Jump to content

Welcome to Yugioh Card Maker Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account
Photo

Replacing Statuses


Necrobump!

Guest, the last post on this topic is over 30 days old and a new post will be considered as necrobumping!



  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
41 replies to this topic

#21
(Mizzet)

(Mizzet)

    Firemind

  • Ace Investigator
  • 7,340 posts
    Last Visit
  • Alias:(parenthesis)
  • Spouse:cinnamon

I'll be perfectly honest I don't really care much either way I just don't want to change the rule unless I know multiple people actually want this changed.

winter wants it changed, I wants it changed. Boom, multiple.


In all seriousness, if a mod can go this long without properly weighing in, I can't say the issue is particularly important to them. I get waiting so people don't feel cut out, but stuff this trivial being haulted because so much of the staff doesn't care either way is just silly.

#22
Phantom Roxas

Phantom Roxas

    I am not afraid to keep on living

  • The Chariot
  • 26,556 posts
    Last Visit Today, 01:28 AM

winter wants it changed, I wants it changed. Boom, multiple.


In all seriousness, if a mod can go this long without properly weighing in, I can't say the issue is particularly important to them. I get waiting so people don't feel cut out, but stuff this trivial being haulted because so much of the staff doesn't care either way is just silly.

 

The issue isn't that particularly important at all anyway. You joke by pointing to you and Winter as wanting it changed, but it's not like there's been any other voices anyway. Not sure if you want any bigger change than just the need for edits, because that seems like a fair exception.


Posted Image


#23
Nathanael D. Striker

Nathanael D. Striker

    Livin' the dream.

  • Twilight Wanderer

  • 19,540 posts
    Last Visit Yesterday, 11:58 PM
  • Discord:Striker#1560
  • Alias:Striker
Just allow reposts for edits, please. I do it all the time, yet no one notices

#24
(Mizzet)

(Mizzet)

    Firemind

  • Ace Investigator
  • 7,340 posts
    Last Visit
  • Alias:(parenthesis)
  • Spouse:cinnamon
Is there actually any harm in allowing deleting and posting something totally different though? Any kind of problems that could bring up are already present in the current ruleset.

It may seem like a case of "why get rid of this rule when the benefit is minute" but frankly I see no valid reason why the rule should have existed in the first place. Giving the site a simpler rulebook is a benefit in and of itself.

Keeping arbitrary rules for the sake of nothing is just lazy

#25
Phantom Roxas

Phantom Roxas

    I am not afraid to keep on living

  • The Chariot
  • 26,556 posts
    Last Visit Today, 01:28 AM

Is there actually any harm in allowing deleting and posting something totally different though? Any kind of problems that could bring up are already present in the current ruleset.

It may seem like a case of "why get rid of this rule when the benefit is minute" but frankly I see no valid reason why the rule should have existed in the first place. Giving the site a simpler rulebook is a benefit in and of itself.

Keeping arbitrary rules for the sake of nothing is just lazy

 

This just feels similar to the thread about controversial statuses, where even though the current rules make something explicitly clear, we have to double down on it by making it more clear that this is a problem.

 

Giving the site a simpler rulebook means nothing when people want to abuse loopholes around those rules. It's not that the rules are "arbitrary", it's that the rules need to cover as many specific circumstances as necessary to prevent that loophole abuse.


Posted Image


#26
(Mizzet)

(Mizzet)

    Firemind

  • Ace Investigator
  • 7,340 posts
    Last Visit
  • Alias:(parenthesis)
  • Spouse:cinnamon

This just feels similar to the thread about controversial statuses, where even though the current rules make something explicitly clear, we have to double down on it by making it more clear that this is a problem.
 
Giving the site a simpler rulebook means nothing when people want to abuse loopholes around those rules. It's not that the rules are "arbitrary", it's that the rules need to cover as many specific circumstances as necessary to prevent that loophole abuse.

what's the abusive loophole in question?

#27
Phantom Roxas

Phantom Roxas

    I am not afraid to keep on living

  • The Chariot
  • 26,556 posts
    Last Visit Today, 01:28 AM

what's the abusive loophole in question?

 
Here:

As I already mentioned, some members were abusing this by posting stuff that was otherwise against the rules (i.e. causing drama). Granted, if we don't see it (or if someone doesn't screenshot / report it), then you won't get penalized. 
 
There's nothing inherently wrong with deleting/reposting, but make sure you have a good reason for doing so and don't abuse the privilege. 

 

To focus on stuff that you haven't already stated, the abusive loophole in question is people posting stuff against the rules to cause drama.


Posted Image


#28
(Mizzet)

(Mizzet)

    Firemind

  • Ace Investigator
  • 7,340 posts
    Last Visit
  • Alias:(parenthesis)
  • Spouse:cinnamon

Here:
 
To focus on stuff that you haven't already stated, the abusive loophole in question is people posting stuff against the rules to cause drama.

except the current rules don't stop this.

I could post a status that breaks every rule possible, then delete it. The rule in question only comes into play if I wanted to post another status after deleting the first.

To fix this "loophole" the ability to delete statuses would need to be removed completely. If that's the way we're gonna go, then sure, but this just limits people for no benefit.

#29
The Necromancer

The Necromancer

  • Topic Starter
  • Night's Watch

  • 14,423 posts
    Last Visit Today, 02:37 AM
  • Discord:#0196
  • Spouse:Fate

Black warned me for posting about YGO spoilers that were 11 minutes in between not the allocated 15. That kinda thing needs to die


Not faulting Josh, he's just following the rules as a impartial judge should. But the rule is overly broad


GQB7sDc.gifH1TI5wa.pngsp8QpRU.gif

bngoeJd.gif


#30
Phantom Roxas

Phantom Roxas

    I am not afraid to keep on living

  • The Chariot
  • 26,556 posts
    Last Visit Today, 01:28 AM

Black warned me for posting about YGO spoilers that were 11 minutes in between not the allocated 15. That kinda thing needs to die


Not faulting Josh, he's just following the rules as a impartial judge should. But the rule is overly broad

 

If you're warned for breaking a rule, maybe you should be following that rule instead of calling for the rule itself to die.


Posted Image


#31
(Mizzet)

(Mizzet)

    Firemind

  • Ace Investigator
  • 7,340 posts
    Last Visit
  • Alias:(parenthesis)
  • Spouse:cinnamon
So, beyond the bit I already explained the false reasoning of, what reason is there for this rule to exist at all?

#32
The Necromancer

The Necromancer

  • Topic Starter
  • Night's Watch

  • 14,423 posts
    Last Visit Today, 02:37 AM
  • Discord:#0196
  • Spouse:Fate

If you're warned for breaking a rule, maybe you should be following that rule instead of calling for the rule itself to die.

It'll let you find the circular logic in your sentence........


GQB7sDc.gifH1TI5wa.pngsp8QpRU.gif

bngoeJd.gif


#33
Phantom Roxas

Phantom Roxas

    I am not afraid to keep on living

  • The Chariot
  • 26,556 posts
    Last Visit Today, 01:28 AM

It'll let you find the circular logic in your sentence........

 

I think you missed the point.


Posted Image


#34
The Necromancer

The Necromancer

  • Topic Starter
  • Night's Watch

  • 14,423 posts
    Last Visit Today, 02:37 AM
  • Discord:#0196
  • Spouse:Fate

I think you missed the point.

There isn't really a point if you build it using circular reasoning.

 

We're trying to say this fucking rule is dumb, and is like using a nuke to kill a rat (mod evasion statuses).

 

You're responding by telling us to shut up and follow the rule, why? Because it's a rule. I was trying to give an example of how audacious this situation is, and you've once again, missed the forest for a tree


GQB7sDc.gifH1TI5wa.pngsp8QpRU.gif

bngoeJd.gif


#35
Phantom Roxas

Phantom Roxas

    I am not afraid to keep on living

  • The Chariot
  • 26,556 posts
    Last Visit Today, 01:28 AM

Black warning you because you posted spoilers too early isn't even what this thread is about, so could you please offer a more relevant example? The rules aren't nukes aimed to kill you, and I'm not telling you to follow the rule solely because it's a rule. It's just difficult to sympathize with your position when your argument is "I was warned for this, and the rule must be abolished." It makes your argument seem less like a critique of any flaws in the rule, and instead seems to merely be lashing out for getting punished.


Posted Image


#36
(Mizzet)

(Mizzet)

    Firemind

  • Ace Investigator
  • 7,340 posts
    Last Visit
  • Alias:(parenthesis)
  • Spouse:cinnamon

Black warning you because you posted spoilers too early isn't even what this thread is about, so could you please offer a more relevant example? The rules aren't nukes aimed to kill you, and I'm not telling you to follow the rule solely because it's a rule. It's just difficult to sympathize with your position when your argument is "I was warned for this, and the rule must be abolished." It makes your argument seem less like a critique of any flaws in the rule, and instead seems to merely be lashing out for getting punished.

Then stop beating off to your hatred of winter and talk about the rule itself.

The rule serves no purpose. You listed off one thing, but once I responded you ignored the part of the conversation that actually matters and continued fighting. And winter does have a point. Just because he was warned for something doesn't invalidate any critique he has of it. That's the same mindset that got things as bad as they were last year.

#37
Phantom Roxas

Phantom Roxas

    I am not afraid to keep on living

  • The Chariot
  • 26,556 posts
    Last Visit Today, 01:28 AM

except the current rules don't stop this.

I could post a status that breaks every rule possible, then delete it. The rule in question only comes into play if I wanted to post another status after deleting the first.

To fix this "loophole" the ability to delete statuses would need to be removed completely. If that's the way we're gonna go, then sure, but this just limits people for no benefit.

 

Again, I say this is reminding me about the controversial status thread, because the issue is that you would have gone out of your way to post such an egregious status in the first place. You don't fix the loophole by preventing users from deleting statuses, but by addressing that you broke the rules and then swept it under the rug as if that means it didn't happen.

 

At that point, I wouldn't say that the user shouldn't be punished for replacing their status; they should be punished because the initial status was inappropriate to begin with. The rule against replacing a status is more about responding to how you could abuse a feature to supplement your other violations.

 

Basically, when you're already breaking every other rule, do you seriously think that sweeping it under the rug with a new status would be helping your case?


Posted Image


#38
The Necromancer

The Necromancer

  • Topic Starter
  • Night's Watch

  • 14,423 posts
    Last Visit Today, 02:37 AM
  • Discord:#0196
  • Spouse:Fate

Again, I say this is reminding me about the controversial status thread, because the issue is that you would have gone out of your way to post such an egregious status in the first place. You don't fix the loophole by preventing users from deleting statuses, but by addressing that you broke the rules and then swept it under the rug as if that means it didn't happen.

 

At that point, I wouldn't say that the user shouldn't be punished for replacing their status; they should be punished because the initial status was inappropriate to begin with. The rule against replacing a status is more about responding to how you could abuse a feature to supplement your other violations.

 

Basically, when you're already breaking every other rule, do you seriously think that sweeping it under the rug with a new status would be helping your case?

I'm so confused, I made one YGO related status and replaced it with another YGO related statues 11 minutes later, where is the controversy there

 

In the cont statues thread, I noted I posted a status and asked to be warned for it, because I felt it was important enough to be said even if I got slapped for it. 2 different incidents 


GQB7sDc.gifH1TI5wa.pngsp8QpRU.gif

bngoeJd.gif


#39
Flash Flyer - Sakura

Flash Flyer - Sakura

    大閃光の心霊龍主人公

  • Moderators

  • 40,514 posts
    Last Visit
  • Discord:Sakura#2014
  • Spouse:Latias and Sapphy-chan

I'm so confused, I made one YGO related status and replaced it with another YGO related statues 11 minutes later, where is the controversy there

 

In the cont statues thread, I noted I posted a status and asked to be warned for it, because I felt it was important enough to be said even if I got slapped for it. 2 different incidents 

 

First one was likely with you not waiting 4 more minutes to make that second status. Talk to Black if you have a concern with it because rest of the team doesn't know what the contents of said status are.

 

15 minutes mean 15 minutes; had you waited a little longer to post it, perhaps you wouldn't have received WP for that particular case.

 

====

As far as I know from the rest of the team regarding the issues brought up in this thread. 

 

Deleting statuses if mispost due to personal error / autocorrect acting up: There should be no problem with you guys doing this if it happens, though you should only have to repost it once with error fixed (unless autocorrect on mobile or whatever is really bad).

 

For the most part, we're generally in agreement about this.

 

Deleting statuses to make new ones about an entirely different topic: At the time of writing, the rest of the team has not yet weighed in on how they feel about the matter (least in specifics, such as whether they disapprove of the idea or if they're fine with it, should the 15 minute period still apply). 

 

There should not be any issue with you doing this, though there shouldn't be many cases where you need to do it, unless it's urgent. Remember, you need to share the status bar; it's not just there solely for one person to always have a status on main page. 

 

[Again, the above statement is just my take on the matter and does not represent the views of the team as a whole.]


Card Directory and TCG Decks
Viva Club Espeon!
Extra Images / GFX stuff
Zootopia GIFs (I have too many of them in here -_-)
Character results
YCM Accolades

 

IzFJLd3.pngJAYSUMQ.gif

 

Pokémon X / AS / Sun FC: 4098-4005-6931

(If you add my code, make sure you tell me so I can add you back)


#40
The Necromancer

The Necromancer

  • Topic Starter
  • Night's Watch

  • 14,423 posts
    Last Visit Today, 02:37 AM
  • Discord:#0196
  • Spouse:Fate
Not complaining, trying to give an example of non-malicious violation

GQB7sDc.gifH1TI5wa.pngsp8QpRU.gif

bngoeJd.gif





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users