Do you think I could just leave this part blank and it'd be okay? We're just going to replace the whole thing with a header image anyway, right?
You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
I have always seen Different551 moderate the forum bad. But today did it take the prices when i found it.
This thread about hide the profile.
http://eeforumify.com/viewtopic.php?pid=139939#p139939
Borkd posted about hide profile in the thread. He posted it also right.
He posted 1 month late and get a 1 day ban for gravedig..
If we rotate on it. Borkd create a new thread about the same thing.
The thread will be closed and borkd will maybe be banned or get a warning for it.
If there is a thread about the same thing you want to talk about.
You will post it in the thread that already is created. But if it's 1 month or later you will get banned for gravedig or what?
And why close a thread when it's maybe more that want to talk about it.
No, we ignore that and people need to create another thread about the exactly same thing..
So how does different551 think? I don't know.
Offline
Who is different551? Is this a new moderator?
The gravedig limit is 2 weeks. I'm enforcing the rules. You said it, he posted ONE MONTH late on loads of topics. Not just a few, but a ton of them.
Last edited by Different55 (Jun 12 2011 9:45:25 pm)
"Sometimes failing a leap of faith is better than inching forward"
- ShinsukeIto
Offline
i think he means you diffrent xD
Who is different551? Is this a new moderator?
The gravedig limit is 2 weeks. I'm enforcing the rules. You said it, he posted ONE MONTH late on loads of topics. Not just a few, but a ton of them.
Stop be so cocky. I mean you of course.
It still not a gravedig. He posted in the right thread about the exactly same thing.
If you should go after that i think you need to ban me too. I have posted a lot in old threads about the same thing.
You need to use the engine a little more. You can't just give people warnings or ban because they post right things in right threads. Even if they are 1 month old.
And still, no need to close it.
Last edited by doh (Jun 12 2011 9:54:23 pm)
Offline
So.. what if I go gravedig the oldest thread in the forum with an on-topic post? And it's not being cocky. I was being a ****. There's a difference.
"Sometimes failing a leap of faith is better than inching forward"
- ShinsukeIto
Offline
So.. what if I go gravedig the oldest thread in the forum with an on-topic post? And it's not being cocky. I was being a ****. There's a difference.
It's good for me. Better than create a new topic about the same thing.
offt: And yes, you was cocky there. You wasn't "smart" at all.
If you have a problem with it, message the mod in question directly.
.
It doesn't work that way. If i had write it he had just ignored me or been cocky.
I know how Different55 is.
EDIT: Actually, ban will not be lifted, however the warning was redacted. The ban was already in effect over something else, and not that post.
I took it as he got banned for the "gravedig". I don't like to stalk people.
Last edited by doh (Jun 12 2011 10:38:07 pm)
Offline
The post is on the edge, it contributes nothing to the topic in my honest opinion, however, it is on-topic and not a spam post. Either way, warning redacted and ban lifted. I need to come up with a clear definition of gravedigging, there seems to be too much confusion over it.
EDIT: Actually, ban will not be lifted, however the warning was redacted. The ban was already in effect over something else, and not that post.
Let me take a completely neutral and objective standpoint here.
Gravedigging occurs when one posts to bring back an old topic when clearly nobody wanted to post in it anymore and the topic is of no interest. On the other hand, there are exceptions in which bringing back an old topic is okay, as long as certain conditions are met.
If the person wants to post something new or relevant and it's important to the old topic, then it's okay to bring it back. Any other time is not okay.
Now, on to the matter at hand. BorkD posted in an old bug report topic. That would be perfectly okay, in my opinion, if he were posting something important about the bug. If the bug had been changed a little or if he had found a temporary fix that hadn't been found before, he would have had a good reason to post.
However, all he did was restate what had been said earlier in the thread. He brought absolutely nothing of value to the already-known bug and so it was purely a gravedig. To enforce against this type of behaviour, mods are given privileges to teach users of what they're doing wrong. Since it was already written clearly in the rules not to gravedig, giving him a temporary ban was a perfectly acceptable way of handling it.
Therefore, I think Different55 did his job well in this case. Besides, making a public thread about a moderator's decision is a bad idea. If you have a problem with it, message the mod in question directly.
EDIT:
Since this took a while to type, keep in mind this was written before the previous two posts.
Last edited by Zalgryth (Jun 12 2011 10:08:29 pm)
I agree with Zalgryth here, but my issue is over the definition of gravedigging. I usually define gravedigging as simply near-spam on an old topic, and that can be up for debate.
I know quite a few people who don't like Different as a moderator, for whatever reason. I don't even have a clue why.
Yeah, well, you know that's just like, uh, your opinion, man.
Offline
Also, instead of making a topic to contribute to e-drama, just PM me so I can get the issue resolved quickly and efficiently.
Different55 wrote:So.. what if I go gravedig the oldest thread in the forum with an on-topic post? And it's not being cocky. I was being a ****. There's a difference.
It's good for me. Better than create a new topic about the same thing.
offt: And yes, you was cocky there. You wasn't "smart" at all.
**** = dripping with sarcasm
And I'll work on it but what do I need to improve? According to you, Ruri, what should I have done in this situation?
"Sometimes failing a leap of faith is better than inching forward"
- ShinsukeIto
Offline
Well, I would have just given him a warning-but-not-a-warning, although that user was gravedigging a lot after checking the records. You handled it well imo, however I just need to make the definition of gravedigging clear.
Offline
Thank you and I think he's been warned-but-not-warned.
"Sometimes failing a leap of faith is better than inching forward"
- ShinsukeIto
Offline
So.. what if I go gravedig the oldest thread in the forum with an on-topic post? And it's not being cocky. I was being a ****. There's a difference.
Correct, that is *not* against the rules. Go double check them.
This is why I hate the gravedig rule. Its useless. It only applies if the reply is spam, and then it can just be warned for spam not gravedigging.
Edit to add rule:
3. No spamming.
B. No posting in dead threads with a useless post. Forum games can always be revived; 'do this' threads can also be revived. A good example of what not to do is posting 'c00l stUf lol!1' in a dead thread in the Graphics Suggestions board.
Last edited by BEE (Jun 12 2011 10:21:02 pm)
Offline
I don't know how to feel about this. He gravedig'd but I can't really tell if it was spam or not. I would have just let it slide.
I don't really like the gravedig rule.
What's really bad about posting in a dead topic?
Of course, posting useless stuff in a topic that is as old as this forum is a bit annoying, but is it really that bad?
I'd be glad if you can tell me what's really bad about gravedigging.
Noone wants to post in it anymore. Normally that happens when people choose to be annoying.
Of course, the thing that I feel should be excepted is the red panda topic. THEY'RE SO CU-UTE!!1!!!shift!!
What if you maked a image of an idea, and the topic of that idea is dead? Should you gravedig the topic posting the image?
This isn't happening to me, i'm just curious.
Offline
Depends on whether it is actually useful to the thread. If you think it adds meaning to the thread and would be something people are interested in, go ahead, by all means.
Pages: 1
[ Started around 1738667174.3404 - Generated in 0.080 seconds, 13 queries executed - Memory usage: 1.61 MiB (Peak: 1.8 MiB) ]