PDA

View Full Version : If you could add one new rule to the forums...


Quasimodo
14-12-09, 21:50
what would it be?

juicybubble
14-12-09, 21:52
your aloud to be a moderator if your name is juicybubble

Tony9595
14-12-09, 21:53
People who complains about things they have agreed while joining to this forum should be banned... :pi:

patriots88888
14-12-09, 21:53
your aloud to be a moderator if your name is juicybubble

Being aloud doesn't necessarily equate to actually being. :p Oops! Allowed, not aloud! :p

Punaxe
14-12-09, 21:54
A maximum running time of forum games, and a maximum amount of simultaneous games. When one game ends, it's first come first serve to open a new one.

Lara's home
14-12-09, 21:55
You are not allowed to post about your feelings more than once a week.

TombRaiderLover
14-12-09, 21:55
People who complains about things they have agreed while joining to this forum should be banned... :pi:

This forum would be a desolate place would that rule be implemented. :p

I wouldn't any more rules, to be honest.

touchthesky
14-12-09, 21:56
I would take away the avatar thing...I always pick an avatar than a week later I don't like it lol

AmericanAssassin
14-12-09, 21:56
More rules? Ugh. This forum has enough. Instead, I'll mention something that bothers me about the forums. The lack of consistency in the TR titles on the home page. They all need to read "Tomb Raider" and have a ":" if they have a subtitle. :o

Aranara
14-12-09, 21:56
There shall be LIGHT!

And a section dedicated to forum games. So only post there.

tranniversary119
14-12-09, 21:58
150 pixels for your avatar instead of 128 :)

mind
14-12-09, 21:58
bad topic sorry!!

Tony9595
14-12-09, 21:59
Oh ok. Edited :o

AmericanAssassin
14-12-09, 21:59
150 pixels for your avatar instead of 128 :)

This. :tmb: I don't care if it has to have the same KB size. I just want bigger avatars...

Sgt BOMBULOUS
14-12-09, 22:02
3 drink minimum. :pi:

Eddie Haskell
14-12-09, 22:02
I was going to write an explicit rule concerning banning members who post simply to make a laughingstock out of the forum, but I have an easier solution/rule. Just let me decide it, and grant me the power to ban them. Under the table of course, so that legally the moderators could honestly say "I don't know what happened!" :)

Love2Raid
14-12-09, 22:06
You may open new threads after making 100 qualitative posts. ;)

Although this leads to the problem that newbies who ask for help can't make a thread either. :/

Catracoth
14-12-09, 22:07
Pointless threads result in a cactus to the bum :smk:. Really, a thread about how often you brush your teeth? There is no Jesus.

TRfan23
14-12-09, 22:08
Give the mods the ability to ban members :tmb: Saves Mona from having to do the work :) Though it gives mods extra work and sadly possibly more criticism :(

It's not a rule but a feature that may be useful :)

^ Yeh but this one's made by Quasimodo ;)

Eddie Haskell
14-12-09, 22:08
You may open new threads after making 100 qualitative posts. ;)

I suggested that a few times. After the events of the last couple of days I think it is mandatory.

As far as newbies asking for help, have a thread devoted to this.

Sgt BOMBULOUS
14-12-09, 22:09
Pointless threads result in a cactus to the bum :smk:. Really, a thread about how often you brush your teeth? There is no Jesus.

Especially when the creator has woefully inadequate dental hygiene habits...

mau3genius
14-12-09, 22:10
what would it be?

No more "X person appreciation/discussion" threads. I'm really growing tired of them.

Quasimodo
14-12-09, 22:11
bad topic sorry!!

bad topic sorry!! (different posts from different threads, believe it or not, folks)

Whatever.

My new rule would be to get rid of forum games. It's not discussion, it's just post farming.

Edit: I'm torn between banning forum games and making the 'new thread' button a feature that's given out as a privilege

Love2Raid
14-12-09, 22:12
I suggested that a few times. After the events of the last couple of days I think it is mandatory.

As far as newbies asking for help, have a thread devoted to this.

"New to the forums and need help? Ask here." And this should be a sticky thread in every TR game subforum. This could work. :)
And one thread in the new members and congratulations subforum for the newbies to introduce themselves.

Nenya awakens
14-12-09, 22:14
Threads can only be made after being a member for 3 months.

Eddie Haskell
14-12-09, 22:17
Threads can only be made after being a member for 3 months.

Someone with an axe to grind could wait that out with a fake account. It should be posts, not time. :)

Sgt BOMBULOUS
14-12-09, 22:18
Threads can only be made after being a member for 3 months.


That works for the people who are a nuisance, but intelligent, well meaning new members would be being punished for something they didn't even do yet.

Quasimodo
14-12-09, 22:19
Someone with an axe to grind could wait that out with a fake account. It should be posts, not time. :)

Sleeper accounts? Make it six months. Then I'd have to applaud their patience! :p

Phlip
14-12-09, 22:19
You are ONLY permitted to upload your avatar yourself.

Eddie Haskell
14-12-09, 22:20
Sleeper accounts? Make it six months. Then I'd have to applaud their patience! :p

Imagine the hatred that would accompany such patience. It's a good thing we are all in cyberspace... ;)

Rai
14-12-09, 22:20
"New to the forums and need help? Ask here." And this should be a sticky thread in every TR game subforum. This could work. :)
And one thread in the new members and congratulations subforum for the newbies to introduce themselves.

Isn't there already a thread like that? I thought there was.

Catracoth
14-12-09, 22:20
Especially when the creator has woefully inadequate dental hygiene habits...

Oh most definitely. That calls for two cacti!

tranniversary119
14-12-09, 22:22
"New to the forums and need help? Ask here." And this should be a sticky thread in every TR game subforum. This could work. :)
And one thread in the new members and congratulations subforum for the newbies to introduce themselves.

But the problem with that is, how many newbies are actually going to post in that thread? They'll still end up making a thread asking for help.

Tony9595
14-12-09, 22:22
↑ Some even make more than one thread for the exact same problem, and in the SAME section of the forum :eek:

Oh most definitely. That calls for two cacti!

:vlol:
I can clearly imagine it.

--------------------

I think that there should be a limit of threads per day. Some people love to make tons of them... and most of them end up being closed or forgotten due to the lack of importance on them

ThatNorskChick
14-12-09, 22:24
My new rule would be to get rid of forum games. It's not discussion, it's just post farming.

Hell to the yeah.

peeves
14-12-09, 22:26
Here's my epic forum rule: each time a certain thread dies it must be bumped especially if you need help and no one don't answer it same for OC.

Sgt BOMBULOUS
14-12-09, 22:26
Hell to the yeah.

Yeah but you could argue the same thing for the Open Chat. You can get 5 posts in a matter of minutes just saying "Hey".... "Anyone there?"... "LOL!!!" and so on & so forth... How far are we going to take it? :mis:

patriots88888
14-12-09, 22:28
A TRF character/etiquette test at the time of registration and at least an 80% percentile to gain admittance.

MiCkiZ88
14-12-09, 22:30
A TRF character/etiquette test at the time of registration and at least an 80% percentile to gain admittance.
... lol, no thank you. Im sure quite a few would want that for MGC to be the elite though.

But I do think you should know the rules before singing up, so a few random questions about the forum rules would be nice before you can sing up.

Love2Raid
14-12-09, 22:31
But the problem with that is, how many newbies are actually going to post in that thread? They'll still end up making a thread asking for help.

Well it will be a locked feature until you reach the rank of Historian. Like we can't make polls. I'm pretty sure it's possible to do this.

remote91
14-12-09, 22:31
An IQ test.

peeves
14-12-09, 22:33
How about this new rule? You must take a photo of you being 5 foot tall or taller and post it here to gain admittance. If you're under 5 foot tall you may not join TRF. And no shoes allowed. Or you could just get your height measured at a scale and must be 5 feet without shoes or taller and have proof.

patriots88888
14-12-09, 22:33
... lol, no thank you. Im sure quite a few would want that for MGC to be the elite though.

But I do think you should know the rules before singing up, so a few random questions about the forum rules would be nice before you can sing up.

What would knowing proper etiquette have to do with elitism?

MiCkiZ88
14-12-09, 22:34
What would knowing proper etiquette have to do with elitism?
Nevermind what I said.

mau3genius
14-12-09, 22:37
An IQ test.

That would be cool :D

Catracoth
14-12-09, 22:38
Give the mods the ability to ban members :tmb: Saves Mona from having to do the work :) Though it gives mods extra work and sadly possibly more criticism :(

It's not a rule but a feature that may be useful :)

^ Yeh but this one's made by Quasimodo ;)

Lol, kiss-butt :p and I never said this thread was pointless...:confused:.

Sgt BOMBULOUS
14-12-09, 22:39
That would be cool :D

Yeah but you can get in trouble for discriminating against anyone. Even the stupid...

Dennis's Mom
14-12-09, 22:40
3 drink minimum. :pi:

Finally a rule I can obey! :D

I was going to write an explicit rule concerning banning members who post simply to make a laughingstock out of the forum, but I have an easier solution/rule. Just let me decide it, and grant me the power to ban them. Under the table of course, so that legally the moderators could honestly say "I don't know what happened!" :)

Eddie Haskell, The Cleaner. ;)
"Don't Hassle, Call Haskell"

My rule would be that ambiguous and vague thread titles result in a 3 day ban. I'm sick of "You Ever Notice . . ?" and "What Do You Think Of . . .?" titles. I shouldn't have to work to read your thread. Be concise, direct and specific! Communicate, dammit!

ThatNorskChick
14-12-09, 22:40
Yeah but you could argue the same thing for the Open Chat. You can get 5 posts in a matter of minutes just saying "Hey".... "Anyone there?"... "LOL!!!" and so on & so forth... How far are we going to take it? :mis:

That is true...but I mean, there's only one open chat and how many game threads? At least I'd like to see some sort of restriction put on it, send them away to the island of misfit toys or something.

Or maybe I secretly just want to spoil everyone's fun. :mis:

Reggie
14-12-09, 22:41
I wouldn't add any rules, I think they're fine as they are but I would (if I could) add a 'games' section where people can post as much as they like in such threads but the catch is that their post count doesn't go up. This would free up GC and make everyone on all sides happy (or is that wishful thinking? :p).

mau3genius
14-12-09, 22:42
Yeah but you can get in trouble for discriminating against anyone. Even the stupid...

It's just a forum, why everything has to be so politically correct? Why do we need to be as hypocritical as real life society is? I say bring on the IQ test. :p

Quasimodo
14-12-09, 22:42
Finally a rule I can obey! :D



Eddie Haskell, The Cleaner. ;)
"Don't Hassle, Call Haskell"

My rule would be that ambiguous and vague thread titles result in a 3 day ban. I'm sick of "You Ever Notice . . ?" and "What Do You Think Of . . .?" titles. I shouldn't have to work to read your thread. Be concise, direct and specific! Communicate, dammit!

I don't read those threads out of spite now. Hopefully my title is specific enough despite the use of ellipsis!:o

da tomb raider!
14-12-09, 22:43
Any member with an exclaimation mark in their username gets deleted, their IP address gets banned, and the police should be sent round to their house.

Seriously, though, I'd probably get rid of forum games. I understand that they're a good way to kill time, but I feel that they really clutter up General Chat, and most of them really are rather pointless and substanceless.

mau3genius
14-12-09, 22:44
Or maybe I secretly just want to spoil everyone's fun. :mis:

There was no need to mention it, I think everyone knew that already :pi:

Sgt BOMBULOUS
14-12-09, 22:44
It's just a forum, why everything has to be so politically correct? Why do we need to be as hypocritical as real life society is? I say bring on the IQ test. :p

I was more kidding than anything... Hinting at how wuss-ified society has become; where there has to be a committee for everyone's feelings.

mau3genius
14-12-09, 22:47
I was more kidding than anything... Hinting at how wuss-ified society has become; where there has to be a committee for everyone's feelings.

Indeed. We could try and avoid bringing in our "real life" faults though. The interwebz would so much more fun that way!

:}hello friend
14-12-09, 22:55
That is true...but I mean, there's only one open chat and how many game threads? At least I'd like to see some sort of restriction put on it, send them away to the island of misfit toys or something.

Or maybe I secretly just want to spoil everyone's fun. :mis:

There is already a posting restriction on forum games, but I think there needs to be a rule on how many can be active at a time.

But hell, no one follows the rules for forum games, maybe POSTING MORE THAN TWICE A DAY ON A GAME THREAD WILL RESULT IN INSTANT BANNEDATION!!!!!! <echo> :mis:

Eddie Haskell
14-12-09, 23:07
Another rule:
If your response in a thread consists of simply an emoticon, an emoticon and word or two, an emoticon and a "^" you get a three day vacation. However, if you respond with a "this", you have to share a jail cell with Snoogie, Moogie, Queal, Haelogin, and Flabble Wobbah Lalski.

marla_biggs
14-12-09, 23:09
Too bad my rule doesn't exist on the anti-dwarf policy :( only if justin can put the rule up on TRF and hefta have your height checked without shoes and be 5 feet or taller. Take a photo or video of you with your height measured and draw a line at the 5 foot 0 point or get height checked at doctor or scale and have a computer read your height with proof to see if you're tall enough.
My Rule is a complete must.

What do you have against dwarfs? :(

Love2Raid
14-12-09, 23:10
Too bad my rule doesn't exist on the anti-dwarf policy :( only if justin can put the rule up on TRF and hefta have your height checked without shoes and be 5 feet or taller. Take a photo or video of you with your height measured and draw a line at the 5 foot 0 point or get height checked at doctor or scale and have a computer read your height with proof to see if you're tall enough.
My Rule is a complete must.

Everybody in your avatar is under 5 foot tall. :p

tombraiderluka
14-12-09, 23:10
How about this new rule? You must take a photo of you being 5 foot tall or taller and post it here to gain admittance. If you're under 5 foot tall you may not join TRF. And no shoes allowed. Or you could just get your height measured at a scale and must be 5 feet without shoes or taller and have proof.
I agree with this, I was just about to write it :tmb:

Pksstr
14-12-09, 23:10
"Moderators are not allowed to be sarcastic"

Tony9595
14-12-09, 23:12
peeves, I don't think you'd like a rule against people with Diabetes or nearsighted... :pi:

Ward Dragon
14-12-09, 23:13
They're too frickin short and to make their livin day a nightmare. :mis:

I'm not quite sure I understand this, but I feel like I should be insulted :p (I'm less than five feet tall)

peeves
14-12-09, 23:14
Everybody in your avatar is under 5 foot tall. :p
No they ain't
I'm not quite sure I understand this, but I feel like I should be insulted :p (I'm less than five feet tall)

How come?

Ward Dragon
14-12-09, 23:15
How come?

It sounded like you said short people should have to live in a nightmare.

peeves
14-12-09, 23:16
It sounded like you said short people should have to live in a nightmare.

Well i asked why are you under 5 feet? That was my question.

AmericanAssassin
14-12-09, 23:16
However, if you respond with a "this", you have to share a jail cell with Snoogie, Moogie, Queal, Haelogin, and Flabble Wobbah Lalski.

I do that so much. :vlol:

patriots88888
14-12-09, 23:17
It sounded like you said short people should have to live in a nightmare.

I thought he was asking you why you are under 5 ft tall. I was waiting for you to try and explain genetics to him.

peeves
14-12-09, 23:17
I thought he was asking you why you are under 5 ft tall. I was waiting for you to try and explain genetics to him.

That's exactly what i asked.

Tony9595
14-12-09, 23:18
Another rule:
If your response in a thread consists of simply an emoticon, an emoticon and word or two, an emoticon and a "^" you get a three day vacation. However, if you respond with a "this", you have to share a jail cell with Snoogie, Moogie, Queal, Haelogin, and Flabble Wobbah Lalski.

According to your rule, I should go for 3 days but this is all I had to say at the moment...

------------------
:off:

da tomb raider!
14-12-09, 23:19
However, if you respond with a "this", you have to share a jail cell with Snoogie, Moogie, Queal, Haelogin, and Flabble Wobbah Lalski.

That's one way to enforce a rule. :vlol:

peeves
14-12-09, 23:20
Ward Dragon why are you under 5 feet?

ThatNorskChick
14-12-09, 23:20
She didn't eat her vegetables, P-man. ;)

Gabi
14-12-09, 23:21
Peeves, give it a rest.
Your posts so far have not exactly been on topic.

peeves
14-12-09, 23:21
Peeves, give it a rest.

Why has my posts been deleted?
Well i was just explaining

Eddie Haskell
14-12-09, 23:24
That's one way to enforce a rule. :vlol:

Yeah, the mere sight of your creations would scare the insufficient writing right out of them... :)

http://www.tombraiderforums.com/picture.php?albumid=81&pictureid=2108

Sgt BOMBULOUS
14-12-09, 23:25
Yeah, the mere sight of your creations would scare the insufficient writing right out of them... :)

http://www.tombraiderforums.com/picture.php?albumid=81&pictureid=2108

Wow... Where did you find those things?

Eddie Haskell
14-12-09, 23:27
Wow... Where did you find those things?

I think I should stop this off-topic stuff, but to answer your question they are the product of a warped mind (http://www.tombraiderforums.com/member.php?u=16356).


Oh, and congrats on your 9000th post. I know you don't care or anything... :)

Catracoth
14-12-09, 23:47
People who make a thread they know is stupid and won't last and then say "Mods, feel free to close this..." need to be slapped. You don't need to tell them what they can feel free to close. And if you feel like they're going to close it, DON'T MAKE THE THREAD. Hello!

peeves
14-12-09, 23:51
People who make a thread they know is stupid and won't last and then say "Mods, feel free to close this..." need to be slapped. You don't need to tell them what they can feel free to close. And if you feel like they're going to close it, DON'T MAKE THE THREAD. Hello!

The Reason why they do that is because the thread is suited for Open Chat and they get closed anyway they ask them not to close it. All threads like that get closed if they don't make that comment.

January_Snow*
14-12-09, 23:52
If members send an amount of complaints on a moderator that moderator should stop being one =))))

Quasimodo
14-12-09, 23:54
If members send an amount of complaints on a moderator that moderator should stop being one =))))

Sometimes moderators have to make unpopular decisions. I trust that if there's a genuine concern about a moderator's conduct, it gets looked into by the team anyhow.

GameGlitcher77
15-12-09, 00:08
Lets see... what about restircted threads??? something like when theres too much spam in a thread it gets restricted instead of locked meaning users can still post responses but the # of posts is extremely restricted i.e. one post per day by each user... just a suggestion :whi:

Dennis's Mom
15-12-09, 00:11
I don't read those threads out of spite now. Hopefully my title is specific enough despite the use of ellipsis!:o

It was most edifying, my dear Quasimodo, and the ellipsis use was perfect. :tmb:

patriots88888
15-12-09, 00:12
Lets see... what about restircted threads??? something like when theres too much spam in a thread it gets restricted instead of locked meaning users can still post responses but the # of posts is extremely restricted i.e. one post per day by each user... just a suggestion :whi:

What if 2 or more members have some serious on-topic discussion going though? Not exactly fair to those who do follow the rules and are contributing meaningful discussion.

LegendLost
15-12-09, 00:13
1. All closed threads should be closed with a reason in the closing statement.

2. To create a new thread you must have 100 post, anyone with under 100 will need to have their post "approved" by a moderator. (although I don't know how this would work, but if it did, it would involve a moderator getting a message of the thread, and then them clicking approve or not.)

3. Instead of banning members, members can be banned from certain threads or even sections. Sometimes members just get carried away in a certain area, doesnt mean they might not having something worth posting in another section.

4. Avatars may be changed 12 times a year, at any given time, but once 12 is reached you must wait till the new year. That way at least if you suddenly chance your mind you can change it, but it still keeps people from changing them too often.


Idk if some of these exsit or not or have been explained why the cant exist, but I thought I'd point out a few things that could be interesting.

Ward Dragon
15-12-09, 00:15
3. Instead of banning members, members can be banned from certain threads or even sections. Sometimes members just get carried away in a certain area, doesnt mean they might not having something worth posting in another section.

I've asked about this one in the past and was told that the forum software doesn't support it.

rowanlim
15-12-09, 00:30
An IQ test.

:vlol:

I'd say put the game, celebrity, movie & music threads in a separate section (entertainment?) :)

SamReeves
15-12-09, 00:35
I'd know what I would do! :cln:

Quasimodo
15-12-09, 00:40
I've asked about this one in the past and was told that the forum software doesn't support it.

Check this out! :D
http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/showthread.php?t=128160

Catracoth
15-12-09, 00:54
Check this out! :D
http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/showthread.php?t=128160

Looks like it does as of 2006. Excellent find, Heather!

Johnnay
15-12-09, 00:56
Bigger Avatars

that is all

Capt. Murphy
15-12-09, 01:33
Something about not having too pervy of an avatar or any text in your public profile information that could be deemed offensive or too risque.

TRhalloween
15-12-09, 01:35
Something about not having too pervy of an avatar or any text in your public profile information that could be deemed offensive or too risque.

Guys not wearing shirts is considered pervy here.

EmeraldFields
15-12-09, 01:42
Guys not wearing shirts is considered pervy here.

That's the rule that I would want removed. Fo'sho.

Lara's Nemesis
15-12-09, 01:44
:vlol:

I'd say put the game, celebrity, movie & music threads in a separate section (entertainment?) :)

Most of it would be more suited to a section called "Lack of Entertainment". :ton:

LegendLost
15-12-09, 01:52
It's not a rule, but I always felt we could use a general Tomb Raider chat. Such as a place to put topics such as fav game, fav character, likes/dislikes or Lara, locations, etc. that all didn't fall under a specific game thread.

And then this section could be non tomb raider related chat only.

Ward Dragon
15-12-09, 04:13
Check this out! :D
http://www.vbulletin.org/forum/showthread.php?t=128160

That's pretty cool, but it looks like an unofficial mod if I understand the thread correctly. I don't think we should risk using anything unofficial in case it's buggy :o

spikejones
15-12-09, 04:15
anything related to pop culture shall be henceforth punishable by death. :mis:

Thorir
15-12-09, 04:16
Not censor swearing.

aktrekker
15-12-09, 05:45
**** that!
:ton:

Drone
15-12-09, 05:55
.. a rule denying all the rules (except for those that prohibit pornography, nazism, racism and other illegal ****)

and yeah censorship can go to hell aswel

:wve:

Mad Tony
15-12-09, 15:00
No more of those stupid GIFs

disneyprincess20
15-12-09, 15:34
1. All closed threads should be closed with a reason in the closing statement.


This would be my one new rule to the forum as well.

Tear
15-12-09, 15:42
My rule would be that every person should try to post at least 20 replies in a day.:p

It gets so boring when nobody's on.:o

Los Angeles
15-12-09, 15:49
your aloud to be a moderator if your name is juicybubble

I still can't believe juicybubble didn't get banned. :eek:

irjudd
15-12-09, 17:41
Thread/Reply ranking. When a thread/reply gets downranked enough it is automatically hidden.

Evan C.
15-12-09, 17:52
You can't create a "Get Rid Off" when a TR games is about to coming out.

Surohicko
15-12-09, 18:27
Allowed to post more in thread without being told by moderators that your spamming :pi:


Screw Open Chat, that place is rubbish

Encore
15-12-09, 18:31
No one under 20 allowed :ton:

just kidding..

Thread/Reply ranking. When a thread/reply gets downranked enough it is automatically hidden.

Good idea :cln:

GameGlitcher77
15-12-09, 18:35
Thread/Reply ranking. When a thread/reply gets downranked enough it is automatically hidden.

Seconded^^^ :tmb:

Eddie Haskell
15-12-09, 19:07
No one under 20 allowed :ton:

just kidding..



Good idea :cln:

Such a move would infinitely raise the bar when it comes to the sobriety, intelligence and purpose of the threads. However, I would not have as many laughs...;)

lara c. fan
15-12-09, 19:10
Such a move would infinitely raise the bar when it comes to the sobriety, intelligence and purpose of the threads. However, I would not have as many laughs...;)
I'm offended....:(



:p

Love2Raid
15-12-09, 19:27
Why would someone over 20 be more intelligent than a teenager? If you want to select on intelligence, than at least do it right by using an IQ test. A high IQ doesn't mean you are a great communicator, so that's not the right way to go either. Besides, who cares? Aren't we taking this whole internet thing a bit too seriously? There should be no selection except for age > 12, which is already the case for obvious reasons.

Tomb Braid
15-12-09, 19:44
I think what the person said about giving reasons for closing threads sounds sensible. Also maybe when people delete other people's posts it should say "this post deleted by so-and-so" so the posters know who is doing what. You can't PM someone to ask why they deleted a post if it's done anonymously.

xXhayleyroxXx
15-12-09, 19:45
if i could add one more rule it be that absolutely no bullying or put-downs are allowed - its disgusting how some members treat others sometimes.

Lee croft
15-12-09, 19:49
if i could add one more rule it be that absolutely no bullying or put-downs are allowed - its disgusting how some members treat others sometimes.

agreed ..on a less serious note i think one of them should be that we are all punk rockers with flowers in our hair :D

Aranara
15-12-09, 20:29
agreed ..on a less serious note i think one of them should be that we are all punk rockers with flowers in our hair :D

God I hate that song.:smk:

Lee croft
15-12-09, 20:31
God I hate that song.:smk:

awww want a daisy chain instead then? :p

Aranara
15-12-09, 20:31
Better:D

Quasimodo
27-12-09, 03:34
That's pretty cool, but it looks like an unofficial mod if I understand the thread correctly. I don't think we should risk using anything unofficial in case it's buggy :o

Actually, doesn't the forum software already allow admins to ban users from specific sections? Like MGC.

EmeraldFields
27-12-09, 03:42
Angelus must be allowed back ASAP!

The best poster EVA!

http://i48.************/5ulbwz.jpghttp://i48.************/5ulbwz.jpghttp://i48.************/5ulbwz.jpg

bloodstormaoa
27-12-09, 03:44
Angelus must be allowed back ASAP!

The best poster EVA!

http://i48.************/5ulbwz.jpghttp://i48.************/5ulbwz.jpghttp://i48.************/5ulbwz.jpg

+1

Spong
27-12-09, 03:44
anything related to pop culture shall be henceforth punishable by death. :mis:

^This.

angelus must be allowed back asap!

The best poster eva!

http://i48.************/5ulbwz.jpghttp://i48.************/5ulbwz.jpghttp://i48.************/5ulbwz.jpg

-1,000,000

EmeraldFields
27-12-09, 03:49
-1,000,000

http://i50.************/16ifp1w.gif

Spong
27-12-09, 03:52
Just think of the annoying gifs. That's why the idea is -1,000,000.

EmeraldFields
27-12-09, 03:54
Just think of the annoying gifs. That's why the idea is -1,000,000.

gifs>your life

http://i46.************/2e66j2b.gif

Mokono
27-12-09, 03:55
Slacker Cats related posts would be a direct violation of the ToC.

EmeraldFields
27-12-09, 03:56
Slacker Cats related posts would be a direct violation of the ToC.

OMG YES! :vlol:

Carbonek_0051
27-12-09, 03:56
Slacker Cats related posts would be a direct violation of the ToC.

lmao

LightningRider
27-12-09, 03:57
gifs>your life

http://i46.************/2e66j2b.gif

+1!

Also, A member who has created more than 1 pointless thread shall be IP Banned immediately. I hate them popping up a lot. :p

Spong
27-12-09, 03:59
gifs>your life

http://i46.************/2e66j2b.gif

Ironically, you're right. Which is why I probably hate them so much.

Slacker Cats related posts would be a direct violation of the ToC.

No, they should be automatically forwarded to everybody's PM Inbox.

Also, A member who has created more than 1 pointless thread shall be IP Banned immediately. I hate them popping up a lot. :p

That's everyone except me then.

Carbonek_0051
27-12-09, 04:00
Ironically, you're right. Which is why I probably hate them so much.

Someone's bitter.:p

Ward Dragon
27-12-09, 04:01
Actually, doesn't the forum software already allow admins to ban users from specific sections? Like MGC.

MGC is special. People can't exactly get banned from MGC, but rather their permission to access it is revoked. Each person had to be manually allowed into MGC. The rest of the forum allows everyone, so there is no special permission that can be revoked for a specific section.

LightningRider
27-12-09, 04:01
Slacker Cats related posts would be a direct violation of the ToC.

LMFAO, YES! :vlol:!

mau3genius
27-12-09, 04:04
what would it be?

No more "+1" or "I agree" posts. :p
I'm sorry, but anyone who dares to break that new rule gets :smk:to death. Also, no more annoying GIFs to explain how you feel about something; use words! It's always better.
And the last one: anyone who disagrees with my many rants, gets sent far far away.
That's pretty much it I guess :p

TRhalloween
27-12-09, 04:06
No more "+1" or "I agree" posts. :p
I'm sorry, but anyone who dares to break that new rule gets :smk:to death. Also, no more annoying GIFs to explain how you feel about something; use words! It's always better.
And the last one: anyone who disagrees with my many rants, gets sent far far away.
That's pretty much it I guess :p

I don't mind "+1" posts. They're not pointless, they show the popularity of an opinion.
And GIFs are a lot more interesting than just saying "I'm happy" :p

tomblover
27-12-09, 04:07
Let's see... Bigger kB limit on avvies.
Ability to change your avatar by yourself.
Make General Chat a "registered-only" forum part. That way we will never again hear:
"ZOMG! We can talk about that for sure because we're mature enough but there are surely 5-year-olds around just watching the forum without their parents' consent! WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT IT! :eek:"
And I'd bring back some banned members.

Oh, and some extensive tutorial system for n00bs.

Mokono
27-12-09, 04:08
+1!

Also, A member who has created more than 1 pointless thread shall be IP Banned immediately. I hate them popping up a lot. :p

And who'd decide wich ones are the pointless ones? You :mis:?

No more "+1" (...)
Plus one.

or "I agree" posts. :p

I agree.

Carbonek_0051
27-12-09, 04:09
No more "+1" or "I agree" posts. :p
I'm sorry, but anyone who dares to break that new rule gets :smk:to death. Also, no more annoying GIFs to explain how you feel about something; use words! It's always better.
And the last one: anyone who disagrees with my many rants, gets sent far far away.
That's pretty much it I guess :p

Ugh +1, I couldn't agree more.

http://i43.************/est7ya.jpg

Vickkyyy
27-12-09, 04:11
^
ROLFAMROFOARLMFOAOOOO! nice GIF (;


..
mean members should be suspended! :hea:

Mokono
27-12-09, 04:12
Ugh +1, I couldn't agree more.

http://i43.************/est7ya.jpg

^ I'm cracking :vlol:!

^ Double crack, the lol smiley happens to have a hat :vlol:.

bloodstormaoa
27-12-09, 04:12
Jeez, I said "Sorry"! Get over it?!

mau3genius
27-12-09, 04:13
Ugh +1, I couldn't agree more.

:smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk:
You shall be spanked to death. Then revived, and then spanked to death once more.
:smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk:

Carbonek_0051
27-12-09, 04:18
:smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk:
You shall be spanked to death. Then revived, and then spanked to death once more.
:smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk:

:(

mau3genius
27-12-09, 04:20
:(
Oh playing innocent won't get you out of this, young man. :smk:
lmao I'm officially addicted to that smilie. :pi:

toughraid3r37
27-12-09, 04:22
^:vlol:

I would have to say No more threads that dis lara croft!! This is a FAN thread people. WOW! :ton:

TRhalloween
27-12-09, 04:23
:smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk:
You shall be spanked to death. Then revived, and then spanked to death once more.
:smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk:

Yeah :mad:

And maybe you should film it :mad:

And send it to me :mad:

jk :p

bloodstormaoa
27-12-09, 04:26
:smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk:
You shall be spanked to death. Then revived, and then spanked to death once more.
:smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk:

You know Nate likes that, right?!

And this:

:(


..is his cheap, manipulative way to get more!

Don't play into his hands :mis:

Carbonek_0051
27-12-09, 04:29
lmao You know me too well Peter. <3

Anyways as for rules....


Don't speak of fight club, fight club does not exist.

mau3genius
27-12-09, 04:30
Yeah :mad:

And maybe you should film it :mad:

And send it to me :mad:

jk :p

You know Nate likes that, right?!

lmao You know me too well Peter. <3

OMG you're all so perv you're scaring me :(:(:(:(:(:(
lmfao

bloodstormaoa
27-12-09, 04:40
Says Mr. ":smk: is my favourite smiley" :ton:

Johnnay
27-12-09, 04:45
No more "+1" or "I agree" posts. :p
I'm sorry, but anyone who dares to break that new rule gets :smk:to death. Also, no more annoying GIFs to explain how you feel about something; use words! It's always better.
And the last one: anyone who disagrees with my many rants, gets sent far far away.
That's pretty much it I guess :p

Ugh +1, I couldn't agree more.

http://i43.************/est7ya.jpg

:smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk:
You shall be spanked to death. Then revived, and then spanked to death once more.
:smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk::smk:

Yeah :mad:

And maybe you should film it :mad:

And send it to me :mad:

jk :p

lmao You know me too well Peter. <3

Anyways as for rules....


Don't speak of fight club, fight club does not exist.

these posts

WIN:D

LightningRider
27-12-09, 04:52
lmao You know me too well Peter. <3

Anyways as for rules....


Don't speak of fight club, fight club does not exist.

I've had enough of that rule, Jake's already enforced it on me. :(

Carbonek_0051
27-12-09, 04:53
I've had enough of that rule, Jake's already enforced it on me. :(

Good.:mad:

LightningRider
27-12-09, 04:56
Good.:mad:

Shut up or I'll slap you.

Carbonek_0051
27-12-09, 04:57
Shut up or I'll slap you.

;__;

mau3genius
27-12-09, 04:59
Says Mr. ":smk: is my favourite smiley" :ton:
HEY! :smk:








Ok you got me there. :pi:

bloodstormaoa
27-12-09, 05:01
Save your spank paddle for Nate! :p

Admles
28-12-09, 11:26
A rule stating that thread titles must be specific, none of this rubbish like "A question" or "Please help" or "A fun game"

If not, said thread will be deleted and thread starter warned.

I hate when people deliberately post vague titles for threads just in order to get more people to read it

LaraLuvrrr
28-12-09, 20:10
Change the avatar change time to a week or 2 instead of however long it is now

Minty Mouth
28-12-09, 20:35
A rule stating that thread titles must be specific, none of this rubbish like "A question" or "Please help" or "A fun game"

If not, said thread will be deleted and thread starter warned.

I hate when people deliberately post vague titles for threads just in order to get more people to read it

Me too!

This makes me not want to read a thread, not the other way around.

Your_Envy*
28-12-09, 20:48
A rule stating that thread titles must be specific, none of this rubbish like "A question" or "Please help" or "A fun game"

If not, said thread will be deleted and thread starter warned.

I hate when people deliberately post vague titles for threads just in order to get more people to read it

Well last year when my grandfather died I really needed some help (very quick) and my thread was called "help please". Only one girl wanted to help me, so I guess people don't even want to open thread like this even though something could be wrong and people could help. When you're in a hurry or in pain, you don't (well, at least I don't) think about the thread title.

Lizard of Oz
28-12-09, 23:09
Well last year when my grandfather died I really needed some help (very quick) and my thread was called "help please". Only one girl wanted to help me, so I guess people don't even want to open thread like this even though something could be wrong and people could help. When you're in a hurry or in pain, you don't (well, at least I don't) think about the thread title.

I understand what you mean. Although you don't really need to think about the thread title.
"My Grandfather died, please help!"

Your_Envy*
28-12-09, 23:23
You have a point but back then I didn't know that people don't open threads like this quite often and I was really upset so "help please" was the only thing on my mind at that time. :)

EscondeR
02-01-10, 01:14
I was going to write an explicit rule concerning banning members who post simply to make a laughingstock out of the forum, but I have an easier solution/rule. Just let me decide it, and grant me the power to ban them. Under the table of course, so that legally the moderators could honestly say "I don't know what happened!" :)

Pointless threads result in a cactus to the bum :smk:. Really, a thread about how often you brush your teeth? There is no Jesus.

You may open new threads after making 100 qualitative posts. ;)


Except Modding/LE/Tech Support sections.


Oh, and some extensive tutorial system for n00bs.

The experience shows that noobs almost never read tutorials, except one is put under their noses after a specific question.

A rule stating that thread titles must be specific, none of this rubbish like "A question" or "Please help" or "A fun game"


*thinks about lobbying the above* :whi:

I'd add those:


Being a common arsehole = ban
Being a troll = ban, IP traced to actual address and mods team going with bats to kick arse IRL :p

Legend 4ever
02-01-10, 01:25
Democracy with more representatives.

Mr.Burns
02-01-10, 01:36
Democracy with more representatives.

Interesting idea. Care to elaborate?

Legend 4ever
02-01-10, 02:11
Interesting idea. Care to elaborate?

Not sure if I'm allowed to, but I do think we don't have enough mods and I also feel that sometimes mods only wish to do their job and not really think that maybe they should let some stuff happen and not weed out everything at the spot, it kills the vivacity of the forum.

Now, I know, it can lead to members getting too loose and allowing themselves to go beyond the limit and still think it's fine, but can also eventually lead to people feeling just a bit more relaxed.

I'm not necessarily saying that I don't feel relaxed, I do most of the time, but I just feel that some people can't express themselves that well so they get misunderstood, some can't control themselves so they just write the first thing that comes to mind and it's like this avalanche starts chasing after them.

Maybe I went too far with explaining this, but other than some stuff that will not be changed (like giving the members right to change their avatars or at least shorten the period avatar can be changed, allowing more characters in signature, giving more forum skins(I still remember how fun that XBox 360 theme was)) or at least I can't see it being changed at this point, I do think we need more mods in certain sections of TRF and also, somehow I feel all mods are unanimous in behavior, I don't feel like there are moderators who have a special relationship with the members(I remember one a long time ago, he was amazing). More mods IMO means faster reactions to spam but also to members' needs(Profile Pic thread is a mess, I don't know if there is a technical difficulty with changing the Profile Pics, but they haven't been changed in like 2 months)

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe there are a lot of you who are strongly connected to many members but I don't see it. I definitely do see that we need a more diverse mod base. Maybe the thing is, you're all doing your job, so that's why you all to me come across as very similar in behavior.

Ward Dragon
02-01-10, 02:24
Maybe the thing is, you're all doing your job, so that's why you all to me come across as very similar in behavior.

Well yeah, we try to make the rules clear to everyone and enforce the rules equally. Granted sometimes we overlook something, but we try our best to be fair to everyone :)

Now I read your post and I think I am misunderstanding you :o It sounds like you want there to be more mods, and you want mods who don't enforce the rules evenly and play favorites. I'm sure that's not what you meant, so can you please explain in a little more detail? Thanks :)

remote91
02-01-10, 02:26
Every friday Mods are stripped of their powers

Quasimodo
02-01-10, 02:29
Well yeah, we try to make the rules clear to everyone and enforce the rules equally. Granted sometimes we overlook something, but we try our best to be fair to everyone :)

Now I read your post and I think I am misunderstanding you :o It sounds like you want there to be more mods, and you want mods who don't enforce the rules evenly and play favorites. I'm sure that's not what you meant, so can you please explain in a little more detail? Thanks :)

Maybe he wants mods who are more involved in discussions/also post as regular members? Maybe it seems too many posts by mods are moderating posts. At least that's what I got out of it.

Ward Dragon
02-01-10, 02:33
Every friday Mods are stripped of their powers

And then every Saturday we have to delete hundreds of posts from previously banned members who made alternate accounts and had a field day on Friday? :p (I can think of at least one guy who would totally take advantage and do that XD)

Maybe he wants mods who are more involved in discussions/also post as regular members? Maybe it seems too many posts by mods are moderating posts. At least that's what I got out of it.

Ah, okay, that makes more sense. Although I would have to say that my impression is most of mods' posts are simply discussion rather than actively moderating things. Then again, I'm sure the moderating posts stand out (as they are meant to catch people's attention) so I understand why it would seem that there are a lot of posts like that.

:}hello friend
02-01-10, 02:35
- Mods shall have magic wands to cast spells on the spammers and trolls that disrupt our beloved forum and the beloved members.
~~~~~
Okay a real rule,
-New threads must be approved by a moderator before they become active, except for threads that a moderator creates like, Open Chat, What are you Listening to.

Alex Shepherd
02-01-10, 02:40
Rule...
No extra emoticons (smilies) should be add here, only the one on the TRF!
:p

Raider Man

Legend 4ever
02-01-10, 03:17
Maybe he wants mods who are more involved in discussions/also post as regular members? Maybe it seems too many posts by mods are moderating posts. At least that's what I got out of it.

Yes.


And to make things just a little bit simpler, all I wanted to say was that, even though our mods do great job, I feel we need more people. I will make it as simple as that so that there's no other focus to the story.

EDIT: And by "democracy with more representatives" that's exactly what I though. People rule and with strong representatives, who will, although they control and edit actions of the people, if inappropriate, still be there for them, not just for the sake of existing.

wantafanta
02-01-10, 03:36
Once a thread reaches 500 replies, it gets moved to a separate board. AKA - Goodbye Lady Gaga, Britney, etc. This forum really is crowded - no clogged with sticky threads that never go away. It needs a spring cleaning - big time.

Sir Croft
02-01-10, 03:56
Thou shall not use "my opinion" as an excuse for whatever you say.

miss.haggard
02-01-10, 03:59
You must write your name out after each post, so everyone double knows who posted it.

Haggardalfredosauce http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/winking/winking0048.gif

Sir Croft
02-01-10, 04:04
You must write your name out after each post, so everyone double knows who posted it.

Haggardalfredosauce http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/winking/winking0048.gif

lmfao
Some members are already adept of that rule.

Legend 4ever
02-01-10, 04:32
Thou shall not use "my opinion" as an excuse for whatever you say.

This too.

Ward Dragon
02-01-10, 06:09
And to make things just a little bit simpler, all I wanted to say was that, even though our mods do great job, I feel we need more people. I will make it as simple as that so that there's no other focus to the story.

EDIT: And by "democracy with more representatives" that's exactly what I though. People rule and with strong representatives, who will, although they control and edit actions of the people, if inappropriate, still be there for them, not just for the sake of existing.

That does happen, but most of the time you don't know it because it goes on behind the scenes. Mods do discuss issues and put forth arguments in people's defense if there are mitigating circumstances. We also discuss the rules and try to figure out ways to make things more fair and clear for everyone :)

Legend 4ever
02-01-10, 06:23
OK, I just thik things could run smoother with more mods.

Surohicko
02-01-10, 06:26
^ We already have enough Mods

aktrekker
02-01-10, 06:26
I think a couple more administrators would help.

Mr_Drake
02-01-10, 09:15
Bigger profile pics! OMW! they are SO small :tea:

Legend 4ever
02-01-10, 11:20
That reminds me, avatars 200x200 in size wouldn't hurt at all.

LightningRider
02-01-10, 11:22
Definitely would open up more possibilities for sizes.

But is it even plausible with the current vBulletin Control Scheme? :)

Legend 4ever
02-01-10, 11:28
I think so, I've seen this theme with avvies that are 200x200.

LightningRider
02-01-10, 11:37
Mods, take this into consideration! Avvies are one way of expressing yourself, increasing size opens up more possibilities for that. :)

Ward Dragon
02-01-10, 11:38
I could be wrong but it looks like an avatar 200 pixels across would stretch the left-hand column a bit. I suppose that's not too much of an issue considering most people have monitors with high resolutions nowadays. I think the main reason for the current avatar limit is because the avatars are stored on the server, so the more space they take up the more bandwidth gets used. Would a 200x200 avatar look decent if it still had to be less than 15 kb?

Minty Mouth
02-01-10, 12:08
I could be wrong but it looks like an avatar 200 pixels across would stretch the left-hand column a bit. I suppose that's not too much of an issue considering most people have monitors with high resolutions nowadays. I think the main reason for the current avatar limit is because the avatars are stored on the server, so the more space they take up the more bandwidth gets used. Would a 200x200 avatar look decent if it still had to be less than 15 kb?

You can do wonders with "Save for web", but even then you are pushing it =/

Besides, 200x200 is WAY too large, that's not an avatar, its like a bloody poster!

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/2039/200example.jpg

Something like 150x150 would be more than enough.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd273/MintyMouth/150-example.jpg

If someone wanted to know, the largest number the current layout could accommodate without stretching the blue section would be about 170x170, which would look something like this:

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd273/MintyMouth/Example-w-layout.jpg

Legend 4ever
02-01-10, 20:21
Very nice, I was thinking about saying 150x150, but then I thought maybe even 200 wouldn't be too bad.

Minty Mouth
02-01-10, 20:29
Very nice, I was thinking about saying 150x150, but then I thought maybe even 200 wouldn't be too bad.

Really? You would actually want 200x200? IMO that would be ridiculous, it would take up way too much room.

170x170 would be perfect, because it wouldnt change the size of the layout.

Carbonek_0051
02-01-10, 20:33
I think 150x150 would be perfect.

Tony9595
02-01-10, 20:37
I like the way it is currently, 128x128

Big enough as to show what you want.

Sgt BOMBULOUS
02-01-10, 21:03
Really? You would actually want 200x200? IMO that would be ridiculous, it would take up way too much room.

170x170 would be perfect, because it wouldnt change the size of the layout.

As it stands the avatars have a bit of unused space to their right. I agree we should be able to use this as now it's just empty space.

TombOfRaiders
02-01-10, 21:16
I'd love a ChatBox on this forum....

xXhayleyroxXx
02-01-10, 21:16
As it stands the avatars have a bit of unused space to their right. I agree we should be able to use this as now it's just empty space.

agreed :) that way nothing gets wasted

Legend 4ever
02-01-10, 21:16
I like the way it is currently, 128x128

Big enough as to show what you want.

Not what I want. I usually do celebrities and sometimes I want to show their body too but can't cause I would lose the expression on their face. It's a big deal actually.

BlackRainbow
02-01-10, 21:16
I think 150x150 would be perfect.
I agree. :D

Minty Mouth
02-01-10, 21:17
I'd love a ChatBox on this forum....

Isn't that what OC is for?

Legend 4ever
02-01-10, 21:24
IMO ChatBox = useless clutter

tombofwinston
02-01-10, 21:40
No GIF's.

Tony9595
02-01-10, 21:44
No GIF's.

Tell me about it! :( (http://www.tombraiderforums.com/showthread.php?p=4262311#post4262311)

trlestew
02-01-10, 22:05
My rule would be to put spoilers in white ;) .

Love2Raid
02-01-10, 22:13
My rule would be to put spoilers in white ;) .

Now that you have mentioned 'spoilers'...where the hell are the 'spoiler tags'? I have been searching for them forever! :confused::confused:

The white text is confusing, doesn't really work (you can still see it if you look closely) and you can't quote it.