Boru

Oh sorry about that.

I guess that's what the 30/30 rule must be.

(June 23, 2024 at 6:11 am)Pavlov Wrote: I guess that's what the 30/30 rule must be.

You’ll find a link to this and other rules at the upper left part of the screen. You’d be wise to familiarize yourself with them.

Boru

(June 23, 2024 at 6:27 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(June 23, 2024 at 6:11 am)Pavlov Wrote: I guess that's what the 30/30 rule must be.

You’ll find a link to this and other rules at the upper left part of the screen. You’d be wise to familiarize yourself with them.

Boru

Why does this rule exist at all?
Shouldn't this particular type of thread be considered an exception to this rule, provided that the image posted is relevant?

(June 23, 2024 at 10:08 am)pocaracas Wrote:

(June 23, 2024 at 6:27 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: You’ll find a link to this and other rules at the upper left part of the screen. You’d be wise to familiarize yourself with them.

Boru

Why does this rule exist at all?
Shouldn't this particular type of thread be considered an exception to this rule, provided that the image posted is relevant?

It was originally intended to clamp down on rampant spamvertising. It still exists because posting outside content is now viewed as a privilege that newbies should earn by demonstrating that they can behave themselves.

Even without the 30/30 rule, I still would have removed the images for being offensive (this also occurs when veteran members cross the line).

Given the above, I see no reason to make exceptions for the type of thread.

Thank you for asking.

Boru

(June 23, 2024 at 2:34 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(June 23, 2024 at 10:08 am)pocaracas Wrote: Why does this rule exist at all?
Shouldn't this particular type of thread be considered an exception to this rule, provided that the image posted is relevant?

It was originally intended to clamp down on rampant spamvertising. It still exists because posting outside content is now viewed as a privilege that newbies should earn by demonstrating that they can behave themselves.

Even without the 30/30 rule, I still would have removed the images for being offensive (this also occurs when veteran members cross the line).

Given the above, I see no reason to make exceptions for the type of thread.

Thank you for asking.

Boru

If the idea is to stop spamvertising and a mod/admin needs to step in to remove the images, then it's not very effective. Can't any one of you admins with access to the behind the scenes cook up some PHP module to absolutely prevent the server from parsing the img tags for users with less than 30 days and 30 posts already in? Or to automagically convert those into the Admin warning you're currently having to put up manually?

As it is a manual thing, such privileges on newbies on these threads can safely be waivered... again, provided the content is relevant. If it isn't, like you said happens for any other user, it gets moderated.
I trust you that this particular instance was indeed offensive, but then you wouldn't need to invoke the 30/30 rule, just the trolling (or graphic content, as I don't know why you say it's offensive) which is much more justified and you would have used regardless of who was posting it.

Imagine there's a legitimate user who wants to share some funny stuff... why not let them? 30 days is a long time to be in a new forum when they want to post something they find funny.... If they're anything like me, they'll forget it by the time they can post it... or won't even return when they see their compeltely harmless post moderated like that.

Thank you for your attention.

(June 23, 2024 at 3:27 pm)pocaracas Wrote:

(June 23, 2024 at 2:34 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: It was originally intended to clamp down on rampant spamvertising. It still exists because posting outside content is now viewed as a privilege that newbies should earn by demonstrating that they can behave themselves.

Even without the 30/30 rule, I still would have removed the images for being offensive (this also occurs when veteran members cross the line).

Given the above, I see no reason to make exceptions for the type of thread.

Thank you for asking.

Boru

If the idea is to stop spamvertising and a mod/admin needs to step in to remove the images, then it's not very effective. Can't any one of you admins with access to the behind the scenes cook up some PHP module to absolutely prevent the server from parsing the img tags for users with less than 30 days and 30 posts already in? Or to automagically convert those into the Admin warning you're currently having to put up manually?

As it is a manual thing, such privileges on newbies on these threads can safely be waivered... again, provided the content is relevant. If it isn't, like you said happens for any other user, it gets moderated.
I trust you that this particular instance was indeed offensive, but then you wouldn't need to invoke the 30/30 rule, just the trolling (or graphic content, as I don't know why you say it's offensive) which is much more justified and you would have used regardless of who was posting it.

Imagine there's a legitimate user who wants to share some funny stuff... why not let them? 30 days is a long time to be in a new forum when they want to post something they find funny.... If they're anything like me, they'll forget it by the time they can post it... or won't even return when they see their compeltely harmless post moderated like that.

Thank you for your attention.

My take, most people who are here for honest reasons understand the need for the 30/30 rule and we seldom get blowback from them.

At this point, IMHO, this rules works well.

(June 23, 2024 at 3:27 pm)pocaracas Wrote:

(June 23, 2024 at 2:34 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: It was originally intended to clamp down on rampant spamvertising. It still exists because posting outside content is now viewed as a privilege that newbies should earn by demonstrating that they can behave themselves.

Even without the 30/30 rule, I still would have removed the images for being offensive (this also occurs when veteran members cross the line).

Given the above, I see no reason to make exceptions for the type of thread.

Thank you for asking.

Boru

If the idea is to stop spamvertising and a mod/admin needs to step in to remove the images, then it's not very effective. Can't any one of you admins with access to the behind the scenes cook up some PHP module to absolutely prevent the server from parsing the img tags for users with less than 30 days and 30 posts already in? Or to automagically convert those into the Admin warning you're currently having to put up manually?

As it is a manual thing, such privileges on newbies on these threads can safely be waivered... again, provided the content is relevant. If it isn't, like you said happens for any other user, it gets moderated.
I trust you that this particular instance was indeed offensive, but then you wouldn't need to invoke the 30/30 rule, just the trolling (or graphic content, as I don't know why you say it's offensive) which is much more justified and you would have used regardless of who was posting it.

Imagine there's a legitimate user who wants to share some funny stuff... why not let them? 30 days is a long time to be in a new forum when they want to post something they find funny.... If they're anything like me, they'll forget it by the time they can post it... or won't even return when they see their compeltely harmless post moderated like that.

Thank you for your attention.

I’m confused. You seem to want 1) the 30/30 rule to be more efficient and effective, 2) the 30/30 rule to be enforced, but with using other rules to achieve the same results, and 3) the 30/30 rule to only be applied in some threads and not others. Let’s do these one at a time.

1. I’m not a computer guy, but I imagine automating the rule is doable and probably not difficult. But it would actively make things less efficient than doing it manually. When some makes a post that gets caught in our spam filter and doesn’t show up on the boards, the user tries to repost (often several times), which requires Staff to take action on each and every rejected post. Then, the user either hits up the Questions for Staff forum wanting to know why their posts aren’t posting, or they PM every Staff member with the same question. I can’t imagine that an automated 30/30 rule would be any different.

2. Since new users don’t seem to understand the 30/30 rule, I can only surmise that they haven’t read ANY of the rules. What difference does it make if a post is bounced for one rule or another?

3. Other than the Adult section, we simply cannot have different rules for different parts of the Forum. That would be so unwieldy as to make ANY moderation all but impossible.

And no, 30 days/30 posts isn’t too long to have new members wait. Each and every active member here (apart from a couple of newbies) managed to do it. You yourself were subject to this rule when you joined up, and here you are - nearly 12 years and 20K posts later. If you didn’t leave in a huff over the 30/30 rule, why would you suspect that other people would?

Boru