Seriously, I just witnessed a guy make 17 blogs just on EDH decks. That was resolved because he didn't understand what he did wrong, which I can except, but now today some one else made like 6 in a row about tribal decks that no one cares about. I know it's assumed that people can use common sense when blogging, but I don't believe that is possible anymore. Maybe common sense should be enforced like it is everywhere else in the forums.
So my question is, should blog spamming be infractable?
Since I tend to be the mod unofficially in charge of handling the blogs, I'll chime in on this.
The forum rules do carry over into the blogs, but to a lenient degree. The only rules I follow to the same degree are the big ones (flaming, trolling, advertising, illegal discussion, porn, etc). Spamming and doubleposting are two that I let slide in blogs far more than I would in the forums proper. But I do agree that there is a limit. Obviously the 17 blog posts in a row was excessive, and the six today isn't much better. My take on it is that I give the blogger some time to correct the mistake (unless of course, they've done it before, but we're not at that point yet) and if they don't, I do it and probably give them a warning. Is that a bit lenient and hypocritical given how little room for error we give in the forums themselves? Probably, yeah, but moderating the blogs is new territory and I don't feel it needs as strong a hand.
It's an honest mistake, and one that may well be common since I think some are confused about the rules in blogging. I'll see what I can do about making the rules easier to find and understand.
It's an honest mistake, and one that may well be common since I think some are confused about the rules in blogging. I'll see what I can do about making the rules easier to find and understand.
Is there some way to make announcements in the blog area? That would be a good way to say something like "the forum rules apply here too".
And yes, I agree that there should be leniency to spamming on blogging, but I'm sure everyone can agree there has to be a limit.
Nothing for nothing But isnt the idea of blogging with your own section pretty much your own section? I didnt know blogs are now the new forum. Trolling, flameing, Questionable material Granted should still apply But Cause someone wants to put all there EDH deck sin there own blog shouldnt count as spamming.
Up front, overall this forum board has the most rules then other forum boards I have been on for any other website forum board (not just including boards for MTG). With all this infraction/warning and rules system, I just read what is needed and honestly do not take the chance to add much in posting due to the worry of getting infractions. Also I doubt much that I am alone in this mindset and overall this site is losing possible added information from others over the cost of combing out spammers/spelling errors and other infraction-able offenses.
In Psychology and in business management, it has been noted many times that if too many rules or restrictions are in place people will either:
1) grow numb to that rule set and do rule breaking, as people will view as anything they do will break the rules so the rules lose their weight and they do what they want anyways
Or
2) for others it will be a alluring carrot or challenge to break the rules, but in they way to waste other authorities energy and time and/or see how far they can push it.
As one saying goes "Rules are made to be broken".
In managing others, it is mainly easier to be passive and give people freedom to find out for themselves then restrict.
This argument comes up every few months, and its generally from people who are new and haven't yet actually experienced anything in relation to the rules. They get worried that we have too many and that they're too strict.
Once that person is actually in a position where the rules are being broken and they, themselves, are the victims, they tend to see that the rules are there for a reason.
Yes, we have a few people who try to break the rules and push authority. And honestly, the question comes up every time: Do you -want- people in your community who see a rule as only an opportunity to waste authority's time? Do you -want- people in your community who break the rules simply to make them less potent? Are these not the people who the rules are set to infract and punish in the first place?
This argument comes up every few months, and its generally from people who are new and haven't yet actually experienced anything in relation to the rules. They get worried that we have too many and that they're too strict.
Once that person is actually in a position where the rules are being broken and they, themselves, are the victims, they tend to see that the rules are there for a reason.
First off kinda getting the impression that you do not care much if newer people have a hard time adjusting to this website or interests of getting new people interested with this forum board.
With that, the comment of once that person broke the rule they are the victims? Then they see the rules there for some reason? Obliviously the rule was placed into existence for some reason, however are they they all necessary?
Yes, we have a few people who try to break the rules and push authority. And honestly, the question comes up every time: Do you -want- people in your community who see a rule as only an opportunity to waste authority's time? Do you -want- people in your community who break the rules simply to make them less potent? Are these not the people who the rules are set to infract and punish in the first place?
All in the nutshell as the first quote and now this second quote, really you do not place much faith in people overall.
So on one hand it is good for the rules to over-restrict people that will break rules and push authority (which indirectly is really stoking the fire more as they will want to do it more), however as in the first quote, others may fall victim but see the reason for it all.
Also to the person that quoted easier is not better, is what you need to ask is it all necessary? Do we could we give faith that overall most people are good and will conduct themselves in a good fashion, and are we not just restricting ourselves a bit much for the few the rules were fashioned for?
First off kinda getting the impression that you do not care much if newer people have a hard time adjusting to this website or interests of getting new people interested with this forum board.
This issue has been discussed to death in this very forum; if you care to use search you'll fine many instances of where we have invited the community to contribute to rules creation... in any case, that is why we have warnings (which mean little unless you manage to get a bunch in a short time) rather than just infractions (which can lead to a suspension of varying length).
With that, the comment of once that person broke the rule they are the victims? Then they see the rules there for some reason? Obliviously the rule was placed into existence for some reason, however are they they all necessary?
Are all the rules necessary? Again, this has been discussed at length, but I would have to say that anything that contributes to the smooth running of such a large site is probably necessary. Disruptive elements are dealt with by staff according to the established channels. Our warning system allows for an official record of an even should that user become an issue later, but for those who may have not known it serves as a push in the right direction. The vast majority of the site rules are common sense; others are somewhat more nebulous yet they serve a purpose nonetheless.
All in the nutshell as the first quote and now this second quote, really you do not place much faith in people overall.
So on one hand it is good for the rules to over-restrict people that will break rules and push authority (which indirectly is really stoking the fire more as they will want to do it more), however as in the first quote, others may fall victim but see the reason for it all.
Also to the person that quoted easier is not better, is what you need to ask is it all necessary? Do we could we give faith that overall most people are good and will conduct themselves in a good fashion, and are we not just restricting ourselves a bit much for the few the rules were fashioned for?
My personal opinion of people is not the issue here; it is how the staff acts towards the site's guests that is, and I try to be as fair as possible when arbitrating a dispute. People make mistakes, though, and we try to make reparations for those. I do not warn/infract a person with the intent that they repeat the offense; I hope that they don't, because banning people is a chore In all seriousness, though, this site isn't very restrictive in comparison to others, yet is far more strict than yet more. There is a thread about this on this very page that discusses this; you may want to have a look at it.
Don't think of them as restrictions; thinking of them in that way tends to create a mindset of repression, which is not what we're aiming for here. Guidelines is a better way of putting it, because we like to keep MTGS clean and userfriendly for everyone involved.
As for the original topic, I believe we are going to make a general announcement soon about spamming and blogs.
And yes, no incantatrix for you. Or anyone. That class makes puppies cry. Mostly because they are the former Big Bads who have been Baleful Polymorphed into said puppies. By you. Because you're an incantatrix.
Quote from Yukora »
This is Deraxas we're talking about.
Remember, the girl that just killed an aspect of herself before literally consuming her?
Yeah, I don't see her handling a pissing match in any way other than a duel.
Quote from RedDwarfian »
Yes mistress...
Quote from About epic-level D&D »
There are only so many epic, psuedonatural barbarian/blackguard half-dragon akutenshai vampire balor paragons they can throw at you, right?
Quote from Concerning breeding habits of humans in fantasy games »
I suppose it's true. Though the logistics implied in a human/Great Wyrm Prismatic Dragon pairing makes me shudder.
...Something tells me that even should all arcane casters in the world unite, that the Grease spell would NOT be sufficient.
Yeah, this is a healthy rules system. The longer you are around forums the more you will see that the fewer rules you have the more arbitrary the system will be. The more arbitrary a system, the easier it is for abuse to be introduced.
As to the original point, I am sort of with Sapphire Tri here. I thought the point of blogs was that they would be similar to external blogs just hosted here. Obviously, with some limitations, but if someone wants to post on their blog several times, or a ridiculous number of times, I am of the mind that that is their business.
Well I have to third the comment of SapphireTri and Sorryguy. While it may be annoying to some people, as long as it is not breaking any of the Trolling, flaming, Questionable material rules, or is using excessive resources by exploining a flaw in the blogs, I see no reason a person should be limited to how many posts he or she can make. Unless of course the posts in the blog do count towards your overall post count, then maybe a limit should be instituted.
I also add that the set up of blogs should count to a post count on a forum. Some people are failing to seperate Forum and Blogs. Both are completly different animals. But then again My idea of ideal forums is different next someone else.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How am I NOT banned
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So my question is, should blog spamming be infractable?
techoverrated.The forum rules do carry over into the blogs, but to a lenient degree. The only rules I follow to the same degree are the big ones (flaming, trolling, advertising, illegal discussion, porn, etc). Spamming and doubleposting are two that I let slide in blogs far more than I would in the forums proper. But I do agree that there is a limit. Obviously the 17 blog posts in a row was excessive, and the six today isn't much better. My take on it is that I give the blogger some time to correct the mistake (unless of course, they've done it before, but we're not at that point yet) and if they don't, I do it and probably give them a warning. Is that a bit lenient and hypocritical given how little room for error we give in the forums themselves? Probably, yeah, but moderating the blogs is new territory and I don't feel it needs as strong a hand.
It's an honest mistake, and one that may well be common since I think some are confused about the rules in blogging. I'll see what I can do about making the rules easier to find and understand.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
Is there some way to make announcements in the blog area? That would be a good way to say something like "the forum rules apply here too".
And yes, I agree that there should be leniency to spamming on blogging, but I'm sure everyone can agree there has to be a limit.
techoverrated.If it is Then the blog system is flawed.
I think the spam and such rules should apply to COMMENTS, but not to blogs themselves.
My helpdesk should you need me.
In Psychology and in business management, it has been noted many times that if too many rules or restrictions are in place people will either:
1) grow numb to that rule set and do rule breaking, as people will view as anything they do will break the rules so the rules lose their weight and they do what they want anyways
Or
2) for others it will be a alluring carrot or challenge to break the rules, but in they way to waste other authorities energy and time and/or see how far they can push it.
As one saying goes "Rules are made to be broken".
In managing others, it is mainly easier to be passive and give people freedom to find out for themselves then restrict.
Once that person is actually in a position where the rules are being broken and they, themselves, are the victims, they tend to see that the rules are there for a reason.
Yes, we have a few people who try to break the rules and push authority. And honestly, the question comes up every time: Do you -want- people in your community who see a rule as only an opportunity to waste authority's time? Do you -want- people in your community who break the rules simply to make them less potent? Are these not the people who the rules are set to infract and punish in the first place?
My helpdesk should you need me.
First off kinda getting the impression that you do not care much if newer people have a hard time adjusting to this website or interests of getting new people interested with this forum board.
With that, the comment of once that person broke the rule they are the victims? Then they see the rules there for some reason? Obliviously the rule was placed into existence for some reason, however are they they all necessary?
All in the nutshell as the first quote and now this second quote, really you do not place much faith in people overall.
So on one hand it is good for the rules to over-restrict people that will break rules and push authority (which indirectly is really stoking the fire more as they will want to do it more), however as in the first quote, others may fall victim but see the reason for it all.
Also to the person that quoted easier is not better, is what you need to ask is it all necessary? Do we could we give faith that overall most people are good and will conduct themselves in a good fashion, and are we not just restricting ourselves a bit much for the few the rules were fashioned for?
Sorry, this is the internet.
This issue has been discussed to death in this very forum; if you care to use search you'll fine many instances of where we have invited the community to contribute to rules creation... in any case, that is why we have warnings (which mean little unless you manage to get a bunch in a short time) rather than just infractions (which can lead to a suspension of varying length).
Are all the rules necessary? Again, this has been discussed at length, but I would have to say that anything that contributes to the smooth running of such a large site is probably necessary. Disruptive elements are dealt with by staff according to the established channels. Our warning system allows for an official record of an even should that user become an issue later, but for those who may have not known it serves as a push in the right direction. The vast majority of the site rules are common sense; others are somewhat more nebulous yet they serve a purpose nonetheless.
My personal opinion of people is not the issue here; it is how the staff acts towards the site's guests that is, and I try to be as fair as possible when arbitrating a dispute. People make mistakes, though, and we try to make reparations for those. I do not warn/infract a person with the intent that they repeat the offense; I hope that they don't, because banning people is a chore In all seriousness, though, this site isn't very restrictive in comparison to others, yet is far more strict than yet more. There is a thread about this on this very page that discusses this; you may want to have a look at it.
Don't think of them as restrictions; thinking of them in that way tends to create a mindset of repression, which is not what we're aiming for here. Guidelines is a better way of putting it, because we like to keep MTGS clean and userfriendly for everyone involved.
As for the original topic, I believe we are going to make a general announcement soon about spamming and blogs.
"I am in the arcane, and the arcane is in me."
Official Matron Mother of Clan Planar Chaos
Awesome Avatar and signature by DarkNightCavalier
Deraxas, Dark Maiden of Shimia,, still oddly obsessed with a mindmage.
As to the original point, I am sort of with Sapphire Tri here. I thought the point of blogs was that they would be similar to external blogs just hosted here. Obviously, with some limitations, but if someone wants to post on their blog several times, or a ridiculous number of times, I am of the mind that that is their business.
Come join us in the MTGSalvation chat ||| My trade thread. ||| My Personal Modern Blog: The Fetchlands