Bungie.net Community
This topic has moved here: Subject: Late Night Flood - Should it be allowed?
  • Subject: Late Night Flood - Should it be allowed?
Subject: Late Night Flood - Should it be allowed?
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Der Todesengel
This doesn't mean I don't still hate you


WorkPLace l Mythics l Regulars

RIP BerserkerBarage DeathPimp72


Posted by: elmicker
Posted by: x Foman123 x
I prefer not having to continue going into a thread every 10 minutes to "check up" on it.
It's almost like effectively moderating a forum requires one to participate. Astonishing.


This sums up my opinion

  • 08.21.2012 12:02 PM PDT

Hey I am a big Bungie fan ever since I played Halo 2. I love the series, I love Bungie. I have made a few Bungie logos in my metal shop.

it should be allowed

  • 08.21.2012 12:08 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
Threads that are off-topic and derailed are threads that need to be locked.
How can something that has no topic, go off topic?

or more seriously, why do threads that "are off topic" need to be locked? what absolute -blam!- nonsense.

  • 08.21.2012 1:04 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: x Foman123 x
The "death of a thread" is a natural result of the discussion forum structure. If the community at large is not interested in a thread's topic, they stop posting in the thread and it sinks to the bottom of the page. If people are interested, they continue discussing it and the thread remains at the top of the page. This is the way of discussion forums and is the reason that they are such a popular medium on the internet. Conversely, the "Late Night Flood" and other post-whatever-you-want threads circumvent and defeat this forum structure by having no particular subject matter, allowing the thread to remain at the top of the forum for as long as anybody feels like spamming it.
My cognitive dissonance detector just exploded. You start by saying the forum's method of sorting, by keeping alive topics people want to talk about and conversely killing ones they don't is a good thing, and finish by saying the general discussion threads are bad because they're kept alive too much.

Do you not see the contradiction here?

People want to talk, they will talk, it does no harm, it's pretty much the only way to do things, really you are talking complete bollocks.

Once again, all of this can be accomplished via other methods...
I'm sorry, but at the end of the day, ... [these threads are] not the kind of thing that is necessary


Really, we've descended to the "IT'S NOT NECESSARY" argument, already? Crimeny.

  • 08.21.2012 1:08 PM PDT

Posted by: elmicker
Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
Threads that are off-topic and derailed are threads that need to be locked.
How can something that has no topic, go off topic?

or more seriously, why do threads that "are off topic" need to be locked? what absolute -blam!- nonsense.
But isn't there a difference between "Off Topic" and "Against The Rules" here? By being a member of the site we abide by the CoC and Forum Rules. Under those we are not allowed to make threads that don't harbor discussion (spam).

I know that is simplifying things, but that's basically what the OP is saying. "Should we be able to spam late at night?"

  • 08.21.2012 1:09 PM PDT
  • gamertag: BC1096
  • user homepage:

BC1096
One does not choose a destiny, his destiny is bestowed, shaped and formed, from the soul.


Posted by: Lobster Fish 2

I know that is simplifying things, but that's basically what the OP is saying. "Should we be able to spam late at night?"


That's not what he's saying at all.

  • 08.21.2012 1:12 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Lobster Fish 2
I know that is simplifying things, but that's basically what the OP is saying. "Should we be able to spam late at night?"
And the question we should be asking ourselves is "Is there any reason why we shouldn't let them?"

Seriously, someone provide one good reason why people posting their nonsense in a single thread when the forum is quiet is a bad thing and we can leave this whole thing alone. Demonstrate some harm, then you won't be annoying anyone by locking the threads. Unfortunately, to this point, the only argument presented for locking them is "I don't find the content to be of a high enough standard so I'm going to lock it"

B.net's moderators have said time and again they are not judges of content, they are enforcers of rules. More than enough members, probably a majority, have absolutely no problem with these threads. They are, after all, just single threads. Plenty of people enjoy participating in them and they don't disrupt anyone else's use of the forum so why on earth should they be categorised as "spam"?

We're talking about hundreds of posts, yes, but hundreds of posts in one thread in the middle of the night. A thread where everyone who clicks on it is going to know fine well what they're getting in for. They're not preventing anyone else from enjoying their time on the forum, so, again, why lock them?

If the moderators want to actually start locking threads for lack of constructive discussion or for being overly repetitive then by all means, go forth and lock, but we all know fine well they don't and won't (they'd get nothing else done, for a start). This is just more petty jobsworthiness of the same kind that resulted in forum game threads being locked.

[Edited on 08.21.2012 1:19 PM PDT]

  • 08.21.2012 1:15 PM PDT

Posted by: elmicker
We're talking about hundreds of posts, yes, but hundreds of posts in one thread in the middle of the night. A thread where everyone who clicks on it is going to know fine well what they're getting in for. They're not preventing anyone else from enjoying their time on the forum, so, again, why lock them?
I liked your reply as a whole and do detect a great level of intelligence and knowledge of discussion. That being said, I hooked on to this paragraph in particular.

I am not disagreeing with you here but in this point you make I can see where I mod may retort from. A mod may say, "if we let one do it, they may all start doing it" and that becomes a spam attack rather than 1 thread. You'd start seeing parodies, repeat threads, multiple off-topic late night threads and spin-offs, because that is what the immaturity of The Flood reduces to.

The bottom line is if they allow a little wiggle room then people will start saying "if he can do it then why can't I?" Which would be accurate but then again would be a created inequality under the rules and we can't have that.

  • 08.21.2012 1:24 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Lobster Fish 2This is what we call a slippery slope fallacy and can be filed with "absolute -blam!- nonsense".

Any thread made more than would be considered reasonable is a spam attack, applying your logic would result in us banning all threads. It's the analogue of the "this is unnecessary therefore disallowed" argument foman made earlier.

There's no reason to believe things would get out of hand, and frankly, dealing with otherwise acceptable things that can get out of hand is exactly why we've got humans as moderators.

B.net, since the rules were rewritten at least, is supposed to be run by discretion, setting out a series of areas where there be dragons, where users go at their own risk, rather than thousands of words of proscribed actions as we used to have. Simply banning a thread like this, a thread which dozens of users participate happily in without disrupting anyone else, goes completely contrary to that strategy.

[Edited on 08.21.2012 1:28 PM PDT]

  • 08.21.2012 1:25 PM PDT

Posted by: elmicker
Posted by: Lobster Fish 2This is what we call a slippery slope fallacy and can be filed with "absolute -blam!- nonsense".

Any thread made more than would be considered reasonable is a spam attack, applying your logic would result in us banning all threads. It's the analogue of the "this is unnecessary therefore disallowed" argument foman made earlier.

There's no reason to believe things would get out of hand, and frankly, dealing with otherwise acceptable things that can get out of hand is exactly why we've got humans as moderators.
Fair enough, but that leaves us with 1 remaining question.

Is the idea of allowing late night, off-topic threads something that you would like? Because, in that case, it's something this site just can't have! ;)

  • 08.21.2012 1:28 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Lobster Fish 2
Is the idea of allowing late night, off-topic threads something that you would like? Because, in that case, it's something this site just can't have! ;)
Oh don't worry, I'm always right. It just takes time for b.net to catch up.

  • 08.21.2012 1:29 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Gray socks are best socks. White is second, black third. Every other sock color is simply horrible.

Posted by: x Foman123 xSo let me get this straight, mods are allowed to create threads on whatever they want (be it to troll or spam), but when a normal member does the same, it's against the rules and the thread gets locked? Damn, you guys are starting to act like the Waypoint mods.

  • 08.21.2012 1:33 PM PDT

Challenge me to a Hawaiian Punch chugging contest. I dare you.


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

Geez, i missed a heck of a lot at work today. I read up on a few of them before i finished this post i started this morning, and a lot of this is what others, specifically Puma, have already stated, but what the hey. I'll finish it up.

And a quick note, cool down guys, no matter what side you're on here. Foman locked the thread because he thought it violated rules. That's what he's supposed to do. Whether you agree with him or not is up to you, but don't bash the man for doing his duty as a ninja.
Posted by: x Foman123 x
Every single reason given in this thread to allow the "late night Flood" threads is just as easily accomplished through individual threads on a particular subject matter.

The mere fact that a thread reaches a large number of replies is most certainly not evidence of "discussion." I could easily create a 150-reply thread by going into the Flood and creating a "post your desktop" thread or a "smash your head into the keyboard and hit the 'post' button" thread. In fact, many of the threads that gain replies the fastest are inappropriate (e.g., politics, religion, sex, spam, malicious trolling) and when a thread gains many replies very quickly, it is often a warning sign to us as moderators that something is going wrong in there.
It's sad how true this is. Essentially all you have to do to gain a hot topic is post a thread with Halo 4 or CoD in the title and people come flocking to it. And as you said those are the sort of threads that end with being derailed by trolls and flame wars. But that's true for just about any thread, isn't it? While a thread with more replies is often a more likely place for rulebreaking, maybe simply because there are more people there, small threads are also vulnerable to all kinds of internet hate. How often do you see a thread get so few replies that someone will eventually bump it with a random, completely useless reply just for laughs? I'd find it hard to believe things like that don't happen on a daily basis.

On the other hand, despite your claims of intellectual and enriching discussion (which I have no doubt are true), a "late night Flood" thread is essentially a "post whatever you want in here" thread. There is no question that a thread whose subject line is "Post whatever you want in here" would be locked -- a cleverer title changes nothing about this. Intellectual and interesting discussion happens every day in the Flood in more focused threads -- I participated in several myself just earlier today. A "late night Flood" thread is certainly not the only vehicle for this.

Furthermore, there is no way to moderate these threads and discussions can quickly be derailed or spiral out of control. I have personally seen them devolve into flaming, trolling, and spam numerous times. And because the Flood at large generally reports only the very worst kinds of spam attacks and trolling, I prefer not having to continue going into a thread every 10 minutes to "check up" on it.
I'd argue this point with you all day, but it'd would be pointless and for the sake of this discussion you're pretty much right. The LNF threads are just about "Say whatever you want" threads. But so is This thread, which has been around as long as i can remember. Threads such as This are essentially just say anything, but with a 'clever name change' so it appears to be a discussion of a hypothetical scenario, all though it is still really just 'Say anything (to the Older Generation).

As for having to check up on the thread every ten minutes because it 'has no topic,' that just doesnt make sense to me. Aren't you supposed to check up on every thread? For example, threads like "Halo 4 sucks" are allowed as long as no rules are broken in the OP, when we all know they'll attract plenty of replies, mostly being flame wars and trolls. But because a topic is clearly stated they're okay. Are you saying threads like that don't have to be monitored from time to time?

Or again, bringing up things like "Post Random Facts," you say it has a more defined topic than Late Night Flood. I'd still say that's arguable, but if we look past that for a minute are you saying that the thread isn't monitored because it has a defined topic? Random facts could easily break rules. I know i could come up with a few that do. Surely a thread such as that is checked by the Ninjas occasionally.

And that's just two threads i pulled off the front page. Let's not forget things like Community Carnage, which has been mentioned several times. It's a great thread that lets a lot of people have a lot of fun. Does it generate intelligent discussion? Hardly. It's just fun, and that's why it's allowed. Or threads such as the popular Swag Central. Sure, it's a cool thread. I enjoy it. Generates discussion? The OP is just a bunch of pictures. Where is the "intelligent discussion" in that thread? We can all see that the title says "Discuss" your swag, but an OP full of pictures doesn't necessarily promote loads of discussion. Again, it seems to be allowed because we are able to enjoy it responsibly, without busting the rules in it. And the Members list? No discussion. Just a list. And it has been going on for over a year.

Basically what i'm saying is this: Every thread, regardless of topic or discussion, can potentially be derailed, flamed, trolled, or used for inappropriate discussions. Late Night Flood is no exception. However, it isn't a catalyst for rule breaking either. From the two threads i linked in the OP i didn't see any rule breaking. And if there was some, it certainly wasn't at a higher rate than any other part of the Flood, or all of B.net for that matter. It was good clean fun.

I don't see what's wrong with the Late Night Flood threads. They may not generate discussion on a single, blatantly stated topic. But that's clearly a fine line when it comes to threads. I don't see how anyone can say all the threads i listed promote intelligent discussion while LNF does now. Late Night Flood does, however, generate discussion between members in a way that they all have good, clean fun. And really, what's wrong with that?

[Edited on 08.21.2012 2:20 PM PDT]

  • 08.21.2012 2:16 PM PDT
  • gamertag: ALI217
  • user homepage:

I'm gonna finish it. Just like Jigga did to the pyramid.

anything to make the community a better, brighter and more active (in a positive way) should be allowed IMO.

EDIT : The guy above me, TL;DR

[Edited on 08.21.2012 2:19 PM PDT]

  • 08.21.2012 2:18 PM PDT

Challenge me to a Hawaiian Punch chugging contest. I dare you.


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.


Posted by: ALI217
anything to make the community a better, brighter and more active (in a positive way) should be allowed IMO.

EDIT : The guy above me, TL;DR
Haha, exactly, this sums up my thoughts. No rules are broken, just as in the multiple threads i listed, and the community enjoys them. Why not allow them?

  • 08.21.2012 2:21 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Destinypedia - The Wiki for Bungie's Destiny
Posted by: DEATHPIMP72
Anyone but Foman. He smells like cheese.


Posted by: Graysoxrule
Posted by: x Foman123 xSo let me get this straight, mods are allowed to create threads on whatever they want (be it to troll or spam), but when a normal member does the same, it's against the rules and the thread gets locked? Damn, you guys are starting to act like the Waypoint mods.
No, and because you quoted nothing I actually said to support this "summary," and because I didn't say anything even close to that, I'm going to assume you either made this up or you're posting in the wrong thread.

Eakle, I've read your post but I have to jump into a meeting and will respond when I can.

  • 08.21.2012 2:23 PM PDT

Challenge me to a Hawaiian Punch chugging contest. I dare you.


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.


Posted by: x Foman123 x

Posted by: Graysoxrule
Posted by: x Foman123 xSo let me get this straight, mods are allowed to create threads on whatever they want (be it to troll or spam), but when a normal member does the same, it's against the rules and the thread gets locked? Damn, you guys are starting to act like the Waypoint mods.
No, and because you quoted nothing I actually said to support this "summary," and because I didn't say anything even close to that, I'm going to assume you either made this up or you're posting in the wrong thread.

Eakle, I've read your post but I have to jump into a meeting and will respond when I can.
Sounds good, i'll check in again later tonight. Thanks for the time, man.

  • 08.21.2012 2:25 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Intrepid Member

Don't judge a book by its cover, unless it has bacon on the cover, then it is a good book.

-Me

hold on a second let me find the thread Foman, a mod named Slayer made this thread and it was nothing but spam and if any other member had made it we would have been banned.

Slayer's thread

he only post spam threads like this

It is also a form of self advertisement as it is a link to his Youtube channel.

[Edited on 08.21.2012 2:31 PM PDT]

  • 08.21.2012 2:27 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: x Foman123 x
No, and because you quoted nothing I actually said to support this "summary," and because I didn't say anything even close to that, I'm going to assume you either made this up or you're posting in the wrong thread.
He's probably talking about The Slayer's thread, and to be fair, he has a point.

Not to mention the whole April Fools' thing.

[Edited on 08.21.2012 2:30 PM PDT]

  • 08.21.2012 2:28 PM PDT

Challenge me to a Hawaiian Punch chugging contest. I dare you.


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.


Posted by: elmicker
Posted by: x Foman123 x
No, and because you quoted nothing I actually said to support this "summary," and because I didn't say anything even close to that, I'm going to assume you either made this up or you're posting in the wrong thread.
He's probably talking about The Slayer's thread, and to be fair, he has a point.
Fair point or not, it hardly relates to the topic of LNF. That's already being debated in another thread that may still be on the front page. This particular discussion is about the specific thread Late Night Flood, not the treatment of mods compared to the members. I'd appreciate it if we left that out of this debate.

  • 08.21.2012 2:30 PM PDT

When I grow up I want to be bitter and spiteful.

"i liked the reality where everything was on fire better"
-legato on remedial chaos theory

This is a debate?

  • 08.21.2012 2:31 PM PDT

Challenge me to a Hawaiian Punch chugging contest. I dare you.


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.


Posted by: Duck duck DEATH
This is a debate?
Isn't it? A Ninja is trading discussion points with several members, so i'd say so.

  • 08.21.2012 2:32 PM PDT

When I grow up I want to be bitter and spiteful.

"i liked the reality where everything was on fire better"
-legato on remedial chaos theory

Posted by: The EAKLE
Posted by: Duck duck DEATH
This is a debate?
Isn't it? A Ninja is trading discussion points with several members, so i'd say so.
Having a ninja doesn't make this a debate, and it's funny because he's spitting out the most nonsense. Aside from that and crazzysnipes reiterating the silly rules, this debate is rather one-sided.

  • 08.21.2012 2:34 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: The EAKLE
Fair point or not, it hardly relates to the topic of LNF. That's already being debated in another thread that may still be on the front page. This particular discussion is about the specific thread Late Night Flood, not the treatment of mods compared to the members. I'd appreciate it if we left that out of this debate.
Well, it does relate to the topic. Foman's argument hinges on the topic in question effectively having, in his eyes at least, "no discussion value". That's his entire reason for deeming it spam therefore lock.

The fact that dozens of such threads are not only overlooked every single day, but even occasionally made by moderators themselves, is extremely relevant to this.

The moderators are quite happy to overlook dozens, hundreds of other similarly worthless threads on the basis that they're not really doing any harm, what's more piss in an ocean of piss, oh look it's made by my bro/i dont want any drama in hfcs etc.

It brings us back to the point of "Why that thread?" and for me the only obvious answer is petty jobsworthiness a la the forum games ban. As I said, if the moderators genuinely want to clean up the forums then I'm sure everyone will get behind them, but they're not going to do that, are they.

As it is we've got one particular thread being vindictively attacked for no good reason. It's the same kind of petty adversarial nonsense that resulted in us having 2,000 words of rules a couple of years ago. It makes the site a very, very unpleasant place to be.

[Edited on 08.21.2012 2:40 PM PDT]

  • 08.21.2012 2:34 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Destinypedia - The Wiki for Bungie's Destiny
Posted by: DEATHPIMP72
Anyone but Foman. He smells like cheese.

Posted by: The EAKLE
I'd argue this point with you all day, but it'd would be pointless and for the sake of this discussion you're pretty much right. The LNF threads are just about "Say whatever you want" threads. But so is This thread, which has been around as long as i can remember. Threads such as This are essentially just say anything, but with a 'clever name change' so it appears to be a discussion of a hypothetical scenario, all though it is still really just 'Say anything (to the Older Generation).
Obviously, there is a gray area for every user here, moderator and member alike, as to what kind of thread "encourages discussion." The threads you linked, and indeed all of the other threads linked by other members in this thread as examples of similar threads to the LNF threads, either center around a particular premise or focus on a particular topic for discussion.

To illustrate this briefly: if I went into the "post random facts" thread and posted "Red is the best color," it would be off-topic in that thread and inappropriate, but not in the LNF thread.

If I went into the "what is the most important message for the older generation" thread and posted "*sits down at the fireplace*," it would be off-topic in that thread and inappropriate, but not in the LNF thread.

If I went into the Swag Central thread and posted "Master Chief should die at the end of Halo 6," it would be off-topic and inappropriate in that thread, but not in the LNF thread.

If I went into the Members List thread and posted "How is everybody tonight?" it would be off-topic and inappropriate in that thread, but not in the LNF thread.

If I went into Slayer's YouTube video thread and posted "I had a burrito for dinner," it would be off-topic and inappropriate in that thread, but not in the LNF thread.

If I went into the Community Carnage thread and posted "This thread is now about Oreos," it would be off-topic and inappropriate in that thread, but not in the LNF thread.

The fact is that, unless it violates another forum rule such as being a jerk or posting about politics or whatever, nothing is off-topic or inappropriate in the LNF threads. And though I know we all have our own definitions of what kind of thread encourages "discussion," this is simply where I draw the line, and I think it's a fair place to draw it. If no post can be off-topic in a particular thread, the thread does not encourage any particular discussion and, in fact, actively encourages random spam.

As for having to check up on the thread every ten minutes because it 'has no topic,' that just doesnt make sense to me. Aren't you supposed to check up on every thread? For example, threads like "Halo 4 sucks" are allowed as long as no rules are broken in the OP, when we all know they'll attract plenty of replies, mostly being flame wars and trolls. But because a topic is clearly stated they're okay. Are you saying threads like that don't have to be monitored from time to time?Obviously, all threads must be monitored from time to time, and some must be monitored more than others. But it is far easier to tell when a "Halo 4 sucks" thread has derailed and needs to be locked than a thread with no topic. Despite what some people seem to think, reading every post in every thread, even late at night, is simply not possible. Even if it were possible, that would require moderators to do nothing but review threads for rulebreaking, all the time, whenever we are on. This is not expected of us, and frankly I enjoy participating in discussions too much to do nothing but moderate.

I don't mean to sound pretentious, but you have to trust me that a thread discussing a particular topic is much, much easier to monitor than a post-whatever-you-want thread for a number of reasons. Not the least of which is that the context of any particular post I'm looking at in a thread with a certain subject matter is already predefined to some extent.

Basically what i'm saying is this: Every thread, regardless of topic or discussion, can potentially be derailed, flamed, trolled, or used for inappropriate discussions. Late Night Flood is no exception. However, it isn't a catalyst for rule breaking either.This is where we differ in opinion. A "post whatever you want" thread, regardless of its title or who starts it, is far more of a catalyst for rulebreaking posts and discussions than a thread on a particular subject matter.

Furthermore, as I briefly noted earlier, if we were to allow the LNF threads, we would have to allow ALL "post whatever you want" threads. I know I could make an exception, but I've found that exceptions to the forum rules are generally a bad thing. Every single time we do it, those threads are called up in numerous other threads (such as this one), as examples of our unfairness.

So, for reasons already noted, I think that post-whatever-you-want threads are inappropriate because they circumvent the purpose of the forum structure, are difficult to monitor, and fail to encourage discussion and easy, immediate participation by the entire community on a particular subject matter.

  • 08.21.2012 3:29 PM PDT