Super Mario Bros. X Forums

Emral wrote:

Raster wrote:You won't reach that rank because you already had it.

Except he'll reach it in 195 posts.

Are we talking about the spinning shell?
EDIT: I see what you mean now.

Knux: I feel like, as Joey said, this isn't actually controversial, and that you sort of manufactured this supposed controversy surrounding it. As Magician said, it seems highly improbable that this will actually negatively affect anyone. Epileptic people would probably avoid video games for the most part anyways.

I'd like to suggest, that if you don't like a rank you should be able to pick any rank under you.

TangledLion wrote:I'd like to suggest, that if you don't like a rank you should be able to pick any rank under you.

No offense, but this is a quite dumb recommendation. If someone doesn't like their rank, they should think that eventually it's going to go away and it's not like another user will judge him/her by him/her's rank. That's just what I'm thinking.

It's not a bad suggestion. It's been done before at other sites. Though it consisted of choosing amongst a bunch of user groups, the latest of the visible ones determined by the forum's top poster, and being approved by a staff member who would check the post count. It was more of a workaround solution and it screwed up the member list when sorted by ranks. There was a whole separate echelon in the list for all the users who had preferred to rank down as they continued posting.

Unless there's a specific plugin for something like that, which I doubt.

Knux wrote:it also hurts my eyes. and i dont want to have to make 200 posts to get rid of it when i reach that rank.

If you don't want to disable animated gifs, you can use an image blocking plugin.

This might do the trick.

You say it's a small request, but it's just as small of a request for you to drop the issue and use the tools at your disposal to deal with it yourself. It's also the most logical course of action when you consider the fact that there was already a decision to remove it, and it was reversed.

I think displaying a willingness to compromise on issues like these would probably also make staff members more receptive to things you say, because it demonstrates maturity and good will.

TangledLion wrote:I'd like to suggest, that if you don't like a rank you should be able to pick any rank under you.

That could be a good suggestion for Knux and other people that have problems with flashing images.

lighthouse64 wrote:

TangledLion wrote:I'd like to suggest, that if you don't like a rank you should be able to pick any rank under you.

That could be a good suggestion for Knux and other people that have problems with flashing images.

No, I don't like it as a idea, people can just keep changing ranks and then be at Birdo/idk rank with 5 or 1 posts. i would like more this idea if you could only rank above only 1time.

We're not changing the ranks. Download the GIF disabler plugin thing because you're literally the only person who will ever have a problem with the rank.

Knux, I may have misled you accidentally. The recent image blocker tool I attempted to link you to actually IS for specific images. Not for all images. I thought I had conveyed that much, but I guess I wasn't specific enough. This is probably because the URL I originally linked to had a means to disable animated gifs in about:config, which I mistook for a plugin because it also had a flash blocking plugin on top of it and I was only skimming. That was when you were advocating for seizure-prone victims, but since you dropped that, I gave a new reply with a different link to something fitted to your personal needs and I called it a plugin without specifying how it was different.

Here is the link again.

I tried it out just now and all you do after installing it is right click the offending image and click "Block image."

Do both of you, Knux and the staff team realize that this discussion keeps enlarging because neither of you wants to do what the other demands? I think it's time to give my opinion on this one as well.

Indeed, it's easy to do both of 'em, to install that certain plugin, and to change the rank. I can assure the staff's point regarding the rank's image; honestly, who would bother on staring constantly at that rank knowing they are seizure-prone victims? I would understand it if it was a huge image, but it's not like you're forced to watch it, you focus on it on your own. It's practically the same as eating something you're allergic to just because people could get served with it having lunch, your parents aren't going to stop cooking a certain food because you're allergic to that certain food you consciously acknowledge. Of course, there might be some cases where seizure-prone victims don't know they actually are, it's not that rare.

I also agree with Knux's point. Forcing someone to install that certain plugin just because it hurts his eyes or ignore it is rather harsh. Besides, we can't exactly assure he's making a big deal out of nothing because we can't see the rank with HIS eyes, we're in no position to deny the possibility of the rank's flashing effect hurting his eyes. There's no proof of the contrary either, but we can't ignore this with a mere excuse such as "it doesn't affect you that much". From now on I'm going to assume you guys want this forum to grow bigger. If some people find something in this forum that bother them so much, to the point of hurting them physically, the staff should really consider a solution instead of leaving it as it is.

Honestly, I agree with Knux. The rank should be changed to something else.

I also agree with Knux's point. Forcing someone to install that certain plugin just because it hurts his eyes or ignore it is rather harsh

If a person thinks the images are seizure-inducing and/or hurt their sight then they shouldn't be here in the first place. SMBX is a dynamic game with lots of flashing graphics.

Do both of you, Knux and the staff team realize that this discussion keeps enlarging because neither of you wants to do what the other demands?

There's no reason to do what Knux demanded because that's not a real issue.

Raster wrote:

I also agree with Knux's point. Forcing someone to install that certain plugin just because it hurts his eyes or ignore it is rather harsh

If a person thinks the images are seizure-inducing and/or hurt their sight then they shouldn't be here in the first place. SMBX is a dynamic game with lots of flashing graphics.

Following your statement, anybody here that doesn't use SMBX should leave this place, correct?

Raster wrote:

Do both of you, Knux and the staff team realize that this discussion keeps enlarging because neither of you wants to do what the other demands?

There's no reason to do what Knux demanded because that's not a real issue.

How can you tell? You're not wearing his shoes, you can't assure something you don't feel.

Following your statement, anybody here that doesn't use SMBX should leave this place, correct?

People that are affected by flashing images shouldn't be here, yeah.

How can you tell? You're not wearing his shoes, you can't assure something you don't feel.

He hasn't said or done anything to prove to us that this is a real issue. We don't know if people are affected by it and we can't just take knux's word for granted.

Raster wrote:

Following your statement, anybody here that doesn't use SMBX should leave this place, correct?

People that are affected by flashing images shouldn't be here, yeah.

Let me clarify the question, anybody here that doesn't use SMBX should leave this place, correct?

Raster wrote:

How can you tell? You're not wearing his shoes, you can't assure something you don't feel.

He hasn't said or done anything to prove to us that this is a real issue. We don't know if people are affected by it and we can't just take knux's word for granted.

There's no proof it isn't a real issue either. You won't leave the boat until you verify with your own eyes that there's a leak? Once you realize it might be too late.

Let me clarify the question, anybody here that doesn't use SMBX should leave this place, correct?

no

There's no proof it isn't a real issue either

The burden of proof is on Knux, not us. It's like saying: "There's a soccer ball floating in space in close proximity to the sun. What I said is true because nobody can prove me wrong."

Raster wrote:

Let me clarify the question, anybody here that doesn't use SMBX should leave this place, correct?

no

There you go then. Besides, not changing something at the point of not caring about how it would affect the userbase physically to the point of telling them "then you should leave" is pretty much unprofessional. If you care about the community, you need to make changes attractive enough so people would start coming and stop leaving.

Raster wrote:

There's no proof it isn't a real issue either

The burden of proof is on Knux, not us. It's like saying: "There's a soccer ball floating in space in close proximity to the sun. What I said is true because nobody can prove me wrong."

You're starting to understand my point. Yes, the burden of proof is on Knux, so instead of saying he's wrong we need certain proofs. That is, if the staff actually cares about possible physical damage that the forum inflicts to the userbase.

There you go then. Besides, not changing something at the point of not caring about how it would affect the userbase physically to the point of telling them "then you should leave" is pretty much unprofessional. If you care about the community, you need to make changes attractive enough so people would start coming and stop leaving.

...nobody left because of a single rank.

You're starting to understand my point. Yes, the burden of proof is on Knux, so instead of saying he's wrong we need certain proofs. That is, if the staff actually cares about possible physical damage that the forum inflicts to the userbase.

You don't understand what I said. So, Knux says, "The kamikaze koopa rank needs to be removed because it is seizure-inducing" without showing evidence. In this case, the staff isn't obliged to fulfill Knux's request because it's ungrounded. Knux's assertion that the rank is dangerous to users doesn't qualify as proof.

Raster wrote:Knux's assertion that the rank is dangerous to users doesn't qualify as proof.

How the hell do you need proof that a flashing image causes seizures?

Kep wrote:

Raster wrote:Knux's assertion that the rank is dangerous to users doesn't qualify as proof.

How the hell do you need proof that a flashing image causes seizures?

You're missing the point. You do need proof that a single rank is potentially dangerous to the users of this community.