Super Mario Bros. X Forums

There's a thought that has been on my mind lately: how practical is it to lock threads? In extreme situation it makes sense, but if it's really not hurting anyone it doesn't matter, right?

Electriking wrote:I think it would be nice to have an SMB1 theme. Although we should also have SMB2 and SMW.

I was actually making a SMB1 theme some time ago, but I don't think I have it anymore. I think I'll try and remake it.

A theme based on NSMBU would look cool. That goes for all other NSMB games too.
What about Paper Mario themes? Look at the logo / title for each game, starting with the first, you'll see that the text is coloured and looks papery. Maybe the text could be styled like that.

Taycamgame wrote:A theme based on NSMBU would look cool. That goes for all other NSMB games too.
What about Paper Mario themes? Look at the logo / title for each game, starting with the first, you'll see that the text is coloured and looks papery. Maybe the text could be styled like that.

We should probably stick to the vanilla SMBX styles as otherwise we would be straying away from the theme of SMBX if used game styles not in SMBX.

Howcome the Month of January topic was posted but we haven't got any episode or graphic pack to go with it? The site should be as up to date as it can be.

Taycamgame wrote:Howcome the Month of January topic was posted but we haven't got any episode or graphic pack to go with it? The site should be as up to date as it can be.

They're listed in the thread but iirc Joey has to update the other parts of the site

Oh yeah!
Return to Dinosaur land - the episode that pretty much everyone who uses 2.0 has played.
Witchking666's Graphic Pack - I already have it.
The staff should pick some more unique episodes that are good but not likely to have been played by many people.

yeah how is hypnosis redo not featured like what

Musicality_Minister45 wrote:Could we add "who voted what" functionality to polls? It would be nice to see who voted an option and who voted another one.

Even for when it would be useful, I recall that it's not possible for phpBB.

And yes, sometimes threads need to be locked as a sign of ending them for good. The question is rather about locking vs. deleting; some threads deserve to be deleted just for being plain garbage, while others still have some amount of substance so deleting them would go too far.

Enjl wrote:yeah how is hypnosis redo not featured like what

Bias in order to not look biased. Best way I can phrase it.

viewtopic.php?f=50&t=20447
viewtopic.php?f=50&t=20448

There really should be some limitations for newly registered accounts. Not being able to post links like this would be nice.

Because disallowing new users from posting links in a community built around a feature that depends on one posting links to fully utilize is a great idea. Sorry but why should new users be punished for a tiny minority of malicious users and bots abusing features, especially if that disables them from posting levels, which is the main reason for the community to exist?

Electriking wrote:Because disallowing new users from posting links in a community built around a feature that depends on one posting links to fully utilize is a great idea. Sorry but why should new users be punished for a tiny minority of malicious users and bots abusing features, especially if that disables them from posting levels, which is the main reason for the community to exist?

This isn't a big issue at all. According to my observations, almost all new users post levels with links without the [url] tags. And also I second Aero's idea.

Is it that much of a punishment if you can't post links during your first day?

Oh and speaking of which, I really think we should clamp down on replies to bots, say, a tempban of at least 1 day. Otherwise this stupidity won't stop.

Yeah, replying to spambots shouldn't be allowed, but I am not sure if it should warrant a ban. Still, if you reply to spambots, stop. It just helps them.

Back to when we had warnings and tempbans following from multiple warnings, a warning would also be apropriate. I don't know if staff PMs people and gives informal warnings about it, but an instant 1 day ban also makes sense given that it's so ridiculous and so easy to avoid at the same time.

The linking limitation would be until the account reaches a certain amount of posts that bots don't usually surpass. It shouldn't really affect normal new users that much if at all.

But what if a user only signs up because they've made a level or episode etc. that they want to share?

It would encourage some users to spam if the reason to join was to share a level or episode, only to find they must reach a certain post count to do so.

If the required post count is just like 5 or 10 then you'll easily find some discussions where you can contribute without making useless posts. It would only take a few days.

Or a new user could PM their links to staff. Bots don't do PMs.