Bungie.net Community
This topic has moved here: Subject: Should New Members Have To Wait Longer.....
  • Subject: Should New Members Have To Wait Longer.....
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4
Subject: Should New Members Have To Wait Longer.....

Posted by: Enormous Corgi
Posted by: Unanimate Objec
There's no way Nate Hawbaker's favorite hero is Alan Stuart


ALAN IS A BEAUTIFUL MAN!


Posted by: talon2000
What if the user makes an account because they have an issue and are wanting help? They would have to wait 3 days to get that help?




This is true.

  • 07.22.2012 7:09 PM PDT

Cammalamm is the best.

External Links-
>My Photobucket page
>My Twitter account

i think making new members wait 3 days to make a thread will deter them from coming back at all.

even if you make members wait a week before posting that does not mean they will understand/read the rules at all.

[Edited on 07.22.2012 7:16 PM PDT]

  • 07.22.2012 7:15 PM PDT

GT: j0sh291
"Gentlemen. I be placed at a bewilderment. There I were, resting, when I hear a frightful row on deck. What be that first mate?"
-"Mutiny. And what fate befalls mutineers? I think we know the answer to that, don't we? Mutineers...HANG!!!"

Twitter:@j0sh291
Follower of Christ!

][-][ //-\\ ][_ ((_))

I am pretty sure, the web-team have think about that situation before and why they haven't do something similar to avoid spam accounts.

  • 07.22.2012 9:58 PM PDT

The world is not beautiful: And that, in a way, lends it a sort of beauty.

~Kino's Journey


Posted by: x Foman123 x
Posted by: Agrajag
Posted by: x Foman123 x
Would there be the concern that those who don't have cell phones can't post? That mandates the need to purchase a phone, and I would say B.net has done a great job of making itself free.
This is a concern in theory only. While theoretically, it is possible that a user of this site (i.e., an internet user and gamer) might not have access to a mobile phone, the reality is that 100% of this site's users own or have access to a cell phone. I have yet to run across one who can genuinely claim that he or she doesn't.

The "not everyone has a cell phone" argument is, IMO, a complete red herring and a bogus reason not to implement this.


I only recently got a phone, and it doesn't have any credit right now, assumptions can be a bad thing.

  • 07.22.2012 10:08 PM PDT

Non facete nobis calcitrare vestrvm perinaevm.

Posted by: Achronos
You imply a level of control over Halo: Reach matchmaking that we no longer have. Or, in your vernacular, it isn't our shiznit anymore.


Active 9/1/11, Heroic 12/25/12

Posted by: DarkJet7
Posted by: x Foman123 x
This is a concern in theory only. While theoretically, it is possible that a user of this site (i.e., an internet user and gamer) might not have access to a mobile phone, the reality is that 100% of this site's users own or have access to a cell phone. I have yet to run across one who can genuinely claim that he or she doesn't.

The "not everyone has a cell phone" argument is, IMO, a complete red herring and a bogus reason not to implement this.


I only recently got a phone, and it doesn't have any credit right now, assumptions can be a bad thing.
You must of had access for a cell phone for a while though, do you have any friends or family members that would let you borrow their phone for a verification?

  • 07.22.2012 10:30 PM PDT

Man of God. Fan of Bungie. Eater of many Jr. Bacon cheeseburgers.


Posted by: x Foman123 x
1. Tie user accounts to their cell phone number, make them validate it by inputting a code sent by text message, and allow only one account per phone number.

2. Prohibit new accounts from posting in the Flood Forum -- new threads OR within thread -- for at least 30 days.

If the site did these two things, 95% of spam and chronic rulebreaking would be eliminated.


That's a really good idea. Alert the Webteam.

  • 07.23.2012 6:34 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member

ODST Expeditionary Force I The WorkPLace I Mythics
Technically Mythic
Posted by: Cobravert
I just saw a green monkey nut shot a small tan lizard(?) in a gunny sack.

I'd like to see some current members being made to wait a certain amount of time before making a thread...

[Edited on 07.23.2012 7:27 AM PDT]

  • 07.23.2012 7:27 AM PDT

Why do you guys want this site's forum to be more dead than it already is? Keep your elitism to yourselves, jeez.

  • 07.23.2012 8:02 AM PDT

Key


Posted by: DarkJet7

Posted by: x Foman123 x
Posted by: Agrajag
Posted by: x Foman123 x
Would there be the concern that those who don't have cell phones can't post? That mandates the need to purchase a phone, and I would say B.net has done a great job of making itself free.
This is a concern in theory only. While theoretically, it is possible that a user of this site (i.e., an internet user and gamer) might not have access to a mobile phone, the reality is that 100% of this site's users own or have access to a cell phone. I have yet to run across one who can genuinely claim that he or she doesn't.

The "not everyone has a cell phone" argument is, IMO, a complete red herring and a bogus reason not to implement this.


I only recently got a phone, and it doesn't have any credit right now, assumptions can be a bad thing.
How old are you? (if you don't mine me asking)

  • 07.23.2012 8:10 AM PDT

GGGGGGggggggggggggGGGG


Posted by: x Foman123 x
1. Tie user accounts to their cell phone number, make them validate it by inputting a code sent by text message, and allow only one account per phone number.

But my phone is broke!

  • 07.23.2012 8:18 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Haven't fully weighed the pros and cons of these thoughts, so take them with a grain of salt.

-New users and users coming off of a ban will have a dramatically increased post rate limit (current 30 seconds, I believe). The high limit will decrease daily until it reaches 30 seconds like everyone else.

-A good forum standing is incentivized through in-game rewards for future game releases and/or rewards like Bungie Pro or discounts on Bungie Store merchandise.

-Users have the ability to upvote and downvote posts. Downvoting a post will hide it and downvoting a thread will hide it from the listing, and upvoting something could influence the order of your thread display based on who you upvoted. Users will get a "reveal" button similar to the mods to show what they've hidden and see the page as a default user would see it. Reporting a post automatically downvotes it. The key here is that the amount of upvotes and downvotes doesn't have to be public information, but the mods could view reports on which users have the most downvotes/upvotes/etc. to more easily understand who's more likely to be breaking the rules and who's doing a good job. Notably, a manual review here would still be required, but it might make it easier to notice smaller trends in negative behavior.

  • 07.23.2012 8:29 AM PDT

Key


Posted by: CAVX
Haven't fully weighed the pros and cons of these thoughts, so take them with a grain of salt.

-New users and users coming off of a ban will have a dramatically increased post rate limit (current 30 seconds, I believe). The high limit will decrease daily until it reaches 30 seconds like everyone else.

-A good forum standing is incentivized through in-game rewards for future game releases and/or rewards like Bungie Pro or discounts on Bungie Store merchandise.

-Users have the ability to upvote and downvote posts. Downvoting a post will hide it and downvoting a thread will hide it from the listing, and upvoting something could influence the order of your thread display based on who you upvoted. Users will get a "reveal" button similar to the mods to show what they've hidden and see the page as a default user would see it. Reporting a post automatically downvotes it. The key here is that the amount of upvotes and downvotes doesn't have to be public information, but the mods could view reports on which users have the most downvotes/upvotes/etc. to more easily understand who's more likely to be breaking the rules and who's doing a good job. Notably, a manual review here would still be required, but it might make it easier to notice smaller trends in negative behavior.
Um, uh... no because Facebook. Wait, uh, no because elitism. Or... I don't know... abuse. Some other tired unoriginal nonsensical argument that'll be brought against this idea.

For real though, I like all of the idea's you've proposed except the changing of the order of posts based on upvoting. That does lead to a logical argument of abuse because people can constantly upvote a thread to keep it at the top of the forum. Also, I'm just partial to seeing things chronologically. It lets me know what I have and have not read.

  • 07.23.2012 8:38 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
For real though, I like all of the idea's you've proposed except the changing of the order of posts based on upvoting. That does lead to a logical argument of abuse because people can constantly upvote a thread to keep it at the top of the forum. Also, I'm just partial to seeing things chronologically. It lets me know what I have and have not read.

To clarify, the hiding and reordering of posts and threads as described in that idea would be per-user only. Only the user who is doing the upvotes and downvotes would see any difference. Perhaps a profile setting could change whether or not you want your post/thread order influenced by your personal upvotes.

  • 07.23.2012 8:42 AM PDT

Key


Posted by: CAVX
Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
For real though, I like all of the idea's you've proposed except the changing of the order of posts based on upvoting. That does lead to a logical argument of abuse because people can constantly upvote a thread to keep it at the top of the forum. Also, I'm just partial to seeing things chronologically. It lets me know what I have and have not read.

To clarify, the hiding and reordering of posts and threads as described in that idea would be per-user only. Only the user who is doing the upvotes and downvotes would see any difference. Perhaps a profile setting could change whether or not you want your post/thread order influenced by your personal upvotes.
But then at the same time would upvotes in general still be tallied in a manner that all users could see how many upvotes/downvotes a thread/post has?

  • 07.23.2012 8:47 AM PDT


Posted by: x Foman123 x
1. Tie user accounts to their cell phone number, make them validate it by inputting a code sent by text message, and allow only one account per phone number.

2. Prohibit new accounts from posting in the Flood Forum -- new threads OR within thread -- for at least 30 days.

If the site did these two things, 95% of spam and chronic rulebreaking would be eliminated.


I think we should also force every user to give Bungie pictures of their genitals. Then, if they screw up, the pictures get posted as their avatar.

  • 07.23.2012 8:50 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
But then at the same time would upvotes in general still be tallied in a manner that all users could see how many upvotes/downvotes a thread/post has?

In my example, ups/downs would not be visible to the public - you'd only see what you've done. But it doesn't necessarily matter as it pertains to this thread. The bigger idea was that the total votes (from everyone) could be viewed by moderators to help understand trends and general user feedback. My thought was that this information would only be visible to the public on a per-user basis to make the votes more genuine and less influenced, but even if all votes could be seen by the public it'd work the same way.

[Edited on 07.23.2012 8:51 AM PDT]

  • 07.23.2012 8:50 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Shoot pool, not people.

Obvious alt

Sounds good to me. Half the current accounts are alts. Or at least they seem to be.

  • 07.23.2012 8:57 AM PDT

i c u thar c' ing my signiture

Yours in _Kai_


Posted by: x Foman123 x
1. Tie user accounts to their cell phone number, make them validate it by inputting a code sent by text message, and allow only one account per phone number.

2. Prohibit new accounts from posting in the Flood Forum -- new threads OR within thread -- for at least 30 days.

If the site did these two things, 95% of spam and chronic rulebreaking would be eliminated.

Foman for president '12

  • 07.23.2012 9:02 AM PDT

Key


Posted by: CAVX
Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
But then at the same time would upvotes in general still be tallied in a manner that all users could see how many upvotes/downvotes a thread/post has?

In my example, ups/downs would not be visible to the public - you'd only see what you've done. But it doesn't necessarily matter as it pertains to this thread. The bigger idea was that the total votes (from everyone) could be viewed by moderators to help understand trends and general user feedback. My thought was that this information would only be visible to the public on a per-user basis to make the votes more genuine and less influenced, but even if all votes could be seen by the public it'd work the same way.
You're right, of course. I was just interested in the idea (as I become on many occasions). I do like the idea, though. I mean, there is SOMEWHAT of an open argument as to whether or not people would abuse opinions they don't like but I don't see that as too much of an issue. In fact, I see it more as a non-issue.

Sure, it may happen in the Flood but the Ninjas should already know to take things that happen and are reported in the Flood with a grain of salt, and would read posts before making any sort of decisions such as bans, etc.

  • 07.23.2012 9:11 AM PDT

The message is a good idea, but they shouldn't have to stall to ask a question. Most new members sign up to ask a question. The longer they wait, the more likely they'll go to another source for help.

  • 07.23.2012 9:50 AM PDT

Indie video game designer and relatively good photoshopper.

Two wrongs do not make a right, however three wrongs do make a
delicious bedtime snack if served with warm milk.

TR011-F3ll-4ITL0L-10101-12345
1FY0U-B31IE-V3TIS-URADU-MB455


Posted by: talon2000
What if the user makes an account because they have an issue and are wanting help? They would have to wait 3 days to get that help?

  • 07.23.2012 9:59 AM PDT

We miss you Logan.
Ask any question. I'll help with anything on site or off.

No. We don't really need that. If there going to troll there going to troll no longer the wait. Besides we have mods for a reason. Doing all the update for a more secure forums would take away there jobs.

  • 07.23.2012 11:51 AM PDT

"It's better to burn out than fade away..."

Join Sapphire for intense and pleasing sex­ual pleasure.


Posted by: defnop552
I think that a 3 day delay will just make trolls stock up on accounts on 1 day and unleash them all on the same day.

But that's just, like, my opinion, man!

  • 07.23.2012 11:54 AM PDT

Posted by: burritosenior
Nah. It's a good base idea, but I don't think it's really what will solve any issues. We need something else to prevent new accounts. I just can't for the life of me think of what. I have no contributions.
>.<
Change the minds into the people so that they are loyal to one account and one account only. It'll work!

  • 07.23.2012 1:46 PM PDT

Twitter | Raptr | Facebook
------------------------------------------
Let me change my username! Pwease, I'd do anything! :'(
------------------------------------------
Xbox Ambassador

Honestly, I think 1 day is too long; a few hours should suffice. We have moderators for a reason, to fight spam and the bad guys. People should not be restricted in any way from posting abilities, I fear it has an impact on forum activity because some people will lose interest.

  • 07.24.2012 1:41 AM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4