Roman-freakin-elli.

I've seen great speeches on this thread, but none top Romanelli's.

Re: Limiting User Abilities

Mercury — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 22:03:19 GMT

Author: Mercury

Posted: 04/27/2013 02:03

Romanelli is da man! Very well said.
Damn why didn't I think of all that?

Re: Limiting User Abilities

Anonymous — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 21:58:12 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 04/27/2013 01:58

Happymeal wrote:

I agree with Defago as you can see.

Secondary note, I also agree with Romanelli.

Re: Limiting User Abilities

Anonymous — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 21:56:04 GMT

Author: Anonymous

Posted: 04/27/2013 01:56

Defago wrote:

A solution would be a chatbox, definitely. .

Happymeal wrote:

Secondary note, there are always secondary solutions. You tired of Jman posting his thoughts too often, creating inane threads? Why not recommend a chatbox?

I agree with Defago as you can see.

Re: Limiting User Abilities

Romanelli — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 21:52:23 GMT

Author: Romanelli

Posted: 04/27/2013 01:52

We don't get to dictate personalities, and we don't get to pick and choose who gets to speak and who doesn't simply based on whether we feel that the person has something to offer the discussion or not. If someone is breaking the site rules, that's a different thing. But just because someone is different or posts a lot doesn't mean they should be punished for it. There may be people who don't like the way you post...does that mean that it's fair for them to lobby for your posting priveledges to be limited...just because you don't suit their tastes? And that's what this really boils down to. Nobody is offended by what this person posts. Nobody is threatened, or being taken down a dark road to hell, or anything of the sort.

The argument is that people simply don't like what is being posted. Someone on this site once told me that I should "suck the fuck up" in regards to what other people post. That person, it turns out, was right. If you don't like it, and no one is breaking the rules, tough. Deal with it. Some of the people who are complaining on this subject are the very same people who show no hesitation when it comes to egging on and pushing and teasing and bullying this same user until he goes ballistic...then they're complaining that he posts too much. I say again...if he posts too much, and you reply to everything he posts, who has the problem?

If you can't deal with it, there's a little button at the bottom of the page that says "IGNORE". I suggest you use it. But I think that putting limits on posting, if it were being done because of YOU, would be cause for a riot. We've already seen people crying "favoritism" in this thread...I can just hear the "I'm being persecuted" cries. If you think someone is posting too much, HIT IGNORE. If you don't want to do that, STOP REPLYING. If you don't want to do either, then stop complaining.

Re: Limiting User Abilities

Defago — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 21:38:29 GMT

Author: Defago

Posted: 04/27/2013 01:38

A solution would be a chatbox, definitely. Meanwhile, you guys could use Skype or something, that's what I use to chat with other members without clogging the forums.

Re: Limiting User Abilities

Mercury — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 21:28:00 GMT

Author: Mercury

Posted: 04/27/2013 01:28

Defago wrote:

I was answering you. You don't have to read threads upon threads of pages upon pages of meaningless posts everywhere just as much as you don't have to smell someone's fart. This problem requires a solution, either an implementation by the mods or some consensus among all of us, but we've lost quite a few members in the last few days which is a clear sign there's something wrong.

Dude, I understood your analogy. I qouted Jman with my last post and I was referring to his post about literally farts, not your communication about an analogy on farts.

Anyway, yeah people leaving is a bad sign. But honestly if someone is inclined to leave they will find an excuse for why they must leave no matter what. I highly doubt these posts and threads necessitated these members leaving.

It's not the right Why to the problem.

Re: Limiting User Abilities

ptaylor1989 — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 21:26:23 GMT

Author: ptaylor1989

Posted: 04/27/2013 01:26

Defago wrote:

You don't have to read threads upon threads of pages upon pages of meaningless posts everywhere just as much as you don't have to smell someone's fart.

And how long should we hold our breath (to extend the exhausted fart metaphor)?

We shouldn't have to read meaningless posts because users should take a bit more care to think about what they type before they submit. The simple solution is asking yourself, "is this on topic?" and "would ignoring the off-topic user help facillitate discussion?". I think both questions are one step to a completely overhauled forum experience.

Re: Limiting User Abilities

Defago — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 21:17:21 GMT

Author: Defago

Posted: 04/27/2013 01:17

Mercurydylan89 wrote:

Please keep this on topic or not talked about at all. I can imagine AM having to read all this silliness and jut being annoyed as hell.

Anyway, yeah, I think the "suggestion" is stupid. It will lead to alienation and over complication.