[cerevox]

There are the usual things I whine about, and there are some things I can see that could be changed, but I don't see anything that needs a change. Good update.

[panthers17nfl]

There are the usual things I whine about, and there are some things I can see that could be changed, but I don't see anything that needs a change. Good update.

Comment appreciated. Though if you do get a moment, I have to log off for the next two days or so, so if you see any extra typos or instances of "one" instead of "someone", or "outcome of an occurrence" nonsense, post your findings here.

[urmumma23]

I like how its written by somebody who can speak fluent English.

[cerevox]

Panthers, do you really think you need to tell me to post my findings? Did you doubt for even a second that if I found something new to pick at that I would hesitate for even a second before I sprayed my discovery over the whole of this thread? My last point was not a sign of weakness but a sign of improving updates.

[panthers17nfl]

Panthers, do you really think you need to tell me to post my findings? Did you doubt for even a second that if I found something new to pick at that I would hesitate for even a second before I sprayed my discovery over the whole of this thread? My last point was not a sign of weakness but a sign of improving updates.

I did not mean it like that. I was just saying regardless of what you think of the update, pointing out glaring typos or grammatical errors is always nice >>

[ChronicTacos]

With the current explosion of ban appeals, I have noticed some problems and was wondering if they will ever be added into the sacred "Book of Rules."

1. Bumping a thread
2. Users posting irrelevant posts in a ban appeal/request threads.

1. The rule can be to never bump a ban appeal/request thread, bump once a week, or bump once it gets to page 3 or so.
2. Irrelevant posts as in "Personal attacks, accusing with no solid evidence or with no evidence at all and/or having a conversation."

My opinion is that only certain people should be allowed to post in a person's ban appeal or request. They are the Accuser, Accused, Forum Moderators, Moderators, and Admins. Only few exceptions to this rule, such as if a person has solid evidence or has asked via PM before posting a comment. I believe this would reduce over bumped threads, make it cleaner and easier for moderators and admins to go through ban requests and appeals, and reduce the rage/fights/personal attacks etc. that is commonly followed or associated due irrelevant posts. Thank you for reading and I hope you put it into consideration.

[Cogohst]

With the current explosion of ban appeals, I have noticed some problems and was wondering if they will ever be added into the sacred "Book of Rules."

1. Bumping a thread
2. Users posting irrelevant posts in a ban appeal/request threads.

1. The rule can be to never bump a ban appeal/request thread, bump once a week, or bump once it gets to page 3 or so.
2. Irrelevant posts as in "Personal attacks, accusing with no solid evidence or with no evidence at all and/or having a conversation."

My opinion is that only certain people should be allowed to post in a person's ban appeal or request. They are the Accuser, Accused, Forum Moderators, Moderators, and Admins. Only few exceptions to this rule, such as if a person has solid evidence or has asked via PM before posting a comment. I believe this would reduce over bumped threads, make it cleaner and easier for moderators and admins to go through ban requests and appeals, and reduce the rage/fights/personal attacks etc. that is commonly followed or associated due irrelevant posts. Thank you for reading and I hope you put it into consideration.

There are quite a few (if not the majority of) ban requests/appeals that are so terrible that most of the staff won't even waste time on them. The rage you talk about is something that no one really wants in a server, and if someone loses their head, it just shows the staff what the person is truly like. If they can outlast the trolls and shrug off the attacks, they tend to be considered a bit more highly.

Now, people like kongel nick (not attacking you personally, just using an example) who post arbitrary nonsense on every single thread in the ban section shouldn't be there, and are normally warned, temp banned, then permanently banned by saves, who is our friendly neighborhood forum janitor.

tl;dr: Even if the posts don't provide evidence, they often contribute to the outcome of the case.

[ChronicTacos]

There are quite a few (if not the majority of) ban requests/appeals that are so terrible that most of the staff won't even waste time on them. The rage you talk about is something that no one really wants in a server, and if someone loses their head, it just shows the staff what the person is truly like. If they can outlast the trolls and shrug off the attacks, they tend to be considered a bit more highly.

Now, people like kongel nick (not attacking you personally, just using an example) who post arbitrary nonsense on every single thread in the ban section shouldn't be there, and are normally warned, temp banned, then permanently banned by saves, who is our friendly neighborhood forum janitor.

tl;dr: Even if the posts don't provide evidence, they often contribute to the outcome of the case.

What you say is true and strong, but if it is terrible, it should be left alone a.k.a. ignored. If people wants to "troll", they should do it through PM and then show a moderator or an admin. They can also post in their ban appeal/request as this can be one of those exceptions. Thinking inside the shoes of moderators and admins, if they ignored a ban appeal/request and it kept getting bumped up by "trolls", wouldn't that be considered annoying? Since an ignored thread is being bumped up constantly. This is just my opinion.

[cerevox]

Speaking as someone who does comment on other's ban appeals/request I don't really think that we need to limit who posts in these threads. Saves and some of the admins regularly patrol the ban section and anyone caught posting pointless crap gets punished fairly quickly.

It seems to me that if someone has something relevant to add, they shouldn't be prevented simply because they are not on the short list of allowed posters. It seems to me that this is already, more or less, taken care of the by the fact that forum bans do get handed out. Restricting who can post where seems like overkill more likley to do harm than to help anything.

[Blackhawkonfire]

Physical Item - Physical item Trade (3.2): This follows the exact same protocol as (3.2)

3.2 follows the same protocol as 3.2

Derp :?