Do MTGS get some commission for putting the names of other sites in the titles of spoiler threads? Best practice is to move the name of the source into the body of the post. If not, surround the source's name in parentheses so we won't mistake it as part of a card name; and attribute them properly: "from <mysource>".
MTGS does not receive commission for properly sourcing our cards, but it has long been our practice. I will pass on the suggestion that we more clearly delineate the cardname and the source, however.
Hey, um, I'm looking through the Dominaria spoiler page, and a lot of the cards with lengthy names extend over mana cost area, making the generic mana cost symbol unreadable. It's been a while since I looked up spoilers here so I don't know how new this formatting issue is. Is there any easy workaround? Having to dig through the page source code seems sort of bad design...
If you click the card name, it opens the page for that specific card, which has a larger card box and you can see the mana cost.
For the most part, this isn't usually a concern as we have images to go with most cards we add (and if they're in a foreign language, we can mock them up), but the Dominaria leak being entirely text has left us in a weird situation.
Unfortunately the other posters were not flaming or trolling hardcore, but just enough to make me feel like a fool. Wish mods can see recently deleted threads.
We can. Looking back at it, the thread was definitely contentious and should have been shut down sooner, but it was low traffic so was not on the top of my posts to pay attention to. In the future, please report such posts more quickly and we'll make sure we get eyes on as soon as possible.
Hello. I'm curious to understand why the Masterpiece Discussion thread (where which is talking about the masterpiece change in general terms and not specific cards) was moved to New Card Discussion, while the Kaladesh Inventions thread - which talks about the specific cards stayed in the main Rumour mill.
I'm also wondering (more than a little) why all of the discussions on new card reveals are in the main Rumour Mill and not in New Card Discussions - when it feels like that's what that subforum is for.
I've only been active on this site since EMN spoilers - so there may be something I'm missing. It just feels a little backwards to me.
The Rumor Mill threads are for the announcement of specific new cards (or products). New card discussion is generally for discussion of how cards might impact the meta, be used in a deck, or interact with other cards.
The Masterpiece discussion was moved to New Card Discussion as there was already a thread for the Inventions. As this was not revealing new information, it belongs in New Card Discussion.
It seems like there are a few bad users who say bigoted things, then other people call them out on it and they argue about it, completely derailing the thread. Then there were a couple other threads going completely off topic and talking about proxies and the secondary market. What do these things have to do with the topics about future sets? It's stupid.
We're working on cracking down on both of these things.
Why are people allowed to post threads in speculation that are basically custom card creation threads? Literally every time I go to that subforum, some guy with less than a hundred posts makes the most overpowered crap or some other bad design that Wizards would never do.
Please report these threads when you see them posted and we will take action to close them, get them on track, or move them to the appropriate forums.
Why are there still locked threads in the main rumor mill forum? Shouldn't they be moved to the archive?
Locked threads are generally left in the main forum so that it's easier for people to see that those topics have been posted and thus don't need to be posted again - most people don't think to look in Archives to determine this.
Dont know if this is the place to post this, but i think there is a problem with the spoiler, its counting both faces of a double faced card in the total number of cards in the spoiler, when they share a collector number...is this supposed to happen?
Merged into Helpdesk thread.
There is a known issue with how our spoilers are tracked. It's not optimal, but it is how it currently works.
We are attempting to keep the number displayed in the navigation bar accurate through manual