Charles

[QUOTE=Shy][size=1]From what I understand, Azure, your objection is not to the fact that the thread itself was nominated. Rather, you feel that as a community we should all have equal access to the boards themselves. You'd like to discount staff threads for consideration in such events (which is fine) because they are largely inaccessible to the community, and therefore cannot be representative of the community as a whole? Am I following you here? Or is it just thta you don't like us linking to a thread you can't access..? I'd like to think that referencing a thread that most members cannot visit is no different than referencing an anime that very few people have seen. These boards are completely elective, and so is every discussion within it. I'm not offended by the PC/Mac forum, even though I don't own a Mac. You as a member should not feel insulted by the staff forum, especially since they can't even see the thing. If nothing else, a passing reference here or there is to be expected in a thread about [i]moderation.[/i] We moderators were asked to discuss moderator-type things in this thread, so it's basically a given that the staff forum will be mentioned in some capacity. If I were to complain about how cumbersome the moderator control panel was, would that also be upsetting?-Shy[/size][/QUOTE] Here is my expert commentary of the proceedings: [IMG]http://img213.exs.cx/img213/6066/beatingdeadhorse0hk.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Adahn][size=2]I don't know if I'd like being a moderator anywhere, simply because it's something I've never done. Besides, if I were a moderator, I'd be in constant competition with the others to be the best one. I compete with people who don't even know they're competing with me :p [/size] [/QUOTE] No. Nope, that's not how the relationship shared by the staff works at all. At least not on a basic functional level, let me tell you. Although James, in the past, mentioned assigning unique events to different Teams to inspire friendly competition, there is no such philosophy as it relates to performing day-to-day activities. It's quite the opposite. The theme of OtakuBoards staff is more in line with [I]cooperation[/I]. Our efforts are coordinated; we often discuss issues regarding problematic members and changes to the site in general, as a collective unit. Our responsibilities aren't looked upon as a "game" or a "contest" that can be won. That's how chaos ensues. It's a collaborative effort that's not about the individual, but the team instead. [COLOR=Silver]And, anyway, everyone knows that I'm the best moderator.[/COLOR] The slimshady that creeps into Sara's threads :D ;) :p :cool: :wigout: :laugh: Charles

[quote name='Shugo54][COLOR=Navy][FONT=Book Antiqua]I would Never want to be a Mod. The only reason I would want to be a mod is for Respect. Everyone Respect the mod's and praise them (somehow =P).[/FONT'][/COLOR][/quote] Actually, I would rather [I]earn[/I] genuine respect through my posts than garner false respect through a title. It's much better to enjoy genuine appreciation, I think, even if it is on a smaller scale. Fair-weather friends are transparent; their respect is much like consuming calories from a piece of cake. It may seem nice at first; it may even be a little sweet. But, it's far from satisfying and will make you sick after a while. Working for real respect is much more satisfying; you've accomplished something and in doing that you've achieved lasting admiration. So, if you're interested in becoming a moderator for the reason you mentioned, then you're interested for the wrong reason. It's probably a sign that you're lonely and unappreciated in real life. Chin up. Charles loves you kid. *snaps fingers and points at you* :D Sara (I am the unreachable itch in the backs of the throats--don'tyouhatethosethings--of all those who sign posts) Charles

[QUOTE=Semjaza Azazel]I'd assume the collection would have all of the ones prior to the 3D versions on the PS2. Capcom wouldn't bother to include games that are still for sale, for obvious reasons. I was wondering when this would be formally announced. The rumors have been jumping around about it all week.[/QUOTE] Yeah, the rumors were almost overshadowed by the announcement of Capcom's other new games (which don't look particularly interesting to me right now). Including Mega Man X7 wouldn't necessarily be a bad move though, considering it's not lighting the market on fire. Wasn't it part of the $4.99 Circuit City sale?

[quote name='ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet']Eh, anyways I plan on not caring too much...it's not like the Bills are playing.[/color][/quote] Don't worry. They won't be playing at this point for a long time either. I'm very disappointed but it was a great game and I'm certain that the Eagles will be in the Super Bowl again next year. They're easily the best team in the NFC and only lost because of McNabb playing sloppy football--and because they weren't able to establish a solid running game. I have to give major props to Owens though. It was simply amazing what he was able to accomplish given his physical condition. OMG Guess Who Wrote This Post Charles

[QUOTE=Shinmaru]Man, I am seriously not liking the attitude in here right now. People being humble and saying they wouldn't want to be Moderators? Former Moderators telling stories of burn out? You guys are all supposed to be worshipping the ground that we walk on, not demeaning our position. How is my ego supposed to be gratified with this crap you guys are posting? Seriously. Being a Mod is cool. Play It, though it has its share of spammers and whatnot, is pretty easy to keep in line. The work is sort of repetitive (informing people of the rules, closing threads, merging threads, sending PMs, yada yada yada), but the perks are what keep me around. You know, sense of purpose, a devoted gang of followers (there [i]should[/i] be a devoted gang of follwers, at any rate - you bunch of slackers), increased amount of visits at your myOtaku (supposedly), ego gratification (again, not as much as there could be, someone pick up the slack), sexual favors...I could go on and on. And I haven't cracked Team Leader status yet. Who the hell knows what [i]they[/i] get? Also, I like all of the Nazi accusations, they tell me that I'm doing my job right, and that I'm ruling Play It with a sufficient amount of fear and heartlessness.[/QUOTE] I've never thought better of you than I do now. I just thought you should know that. Being a staff member allows me to satisfy the cruelty my black heart yearns for, and the empty superficial relationships that come with it are good too. It reminds me of being a rock star, only it?s not nearly as cool, there are far less drugs involved, and it doesn't result in nearly as much sex with loose women. Nevertheless, I?m able to reign over people I?ll never actually meet with utter ruthlessness from the relative safety of my computer, hopefully scarring them permanently in the process. I hope to evoke a reign of terror no one in my position will ever be capable of replicating. No one is safe from a random user name change whose only purpose is to satisfy my sick sense of humor. Who knows when I will next use imagery to publicly advertise someone?s mediocrity as if on a billboard? What right will I attempt to strip newbies of in my next suggestion thread? You never know. Are you all familiar with classic villains? The ones who curl their thin mustache with their forefinger? I?m them, I do hate you, and I will make your life a living hell. In short, I love giving back to the community and almost never ban anyone.

I'm a huge Eagles fan; they're the home team. The Philadelphia/South Jersey area has been waiting for a successful football season for as long as I've been alive. After three disappointing years of coming [I]oh so close[/I] , I'm glad the Birds finally got over the hump. I actually had to work during the NFC Championship game. A couple of the guys and I were huddled around portable television hooting and hollaring before the store closed early and we were sent home anyway. I purposely put in a request to work the morning shift today [I]just[/I] so that I could see the Super Bowl. lol The Patriots are a fantastic team--but I think the Eagles can pull it out if they don't beat themselves. They need to put pressure on Tom Brady and shut him down like they did Michael Vick. Since Brady's not nearly as adept at rushing as Vick is--it should be possible. Also, it'll be an interesting match-up between the Eagles' wide receivers and the Patriots corners. I'd love to see the miracle man, TO, dance all over New England, of course. [CENTER][IMG]http://img231.exs.cx/img231/2870/raydance8yu.gif[/IMG][/CENTER]

[QUOTE=Morpheus]Who would have thought I'd get quoted? All in all, I think this is better than the otaku awards. The Otaku awards were really dominated by Moderators and such and It's nice to see a few not so powerful people make the list. I'm seriously not trying to be like Sara, [B]Morpheus[/B].[/QUOTE] Oh god. I hope that your signature doesn't become a permanent fixture of your posts. Please no. Worst. Trend. Ever. This is especially true of you, since unlike Sara, you just repeat your user name as your signature. Anyway, I like this event. Although it's somewhat flawed since my name isn't sitting atop the list, it's determined that I'm nifty despite my inactive spell. On a forum it?s often easy to be forgotten within the span of a few months. I'm very pleased indeed. Bathing in an Irish spring on the blood of those who sign their posts-- Charles

Following last year's Mega Man Anniversary Collection (which was arguably one of the best compilation packages in quite a while) Capcom has now officially announced its intentions to offer a Mega Man X Collection. Here's a link to the article: [url]http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/02/04/news_6117941.html[/url] Interesting points worth mentioning are the inclusion of Mega Man Battle and Chase as an unlockable game, that the game will seemingly be multiplatform, and more hints being dropped concerning a Capcom Compilation (which many people have been looking forward to for quite some time now). What are your thoughts on the Mega Man X Collection? I'm a fan of the first three games in the series. All iterations following the 16-bit titles lost my interest completely. However, one package featuring a majority of the games in the series sounds like an attractive bargain worth investigating. Especially if the great interface from the last collection is built upon and more enticing extras are added. Although Mega Man Battle and Chase is another kart clone, I?d say it?s definitely a step in the right direction compared to the secret arcade games found in Anniversary Collection. This one could actually be worth toying around with. I also wonder just how many X titles will be included. That is, I wonder if they'll throw in any of the abysmal Playstation 2 efforts.

When I read this yesterday my initial impression went along with many of yours. But, now that I've had time to fully reflect on the issue, I agree with Manic. [quote name='Manic Webb']In all fairness, the girls shouldn't have delivered the cookies at 9pm. It was dark, and that was really a bad time to pull this little stunt. No one expects to see baked goods at their doorstep at 10:30 at night. They should've done it during broad daylight... or at least waited at the door and handed her the cookies themselves.[/quote] I'm not familiar with all my neighbors; most are strangers to me despite the relatively close proximity of our homes. In a close-knit community a gesture such as this would be feasible, but delivering food to strangers past dark for no [B]apparent[/B] reason is odd despite their honorable intentions. I personally wouldn't eat food prepared by strangers that was randomly left on my porch. Even if I do love cookies. Their refusal to answer the woman's call was bound to rouse suspicion too. It's common sense to announce your presence if someone sounds startled. Especially considering the hour of their visit. However, for what it's worth, I don't believe the woman's story. An anxiety attack the next day? Sorry. That doesn't fly with me. She's obviously just a scam artist who's quick to sue. There should have been no reparations. They should have just promised not to make any further cookie deliveries to her. *shrug*

[RIGHT][b]April 15, 1662[/b][/RIGHT] [CENTER][i]I cannot say how long I'd been out at sea. Constant waves had lapped memories of land away from me. Each day brought hopes of shore anew. Alas, my eyes supped only upon ocean blue. My days as an English writer past Every moment on this ship was expected to be my last. Neither skilled at plunder nor with sword My paranoia could not be cured. Why, oh why, should I be kept aboard?[/i][/CENTER] How sad was my coming into this life! Where were those sweet conditions I had pictured in my boyhood? Alas, the consonance of evening-bells now give way to the cries of the sea below. I will never rein in to wonder at the raised gates of the Queen's nor the little shops lighted wtih tapers. The twisted pillars of St. Mary's are but a dream gone by, I do not even see them as a reflection in the sea. Like moody beasts they settle in the card-room. Their faces are fearful and wonderful--cruel and womanish with eyes full and black, lips purple and curved painfully. They are all gamblers but on a much grander scale. We fly from the City to the coast of the Mediterranean in the spirit of chance. Some by the light of waning sun, in their hot breasts devise adventures that will surely sing their doom. The endowment of this reckless appetite is indeed the measure of the man. But who shall mourn my death--will anyone be the wise? I have been swept into this life by circumstances most wicked. On this night, like all others thence, I write additions to my journal in bed with a dark lantern. Indeed, I regard it mainly as a tale of adventure, quite fascinating beause I'm never sure which chapter will be mine last. Jean L'Ollais is a tall, slim depraved man with a slight stoop, a troubled walk, an oval impassable face, and skin clinging tightly over the bone. He explains with swift and sudden gestures that he and his friends are tired of the amusements, wearied with the poor pleasures offered by the civil world. They say we will meet land today. Oh, what a stranger! So familiar and yet like a dream I never knew. However, I wonder at the purpose of my hosts. If this is a merely a visit or an invasion meant to entertain my captors with a new shudder in the destruction, the infusion of their venom among the dwellers whose chapter in my adventure I may very well regret having ever written...

[quote name='Semjaza Azazel']At this point, I was just posting about general "playing mod" stuff, not his post... personally. That seemed to be where the tread got to at this point lol.[/quote] Yeah, I know. I'm mainly referring to the first page and the base issue here. For example, his advice was for the staff to "lighten up." It just takes on such a humorous effect given how limited the "warning" (if you even want to call it that) really was. And then Desbreko had to go on and explain his smiley usage. Priceless. I wish I could frame some of this. As for the general issue itself--it wouldn't exist if members just refrained from getting involved at all as we suggested. Problem solved. The need for pages of discussion and analyzation--gone.

Oh my goodness, [i]that[/i] is what this is all about? :laugh: I don't know what's better: All this talk about Morpheus's tone of delivery, being too blunt, careful analysis of what constitutes "playing mod," [i]whatever, [/i]over [b]one sentence[/b] that encouraged the topic starter to post his own opinion--or the fact that Morpheus was offended enough over a one sentence reprimand, that he saw fit to make a complaint about it. In any case, if this isn't blowing a non-issue out of proportion, then I don't know what is.

[QUOTE=Corey][size=1]There's another facet to this argument that Panda more or less made me think of. Court. If you had to go to court, would you absolutely tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I couldn't. Until there's a separation of church and state i won't ever be able ot be held as a credible witness. The whole [i]"Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole turth and nothing but the truth so help you [b]God[/b]."[/i] I'm a raging athiest and I'd never be able to say yes. I [i]would[/i] tell the truth, but they wouldn't even let me speak because I wouldn't say yes to the statement unless it ddn't have the word god in it.[/size][/QUOTE]Refusing to adhere to the system just to spite it? That's ridiculous. I don't understand why people can't move past such trivial exercises of society sometimes. It's so childish and ignorant. Is merely standing for the flag salute such a [i]terrible[/i] ordeal? If I were in another country, I would stand for their anthem out of respect--with the knowledge in mind that I wouldn't be forsaking my own nationality. Likewise, does swearing on a bible [i]automatically[/i] convert you into a Catholic? The gesture of swearing on the bible is merely symbolic. Although I do agree that it should be changed, it certainly wouldn't prevent me from working with the system to impart the truth in an important trial where my testimony could possibly mean a lot. They could have me swear on a blue jay and it wouldn't deter me--because it's my duty to fulfill my responsibility as a citizen to cooperate to the best of my ability on such an occassion. Lives can be impacted, you know. Sometimes there are more important things in life than being self righteous. As far as my own honesty goes--I'm extremely honest where honesty counts. I'm esepcially honest with money, for example. At my previous place of employment, paper money would literally be scattered about the floor at night--and I could have easily pocketed it. But, I never once considered it because trust and being trusted is important to me. I simply must not accept something unless I've earned it. Recently, I found an envelope full of money and returned it to its owner. In fact, I rarely ever borrow money--and if I do, it's paid back immediately. In life, building a good reputation for yourself in terms of being trustworthy can be more important than making a fast dollar. I'm mostly honest with people (i.e., human relationships). I'll bend the truth to an extent (for the sake of being polite) if a girl asks how they look. But, if it's a matter of them becoming exposed to embarrassment because of my lie, I'm very careful with my language--and I'll tell the truth. It's better to do that than to have my lie cause more trouble than it's worth. So, I'll withhold the truth if I can avoid needlessly hurting someone but that's it. Like Panda, I mostly only fib when people ask me how I feel for the very same reasons she mentioned. --signing my post for redundancy's sake, justincaseyoumisseditinthepostbit-- Charles

We've had topics on cutting before. It's a subject that doesn't need to be renewed. Especially when you begin one in an inflammatory way. Also, your post quality makes me cry. Fix it. Thank you.

[quote name='Corey][size=1']When I first got here I feared James just about as much as I feared a broken bone or a night in jail.[/size][/quote][center][img]http://img208.exs.cx/img208/78/lol8ft.gif[/img][/center] [left][i]Any[/i]way, as far as members offering helpful information--how about "no?" I don't see why anyone should chide others by cautioning them that their thread is in the wrong forum. It's not as if the person who created the thread can move it themselves. It's not as if a moderator won't move the thread and relay that information. So, instead of complicating a simple problem by theorizing and rationalizing over nothing--let's look at this issue at face value. Members should just avoid offering public advice altogether. It's annoying, sometimes wrong, and most of all unnecessary; we do it because it's our job. Because it's not their job, they have no reason to.[/left] [left] [/left] [left]~signing my post for no reason because you all know who wrote it but apparently it's the cool thing to do~[/left] [left]Charles[/left]

[QUOTE=Kane][SIZE=1]Hmm well the discussion seems to have ended although I must put up my hands and say that reading the first few posts in agreement of disallowing new members the ability to create new threads was not something I was in favour of. Many of us from V3 will remember that only members [as in those with 500 posts or more] had the ability to upload their own avatars, now how many of us take that ability for granted. It just seems to me that we shouldn't be limiting the abilities of our members because they're new, after all we were all new at some point. On a side note I do think the PM idea is excellent, reminds me of new Microsoft software where you have to scroll to the end to actually get the [B]I agree[/B] icon to work.[/SIZE][/QUOTE] Haha, you're one leaf short of a four leaf clover son. I was willing to acquiesce to the multiple rebuttals in my last post despite the fact that many seemed to just state and restate the same redundant (and faulty) argument. But, if people keep piling it on, I'm going to be forced to go on offense again. I'd rather not close this in case the suggestion becomes applicable at some point, so I'll just issue that as fair warning. Just because the suggestion isn't being used, doesn't mean you're safe from my overwhelming brand of logic. This is especially true when you reply with such an obvious internal contradiction in your post (i.e., using members taking certain features for granted as an argument [I]against[/I] me). Come on. ;)

First I drafted a poem about pasta, now I bring you one about shoes. My old walking shoes, most endearing friends Worn, laces frayed, but loyal to your ends Your color's fading, your complexion gray But--won't you walk with me--just one last day? Join me, squeaking out your little noises Together, "peep, peep, peep" sing your voices I fit you, and you me, together we Spent youth jogging, now stroll comfortably Our seasons have come, our seasons must go Autumn has passed, now we wear beards of snow Souls exposed--bare, yes, like any man's who Spent all his years being treaded on too With skin aired dry, no longer smooth like cream Won't you please walk me through one last day dream?

[quote name='Morpheus]I don't see what the problem with homosexuality is. I have a friend that's Homosexual and he thought he was straght two years ago. I don't look at him in a worse light because he's Homosexual. It simply makes no sense. If he got married, I would be happy for him. It wouldn't affect me in the slightest. So I challenge [B][SIZE=4]ANYONE[/SIZE][/B'] to give me a good reason as to why Homosexuality is so wrong.[/quote] I'll bite. The [I]spectacle[/I] of homosexuality is absolute pomp that I disagree with wholeheartedly. Why do you need to root out others who disagree with your liberal opinions on homosexuality just for the sake of doing so? Why should that challenge exist? You've already stated that you're not interested in hearing opinions that [I]support[/i] your way of thinking. You just want [I]dissenting[/I] opinions. You're comfortable with your friend's lifestyle; there's no conflict. [I]You[/I] don't need to be convinced or re-assured of your friendship. On the other hand, are you willing to admit that you're pretentious enough to think yourself capable of doing what none of these discussions have ever been capable of doing-- sparking a gay rights revolution, totally changing opposing individuals' personal opinions? There's absolutely nothing to be resolved here. So, why can't you just be happy, co-existing in mutual peace with your friend? I'll tell you why. You're just using the issue of homosexuality to press an argument. Sometimes I feel as if people on both sides of the issue exploit it just for the purpose of having their voices heard. Treading over a controversial issue such as this, again and again, makes us easily forget that real peoples' feelings and lives are involved. At the same time, there [I]is[/I] an important civil rights conflict at the center of all this. Merely [I]talking[/I] about it can make someone feel important, like what they're saying holds extra importance when it's focused on this subject. So, whether a person happens to be a teenager using their parents' computer, or a politician gaining support for a political campaign, it's easy to abuse the issue by [I]using[/I] it to suit our own purposes. Which, of course is typically just an exercise for flexing our own egos. That is what is wrong with homosexuality; its vulnerability. It's so easy to exploit that even children on an Internet message board can bend it to their own shallow agendas. If you were really concerned about your friend's life, you wouldn't need to create threads on OtakuBoards about it. You would be comfortable in giving him the support he needs, becoming involved in local groups, and appealing to area politicians. Taking action and having your voice heard within your community is the only method that will ultimately bring about change. If Martin Luther King Jr. were alive today, I highly doubt that he would be sitting in front of his computer, on an anime message board, simply demanding that people argue with him. So all of you can go on with this discussion for days, just for the sake of having something to argue about and so that you can feel wise/important. But it makes me sick the more I see it because the point of it all is becoming continually more deluded. That's all I have to say.

[b]Kingdom Hearts[/b] is my choice. The combination of Square and Disney properties seemed like a match made in heaven. I was excited at the prospect of playing through an adventure featuring many of my most beloved characters from different mediums. Also, I was hoping for the integration of authentic Disney music with masterful Square compositions. All this taking place within some of the most interesting worlds ever created sounded too good to be true. And it was. Although, impressively enough, Kingdom Hearts managed to capture the look of a Disney film with its amazing facial animations, and featured some great voice acting thanks to the real actors providing their support for their respective characters, nearly everything else was unacceptable. The level designs and scripting were awful. They butchered each film they were based on and forced the player to backtrack repeatedly, all the while suffering through droves of repeating enemies. Each world was extremely small; usually offering about fifteen minutes of terrain to traverse. They didn't feel magical, nor did they inspire a sense of exploration and wonderment that you would expect from worlds pulled directly from some of Disney's best films. The Gummi Ship segments also left a lot to be desired. If you couldn't earn the ability to skip them later, I would have stopped playing the game because of them. The Sega 32X could pull them off visually, they controlled awfully, and just weren't fun. The combat too within the actual game, had its fair share of problems due to poor friendly AI. Donald and Goofy would often waste healing items and rush into their demise. It was extremely frustrating. Hopefully Kingdom Hearts 2 turns out to be much better.

[quote name='Semjaza Azazel']And I swear the PM rules thing was suggested several months ago, if not more lol.[/quote][center][img]http://img187.exs.cx/img187/1250/crybaby4le.gif[/img][/center] Okay, now I feel like a total idiot. Sorry for completely wasting everyone's time. O_o;;

[quote name='kaisha']Its just so sad I mean he really must have nothing better to do with his life other than have someone else run it for him. I would bid if I had the money just for fun![/quote] Not exactly. If you read carefully, you'll see that the examples he lists would all impact his life in a positive way; the options are almost all luxurious retreats. He also gives himself the power to veto any ideas he doesn't like. It's just a joke. Some of you are taking it far too seriously. So, all of you take a deep breath please. lol

[QUOTE=James][color=#811c3a]But anyway, what I was going to say was that your idea about PMing the rules automatically is a great idea. Perhaps we should create a brief PM that all new members receive as a welcome message, which includes the relevant links and brief advice. All new members would also have PM pop-up by default, which they could later turn off, so that this stuff would be 100% noticeable and unavoidable. I think that is a great suggestion to come out of this thread; it directly relates to what I'd like to do.[/color][/QUOTE] Awesome. I'm glad something positive came out of all my rambling. lol Which is why I think it's always cool to suggest something even if it'll bring about a lot of debate. Usually it's in that, that even more useful things come to light. It's funny how things work out. heh

Despite the issue being settled, I don't mind keeping the discussion going, if for nothing else to comment on the posts that have been made since I last visited. It's an interesting discussion, so I'm satisfied with that and the attention it's received. [quote name='Syk3']...with my area in particular, I don't see any problems with new members posting artwork that they have made, or more importantly, requesting artwork that they could use as their banner and avatar. If we do end up not allowing them to make threads for the first 50 posts, this may pose a problem if someone is not very good at graphics but would like something to put in their signature that they can call their own.[/quote]I can see the merit in such a point, but at the same time I have to say that I disagree with you there. I must argue that the implementation of such a proposal would build character for new posters within that forum. They would be restricted to providing critiques and making a contribution to the forum as a whole before simply showing off their own work. It would be a positive thing, I say, to get them into that habit early. Also, I'm not sure if a person who does indeed have less than twenty-five posts [i]deserves[/i] the right to request artwork, such as banners and avatars. Wouldn't it, in fact, be easy for me to register, request a banner or avatar, and simply never return once my request has been addressed? An individual should have a proven committment to the site in general before benefitting from it in such a way. [quote]EDIT: And I'm sure I probably don't need to tell you this, but there are always exceptions to all of these bad threads. New members can make decent threads such as this one - [url="http://www.otakuboards.com/showthread.php?t=45154"]Careers: What's more important to you?[/url] - without even reaching 10 posts. And if we deny these exceptions, then we may be limiting the full range and extent of possible discussions. I dunno, just something to think about.[/QUOTE]Of course you don't need to tell me that; I've acknowledged the point already (if you've read my last post within this topic that is). Which, is why I'm suggesting such a low number of posts in exchange for the permission to create threads. [quote name='Shugo54][color=#000080']It has one major flaw. Dagger IX1 posted it. If I had to reach a certain number of post to be able to create my own threads and be respected I would be pissed. Most people dont have the kind of patience. If this plan goes through then most of the new members will become tired of waiting and leave the forum. [/quote][/color] And I addressed it. We're not talking about a "certain number of posts." On the contrary, we're referring to a very specific number of posts--twenty or twenty-five at the most. The issue in no way goes hand-in-hand with the attainment of respect. I'm in no way setting twenty posts as the measuring stick for respect because such an acceptance is in no way related to the number of threads someone makes. On the other hand, if someone doesn't have the patience to achieve a member rank at twenty or twenty-five posts, well then, they probably don't have much potential to begin with. If an older age range is what this site is trying to target, I'd say that discouraging such people from leaving is probably in line with its best interests. [color=black][size=1][color=#2f4f4f][color=#000000][quote name='Annalisse][/color']I like this idea. But like Panda, I would be afraid of members just rushing through random threads just to get post count; developing no quality or structure. I personally know a few members I introduced to the OB, and when they understood the concept of post counts, I noticed their quality took a plunge into the carpet. [/quote][/color][/size][/color] Surely, a positive way to identify a poor member and "nip the problem in the bud" before they ever get the chance to create a thread if that's the level of their post quality. [size=2][color=#0000ff][color=#000000][quote name='AzureWolf][/color']While the idea sounds neat, I do have just one concern: what is going to stop the newbies who start annoying threads and introduction posts from going to random threads and posting, "OMG! WHY CANT I LIEK, TOTALLY CREATE THREADS TO SAY HI?!"[/quote][/color][/size] [size=2][color=black]Well, yet again, if someone posts in such a way, there's the door. It's rather easy to prune or delete posts. I think that off-topic posts within threads, like the one mentioned above, would not only be easy enough to identify, but would also be insignificant in quanity compared to the threads created for the purpose of delivering the same message. It would take a real lack of common sense to post something like what you stated, compared to creating an actual introduction thread. It would be a sure-fire way of identifying those who wouldn't cut the mustard to begin with. [/color][/size] [size=1][quote name='Sol-Blade']At first glance, while this idea does seem very intriguing, and seemingly necessary (I kinda mouthed "Why didn't they think of this before?" when I read about it). But indeed, I wouldn't feel very motivated to even post, if I felt that I had to "earn" my privleges. If anyone has ever been to the INA forums, you know that you need 50 posts just to be able to have an avatar and custom title. Now while not being that restricting (It's just an avatar), it still feels that the only reason some people are 'compelled' to post, is to gain those things. They (They, meaning a few of them) just kinda half-*** their way through those 50 posts. Kinda annoying, but then again it make work here. But it does seem like a very good idea. You'd just have to take in the fact that, not all New Members make duplicate threads. The ones who *are* smart enough to read to rules will probably have the next 'hot' thread topic, but I'm sure they aren't going to be very happy to learn they have to wait to post it.[/quote][/size] [size=2]People keep on commenting as if twenty or so posts is such an unattainable goal to reach. There's not much to "earn." I don't know if you're aware of this, but for the majority of this site's history, members had to reach a level of posts much higher than what I'm suggesting, just to use a custom avatar. When I first joined, that number was 1,000 posts to be specific. Later, it was reduced to 500. I, along with many other members, didn't put in a "half-assed" effort, as you say, to reach that many posts. Nor was it the reason we kept posting. I remained here long after I was able to use a custom avatar obviously. The wait for these people to post their next "hot" thread topic isn't much of a wait at all either. I see it as a non-issue considering the incredibly insignificant criteria I'm suggesting.[/size] [size=2]People keep referring to this as a restriction; I see it as an official tutorial. One that's tangible instead of an applied responsibility to just read the rules and automatically be cultured with the place enough to make a thread.[/size] [size=2]Also, the ability to post threads will seem more important to people once they have it, if they feel that twenty or so posts is such an unbearable wait. They will be less likely to abuse it and create higher quality threads as a result, thus increasing the likelihood of the next "hot" thread topic you refer to.[/size] [size=2][size=1][quote name='Baron Samedi']I think that this a great idea: It has the possibility to make a difference. But, if such a thing were to happen, rather than cutting down New Member post counts to 25, why not create a distinction between 0-25 and 25-50 posts? I think by the time you've made around 50 posts, you can be considered to be a fully fledged member. But I think that having a 50 post limit before thread creation is a good way to put people off OB. Therefore, a compromise is required.[/quote][/size][/size] [size=2]I'm not sure what you mean exactly. Perhaps you misread me. There won't be a fifty post benchmark for thread creation. People will either become a "Member" after twenty to twenty-five posts, or still be considered a "New Member" but have the ability to create their own threads.[/size] [color=#503f86][quote name='Solo Tremaine']I think this idea's interesting- provisionally I'd say it's decent: 25 posts isn't anything special, but it won't much change the fact that if a new member still doesn't read the rules when they sign up anyway, their post quality may be just as bad and their posts are only going to cause disruption in existing threads rather than clean, new ones. I find that can be more frustrating personally, because as they aren't able to start a new thread to ask a question you're risking a whole string of unrelated replies that have to be deleted individually (especially if it's a seven-page thread- even the 'Delete Posts' option means ages of trawling through to get to the right ones).[/quote][/color] [size=2][color=black]You bring up a good point. And yet, I don't see why they shouldn't be able to browse through the Suggestions & Feedback forum or private message the staff in relation to simple questions. If they disrupt a thread with an abundance of posts, it would be rather easy to prune them. I'd say that such a problem would be related to the minority of new members though. Anyone with an inch of common sense should know better than to ask how to use an avatar or to say "Hello" within a politial discussion, for example. [/color][/size] [size=2]Also, I'm sure there's a way to automatically dispatch private messages to members upon registration. The private message could explain the situation clearly and warn against such behavior. They're more likely to read that then the rules. [/size] [size=2][color=#811c3a][quote name='James']I like this idea but I don't think it will change anything. A member with low-quality posts is a member with low-quality posts. I find that members tend to improve when they are encouraged directly by staff (so thread closures can actually have a benefit for members who are keen to participate, because they are reminded of what we require here).[/quote][/color][/size] [size=2][color=black]Well, this isn't about automatically transforming a low-quality member into a high-quality one though. I agree that it won't change anyone in such a drastic way. This suggestion is meant to help introduce people to the site in a more curved way, however. They're still subject to encouragement from staff--but it will be at the cost of the alienation that accompanies the closure of what was intended to be a friendly albiet unnecessary gesture, like an introduction thread. Or a duplicate thread. If there were obvious, although marginal restrictions in place, it would also encourage people to read the rules more too--because they would want to know exactly what is going on. Also, instead of being reminded of what is required here, they would automatically be thrusted into exactly what it is that's required.[/color][/size] [size=2][color=#811c3a][quote]The most this would do is cause some new members to simply give up and leave. But as Azure correctly pointed out, people who are going to create awful posts will do it one way or another -- if they aren't making threads, they'll just respond incoherently to existing threads.[/quote][/color][/size] [size=2][color=black]Agreed. Azure brought up a valid point. [i]But, [/i]as I said to him--it would be best if those people left. If people who would create awful threads are just regulated to creating awful posts--one problem is automatically eliminated. The other is as simple as pruning their posts. Although this site is active, I don't think it's active so much that moderators should find it much of a hassle to locate off-topic or incoherent threads within their forums.[/color][/size] [color=#811c3a][quote]Our biggest challenge is to make the rules more comprehensive, easier to access and more noticeable. That is something that I am going to tackle with our next version change.[/quote][/color] [color=black]This would make them more noticeable; that's for sure. They would be imposed, in a very liberal way, directly onto people creating a very noticeable presense of the rule set in practice. I think that this idea would encourage people to read the rules or the automatic private message sent to them too.[/color] The rest of your post, I can't argue with because it's your opinion and you're more qualified to discern whether or not something like this would be a good idea or not in practice, so I won't question that. I'm happy with the fact that it's open for future consideration at least. [quote name='Dagger IX1']I understand what you're saying here, and it makes sense, but to me it seems like the most straightforward solution would be warning the people who play mod (which is one of my pet peeves anyway, heh).[/quote]But what does that do for the new member who has already felt the effects of isolation? You're accomplishing something by correcting the offending members, but I'm not sure it's anything that would encourage the member they scolded. [quote]Eh... we may have to agree to disagree on this. Going by my personal experience, there are times when I've joined forums and only gotten to, say, twenty-five posts after months and months of being a member. Some people just prefer to lurk, only occasionally interjecting comments or really getting involved in a discussion--but often lurkers are the ones who make the best threads. That aside, I personally have a tendency to create more threads when I'm new to a forum than when I've been there for a while. Not having that ability would be sort of annoying.[/quote]Sounds good to me. I won't press this point for the purpose of forcing you to agree with me. Like I said to James above, there's a point where I respect personal opinion and just can't question it. I will say though, that after twenty posts, someone is still new at the forum, and a lurker, although not likely to create a thread because it would defy what they in fact are, still wouldn't have to exhibit a high level of participation to gain the right to make a thread. [quote]The thing is, I really think new members should be able to publicly ask questions. That's often the first thing I do when I sign up for a message board, assuming it has a section like this. For example, when I recently joined a different anime-related forum, before posting anything else I made a thread asking how to disable the default smilies in posts.[/quote]Most of the questions that someone would ask upon first joining have already been answered and can be found by browsing through Suggestions & Feedback forum without creating a new thread. I think that it would eliminate redundency and encourage them to make use of the feature, which is required throughout the site. Otherwise, simple questions can always be addressed directly to the staff via private message. Phew. I'd just like to thank everyone who replied whether they disagreed or not. That consideration and attention is good enough to make me happy Again, I'm not expecting this to be put into place in the near future or ever, for that matter but it's definitely fun to both discuss and consider these things.

[font=Tahoma][size=2]I'm kind of glad that you brought these issues up--because other than Panda's concern, they're along the lines of what I was expecting in opposition to my proposal. [/size][/font][size=2]My rebuttal to this argument is that this measure isn't born from [i]necessity. [/i]Obviously, there's no issue surrounding an influx of low quality new members running rampant, bogging down the forums with terrible threads whilst a helpless staff stand idly by, scratching their heads. Even "The Deal With This Member" thread has slowed down significantly. But because it isn't a necessity being applied to a pressing issue, I don't view it as much of a restriction at all. The lack of terrible new member issues actually eliminates any sort of hostile air the idea could be mistaken to have. [/size] [size=2]I see this not as a way of alleviating staff of burden (because it's just not the case at all), but as a way of [i]helping[/i] new members and[i] easing[/i] them into the proceedings. It's not a vote of no-confidence on anyone's part, the staff's or the new membership's. On the contrary, I view it as a simple tweak that would further improve the effectiveness of the "New Member" rank, making it a significantly worthwhile, although hopelessly brief, tutorial. Any concerns about the forums appearing unwelcoming would hold water if the "Member" rank required a significant amount of posts to attain, but that's simply not the case. One could even argue that your logic is quite contradictory. I'd say that it can seem more unwelcoming, as you put it, to obtain a membership here, post a thread, let's say an introduction thread or a gay marriage thread and have it locked in view of everyone on the main topic listing. Even if it is done so in a friendly way. There's typically a number of normal members that group up within such threads and point out the mistake if staff aren't around discover it immediately, creating a feeling of alienation. Instantly, new members may feel that they've started off on the wrong foot and become discouraged. My measure would be a security blanket to prevent that from happening. If the number of posts required for "Member" status were reduced to twenty-five, I'd hardly call that a[i]mass[/i]ing posts. The language there implies that they're being burdened with the task of enduring a long period of posting before being welcomed fully into the community. Also, it's not exclusive in that they would be doing what staff have been encouraging as a whole for quite some time and "jumping right in." They would become more cultured with the boards and experience first-hand the kind of discussion that goes on here before making a thread themselves. Of course, that's what people are supposed to do to begin with--but this implementation would directly ensure that. No one is being denied access of entire forums or features other than that one. They're still able to fully experience the site. And, I'd rather they could not create new threads in the Suggestions & Feedback forum because then when we do encounter poor members, they would surely create annoying threads complaining about not being able to create threads elsewhere. I also feel that they should be acquainted with the site for at least a brief while before suggesting changes. Anyway, I can't say I expect everyone to embrace this idea or for it to be put into practice. I simply remember the heavy debate that ensued the last time I created a thread in here--and that sort of thing I always enjoy. It's why I made this so public, actually. I think everyone should have a say in it. That method of thinking proves there's no elitist or unwelcoming way of thinking involved here. [/size]