Abolish the Anon amendment for FNR

firecage · Post by **firecage** » Sat Jan 16, 2016 12:59 pm #146980

I believe the Anon amendment for FNR should be abolished. Now, I myself would probably get banned/warned sometimes, but holy fuck. Currently people are abusing the fuck out of it to shitpost in Ban Appeals/Ban Requests. With some threads it feels like we are back in the peanut gallery days. I highly preferred it when you would get warned/banned for posting if you weren't directly involved, or weren't an admin.

Well, this, or just put the handful of people doing this shit on post approval for FNR.

LiamLime · Post by **LiamLime** » Sat Jan 16, 2016 1:14 pm #146981

I sort of think this is a decision admins should make. If they feel the junk makes their decision making harder, then sure, otherwise I don't think players' opinion on this matters much.

Zilenan91 · Post by **Zilenan91** » Sat Jan 16, 2016 6:42 pm #147002

Post approval would be best I feel.

Cheimon · Post by **Cheimon** » Sat Jan 16, 2016 7:58 pm #147010

Why does it matter if more people that weren't involved comment on an FNR post? I would like to hear your reasoning.

iamgoofball · Post by **iamgoofball** » Sat Jan 16, 2016 8:15 pm #147013

Aha, no. Fuck off.

Zilenan91 · Post by **Zilenan91** » Sat Jan 16, 2016 8:16 pm #147014

2beard was like Adolf Hitler. I never met Adolf Hitler but I still know how bad he was.

Malkevin · Post by **Malkevin** » Sat Jan 16, 2016 9:56 pm #147021

iamgoofball wrote:Aha, no. Fuck off.

Saegrimr · Post by **Saegrimr** » Sat Jan 16, 2016 10:04 pm #147023

The anon3 amendment isn't the issue here. Forum rules are still in place, they're just a joke.

Sat Jan 16, 2016 10:15 pm

Cheimon wrote:Why does it matter if more people that weren't involved comment on an FNR post? I would like to hear your reasoning.

Because having a billion irrelevant people peanut posting and yelling about what they think when they don't even know what happened is stupid. Admins are generally expected to be professional and look at both sides of an issue before making a decision, but Joe Shmoe who has zero knowledge about what happened and has no stake in it at all doesn't have to give a shit and can just post whatever they want, which has derailed several threads before and is a pain in the ass to deal with

Is your post either:
A. An admin decision on the matter or
B. Bringing new evidence or information in?

If not, it's irrelevant and uneeded

Post by **lumipharon** » Sat Jan 16, 2016 10:41 pm #147031

before you just had admins that had no relation to the issue posting, now it's admins and players.
If people are shitting posting just ban them from fnr.

Post by **Thunder11** » Sat Jan 16, 2016 11:11 pm #147038

Cheimon wrote:Why does it matter if more people that weren't involved comment on an FNR post? I would like to hear your reasoning.

There's a big difference between "But a previous headmin decision said X in forum thread Y" and "LOL UNBAN HE"
The An0n3 amendment was only ever intended to cover the first case, shitposts like the second case were never supposed to be covered by it.

Cheimon · Post by **Cheimon** » Sun Jan 17, 2016 12:02 am #147050

So the issue doesn't actually have anything to do with the Anon amendment, just its enforcement?

iamgoofball · Sun Jan 17, 2016 12:18 am

Shaps wrote:
Cheimon wrote:Why does it matter if more people that weren't involved comment on an FNR post? I would like to hear your reasoning.
Because having a billion irrelevant people peanut posting and yelling about what they think when they don't even know what happened is stupid. Admins are generally expected to be professional and look at both sides of an issue before making a decision, but Joe Shmoe who has zero knowledge about what happened and has no stake in it at all doesn't have to give a shit and can just post whatever they want, which has derailed several threads before and is a pain in the ass to deal with

Is your post either:
A. An admin decision on the matter or
B. Bringing new evidence or information in?

If not, it's irrelevant and uneeded

Yeah. There's a lot of the Joe Shmoe shitposting, but there's quite a bit of useful info posted that falls under A or B using the An0n3 Amendment

firecage · Post by **firecage** » Sun Jan 17, 2016 9:56 am #147090

Well hello Joe Shmoe.

ColonicAcid · Post by **ColonicAcid** » Sun Jan 17, 2016 2:41 pm #147110

ITT: I don't like things that make my hard job : ((((((((((

you precious princesses boohoo, nobody said being an admin is going to be easy.

Saegrimr · Post by **Saegrimr** » Sun Jan 17, 2016 2:42 pm #147111

And then Colonic shows up completely unaware of the situation.

CPTANT · Post by **CPTANT** » Sun Jan 17, 2016 3:40 pm #147124

Personally I don't think its that bad at all when people give their opinion on controversial bans/complaints.

We are after all 1 community and certain decisions affect that community, might as well voice your opinion when those issues are relevant.

shitposting should of course be removed.

firecage · Post by **firecage** » Sun Jan 17, 2016 4:12 pm #147129

CPTANT wrote:Personally I don't think its that bad at all when people give their opinion on controversial bans/complaints.

We are after all 1 community and certain decisions affect that community, might as well voice your opinion when those issues are relevant.

shitposting should of course be removed.

We had that before, and its also what FNR is busy turning into again. An absolute chaos of peanut gallery.

CPTANT · Post by **CPTANT** » Sun Jan 17, 2016 4:15 pm #147130

firecage wrote:
CPTANT wrote:Personally I don't think its that bad at all when people give their opinion on controversial bans/complaints.

We are after all 1 community and certain decisions affect that community, might as well voice your opinion when those issues are relevant.

shitposting should of course be removed.
We had that before, and its also what FNR is busy turning into again. An absolute chaos of peanut gallery.

A large part of that I consider shitposting, and its just a lack of moderation of the board that is now the problem.

ColonicAcid · Post by **ColonicAcid** » Sun Jan 17, 2016 4:34 pm #147134

Saegrimr wrote:And then Colonic shows up completely unaware of the situation.

I know exactly what the situation is.

Admins don't want to deal with "unwanted bullshit" but let me tell you, I have first hand experience on the fact that adminining anything is all about dealing with unwanted bullshit. Nobody ever said it would be easy, and for every piece of "unwanted bullshit" there will be one piece of information that will come out that would be worth all the trouble you have to deal with.

You doing it for free doesn't mean you have to make the job as easy as humanely possible. Deal with it fam.

Zilenan91 · Post by **Zilenan91** » Sun Jan 17, 2016 5:17 pm #147139

There have been times where admins probably go a bit too far on the anon3 emendment, they've deleted my posts when I had relevant information to give.

newfren · Post by **newfren** » Mon Jan 18, 2016 6:14 am #147245

how about instead of abolishing the anon amendment we just enforce it

just ignore whiny butt babies that complain about their shitposts being deleted

Ahammer18 · Post by **Ahammer18** » Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:42 am #147571

I support this, we need more stricter FNR rules.

If you aren't the
-Person appealing/complaining
-Person the complaint was about
-Directly witnessed the events
-Are an admin/moderator

please refrain from posting

That would be my ideal setup.

Malkevin · Post by **Malkevin** » Wed Jan 20, 2016 8:17 am #147594

Seeing as the last time we had the above admins were constantly making shitty decisions and not getting challenged on them, no.

Post by **lumipharon** » Wed Jan 20, 2016 8:53 am #147596

Malkevin wrote:Seeing as the last time we had the above admins were constantly making shitty decisions and not getting challenged on them, no.

Pretty much this.
People make good points, and people shitpost. Warn an FNR ban the shitposters, same as the rest of the forums.

Kangaraptor · Post by **Kangaraptor** » Wed Jan 20, 2016 2:25 pm #147618

Ahammer18 wrote:I support this, we need more stricter FNR rules.

If you aren't the
-Person appealing/complaining
-Person the complaint was about
-Directly witnessed the events
-Are an admin/moderator

please refrain from posting

That would be my ideal setup.

That's the way it used to be.

It didn't work.

Being able to remind people of precedents previously set and challenge the decision of the shitposting shitmins is more valuable than damaging.

Ahammer18 · Post by **Ahammer18** » Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:09 pm #147627

The headmins exist for a reason. Bitch to them when you feel like you have been wronged by an admin.

CPTANT · Post by **CPTANT** » Wed Jan 20, 2016 4:35 pm #147636

Ahammer18 wrote:The headmins exist for a reason. Bitch to them when you feel like you have been wronged by an admin.

That is pretty much an unworkable system.

Malkevin · Post by **Malkevin** » Wed Jan 20, 2016 5:00 pm #147638

Ahammer18 wrote:The headmins exist for a reason. Bitch to them when you feel like you have been wronged by an admin.

We've not had a decent headmin since XSI

iamgoofball · Post by **iamgoofball** » Wed Jan 20, 2016 5:18 pm #147642

Ahammer18 wrote:The headmins exist for a reason. Bitch to them when you feel like you have been wronged by an admin.

I can count on 1 hand the amount of times this worked in my time here at /tg/ and you know it.

leibniz · Post by **leibniz** » Wed Jan 20, 2016 5:23 pm #147643

It's kind of bad to restrict everyone because some people shitpost.
Just ban those from FNR. And maybe FNR posts of new accounts should have to be manually approved if a problem emerges with that.

Wyzack · Post by **Wyzack** » Wed Jan 20, 2016 5:34 pm #147645

I think it should stay, people often have relevant stuff to contribute. I do think that our lovely forummods need to crack down on the shitposters however

Post by **NikNakFlak** » Wed Jan 20, 2016 5:57 pm #147646

In reality mods got lazy (myself included) and we are just gonna start being harsher again. I hope you enjoyed your freedom while it lasted. It's all ogre now

Ahammer18 · Post by **Ahammer18** » Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:56 pm #147686

Okay, I can get behind just being more strict.

Saegrimr · Post by **Saegrimr** » Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:57 pm #147687

You don't even have to be "more strict"

Just actually enforce FNR posting rules for once.

Timbrewolf · Post by **Timbrewolf** » Thu Jan 21, 2016 3:47 am #147770

Saegrimr wrote:The anon3 amendment isn't the issue here. Forum rules are still in place, they're just a joke.

newfren wrote:how about instead of abolishing the anon amendment we just enforce it

just ignore whiny butt babies that complain about their shitposts being deleted

Thunder11 wrote: There's a big difference between "But a previous headmin decision said X in forum thread Y" and "LOL UNBAN HE"
The An0n3 amendment was only ever intended to cover the first case, shitposts like the second case were never supposed to be covered by it.

Suddenly, I'm proud of you.

Post by **oranges** » Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:43 am #148012

abolish it, I could do with some more users

peoplearestrange · Fri Jan 29, 2016 12:13 pm

I've been lax on the Anon amendment in FNR for awhile now. This partly came from a huge amount of backlash from (probably) the vocal minority.
In hindsight I probably should just suck it up and get on with it, but thats less easy when people are screaming about being deleted and I have no real way to silence them other than a delete tool.

There is obviously a balance, and its been about finding that, right now we're too far on the relaxed path.

Saegrimr · Post by **Saegrimr** » Fri Jan 29, 2016 12:19 pm #149876

peoplearestrange wrote:I have no real way to silence them other than a delete tool.

If they don't get the hint from a deletion, they can come back in a day or two. You've adminned the server long enough to get how that goes.

peoplearestrange · Sat Jan 30, 2016 1:00 am

Saegrimr wrote:
peoplearestrange wrote:I have no real way to silence them other than a delete tool.
If they don't get the hint from a deletion, they can come back in a day or two. You've adminned the server long enough to get how that goes.

I dont have the tools as a global mod to ban. Only an admin thing.

Post by **NikNakFlak** » Sat Jan 30, 2016 1:22 am #150023

Global mods can ban. Yes.

peoplearestrange · Mon Feb 01, 2016 11:13 am

Oooh maybe I can!? I can't do post approval though (AFAIK).

CPTANT · Post by **CPTANT** » Sun Mar 06, 2016 4:27 pm #159555

I would say this whole issue becomes a lot less important if ban appeals/requests actually got handled in a reasonable time and didn't pile up for weeks and weeks.

starmute · Post by **starmute** » Sun Mar 06, 2016 4:36 pm #159556

iamgoofball wrote:Aha, no. Fuck off.

To be fair shitposters make things a bit more amusing. If you have a issue just censor their post. If it gets out of hand send them a warning. Don't be the adolf hitler of comedy.