Forum Suggestions / Issues

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks Heathrow, I'll try Remember Me. I would try "Remember Me", but I'm probably better at "Chain Reaction"! (Does that make sense?)
 
Is there a way to get a full-screen button/option added to the YouTube embeds? I use the "+" all the time, but I find myself going to YouTube a lot to watch it full-screen.
 
Is there a way to get a full-screen button/option added to the YouTube embeds? I use the "+" all the time, but I find myself going to YouTube a lot to watch it full-screen.

Me too.
 
Motion to add a rule that new members be required to get 50 posts on the forum BEFORE starting threads... any one willing to 2nd? :D

This!


And I also think that the same 50 post rule should go for being able to view the Video Offers section. I've (and I'm sure others) noticed a lot of noobs in the Top Gear thread just asking for the file links, or registering just for FTP access.
 
It makes sense to me, but I don't touch those areas really. Not too many noobs post in the Technology section, which is where I lurk. There would have to be an exemption for the forum help section. Viper/Quiky, pros/cons?
 
This!


And I also think that the same 50 post rule should go for being able to view the Video Offers section. I've (and I'm sure others) noticed a lot of noobs in the Top Gear thread just asking for the file links, or registering just for FTP access.
I've considered requiring X posts to do Y, but then I realized people will just spam or make pointless posts just to reach that limit. That's even worse.
 
I've considered requiring X posts to do Y, but then I realized people will just spam or make pointless posts just to reach that limit. That's even worse.

Would it be possibe to make it so that you had to be registred X days before making a new thread, you can't spam your way out of that?
 
Requiring X posts would require mods to make sure the X posts are no spam.

...if they make sure the X posts are no spam then they could instead make sure the created threads/requested videos are no spam, making the X-posts-required rule obsolete.
 
We already have a x-posts+reg date for PM usage, so it wouldn't be hard to implement for threads in certain sections. Restrictions should be placed for the main Top Gear area (not spoilers), Off-Topic, The Site Itself, and The Forums. That would prevent duplicate threads+discussions covering subjects, or we could have all new threads by xx-date users require moderation.

Anyone see issues for that?
 
We already have a x-posts+reg date for PM usage, so it wouldn't be hard to implement for threads in certain sections. Restrictions should be placed for the main Top Gear area (not spoilers), Off-Topic, The Site Itself, and The Forums. That would prevent duplicate threads+discussions covering subjects, or we could have all new threads by xx-date users require moderation.

Anyone see issues for that?

It would probably be enough to begin with to have it in those four areas, they seem the most infested with noob threads.


Edit: :lmao: just noticed my new title
 
We already have a x-posts+reg date for PM usage, so it wouldn't be hard to implement for threads in certain sections. Restrictions should be placed for the main Top Gear area (not spoilers), Off-Topic, The Site Itself, and The Forums. That would prevent duplicate threads+discussions covering subjects, or we could have all new threads by xx-date users require moderation.

Anyone see issues for that?
I don't see any problem with the former. 99.999% of the threads people with 1 post make could have gone into another thread.

Could be a good idea to implement the latter, though, just to prevent the junk thread creation being moved into other areas.
 
We already have a x-posts+reg date for PM usage, so it wouldn't be hard to implement for threads in certain sections. Restrictions should be placed for the main Top Gear area (not spoilers), Off-Topic, The Site Itself, and The Forums. That would prevent duplicate threads+discussions covering subjects, or we could have all new threads by xx-date users require moderation.

Anyone see issues for that?

Read like three posts up:

I've considered requiring X posts to do Y, but then I realized people will just spam or make pointless posts just to reach that limit. That's even worse.

I'd rather just close stupid threads than deal with people posting just for their post count.
 
^ Yeah, I imagine the "introduce yourself" thread would just turn into noobs having pointless conversation amongst each other to get their post counts up so they can post elsewhere. Although I have seen it implemented in other forums where it worked ok, but only in "members only" parts. I think a system like that (especially with video offers and FTPs) would be good- you have to have been a member for a certain period of time and have a certain amount of posts before you can access the FTPs and that. I know that sounds elitist, but I think that sort of stuff should only be accessible to people who actually want to cotribute back to this community.
 
^ Yeah, I imagine the "introduce yourself" thread would just turn into noobs having pointless conversation amongst each other to get their post counts up so they can post elsewhere. Although I have seen it implemented in other forums where it worked ok, but only in "members only" parts. I think a system like that (especially with video offers and FTPs) would be good- you have to have been a member for a certain period of time and have a certain amount of posts before you can access the FTPs and that. I know that sounds elitist, but I think that sort of stuff should only be accessible to people who actually want to cotribute back to this community.

Not to sound even more elitist, but maybe implement a rep requirement for the FTPs (and video offers)? Can't really spam your way into that.
 
The way I see it the more stringent you make the entry requirements, the less interested new members will be in joining the forum, and not just the usual noobs but people who might like to integrate with this community.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top