Some Constructive Criticism [Forum]

Automatic. I'll give you one so you can see what it's like (worth 0 points) and I'll remove it later.

edit: Removed your warning so you don't have to worry about it. You can see what it's like in your conversations. Also added a subsection to Suggestions containing old and redundant threads. Subsection is called Archives.

Also, possible mods to add:

http://xenforo.com/community/resources/enforce-post-rules.390/

http://www.xfteam.info/threads/latest-thread-on-sidebar-v2-0.1139/

 

Congratulations.

Suggestion: Remove 'No multipost' , this is solved via plugin.

should be clarified that this should not be done for annoyance, it however should be done for layout if you are making a nice guide or some such, as doing so is quite beneficial to the readability, uppercase should probably still be used sparingly, certain colors should be mentioned as examples to not use like bright as fuck yellow or not quite invisible magenta.

 

It's actually a great approach for idorts. People are going to get into conflict, attempting to outright ban any conflict is stupid. Putting some limits on where it can be done however and giving a place that it can be done is different.

Notice it says 'flame war', this is different than 'flaming'.

Speaking of which the insulting clause is a bit silly, 'flaming' makes much more sense. Leave in insulting any 'group' however, that is aproblem, as that is group bias such as homo bashing, misogyny, racism, etc.

Obviously however, I have a little bias here as I keep getting little warnings for insulting idorts.

 

Mini update: I added the link to the rules under the help drop down, where it was meant to be.
However, the other items in help are kinda useless so considering replacing 'Help' with a direct link to Rules.

 

Flaming is one way, flame wars are two way.

Flaming over time is borderline harassment, flame wars over time are just flame wars.

Well generally the problem is this, if someone suggests something stupid and I call him retarded, I get warned. Could you write posts that are constructive as to why someone's idea is bad? Yes. Could he just not write stupid things? Yes.
Insulting people is going to happen, some people are insult worthy (I surely am :) ), but there is a difference between insults (a one time thing) and flaming (continual harassment over multiple posts or going over the top in a nice wall of text about why something is wrong or negative, etc).

Again, I still have some bias here, but proposed idea is this:

Spoiler

Person1:Allow builders to 1hko knights, this is true balance
Person2:You're stupid
Justifiable, obviously it's not 'without reason' (thus not flaming), and fine.

Spoiler

Person1:"I like ponies"
Person2:I hope donkeys defecate on your chest while you watch your newborn baby cry in your wife's arms as she is being decapitated by the president and you are forced to eat her body for sustenance for a week.
Warning - Clear flaming, over the top, etc. While there is usually satire in this sort of thing unless what person1 said is ridiculously stupid, it is without reason and simply flaming.

Spoiler

Person1:Hi
Person2: I hate you, you're retarded

2 days later

Person1: So there I was right, talking about something and yeah, cool stuff guys.
Person2: Holy shit I hate this prick who the fuck do you think you are to tell us stories, you're retarded.
Warning - Flaming, harassment over time

Spoiler

Person1: I'm homosexual
Person2:I hate homosexuals, all homosexuals are bad.
Warning - Bigotry

In other words given these examples, my suggestion is this:
Insult - Okay
Unprovoked insults - Not okay [Attention to Sarcasm]
Over the top or ridiculously long insults - Not okay [Sarcasm should be taken into account!]
Bigotry - Not okay (Insults due to being part of a group) [Please keep in mind again sarcasm!]
Harassment [Repeated insults over time, person asks you to stop] - Not okay [, much like rape, No plays a key role.]


Another thing I have to ask is how again the 'who has authority' for warning go? I've been warned and have seen warnings people give outside of their 'sections' that were clearly overlooked by guards who posted in there and also have had power in that section.

And then once again the question also comes into play of showing warning points at least in the conversation you get if possible, something like "You got 5/10 warning points, 5 more and you'll be banned" "The warning points will wear off in X days", or in other words some sort of summary, as the current system leaves people with not knowing at all what a 'warning' could mean in terms of points, and having them look it up doesn't really work, it's a right bitch to do so.

Lastly, but certainly not least, stupid posts, I mean seriously stupid posts should not be allowed in threads where people discuss balance.

By that I mean posts with stuff like
"Well combat sucks and archers are OP, so let archer shoot 5x as fast xD"
Not to say that a warning should be issued, although perhaps that should be a thing, but such posts, something should be done about them outside of the designated stupid boxes (such as 'New classes' thread)

 

Issue with that is that if you enable them to see their warning tab, they'll be able to see everyone else's warnings. Currently there is no option to just have a person view their own warnings.

If you are allowed to see warnings, this new tab comes up on profile pages:


and the problem with this is that you'll see everyone else's if you go their profile. Now, it would be nice if you could enable it so that you can see it on your page only, but it's currently not possible.

 

You're not allowed to see your own warnings.

Basically there were two options before the XenForo update: See no one's (standard, only admins/mods can), or see everyone's (addon).

Now after the update there is only one option, only admins/mods can.

Without a work around to this, it could cause some problems ^^;

If the addon has been updated and it is opensource, it would not be hard to add this functionality I'd imagine, I'd be willing to do it personally.


E: Was there really a problem with them being public? I personally don't see one, but I can understand how some people might see it as an issue.

 

As far as I know, it's possible to change that, although I don't have access to that part of the administration.

Well actually it's still there, in fact, I could enable it myself so that you can see warnings like you could before, the issue is that you can see everyone's.

It's up to Shad really though, so I guess you could try making a compelling argument as to why the benefits of knowing what your warnings are outweighs the possible problems of knowing what someone else has been warned for.

 

Basically 2 things that I can think of right now

1.)

So basically to prevent shame and it can potentially cause conflict between members (in particularly the younger ones)

2.) If someone says a warning is unfair, it can basically cause a "gang-fight" because some people just like to join in and it basically becomes a fight between people saying the warning was unfair and the mods saying the warning was unfair. More pointless conflict and can cause tension between the mods and the community (and it has happened before), hence the reason PM's are given as the place to dispute a warning.

All moderators have authority to give warning in any section. The only thing they can't do is delete offending posts outside their section (unless they are a global moderator). If another moderator thinks that there was no reason for that warning, they can delete it, although it's rarely if ever done.

 

Systems that aren't transparent both in real life and on forums usually lend to easier abuse as they cannot be checked by the community thus they are usually unaware of anything wrong actually happening in this sort of instance.

Someone getting a warning also doesn't shame them, and if they are actually feeling shameful, that isn't a bad thing, if they are legitimately shameful of what they did it will make them think twice, instead of helping them hide their shame, they need to simply face it.

However since the community will I assume embrace children, I can understand why some of them may not be able to do this.

Guess we'll have to wait for something better. Descriptive PMs if possible would indeed be a nice alternative.