If curious about what was changed in the Forum Rules-

[CookiePuss 5378]

The Following has been added to the forum rules as of today...

 

Spam: Replies which could be summarized with a reaction.

Repetitive and/or non-contributory threads

 

Necroposting: Avoid posting in threads older than a month, unless you’re adding significant relevant content.

 

Cheat Sites: Posting about or linking to cheat sites is prohibited.

 

 

If I've missed anything lemme know and I will update the thread.

 

[MACKxBOLAN 431]

So this means i cant complain in general forum about 'web sites that sell Joker Guns'. I should just message my concerns to Matt

[vsb 6171]

“replies which could be summarized with a reaction”

 

does that mean reaction gifs are preferred over actual replies?

[TackoGirl 130]

thanks

[mtz 496]

13 minutes ago, Glaciers said:

“replies which could be summarized with a reaction”

 

does that mean reaction gifs are preferred over actual replies?

Reactions refer to those silly little icons (heart by default) in the bottom right corner of each post.

 

Unless you knew this right away and didn't need this post/were just making a joke, in which case I blame the lack of /s in your post. Text is awful for conveying sarcasm.

Edited August 6, 2019 by MartinPL

[CookiePuss 5378]

12 minutes ago, MartinPL said:

Reactions refer to those silly little icons (heart by default) in the bottom right corner of each post.

Oooh, I was actually wondering that myself.

So we can't post, "Very good thread, thank you."

We now can only use the "thanks" reaction.

 

That's pretty lame tbh, makes things so much less personal. Too bad they can't / won't enable positive reactions to show names.

 

 

 

Edited August 6, 2019 by CookiePuss

[TheJellyGoo 343]

Only thing left now is how to define non-contributory!

[mtz 496]

1 minute ago, CookiePuss said:

Oooh, I was actually wondering that myself.

So we can't post, "Very good thread, thank you."

We now can only use the "thanks" reaction.

That's pretty lame tbh, makes things so much less personal.

I wouldn't say it's a "this is the only option now" sort of situation. If you have something to add to the thread beyond "thanks for saying this" (like, for example, elaborate on an idea in the thread or discuss it), obviously no one should be taking moderative action on your post.

As for "making it less personal" - eh. If anything, that would be beneficial for our community; we're practically a bunch of high-schoolers with how prone we are to holding grudges and creating cliques. Obviously not all of us are like that, but a noticeable amount of people is.

 

Can't say I disagree with these rule changes. A similar system worked for Facepunch forums (RIP) - rate someone's post to show your opinion, make a post of your own to actually add more to the discussion than just the opinion.

[iRawwwN 283]

4 minutes ago, TheJellyGoo said:

Only thing left now is how to define non-contributory!

eh, we're gonna need a fine line on that because 99% of threads in this forum would fall under that tbh

[CookiePuss 5378]

21 minutes ago, iRawwwN said:

eh, we're gonna need a fine line on that because 99% of threads in this forum would fall under that tbh

See, Im afraid to even make a joke now... is that still allowed?

[iRawwwN 283]

6 minutes ago, CookiePuss said:

See, Im afraid to even make a joke now... is that still allowed?

does it humour the admins/mods? if no, then no. ur gonna be banished 

[CookiePuss 5378]

Just now, iRawwwN said:

does it humour the admins/mods? if no, then no. ur gonna be banished 

aww

[vsb 6171]

49 minutes ago, MartinPL said:

Reactions refer to those silly little icons (heart by default) in the bottom right corner of each post.

 

Unless you knew this right away and didn't need this post/were just making a joke, in which case I blame the lack of /s in your post. Text is awful for conveying sarcasm.

i get it now thanks

 

i wonder if there will be additional reactions added to the forums, for instance i would like a “ur fucking stupid” reaction for a lot of stuff

[CookiePuss 5378]

39 minutes ago, MartinPL said:

As for "making it less personal" - eh. If anything, that would be beneficial for our community; we're practically a bunch of high-schoolers with how prone we are to holding grudges and creating cliques.

I definitely think removing names from dislike was a good idea, and I'm sure its prevented a great number of squabbles.

But when I think someone has made a good point, or was funny, I kinda wish they could see it was me giving the positive reaction.

Perhaps the two are inextricably linked?

[Benguin 141]

2 hours ago, CookiePuss said:

Oooh, I was actually wondering that myself.

So we can't post, "Very good thread, thank you."

We now can only use the "thanks" reaction.

 

That's pretty lame tbh, makes things so much less personal. Too bad they can't / won't enable positive reactions to show names.

 

 

 

Very good thread, thank you.

[CookiePuss 5378]

7 minutes ago, Benguin said:

Very good thread, thank you.

uh oh... you're in trouble now mister!

[KnifuWaifu 499]

10 hours ago, CookiePuss said:

Spam: Replies which could be summarized with a reaction.

Repetitive and/or non-contributory threads

 

But seriously if they're going to restrict us to "reactions-only" how about not limiting the amount of reactions we can do per day?

[Goldtiger 133]

11 hours ago, CookiePuss said:

Repetitive and/or non-contributory threads

And it was at this moment that the APB Forums died

[Fortune Runner 796]

15 minutes ago, Goldtiger said:

And it was at this moment that the APB Forums died

hopefully it stops multiple threads of the same exact thing at once.

it gets annoying when you have to post the same thing 3 times within 6 hours

11 hours ago, Glaciers said:

“replies which could be summarized with a reaction”

 

does that mean reaction gifs are preferred over actual replies?

I guess that means I can't reply " huh? " to someone anymore when they are so confusing that I don't even know where to start asking about "what did I just read"

 

[Aeronaut 647]

should i test the waters

 

very good thread thanks!

 

edit: i think we're good

Edited August 7, 2019 by Aeronaut

[Flight 239]

44 minutes ago, Aeronaut said:

should i test the waters

 

very good thread thanks!

 

I suppose I could say from our side that not much has changed. We've been moderating under the current ruleset for quite some time, but we wanted to push an update to you guys for ages in order to have a higher level of transparency and clarity.

 

Hopefully you'll barely notice anything has changed at all (beyond better understanding).

 

There's nothing worse than being punished for something you don't quite understand.

If there's anything that comes off as too vague, please do let us know and we'll try to elaborate or even update the rules if need be.
 

11 hours ago, CookiePuss said:

I definitely think removing names from dislike was a good idea, and I'm sure its prevented a great number of squabbles.

But when I think someone has made a good point, or was funny, I kinda wish they could see it was me giving the positive reaction.

Perhaps the two are inextricably linked?

I resonate with this a great deal. I like/thank a ton of posts and wish people could see that. Oh well!

 

***

 

Thanks for the thread Cookie!

A link for the lazy: https://forums.gamersfirst.com/announcement/3-forum-rules/

[LilyV3 323]

17 hours ago, MartinPL said:

Reactions refer to those silly little icons (heart by default) in the bottom right corner of each post.

 

Unless you knew this right away and didn't need this post/were just making a joke, in which case I blame the lack of /s in your post. Text is awful for conveying sarcasm.

 

sounds like a stupid idea then since we cannot see who gave those reactions.

[Alani 475]

26 minutes ago, LilyV3 said:

 

sounds like a stupid idea then since we cannot see who gave those reactions.

Yeah, its kind of funny how they made reactions anonymous and then for the next week after that you get notifications 'SOMEONE HAS REACTED' and there is some crackpot downvoting everything you posted.

 

Reactions shouldn't be hidden simply to prevent people from spamming negative reactions everywhere. People will think twice prior to making an angry reaction when the person being reacted knows who did it.

 

This isn't reddit and honestly shouldn't become so. Community is toxic as fuck as is, and making certain things anonymous will just continue it.

[Ohshii 215]

 

 

What's the point of these new rules being added in? The vast majority of the people who post on these forums should be getting warnings/suspensions nonstop if these rules are fairly enforced across the board and not just cherry picked by moderators. The majority of all the threads as well as the posts within them will just be mass deleted and everyone will be on moderator warning/suspensions.

 

It just comes across like you can't say/do nothing on the forums without getting in trouble now, while at the same time for the last like 7 years you can cheat in FC all day and night and no one seems to care. (because no one ever seems to get banned from cheating in FC anymore because it's always the same people over and over blatantly cheating without recourse)

 

Just imagine for one second, if the actual in-game GM's were that efficient we wouldn't have a cheater problem anymore.

 

 

 

 

[NotZombieBiscuit 3146]

I give this thread a :thanks: reaction