Accepted Forums Forum rules are too strict.

[Vessalie]

Minecraft Username:

Vessalie​

What is the suggestion about?

Forum rules are too strict.​

Description:

Let me just start with this, forum rules right now are way too strict, I get bringing up these rules that get to get rid of trash talkers or toxic people or overall rulebreakers but people get banned for the stupidest things ever, you get 4 warning points for bypassing a filter which is not useful in the first place. ​

The rules were introduced so people don't spam messages and farm them, but instead of giving them 4 warning points and bannning them for 31 days, it should be changed around:​

My good idea is to remove the bypassing rule and let people talk in how characters they want but instead if people talk in less than 30 characters they don't get an increase in their messages so it prevents people that farm them.​

https://imgur.com/FB9DLJ7

​

View: https://i.imgur.com/FB9DLJ7.png​

How can this idea help to improve JartexNetwork?

In many ways, right now the forums is way too strict, as Andeh said the best; It's a free place and let anyone talk whatever they want unless they're breaking the rules. And if there are worries that people are going to farm messages use my idea.​

Extra Information:

Rodagave115 ​

 

[ZoneRGH]

Let's be real for a second here, if someone want to farm messages, he can, and no one will punish him for that, he can go "It's a great suggestion I like it, that is a +1 from me" in every suggestion he sees to farm messages, and I repeat again, no one can punish him for that.
So there's no point from the filter

Unfortunately, this is correct. People who wanna farm messages are the ones meant to be punished under that rule.
I personally don't think it's a big deal to just say "+1" once or twice, but if most of your 500 posts are just like that, then you're crossing the line here. And I think it's normal to get punished for bypassing a rule that the management has decided to enforce. But still issuing 4 warning points that last for a total of 120 days to someone who just didn't have something else to say seems extremely strict (at least in my opinion). And It's very easy to bypass as stated ^.

On the other hand, other forum rules like inappropriate behavior and rudeness seem to be less offensive and issuing less warning points than bypassing restrictions rule does, but I personally think it should be the other way around. However, my opinion is completely different from my duties, I may not like it but I have to punish for it.

Thank you for suggesting this, upvoted!

 

[Rod_]

Hello iSaMeD0OM.

I was talking to Vessalie but I appreciate your reply.​

What are you trying to prove here exactly?

• There's no point from this suggestion, but if there is, I clearly asked for it myself.

how can this suggestion help the community? in any type of way?

• If he showed me some points that can convince me, I will change my vote.

U want to follow with ur opinion about the thread go ahead but going off-topic about how people should own their mistake and its their fault / decision whether to break them or not is off-topic to me.

• In every community, there's rules. Not reading the rules was completely your fault and you must accept what kind of punishment will be applied to you.

How's that off-topic?

I was talking about the people who get punished for bypassing restrictions, if they read the rules, they can clearly avoid the punishment.​

​

You can show the dedication of yours in many ways not just making an unnesessary paragraph that doesn't have to do with the actual meaning of this suggestion.

• Quote the message with the "unnecessary paragraphs" so I can explain it to you.

This is a suggestion, not a complaint about the forums and how they are made.

• Never said he's complaining.

---

---

Just a side question. Why do you take it as a disrespect when someone disagree with your suggestion?


Kind regards,
Rod

 

[Vessalie]

On the other hand, other forum rules like inappropriate behavior and rudeness seem to be less offensive and issuing less warning points than bypassing restrictions rule does, but I personally think it should be the other way around. However, my opinion is completely different from my duties, I may not like it but I have to punish for it.

Completely agreed, I don't understand why more severe offences like Racism give fewer points and a simple one like Bypassing filters which is a bad rule in the first place give more warning points.

My idea to remove the filter and not count as a message if its below 30 characters fits the best because people can't farm messages.

 

[Yanique1]

Upvoted, 4 points for not writing 10 words is just too much compared to other punishments.

 

[vortex91]

+1 I agree with everything zone says I don’t know why bypassing filter is a harsher punishment than a lot of the other ones that you could break.
But, I don’t think that removing the bypassing rule and letting people talk in how many characters they want but instead if people talk in less than 30 characters they don't get an increase in their messages so it prevents people that farm them will be a good strategy to implement because it’s hard to see if it’s 30 characters or not

 

[Vessalie]

+1 I agree with everything zone says I don’t know why bypassing filter is a harsher punishment than a lot of the other ones that you could break.
But, I don’t think that removing the bypassing rule and letting people talk in how many characters they want but instead if people talk in less than 30 characters they don't get an increase in their messages so it prevents people that farm them will be a good strategy to implement because it’s hard to see if it’s 30 characters or not

Yep, glad to see that people are agreeing with my idea. The filter will still basically be there but it will let you write how much you want.

 

[Rod_]

Hello again.

I was talking to stupxd about it and I just wanted to make everything clear.​

• I'm not against removing the filter.

This filter has been made to stop people who spam/farm messages, but obviously It doesn't do what it was made for, and I don't know a single person who likes this filter. So why don't you remove this filter, and who knows, you may get a better idea to stop those type of people.

Like punishing whoever replies to suggestions with a completely useless message. only suggestions.​

• I'm not against this suggestion.

I'm not against this suggestion but I don't see the point from it. When I asked you ' Vessalie ' about it, you just reacted with ':dumb:' instead of answering my question. Maybe something happened and you weren't able to reply, or there's actually no point from this suggestion.

• So I repeat again, what's the point from this suggestion and how's it going to help the community?

It's a simple question and I want an answer for it.

---

---

How can this idea help to improve JartexNetwork?

if there are worries that people are going to farm messages use my idea.

How can this suggestion stop messages spammers/farmers? I'm confused?! If you can explain I'll appreciate that.

Kind regards,
Rod

 

[Xplode]

How can this suggestion stop messages spammers/farmers? I'm confused?! If you can explain I'll appreciate that.

He was talking about if they don't like to remove the filter, they should make the cap 30characters. Now the thing is already implemented so basically the only suggestion here is removing the filter or make it less warning points.

 

[Vessalie]

He was talking about if they don't like to remove the filter, they should make the cap 30characters. Now the thing is already implemented so basically the only suggestion here is removing the filter or make it less warning points.

Or more logically implement my idea, it makes more sense tbh.

 

[Rodagave115]

The off-topic has come to be a pain. I recently tried to help teh staff team by trying to help them remove an old opened thread by simply telling them that this should not be up and that Is it really gravedigging or not, therefore I got warned for going off-topic when in the end I just told them to lock it which is a pain.

You were indeed warned, as it was unnecessary to make that post, though your warning was removed, should’ve listed that as well.