As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

New Forumers

ElkiElki get busyModerator, ClubPA mod
I suggested this in EE, but I'm not sure if it's easy to do.

Can you guys make a prompt that comes up for first time users whenever they try to create their first thread and remind them to read the rules first?

smCQ5WE.jpg
Elki on
«13

Posts

  • futilityfutility Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    such a thing has been suggesed before. I think now that it's something the mods are supposed to regulate really.

    futility on
  • PheezerPheezer Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    futility wrote:
    such a thing has been suggesed before. I think now that it's something the mods are supposed to regulate really.

    Actually, this specific thing hasn't been iirc.

    Just one click through with a reminder, a link, a "Yup, I gotcha" check box and an okay button that shows up the very first time a new user tries to create a thread, and keeps showing up when they try to create a thread until they click the check box and hit OK. And it could just be for creating new threads, not for replying.

    I can't see the harm.

    Of course, I don't think it'll make the slightest fucking difference, but it'd be fun to try. Oh, and yes, I am saying that from the position of the person who wouldn't be in charge of making it happen.

    Pheezer on
    IT'S GOT ME REACHING IN MY POCKET IT'S GOT ME FORKING OVER CASH
    CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
  • SzechuanosaurusSzechuanosaurus Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    I installed a program on my computer the other day - I don't recall what it was - and when the licence agreement thing came up the I Agree check box was greyed out. i soon figured out that the only way to be able to select it was to scroll all the way to the bottom of the licence.

    Needles to say, I just scrolled right to the bottom and didn't read a damn word.

    Moral of the story? How the hell would I know?

    Szechuanosaurus on
  • Red Machine DRed Machine D __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2004
    My suggestion was that for the first week (or 48-72 hours) of an account's life, the all forums are viewable, but the only threads viewable in those forums are the rules threads. Either that or make a special rules forum, and allow the new accounts to only view that thread for a predetermined length of time.

    Red Machine D on
    Fencingsax wrote:
    Death metal hippies: BLARRRGRH!!! PEACE MAN!!11!
  • PheezerPheezer Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    My suggestion was that for the first week (or 48-72 hours) of an account's life, the all forums are viewable, but the only threads viewable in those forums are the rules threads. Either that or make a special rules forum, and allow the new accounts to only view that thread for a predetermined length of time.

    Yes, thanks for reminding us of a suggestion that HAS been shot down for being retarded already.

    Pheezer on
    IT'S GOT ME REACHING IN MY POCKET IT'S GOT ME FORKING OVER CASH
    CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
  • msuitepyonmsuitepyon Registered User regular
    edited September 2004
    pheezer wrote:
    My suggestion was that for the first week (or 48-72 hours) of an account's life, the all forums are viewable, but the only threads viewable in those forums are the rules threads. Either that or make a special rules forum, and allow the new accounts to only view that thread for a predetermined length of time.

    Yes, thanks for reminding us of a suggestion that HAS been shot down for being retarded already.

    Burn... :P

    Just let them do what the hell they want... We already have people that say "OMG, read the rules" and the Mods can jail and/or ban the crap out of the n00bs that step out of line.

    msuitepyon on
  • Red Machine DRed Machine D __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2004
    pheezer wrote:
    My suggestion was that for the first week (or 48-72 hours) of an account's life, the all forums are viewable, but the only threads viewable in those forums are the rules threads. Either that or make a special rules forum, and allow the new accounts to only view that thread for a predetermined length of time.

    Yes, thanks for reminding us of a suggestion that HAS been shot down for being retarded already.
    I don't see how that is any more retarded than a check-box and an OK button. See, with a chedck-box and an OK button, they could just go "yeahyeahyeah I read the rules sure thing boss" and fly right into "HILARIOUS NEW WEBCOMIC" mode. With my proposal, they would be forced to read the rules before they could read or post in any other thread.

    Red Machine D on
    Fencingsax wrote:
    Death metal hippies: BLARRRGRH!!! PEACE MAN!!11!
  • bone daddybone daddy Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    pheezer wrote:
    My suggestion was that for the first week (or 48-72 hours) of an account's life, the all forums are viewable, but the only threads viewable in those forums are the rules threads. Either that or make a special rules forum, and allow the new accounts to only view that thread for a predetermined length of time.

    Yes, thanks for reminding us of a suggestion that HAS been shot down for being retarded already.
    I don't see how that is any more retarded than a check-box and an OK button. See, with a chedck-box and an OK button, they could just go "yeahyeahyeah I read the rules sure thing boss" and fly right into "HILARIOUS NEW WEBCOMIC" mode. With my proposal, they would be forced to read the rules before they could read or post in any other thread.

    Actually, they wouldn't. Not having access to other stuff by no means forces or guarantees rule-reading. It just results in an idle pupa period before the "OMG muthafucka wheeeeeeeeeeeeee IM A POSTIN' BUTTAFLY" stage.

    bone daddy on
    Rogue helicopter?
    Ecoterrorism is actually the single largest terrorist threat at the moment. They don't usually kill people, but they blow up or set on fire very expensive things.
  • Red Machine DRed Machine D __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2004
    bone daddy wrote:
    pheezer wrote:
    My suggestion was that for the first week (or 48-72 hours) of an account's life, the all forums are viewable, but the only threads viewable in those forums are the rules threads. Either that or make a special rules forum, and allow the new accounts to only view that thread for a predetermined length of time.

    Yes, thanks for reminding us of a suggestion that HAS been shot down for being retarded already.
    I don't see how that is any more retarded than a check-box and an OK button. See, with a chedck-box and an OK button, they could just go "yeahyeahyeah I read the rules sure thing boss" and fly right into "HILARIOUS NEW WEBCOMIC" mode. With my proposal, they would be forced to read the rules before they could read or post in any other thread.

    Actually, they wouldn't. Not having access to other stuff by no means forces or guarantees rule-reading. It just results in an idle pupa period before the "OMG muthafucka wheeeeeeeeeeeeee IM A POSTIN' BUTTAFLY" stage.
    My second, stupider idea was a quiz. You could browse all you want but you couldn't post until you passed a quiz on the various forum rules. If you wanted to create a thread, you had to pass a much harder quiz.

    Like I said, stupid.

    Maybe there is no real solution to stuff like this besides the tried-and-true method of bannination.

    Red Machine D on
    Fencingsax wrote:
    Death metal hippies: BLARRRGRH!!! PEACE MAN!!11!
  • Munkus BeaverMunkus Beaver Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    New forumers are not diseased ridden and they don't come like locusts to devour your posts and pages en masse.

    Let the mods do their jobs and you can do your part.

    Ignore the stupid threads you jackasses.

    Munkus Beaver on
    Twitch Channel
    Steam: munkus_beaver
    Humor can be dissected, as a frog can, but it dies in the process.
    http://www.ccfa.org/
  • apotheosapotheos Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    I disagree with anything that makes it really annoying to join the boards.

    You know, like everythind Red said.

    apotheos on


    猿も木から落ちる
  • Red Machine DRed Machine D __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2004
    apotheos wrote:
    I disagree with anything that makes it really annoying to join the boards.

    You know, like everythind Red said.
    And checkboxes and "click OK if you read the rules" aren't annoying?

    Red Machine D on
    Fencingsax wrote:
    Death metal hippies: BLARRRGRH!!! PEACE MAN!!11!
  • bone daddybone daddy Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    apotheos wrote:
    I disagree with anything that makes it really annoying to join the boards.

    You know, like everythind Red said.
    And checkboxes and "click OK if you read the rules" aren't annoying?

    By themselves, they are annoying in a minor way that's soon forgotten. Compared to having an enforced idle, which would make quite a few people think the board's run by dipshits who think they're dealing with twelve-year-olds, they are a pleasant summer breeze.

    bone daddy on
    Rogue helicopter?
    Ecoterrorism is actually the single largest terrorist threat at the moment. They don't usually kill people, but they blow up or set on fire very expensive things.
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited September 2004
    New forumers are not diseased ridden and they don't come like locusts to devour your posts and pages en masse.
    I know, but a lot of them just miss the rules sticky. I did when I first joined.

    Elki on
    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • ÄlphämönkëyÄlphämönkëy Registered User regular
    edited September 2004
    Elkamil wrote:
    New forumers are not diseased ridden and they don't come like locusts to devour your posts and pages en masse.
    I know, but a lot of them just miss the rules sticky. I did when I first joined.
    If that is the problem I just need to find a way to make the rules more easily accessible. Im holding out on designing such a thing as phpBB 2.2.x has a pretty nice system in place.

    Älphämönkëy on
  • OrthancOrthanc Death Lite, Only 1 Calorie Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    What a lot of you don't seem to understand is that the vast majority of new people follow the rules and don't cause any problem. It's only a small but highly visible minority that fuck up.

    I see no reason to inconvienience the vast majority because of a few fuck ups.

    Orthanc on
    orthanc
  • futilityfutility Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    no orthanc is wrong burn all the noobs. booo booo kill them run them out of their village homes. steal their possesions.

    um yeah....

    i thought there was gonna be like whole forum rules. like all of the on topic forums were gonna have similar and stricter rules and the same for the chat forum.

    futility on
  • PaladinPaladin Registered User regular
    edited September 2004
    I didn't even know there was a rules thread until 3 months after joining. Then again, I didn't have that much experience with forums.

    Paladin on
    Marty: The future, it's where you're going?
    Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
  • Munkus BeaverMunkus Beaver Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    Elkamil wrote:
    New forumers are not diseased ridden and they don't come like locusts to devour your posts and pages en masse.
    I know, but a lot of them just miss the rules sticky. I did when I first joined.
    If that is the problem I just need to find a way to make the rules more easily accessible. Im holding out on designing such a thing as phpBB 2.2.x has a pretty nice system in place.

    The only thing I would do is add onto the "click here if you are over 13" page is put in big pastel colors EACH FORUM HAS ITS OWN RULES THREAD THAT YOU NEED TO CHECK BEFORE POSTING so that it is obvious, unobtrusive, and not frustrating to the newbies.

    Munkus Beaver on
    Twitch Channel
    Steam: munkus_beaver
    Humor can be dissected, as a frog can, but it dies in the process.
    http://www.ccfa.org/
  • MillowMillow Registered User
    edited September 2004
    this is stupid. your all stupid.

    stupid stupid stupid.

    Millow on
  • SzechuanosaurusSzechuanosaurus Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    New forumers are not diseased ridden and they don't come like locusts to devour your posts and pages en masse.

    Let the mods do their jobs and you can do your part.

    Ignore the stupid threads you jackasses.

    Just...because..you know.

    Szechuanosaurus on
  • PheezerPheezer Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    Orthanc wrote:
    What a lot of you don't seem to understand is that the vast majority of new people follow the rules and don't cause any problem. It's only a small but highly visible minority that fuck up.

    I see no reason to inconvienience the vast majority because of a few fuck ups.

    This is a good and very fair point. The only further restriction I'd be willing to endorse would be the safety catch on making a first new thread, but that'd be too much effort and accomplish nothing anyhow.

    Munkus's suggestion is a good one though. That's a point that needs to be made in huge, friendly coloured letters on the signup page, because a lot of people legitimately miss that point. They assume all the rules are the same, or that the rules are all fairly typical, when there are a lot of really specific rules that aren't altogether obvious, and aren't present everywhere.

    Pheezer on
    IT'S GOT ME REACHING IN MY POCKET IT'S GOT ME FORKING OVER CASH
    CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
  • The Muffin ManThe Muffin Man Registered User regular
    edited September 2004
    pheezer wrote:
    My suggestion was that for the first week (or 48-72 hours) of an account's life, the all forums are viewable, but the only threads viewable in those forums are the rules threads. Either that or make a special rules forum, and allow the new accounts to only view that thread for a predetermined length of time.

    Yes, thanks for reminding us of a suggestion that HAS been shot down for being retarded already.
    I don't see how that is any more retarded than a check-box and an OK button. See, with a chedck-box and an OK button, they could just go "yeahyeahyeah I read the rules sure thing boss" and fly right into "HILARIOUS NEW WEBCOMIC" mode. With my proposal, they would be forced to read the rules before they could read or post in any other thread.

    And thus prove they ignored the rules by breaking one, giving the mods no qualms against telling them where they can firmly plant their topic.

    The Muffin Man on
  • DogDog Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin
    edited September 2004
    pheezer wrote:
    My suggestion was that for the first week (or 48-72 hours) of an account's life, the all forums are viewable, but the only threads viewable in those forums are the rules threads. Either that or make a special rules forum, and allow the new accounts to only view that thread for a predetermined length of time.

    Yes, thanks for reminding us of a suggestion that HAS been shot down for being retarded already.

    With some tweaks, it could be a good idea.

    How about read-only access for the first 72 hours after registration. It would serve two purposes:

    1.) It would get new users acclimated to how the forums work.
    2.) It would discourage people from signing up just to make stupid posts and/or create an alt.

    People would still be able to read, just not respond or start new threads.

    I'm also a big fan of people below a certain postcount (say 25) being unable to start new threads.

    Your thoughts?

    Unknown User on
  • TubeTube Registered User admin
    edited September 2004
    I think that's unbelievably stupid. Sorry.

    Tube on
    Hobnail wrote: »
    This forum has taken everything from me
    This hurts but I deserve it

  • DogDog Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin
    edited September 2004
    Care to explain why?

    Unknown User on
  • TubeTube Registered User admin
    edited September 2004
    Because it's not necessary. Quite apart from anything else, if you're willing to sit on your hands for two days before you're given the privilige of posting here, you're probably a bit of a gimp anyway.

    Tube on
    Hobnail wrote: »
    This forum has taken everything from me
    This hurts but I deserve it

  • DogDog Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin
    edited September 2004
    I liken it to the 7 day waiting period on the purchase of firearms. It helps to prevent someone from doing something dumb.

    Unknown User on
  • TubeTube Registered User admin
    edited September 2004
    No it doesn't. It just makes people do things a few days later, or more likely not do anything at all. Most people here wouldn't have bothered if there was a waiting period.

    Tube on
    Hobnail wrote: »
    This forum has taken everything from me
    This hurts but I deserve it

  • Red Machine DRed Machine D __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2004
    Precisely.

    Red Machine D on
    Fencingsax wrote:
    Death metal hippies: BLARRRGRH!!! PEACE MAN!!11!
  • DogDog Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin
    edited September 2004
    If you can't make it thru a few days of reading-only, then, to quote you, you're probably a bit of a gimp anyway.

    If we could have weeded out the majority of the retards that post here in the first place, the forums would be a much better place and you probably wouldn't be such a hardass.

    Unknown User on
  • Red Machine DRed Machine D __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2004
    To point, the spammers. They sign up, get activated, and then post a thread about their "hilarious new webcomic" or their "killer new game site" or whatnot. Making them wait a couple days to do this would not only discourgae this kind of thing, but would also cut down on it SHARPLY, as many people odn't have the patience to wait two hours to make their new thread in the heat of the spam, much less two days. Many people just want to come on the forums, spam away, and get out. There are other people, however, who want to come and spam away repeatedly (a good example is Mr. Glub Glub), and the waiting period would deter this not only by preventing their spamming, but also by enticing them to spam other forums where there are less lenient restrictions.

    Red Machine D on
    Fencingsax wrote:
    Death metal hippies: BLARRRGRH!!! PEACE MAN!!11!
  • DynagripDynagrip Destroy Everything You Touch HoustonRegistered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    If you can't make it thru a few days of reading-only, then, to quote you, you're probably a bit of a gimp anyway.

    If we could have weeded out the majority of the retards that post here in the first place, the forums would be a much better place and you probably wouldn't be such a hardass.
    Well, it screws over lurkers that haven't gotten around to registering. That's one pretty big drawback. Plus, foruming isn't that complicated. We don't really need a waiting period. I have seen no evidence of the mods being overwhelmed with "Hi! I'm new!" threads or generic rookie mistakes.

    Dynagrip on
  • DogDog Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin
    edited September 2004
    Dynagrip wrote:
    If you can't make it thru a few days of reading-only, then, to quote you, you're probably a bit of a gimp anyway.

    If we could have weeded out the majority of the retards that post here in the first place, the forums would be a much better place and you probably wouldn't be such a hardass.
    Well, it screws over lurkers that haven't gotten around to registering. That's one pretty big drawback. Plus, foruming isn't that complicated. We don't really need a waiting period. I have seen no evidence of the mods being overwhelmed with "Hi! I'm new!" threads or generic rookie mistakes.

    Lurkers would know the system and, honestly, if you've lurked for several (days|weeks|months), what's another 2 days?

    I agree that there's no blatant evidence of mods being overwhelmed with their duties but why not nip it in the bud BEFORE they start to become burdened? They won't notice a difference, and it'll be one thing they'll never have to worry about.

    Unknown User on
  • bone daddybone daddy Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    I agree that there's no blatant evidence of mods being overwhelmed with their duties but why not nip it in the bud BEFORE they start to become burdened?

    It occurs to me that locking the forums would take care of 100% of the idiots and absolutely guarantee that the mods don't become overwhelmed.

    bone daddy on
    Rogue helicopter?
    Ecoterrorism is actually the single largest terrorist threat at the moment. They don't usually kill people, but they blow up or set on fire very expensive things.
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited September 2004
    pheezer wrote:
    Orthanc wrote:
    What a lot of you don't seem to understand is that the vast majority of new people follow the rules and don't cause any problem. It's only a small but highly visible minority that fuck up.

    I see no reason to inconvienience the vast majority because of a few fuck ups.

    This is a good and very fair point. The only further restriction I'd be willing to endorse would be the safety catch on making a first new thread, but that'd be too much effort and accomplish nothing anyhow.
    Well, I don't know how to code so I didn't know how much work it would take.

    It wouldn't be worth it if it required too much effort.

    Elki on
    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • DynagripDynagrip Destroy Everything You Touch HoustonRegistered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    Dynagrip wrote:
    If you can't make it thru a few days of reading-only, then, to quote you, you're probably a bit of a gimp anyway.

    If we could have weeded out the majority of the retards that post here in the first place, the forums would be a much better place and you probably wouldn't be such a hardass.
    Well, it screws over lurkers that haven't gotten around to registering. That's one pretty big drawback. Plus, foruming isn't that complicated. We don't really need a waiting period. I have seen no evidence of the mods being overwhelmed with "Hi! I'm new!" threads or generic rookie mistakes.

    Lurkers would know the system and, honestly, if you've lurked for several (days|weeks|months), what's another 2 days?

    I agree that there's no blatant evidence of mods being overwhelmed with their duties but why not nip it in the bud BEFORE they start to become burdened? They won't notice a difference, and it'll be one thing they'll never have to worry about.
    BEFORE? The forums have been around for a long time. This has yet to be a problem. Based on that trend, I don't see why it should be protected against. You seem to get on a lot of drives for tweaks to the forums.

    As far as lurkers, maybe when they finally signup, they have something relevant to say that day. Forcing them to wait 2 days or whatever while a topic could cool is bullshit.

    Dynagrip on
  • futilityfutility Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    the only time such things ever become a problem is when user responce gets out of hand or when disoriented noobs don't understand why their thread was locked and then feel vengance needs to be sought out

    really even people starting a thread that says hey look I've got something cool isn't a bad thing, so long as what they have is actually cool... which is rare. and one of the times where this did happen some of you fucked it up for the rest of us who might have been interested. realistically we can all judge what is good and what is bad, and while our oppinions may differ many of us have like interest. it's only when someone comes in here with the explicit desire to sell something and they try to trick us into liking it that we should have a problem.

    and let me clarify this.
    an example of maybe what should happen when something of quality is being presented to us:
    hey guys I got this web comic I'd like you to check out
    um... who are you and why are you telling me this
    oh hey I checked out your site pretty interesting but this isn't a place for free advertising.
    mod wrote:
    I think I'm gonna lock this.
    some noob wrote:
    please don't
    it's not so bad give it a chance
    POOP!

    and now when an ass is selling to us
    woo hey fuck you guys! anyone ever here of the new religion fuckism. it's crazy man. hey check it out at this site www.fuckism.org
    fuckism.org is also his avatar and www site
    fuck you
    fuck you and the horse you rode in on
    mod wrote:
    IP ban, and letter sent to your ip about how you were selling child porn
    [thread locked]

    futility on
  • OrthancOrthanc Death Lite, Only 1 Calorie Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2004
    Amor, that suggestion like all the others greatly inconviences the vast majority of good new people to slow down a few bad people. Unacceptable.

    Orthanc on
    orthanc
  • ToastToast Registered User
    edited September 2004
    Most people join forums because they have something to say. Sometimes the thing they have to say is pretty fucking retarded, but that's because they're morons. If you don't allow people to register and say the thing they wanted to say that made them register, they won't register at all (or they'll register, figure it out, say "fuck that" and wander off again).

    Toast on
Sign In or Register to comment.