Site Discussion Thread

[ElectriKong]

It will be unlocked once there's a concrete plan for what to do with it. I encourage you all to figure something out.

It could be used for information about users
It could also be used for information about SMBX levels and episodes (and the levels in them, similar to what the Mario Wiki does for games and I know there are articles like that in the SM64 ROM hacks Wiki)
There should also be an article about the history of SMBX
And there would be no harm in having guides about LunaLua and created APIs.

[Shadow Yoshi]

Precisely. Once there's a concrete plan to do that, the wiki can be reopened and worked on.

[Valentine]

There's way too many global announcments

You could've just put the quoting one as an update to the forum rules one, seriously guys.

[ElectriKong]

There's way too many global announcments

You could've just put the quoting one as an update to the forum rules one, seriously guys.

But people would not have seen it if it was just an update to the rules. Making it a global announcement means more people will realise they are starting to disallow (or allow) something.

[Valentine]

An update to the forum rules generally tends to grab people's attention. At least it does grab my attention when the thing changes color

[Cedur]

we also had times with only four or five announcements; I agree that nine is many but the number will drop back down quickly enough. (and the announcements on behaviour are more effective if they stay as a permanent note in the rules thread after getting archived)

[Snessy the duck]

I think it should be a bit more consistent if a warning is posted in the thread the warned post was posted in or as a PM. I think it should always be posted in the thread (Except if the original post was deleted), as that allows other people to see what exactly what that post did wrong and avoid it.

[Cedur]

This is exactly not the way to go. Having a concise rules thread and enforcing rules through PMs (or editing notices) is all what it takes, not dozens of moderator posts with no additional value to the topics themselves.

[Zha Hong Lang]

This is exactly not the way to go. Having a concise rules thread and enforcing rules through PMs (or editing notices) is all what it takes, not dozens of moderator posts with no additional value to the topics themselves.

I don't think that it necessarily needs to be additional moderator posts? Just edits on the posts themselves.

[Snessy the duck]

This is exactly not the way to go. Having a concise rules thread and enforcing rules through PMs (or editing notices) is all what it takes, not dozens of moderator posts with no additional value to the topics themselves.

Fair point there. Then I feel like warnings should only be given out by PMs (Except in some cases like if it's a discussion that should stop)

[ElectriKong]

There are some rule breaking posts that are editited by a mod to say user notified about post.
This is would be a solution that does not clutter the topic but telss those who see the post that user did something wrong.

[Snessy the duck]

There are some rule breaking posts that are editited by a mod to say user notified about post.
This is would be a solution that does not clutter the topic but telss those who see the post that user did something wrong.

But those edited notifs dissapear when the OP edits the post again (Even if the edited post doesn't fix the rule breaking problem)

[Zha Hong Lang]

But those edited notifs dissapear when the OP edits the post again (Even if the edited post doesn't fix the rule breaking problem)

It's called "add red text to the post"

the edit dialogue is not really useful anyway imo

[Snessy the duck]

But those edited notifs dissapear when the OP edits the post again (Even if the edited post doesn't fix the rule breaking problem)

It's called "add red text to the post"

the edit dialogue is not really useful anyway imo

Oh, I thought Electriking was referring to the edit dialouge some mods place on warned posts.

[Quill]

The 'User notified about post' edit comments are just there to let other users know that a report has been dealt with. Otherwise, people will report posts of users who have already been PM'd about what they did wrong. It doesn't matter too much if that edit comment is lost later on, as usually it's because the user is fixing their post.

[ElectriKong]

The 'User notified about post' edit comments are just there to let other users know that a report has been dealt with. Otherwise, people will report posts of users who have already been PM'd about what they did wrong. It doesn't matter too much if that edit comment is lost later on, as usually it's because the user is fixing their post.

I thought you were unable to report posts that were already reported (unless dealing with reports resets that).

[underFlo]

The 'User notified about post' edit comments are just there to let other users know that a report has been dealt with. Otherwise, people will report posts of users who have already been PM'd about what they did wrong. It doesn't matter too much if that edit comment is lost later on, as usually it's because the user is fixing their post.

I thought you were unable to report posts that were already reported (unless dealing with reports resets that).

A post can't have more than one pending report at a time, but once a report is dealt with users can report it again.

[Zha Hong Lang]

The 'User notified about post' edit comments are just there to let other users know that a report has been dealt with. Otherwise, people will report posts of users who have already been PM'd about what they did wrong. It doesn't matter too much if that edit comment is lost later on, as usually it's because the user is fixing their post.

That can work, though there's always the possibility that a user may edit their post and keep the offending content, resulting in another report made by a user.

I also generally disagree with the intended effects of that strategy, since it hides information about what the user had done, and that's not always a good thing (especially since phpbb doesn't display edit history, last I checked). What I'd recommend instead is:

1. Have a moderator add in red text User was warned for this post, and whatever other information is necessary, without taking anything away unless it's porn/illegal content, and
2. Lock the post, so that the user can't change it from its reported state.

[ElectriKong]

The 'User notified about post' edit comments are just there to let other users know that a report has been dealt with. Otherwise, people will report posts of users who have already been PM'd about what they did wrong. It doesn't matter too much if that edit comment is lost later on, as usually it's because the user is fixing their post.

That can work, though there's always the possibility that a user may edit their post and keep the offending content, resulting in another report made by a user.

I also generally disagree with the intended effects of that strategy, since it hides information about what the user had done, and that's not always a good thing (especially since phpbb doesn't display edit history, last I checked). What I'd recommend instead is:

1. Have a moderator add in red text User was warned for this post, and whatever other information is necessary, without taking anything away unless it's porn/illegal content, and
2. Lock the post, so that the user can't change it from its reported state.

That could work.

I think that keeping rule breaking posts in that state and a mod posting that it breaks the rules is useful as a warning to other users to not repeat that poster's mistake, unless of course it is something like porn/illegal stuff which should be removed for obvious reasons. Blatent bot spam posts can also be deleted in order to not tarnish and mess up the forums.

[aero]

Okay so this keeps being brought up with how there is some need for everyone to know what someone did wrong and if/when it's handled. On the forum, you already can get notifications of when a report is closed and if the post is already reported you are notified of that too if you try to make a report. Everyone who would make the report is already informed about the status of the post, and anything more wouldn't serve a substantial purpose. Adding text is already done in edit reasons for double posts which is probably 80-90% of the reports staff get, and anything else like off topic or bad threads also usually have a public post from a staff member and a lock. If a post is still reported more than once after some time has passed and someone else finds the post, it's not even an issue since it takes two seconds to close/delete reports. There's no point in fretting over it when it's just about trying to make arbitrary changes to a system that already works fine. Staff should be focused more on preventing things from happening in the first place, and really shouldn't be made into the mediator of every little thing for that matter if we're going to be honest about efficiency and staff performance.