Current Forum Standings

hurr

So this is "nothing personal"?
 

And I agree on the bloxmaster part, he's a nice guy.

This is so long I'm not going to reply on a point-by-point basis, but I'll try to do this in order.

There is no absolute way to make people care about their posts if they don't want to. Having consequences in place is an attempt to make people care, but it's never totally successful.

The staff cares very much about this forum. Otherwise why would they be here? As of right now all the staff members are reasonably active, and just because the staff doesn't judge posts as being "nonsense" while you do doesn't mean the staff doesn't care.

The rules are to be interpreted and enforced by the staff. If you think rules aren't being enforced enough, or are being enforced in the wrong way, you can report a post or pm a staff member. But normal members should not be able to overrule the staff's decisions. If enough people complain, obviously, the staff will have to consider it, or risk losing people. But saying "the rules are enforced wrong" is entirely subjective and isn't really helpful. (Incidentally- when I posted the video you mention, I don't recall anyone telling me they were offended or anything; in fact, Manator said he loved it so much he would e-mail it to his friends. If I've offended anyone, I'm sorry. But complaining behind my back, before complaining to me, is stupid.)

If you report a post, you can expect action to be taken on it. The reported posts board is active. If you report a post and no action is taken, then you must assume that the staff decided that the appropriate response was simply to not take action. And if you see a post that you think break the rules, by all means report it. It will be discussed and it will be handled.

"Giving a talking to the forum trolls" is also simply not helpful. Talking to trolls typically doesn't help, and the worst trolls get permabans. If you think someone is a troll, PM a staff member about their conduct.

"googoogjoob: googoogjoob is an atrocious chat op who breaks rules and doesn't bother enforcing them.  The most visible work he does as a mod is lock threads by the book.  He has no respect for anyone, is terribly inactive, mod-wise on the main forums, and a horrible example as a mod.  Additionally, he has been de-opped and kicked several times by other operators in the chat for acting inappropriately."

Okay what. It's up to the ops to choose when and why people need to be kicked or banned. There are no rules saying "if a user does x, kick them". It's totally subjective.

I try to respect everyone, and I find the statement that I don't respect anyone incredibly disrespectful itself. I try to respect everyone on the forum (unless they've done something really stupid), and I try to be helpful. (I mean, look at my recent posts. Complimenting someone's level and pointing out a bug in it; helping a confused user who missed a detail; playing along with a harmless joke started by Nifflas himself; making a bald statement of fact concerning administration; giving some commentary on a new game. I fail to see how any of these are "disrespectful"- please point out posts to me that are disrespectful, or better yet, report them.)

The only times in recent memory I've been deopped or kicked is for saying "in bed" or "lulz" (in front of Paula or J, respectively), and then by Blox earlier today for I forget what now even. Paula's and J's de-oppings and kickings for these things isn't actually that bad; I understand the in-jokes behind the actions, and I'm not really irritated by it.

And what do you mean, "inactive mod-wise"? I'm plenty active, mod-wise. If I see something that needs moderated, I take care of it. Obviously you aren't going to be able to see deleted posts, but you're able to see locked topics and moved topics. If a mod- any mod- is inactive, you really have to assume that it's because modding doesn't need to happen.

lilmanjs16 is a competent mod. He's also the newest mod, so of course he's less active. Just because he doesn't try to "look professional" doesn't make him a bad mod.

LPChip is a fine admin. I don't always agree with him but I recognize that Nifflas delegated the power to run the forum to him, and I respect that authority.

Paula is also a fine admin. She has done lots of work behind the scenes- most noticeably, the modded buttons (like the little house on the home button, the turtle on the help button, etc). Anytime she's "abused her power" it's been in jest.

PONTO's not very active, but I'm sure if he was you'd find something about his conduct to complain about.

J mods plenty. He makes a good number of posts in the mod forums. He isn't necessarily always active in the chat, but he's always there, and he does step in when things start to go bad.

"BloxMaster: It would be nice if BloxMaster is promoted; as he is a very active part of the forum, helps with people's problems, knows what is fair and what is unfair, and what should and shouldn't be allowed. (this was an anonymous agreement)"

"Mr. Monkey, Kasran, BloxMaster, Dib, Sabata, chipset, and EarthBound015"

Sure, anonymous. Mods are chosen by the admins. Being a mod isn't just a popularity contest. Asking to be a mod is very, very stupid. If the admins decide we need a new mod, a new mod will be instated.

The rules apply to administration, of course. You can report mods' posts just as well as normal users'. If you think one breaks the rules, report it.

By its nature #niffchat cannot be held to rules as strict as the forum.

As for the "three strikes" idea- this is basically what already happens. Very few people are permabanned without being tempbanned first. Just because such bannings aren't announced doesn't mean they don't happen.

And lastly- if it looks like the mods are inactive, you have to contemplate the fact that maybe it's because there isn't much that needs moderating. The forum's been less active lately all around.

derk derk

First goog point: I agree that there is no way to motivate people to care about their posts if they do not want to, but that doesn't say anything about people who don't want to care, but what about the people who don't know how to care?  There are lots of people who want to be accepted into the community, but are too immature to formulate a sensical post?  Punishment isn't always needed for some cases, also; they can simply be handled by gentle correction.  Sometimes that in itself is an unintended punishment, though.

If an inappropriate post has stuff like huge text or smile spam or something, as long as the post also has legitimate content, typically it'll just be edited to conform to the rules, and probably have a link to the rules put into it. This is about as gentle as correction can get.

Second point: Maybe it was worded incorrectly, but here's another way of saying it: "We think the administration doesn't care for forum's community enough to keep people mature".  If it sounds unreasonable, then let it be that.

It's not unreasonable at all to expect the administration to keep the community mature. It is unreasonable, though, to expect your definition of "maturity" to match exactly with the staff's, or to expect the staff's definition to change in order to match it.

Third point: We posted this here so everyone would have a chance to see it.  I don't see a problem with that.  Also, I, at least, said the video was terrible, but maybe you didn't listen.

Well, then. I am sorry if I offended you.

Fourth point: Maybe we want a little more feedback, though.  All we get is the message telling us to wait for a moderator to judge it.

I don't know if there is a better system for this. Announcing reported posts publicly would be wrong, as the reporter has the right to report anonymously, and not all reported posts' reportings are justified. Unless the posts were shown publicly with no information on who reported it or what the reporter said about it, there's no way to keep this anonymity.

Fifth point: The talking bit is for the senseless people.  I'm sorry to have grouped them together if it troubled you.

Okay. But: "senselessness" doesn't break the rules until it becomes disruptive. (Like huge text, excessive colors, smiley spam.) And as I mentioned, in these cases, gentle correction tends to be what happens.

Sixth point: I did not say your helpful posts were disrespectful.  Your behavior in the chat is what annoys us.  A specific example, if you want one, is what you said before Blox kicked you, "<@googoogjoob> gangster muk will put a cap in your ass".  I think that's disrespectful enough.

Disrespectful to whom? (The "your" in this case does not refer to anyone in particular, as further context would reveal.) If you think profanity is inherently disrespectful, then it's hardly fair to single out one such instance, as it's not really a rare thing in #niffchat. (And it's almost never aimed at anyone in particular. Actually, I can't think of a single instance of a user swearing at another user, except maybe bokabeed.)

Seventh point: Inactive based on the problems we see in the forum.  I'm sorry if it's terribly inaccurate, but I thought I already admitted it might be.

Regarding LPChip: I never disrespected his authority. We simply said that he could use some help.

Regarding Paula: Sure, the censorship deal was a jest, but it wasn't taken down after people started complaining.  Also, the button deal is nice, but it's more of a subject of format rather than content. I'm sorry for not noticing that and putting it in the original post.

It's always been that a new mod is promoted when the administration decides that a new one is needed. If they have not seen fit to install a new mod, then that means that they don't think there needs to be a new mod. As is, I think the forum has plenty of mods. LPChip isn't the only admin, and the majority of moderation-related tasks can be done by less-powerful staff members.

Regarding Blox: I know it is often regarded as stupid, but we were not asking for your opinion on the matter.

...what does this sentence even mean?

Regarding #niffchat: Yes, but I believe the rules are claimed to be the same.

The rules may be the same in theory, but in practice, it's not possible to hold the same standards to a forum and a chat channel. On a forum, users have much more time and space for anything they want to say, and can edit- or delete- what they've said even after saying it. In a chatroom, any action based on something someone's said cannot affect what has already been said, and since the conversation happens in real time, people will tend to post more and more often.

Regarding moderation in general: Of course no moderation is needed based on your current standards of moderation.  Perhaps we would like some new standards. Eh, you'll just bash me for saying that, too.

I won't bash you for saying that you think there needs to be more moderation. You're free to think whatever you want. However, the standards are not set by popular demand- otherwise I'm sure there would be a general forum, forum games would go way out of hand, there would be a tileset board, etc. You just have to trust the admins. (As do I- I'm just a global mod, and I don't have any control over these decisions.)

I'm with googoogjoob on this.

I'd look for more to say but I did look and googoogjoob's been there already. I do see a general issue with ignorance though. People do not know some things and thus make assumptions.

Regarding Blox: I know it is often regarded as stupid, but we were not asking for your opinion on the matter.

Whoa, man. You can feel the ice from here. Somethin' personal maybe?
Are you asking for anyone's opinion on the matter? Because having someone promoted is something people deserve to have an opinion about (actually, people deserve to have an opinion about everything). I wouldn't know about this, but if it is "often regarded as stupid", isn't it a strange thing to even suggest?

I also have to point out that "what is fair and what is unfair, ...what should and shouldn't be allowed" is way too subjective (if not redundant). When it comes down to it, what IS fair and unfair (on this forum) is up to Nifflas and the people he has put in charge.
I suggest avoiding what is subjective and vague. "Fair", "better", "mature", "senseless", "nothing", "importance", and probably some others are all very subjective words used in the initial post.

"The rules are not enforced in the right way"
I think goog said that before, but of course this is subjective.

Not that you haven't made that clear enough before, but I suppose it's nice to know that you think that we fail at "our job", and I can't help but interpret your post(s) as if you are strongly of the opinion that you can do and know so much better.

The staff does have a code of conduct, so to speak. Because of the (to me seemingly) unavoidable heterogenity of the staff, it might not always seem to be followed "logically" from an objective viewpoint though.
Which means that the administration is by no means doing a perfect job, but I'd say that everyone does as good and as much work as they can with their resources, like time, motivation, dedication and "sensibility".
I do not know good additions to the staff to be made. Which again, wouldn't be because I think it's perfect as it is, but because I rather lack ideas of people who have the aforementioned resources.

Every report is seen and considered, I think I spoke about that before, too. A lot of the cases are reports of off-topic or silly posts. Some of them just get deleted. The ones that stay usually are acceptable, not at all completely/horribly derailing and in the least cases considerably abusive. That is, if you judge them from a tolerant point of view, regarding average age of forumers. This leads me to the "Give a Talking to senseless Posters".

A), when things get out of hand, people are "given talkings", but it is a rather futile attempt, most of the time. Which demotivates at least me to keep on trying to hold up standards that might have existed earlier in time. It's annoying, and exhausting, and ultimately not really successful. Which can well be interpreted as carelessness then when I adjust my actions to that.

B) I still like to think of this forum as a very tolerant community. Might be that occasionally it is too tolerant, but most of the time I get the feeling that you rather tend to be elitist, like "We've been here for so long, it used to be so much better, but then all the newbs came and they're annoying, get them out!"
Which is not quite the best stance to take, seeing that new people are somewhat unavoidable, and actually rather desired in this forum.

It's a stale thing to say, but when you so obviously don't like this place with all the oh so horrible abusive, senseless people, and think of yourself as so much better at generally dealing with things, and when you don't like the way we act, it might be time to emigrate to your own happy place where you can do things absolutely perfectly and call this forum a sinking ship and give it other names to distinguish you from its idioticy. Oh wait, you already did that, didn't you.

I'm with the mods on this one. Just because you didn't see something happen doesn't mean nothing happened.
I already think that the rules are being enforced a tad too much. If it gets even stricter I'm going to leave.
Just so you know, there is such a thing as too much PC.

I'm with the mods on this one, as well. I don't see many problems, and usually if I do, the next time I come around it will have that edit by mod box in them, or it will be removed. I respect that you all took the time to diagnose these "problems", but really, most of them are not the mods fault and can't be corrected easily. We don't really have any trolls here that I have seen (at least, not as bad as it could be), and as for senseless posters... well, I think everyone is guilty of one or two senseless posts here or there, especially when you're on your first forum. They will learn with time, although it is sped up if the mods enforce the rules, editing the posts, which they do when it needs to be done. In fact, I have never seen a post with large font or tons of smileys... it's always caught pretty quickly and corrected. I did, however, see one attachment that was really long before it was corrected, but it too was corrected. Just give people time, and they will learn, and if not, they could be banned (which almost certainly happens without our knowledge already).

As for your bashing of the mods... I think they do a fine job. Sure, they may sound disrespectful or act immature sometimes, but that only shows that they are human. They do a good job, and if you think there is a problem, let one of the other staff members know. They should correct it. If not... anyway, they've got a lot of stress, I'm sure, holding a job and then coming to the forum to mod it. So don't bash them like that. Yes, I believe that there aren't enough mods around to support the consistently growing forum, but that is a personal opinion, and they will choose who they want if it becomes an issue. Right now, they do a good job of not letting a topic get to out of hand or break the rules. I very rarely see a time when no mod is active. Don't be so critical. Be glad we have the forum in the first place, especially after the last one crashed.

@Goog: I haven't seen this video, but if you're going to say it's funny, possibly insulting a few people, try to keep it away from this forum. You do a decent job moderating, but a video like that with people aged as they are on this forum... it could influence them (not a good chance, but still), and they may think that people like that. We also have guests, and we don't know what age some of them are. If they grow up thinking people laugh at things like 9/11 happening...

@Paula: With all due respect, you did push the censorship thing a little bit too far. I think you do a good job moderating, though.

@Ponto: Good job moderating... when you're here. It'd be nice if you could happen to find some more time to moderate things, and you contribute to the community.

@J: Good job as well, I'd like to see you around more often though. You do a good job, and if you had the time to come on the forum more that would be great.

Concerning all mods: they do a great job, and I personally haven't seen any of them breaking rules.

As for Bloxmaster: I really don't think that we need a mod that the forum members voted on. The administration will decide on a new mod if and when the forum gets to big. The forum ain't a democracy (really, ain't is a word on the forum? just noticed that...)
I do agree that Bloxmaster might make an ok mod, but I personally don't see him active as much as you make him out to be.

As for niffchat: it's meant to be a little freer. I haven't used it much, but I'm sure if there are inappropriate things being said then the mods will step in. But it's not like posts, where everyone on the forum can go and see it at any time... you only see what you're signed in for. So if something inappropriate is said, it's not something that a lot of people will see, and the person who says it might get the three strike deal then be banned from it. I think it is ok.

As for leaving if these requests aren't granted: shouldn't it be telling you something if you are going to leave if they aren't? It seems that this is almost blackmailing us. Yes, most of you are good members, but if you left this forum will go on. Seems almost like this could be a ploy to get Bloxmaster into an office as a mod... not saying it is or isn't, but that's what it seems like... addressing several "issues", then when the mods would, hopefully (for you, at least), feel overwhelmed, introduce a possible new mod. Seems kinda fishy to me.

As for opinions: yes it would be nice if and when a new mod is eventually selected that we get a say, but if we have a say, it could be a less mature member who wouldn't get the job done correctly or would abuse the privilege. That's all I have to say for now.

@Goog: I haven't seen this video, but if you're going to say it's funny, possibly insulting a few people, try to keep it away from this forum. You do a decent job moderating, but a video like that with people aged as they are on this forum... it could influence them (not a good chance, but still), and they may think that people like that. We also have guests, and we don't know what age some of them are. If they grow up thinking people laugh at things like 9/11 happening...

The funny part of the video wasn't the horrific events in it, but rather the juxtaposition of these horrific events with Yakety Sax.

I'm going to go through the rules here, one at a time, and give my opinion of them and how they're enforced.  I think this fits in this topic fairly well.



    * Be friendly towards everyone. Regardless what other people say to you, I'd like to ask you to be friendly whereever possible. It will make this forum a nice place to be.
This is never enforced, but I'm not sure it needs to be.  Everyone here is fairly nice even when they're mean.

    * Respect everyone's opinion. Everyone has the right to have their opinion. If you don't agree with someone, then it's okay to say what your opinion is as long as you repect theirs.
I honestly don't think this needs to be seperate from the first rule.  It doesn't even seem like a real rule.

    * Do not curse using bad words. It is not allowed to excessively curse using bad words, particulary those that are aimed towards other people. You can say "damn" or "shit" when you do something wrong etc, but not: "you are a @#$##$^#".
This strikes me as an odd rule as the usual reason for avoiding swearing is to avoid offending the parents of younger forumers.  Furthermore, I have never seen this enforced.

    * Do not provoke a conflict that could lead to cursing. Do not say something where your aim is to upset the other person. That person could get mad, and start to curse (see above point).
"Do not do X, or someone might violate that other rule."  This rule is poorly phrased; it should just say "no trolling" and leave it at that.  But I have no particular complaints about this rule other than its wording.

    * Speak english where possible. Everyone should be able to understand what you are saying. If you can't avoid speaking another language, then always add an english translation. If you don't want that, then either PM the user or send an e-mail.
This is perfectly reasonable.

    * Administrators and Moderators always have the final word. When it comes to a conflict between 2 members, regardless their status, an admin or moderator always has the final word.
This would be reasonable, BUT...our administrators do not know when to get involved, and when to stay out.  Take the Night Game WiiWare only situation.  Nobody was breaking the rules there except for bokabeed (who left the forum anyway, and that was before the threads were locked), but the threads were, for some reason, locked.
On the other hand, whenever there IS a serious conflict, it is usually between an administrator and a member/members.  This is not a good thing for a forum regardless of who's "right"!

    * An Administrator can overrule a moderator. If a dispute becomes big, and a moderator says something, an admin can still overrule that if it is deemed necessary.
This shouldn't need to happen, period.  If it does, it speaks poorly for both the moderators and the administration that chose them.

    * Do not mention someone's postcount. Even if it's yours or anyone else's, don't. Failing to respect this can result in your postcount being altered.
Given as postcounts don't even work properly, and they aren't displayed except on your profile page, this rule really doesn't seem necessary.

    * Spambots do not have the right to register or post on this forum. Their posts will be removed instantly and the user will be banned.
    * Don't post about mortgages, drugs, sex or illegal stuff, mp3s (from commercial artists) included. You'd be considered to be a spambot (see above note).
Well, these are obvious.  I do not think it would be possible to complain about the presence of these.

    * Don't post things that are obviously not suitable for children. This forum is visited by a lot of young people, so please respect that fact and don't post things that can be disturbing for children. If you post something which we can't allow in this forum out of concern for our younger visitors, your post may be altered/removed without warning.
I don't believe this rule has ever been enforced, but it's never needed to be - unless you count strong language as being unsuitable for children (see comment on that rule).

    * Do not write an ALL CAPS POSTS or ALL CAPS TITLES. All Caps is seen as shouting which is being seen as rude to many people.
It isn't SEEN AS SHOUTING, it isn't SEEN AS RUDE, it's JUST ANNOYING.

    * Don't post topics with nondescript titles. Topics with titles like "Help!" or "I have a noob question..." are often pretty useless. When you have a problem, give as much information about it as you can, so people know what you are talking about and give it a helpful title so that people who might have a similar problem can easily find your topic via the search.
This is a good rule to have, and it seems people actually care about it.  No complaints.

    * Don't post random things in a topic. Do not post something that is completely irrelevant to that topic. This is being seen as not caring for that person or their subject. Doing so can result in a deletion of that post without warning whatsoever.
I've seen this happen a few times and I haven't seen any action taken.

    * Don't go off-topic by posting that you noticed a change in someone's profile/avatar/signature. This is one of the most seen ways of going off-topic. If you find someone's avatar change to be great, please create a new topic in "About Nifflas' Website & Forum" or PM them.
    * Don't bend to off-topic chatter too much. It can happen that someone says something that you find funny and want to comment on. This is okay, but it should not start a new discussion. Try to avoid that.
    * Don't continue a discussion that went off-topic when someone tells you to stop. If someone says: "Please stay on topic", don't continue the off topic discussion. Ignoring that can lead in posts being deleted/altered by a moderator/admin.
These are basically all the same rule.

    * Don't do back-seat moderating. If you see that someone has done something that you think is against the rules, please use the "Report to moderator"-button. Sometimes people can sound somewhat unfriendly when they tell others what not to do and sometimes they're wrong. A moderator will look into it and make a decision.
I really hate it when forums add a rule against "back-seat moderating."  If someone's breaking the rules, then I can't tell them they're breaking the rules without breaking the rules myself?  I'm sorry, but that's just silly!

    * Don't edit your post to change the subject. If you started a topic, and the questions has been answered which makes the topic useless, do not alter your post even if it's the first post, so you can bend the topic. Create a new topic instead and optionally link to the current to explain your posting.
Has this ever actually happened?

    * Don't make a post in a topic that already died if you have nothing to add. If you just reply to a topic to make it active again, while not adding anything to that topic, your post will be deleted without warning. Doing it too often will result in a ban because you'll be seen as a spambot (they do that too!).
I have no particular comments about this rule.  It is fairly obvious and straightforward.

    * Don't add text to your post that is unreadable on purpose (unless its part of a forumgame's rules). This includes small text (like 6 px and smaller), and different colors that match the background color. If you don't want something to be easily read, use a spoilertag. Unreadable text will be removed on sight without warning.
    * Do not use formatting BCC tags that aren't necessary in a post. When you apply formatting tags, like color, bold, size, etc... be sure that it adds value to the text you're applying it to. That means, if you removed the formatting, the goal wouldn't be met anymore. Do note: adding color, and fontsize changes, and bold usually is overkill. Clarification doesn't need alot of tags, people will read it anyways.
If you don't want people to use these features, DISABLE THEM!  Paula herself currently has a violation of the first one in her own SIGNATURE.

    * Don't make your signature higher than 200px. Usually a small post (which are most) is about 100 px big. Having a signature that is way bigger makes things unnecessary large. You can use [ table ] and [ tr ] [ td ] tags to put things next to eachother so it doesn't become that large vertically. Also the spoilertag may assist you here.
I have seen a number of violations of this, most of which have been ignored, but it is understandably annoying to have to monitor something as temporary as a signature.  And nobody seems to mind, including me.

    * Don't edit-out moderator edits. If a moderator has edited your post, do not change anything that the moderator has added/changed. Failing to respect this can result in losing the ability to edit your own posts.
    * Don't make multiple accounts. Users with more than one account will receive a warning and will have all but one account deleted on sight.
    * Don't hand out your account details to anyone. If you hand out your account details to anyone and they post/send PM's/shout/etc  under your name, you'll still be responsible for those actions. If you get banned for it, then note that it won't be an excuse to get you unbanned. If someone hacked you and you find out, change your password ASAP to prevent them from getting you banned. If you cannot login anymore, notify an admin to get it sorted.
These are obvious enough.  Nothing to say about these.

    * Don't post links referring to the old forum. Because it will not stay online forever, please don't add links referring to the old broken forum to your posts. If you want to "save" things that were said there, copy & paste/quote from it.
I still think this is stupid.  It is very annoying to have to quote everything, and a lot of new people have asked for links to the old forum and have been told "oh, well, we're not allowed to give you one, but you can just replace "forum" with "forum2" and guess the rest!"


Rules about Nifflas' Website and Forum:

    * Keep the discussions related to this forum, the main site or issues with #niffchat. You can chat about other members, or problems you experience, but only about issues that are related to this forum. Avatar = yes, new car = no.
    * Announcing your leave and return. You are allowed to announce when you leave or come back, so don't think that this rule prevents that. Although, since these topics previously have lead to spamming, a moderator will lock the topic. This means that it is just a notification to everyone.
No comments.

Rules about Forumgames:

    * Do not post a game that can lead to simply spamming posts. This means: Don't make a topic where the aim of that topic is to just post. It must have a game element.
    * Competitions cannot be about posting alone. It's not allowed to make a competition that requires you to post a lot of posts. This is a serious waste of forum space.
My opinion about forum games: either live with the somewhat spammy ones, or don't have them at all!  I really dislike the number of forum games that have been locked because a member of the administration just happened to interpret it as "spammy."  The classic example of this is the "???" game; it ran for about 200 pages on the old forum and then was suddenly locked, and someone's posted it here and it hasn't been locked, despite being extremely similar and actually quite a bit more spammy.

Rules about Development Showcase:

    * Show your own creations. You can show your music, your games, your images, etc. as long as you made it and it's original. For example: you can show your website, but only if you wrote it yourself, and aren't using someone else's system.
This is quite an obvious rule, but I'm not sure what exactly "someone else's system" refers to.

Rules about Knytt Stories Level Editing Support:

    * Make sure to read the stickied topics. They contain answers to the most commonly asked questions. If they don't help you with your problem, feel free to post a new topic about it.
It's too bad that having a rule about it still doesn't make people read the sticky topics.

Rules about Knytt Stories Level Previews:

    * Post previews of KS levels or present an idea you have about that. You can post screenshots or a story outline here, for example. You CANNOT post a playable level here, The Knytt Stories Level Archive is for that.
This is strange.  We can post tiny, conceptual slivers of levels, and we can post completed levels, but we cannot post perfectly playable half-completed levels.  And encouraging people to pollute the archive is an awful thing to do.





On the whole my biggest complaint about this forum is that we have an administration that doesn't really care about it.  They lock a few topics here and there but don't seem to care about a whole lot else.  They've created some completely random subforums - Collaborations and Development Showcase seem very blurred, what with things like Make 'Em Sweat.  I honestly don't think that KS level editing support and ordinary KS discussion need to be separated like they are, and do gamelets like Roll and GTF really need their own forums?  (Both have only three topics.)



I do, however, disagree that googoogjob has been a bad moderator.  He has been more respectful than any other mod/admin, and has paid far more attention to the rules himself than they have.  As you said, niffchat doesn't have any actual rules.

Quote from: Bored2death on August 04, 2009, 18:32:20

@Goog: I haven't seen this video, but if you're going to say it's funny, possibly insulting a few people, try to keep it away from this forum. You do a decent job moderating, but a video like that with people aged as they are on this forum... it could influence them (not a good chance, but still), and they may think that people like that. We also have guests, and we don't know what age some of them are. If they grow up thinking people laugh at things like 9/11 happening...

The funny part of the video wasn't the horrific events in it, but rather the juxtaposition of these horrific events with Yakety Sax.

Like I said, I didn't see the video, so I wouldn't know.  I'm don't mean to imply anything about you or anything, I was just trying to put in my thoughts on it. If the video is funny, but it's not because of the 9/11 part, then that's ok (as long as the humor is appropriate, again, I have yet to see it, so I don't know). Sorry if it was (unintentionally) rude of me to say.

    * An Administrator can overrule a moderator. If a dispute becomes big, and a moderator says something, an admin can still overrule that if it is deemed necessary.
This shouldn't need to happen, period.  If it does, it speaks poorly for both the moderators and the administration that chose them.

This really never happens anyway. I've always just thought this was sort of a failsafe for if a mod goes rogue or something.

    * Don't post random things in a topic. Do not post something that is completely irrelevant to that topic. This is being seen as not caring for that person or their subject. Doing so can result in a deletion of that post without warning whatsoever.
I've seen this happen a few times and I haven't seen any action taken.

This rule's totally subjective. If you see it happen and you think something needs to be done, report it.

    * Don't do back-seat moderating. If you see that someone has done something that you think is against the rules, please use the "Report to moderator"-button. Sometimes people can sound somewhat unfriendly when they tell others what not to do and sometimes they're wrong. A moderator will look into it and make a decision.
I really hate it when forums add a rule against "back-seat moderating."  If someone's breaking the rules, then I can't tell them they're breaking the rules without breaking the rules myself?  I'm sorry, but that's just silly!

This rule is there largely because a lot of rules get broken very often (typically by new posters), and while there's nothing wrong with wanting to let someone know they've broken a rule unknowingly, there got to be a lot of posts with no content other than "you're breaking the rules".

    * Don't edit your post to change the subject. If you started a topic, and the questions has been answered which makes the topic useless, do not alter your post even if it's the first post, so you can bend the topic. Create a new topic instead and optionally link to the current to explain your posting.
Has this ever actually happened?

Very very rarely.

    * Don't add text to your post that is unreadable on purpose (unless its part of a forumgame's rules). This includes small text (like 6 px and smaller), and different colors that match the background color. If you don't want something to be easily read, use a spoilertag. Unreadable text will be removed on sight without warning.
    * Do not use formatting BCC tags that aren't necessary in a post. When you apply formatting tags, like color, bold, size, etc... be sure that it adds value to the text you're applying it to. That means, if you removed the formatting, the goal wouldn't be met anymore. Do note: adding color, and fontsize changes, and bold usually is overkill. Clarification doesn't need alot of tags, people will read it anyways.
If you don't want people to use these features, DISABLE THEM!  Paula herself currently has a violation of the first one in her own SIGNATURE.

These tags do have legitimate uses, though. Also: I believe it was decided that signatures aren't subject to this rule as long as they don't break other rules (like being too tall), since a signature is a personal thing and isn't necessarily meant to communicate information in the same way a regular post is.

    * Don't make your signature higher than 200px. Usually a small post (which are most) is about 100 px big. Having a signature that is way bigger makes things unnecessary large. You can use [ table ] and [ tr ] [ td ] tags to put things next to eachother so it doesn't become that large vertically. Also the spoilertag may assist you here.
I have seen a number of violations of this, most of which have been ignored, but it is understandably annoying to have to monitor something as temporary as a signature.  And nobody seems to mind, including me.

Whenever this happens (that is, whenever a signature gets too tall), a scrollbar appears on the side of the signature, and the signature is typically edited by an admin shortly thereafter.

(I like, y'know, refrained from commenting on other rules where I can't really add/clarify anything, like the forumgames.)

Like I said, I didn't see the video, so I wouldn't know.  I'm don't mean to imply anything about you or anything, I was just trying to put in my thoughts on it. If the video is funny, but it's not because of the 9/11 part, then that's ok (as long as the humor is appropriate, again, I have yet to see it, so I don't know). Sorry if it was (unintentionally) rude of me to say.

's cool.

I honestly think that the rules for the forum should also apply to the chat, if they don't already, and that moderators should act the same as they do on the forum. And the in beds are getting old, Goog.

chipset, you are almost never active in #niffchat anymore. "In bed" use (by all users) has declined sharply since this time last year.

Well look at how offtopic the r-type 3.14(yah, thats all I know, but I still am the mathexpert!!) went. people started posting fake stuff and no mod bothered to remove the stuff.

Quote from: googoogjoob on August 04, 2009, 19:43:33

Quote from: Bored2death on August 04, 2009, 18:45:47

Like I said, I didn't see the video, so I wouldn't know.  I'm don't mean to imply anything about you or anything, I was just trying to put in my thoughts on it. If the video is funny, but it's not because of the 9/11 part, then that's ok (as long as the humor is appropriate, again, I have yet to see it, so I don't know). Sorry if it was (unintentionally) rude of me to say.

's cool.

...but wouldn't you think twice before posting something that controversial in the chat? Just sounds like common sense to me.

I didn't think it was particularly controversial, especially as it'd been posted before.