• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 40,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

Thread approval

Robocopter87

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2010
Messages
220
Location
New York
WCA
2013KUNK01
I think the real problem is people being bothered by the threads being made, and people feeling they have to scream at the poster. If you just report it and leave it alone, it'll get bumped off the front page, and later deleted. If like 10 people start bashing the person for posting a stupid thread, that's 10 bumps keeping it visible to everyone. The threads are more like the spark to the problem IMO.

So true. So true. Except for the fact that people on the internet act stupid. I don't know why. But they do. Simply asking people to not do this doesn't fix this. Because people do this regardless.
 

Robocopter87

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2010
Messages
220
Location
New York
WCA
2013KUNK01
Thats the part that needs working out.
Either thay can make a decision as a group to remove a thread/close it or they just make sure that threads aren't being reported for no logical reason and that threads that do need removing are pushed to the top right away and removed as quickly as possible.
Just like an assistant. Organize everything.



Aron is your name so it would be right to capitalize it.

So lemme get this straight.

Mods right now can delete threads with a wave of their hands. And because our Mod standards are the way they are. They generally make the right choice. HOwever Mods aren't always around.

So your solution is to get a group of people who can vote on threads to shut them down.

So if a mod isn't around. Why are 5 Half Mods around?
Do you know how many people this would take?
Do you know how low the standards for Half Mod would have to be?

Once again. I will say it again. This doesn't fix the problem. This also makes a Mod problem.
 

insane569

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
432
Location
Don't Worry About It
WCA
2011LUEV01
YouTube
Visit Channel
So lemme get this straight.

Mods right now can delete threads with a wave of their hands. And because our Mod standards are the way they are. They generally make the right choice. HOwever Mods aren't always around.

So your solution is to get a group of people who can vote on threads to shut them down.

So if a mod isn't around. Why are 5 Half Mods around?
Do you know how many people this would take?
Do you know how low the standards for Half Mod would have to be?

Once again. I will say it again. This doesn't fix the problem. This also makes a Mod problem.

Just as a back up. It doesn't make any mod problems since they wouldn't really have any crazy powers other than make sure threads get taken down before anyone decides to troll them.
 

Meep

Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2008
Messages
696
Location
Vancouver, Canada
WCA
2008ASIS01
YouTube
Visit Channel
That's where the "Half-Mods" come in. They'd probably be the ones to decide whether threads should be taken down or not.

Or we can be the "half-mods" by using our super Report Post powers to bring posts to mod-attention without bumping. If people are acting stupid and keep bumping them (like Robocopter said), then treat those bumpers as if they were spammers making "stupid" threads/posts via infractions/reprimands until they take a hint.
 

AustinReed

Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2010
Messages
1,295
Location
Tucson, Arizona
WCA
2011REED01
YouTube
Visit Channel
So if a mod isn't around. Why are 5 Half Mods around?
Because there are more of them.

Do you know how many people this would take?
Not as much as you seem to think
Do you know how low the standards for Half Mod would have to be?
It would be lower. However, more of them would have to come to an agreement about a thread.

Or we can be the "half-mods" by using our super Report Post powers to bring posts to mod-attention without bumping. If people are acting stupid and keep bumping them (like Robocopter said), then treat those bumpers as if they were spammers making "stupid" threads/posts via infractions/reprimands until they take a hint.

The Chicken thread got reported many times. It still took a while for them to bring it down.

Also, I don't think there will be anyway to stop people from spamming. If you tell a group of people to do something, there will probably be a couple that won't do it. It's the way humans are. :-/
 
Last edited:

emolover

Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
3,096
Location
Carmel, IN
WCA
2009MAHO01
YouTube
Visit Channel
Then maybe they should get infractions/reprimands along with the "stupid thread" makers if appropriate.

I don't think infractions work very well. I know they work well for the first 2 or 3 times you get but I have gotten 8 and only one of them I got banned for. The dusty ban hammer needs to be used more often.
 

Robocopter87

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2010
Messages
220
Location
New York
WCA
2013KUNK01
I facepalmed at that post insane569

OK.

So instead of creating a filter for the threadmaking. You wanna delete the threads after they are made.

However, you wanna introduce a new Mod status of Half Mod.
It takes multiple half mods to vote to close the thread.
By the time the thread has been made and enough mods have seen it to vote. I guarantee that the thread has already been trolled, vandalized, shot and killed, murdered, raped and anything else.
Having a group of people vote on the thread won't get the thread taken down quickly.
In order to actually have enough people to be able to respond quick enough you would need to make the whole site Half Mods.

With my idea, the threads aren't ever made, thus they are never trolled.

Thus,

Problem solved.
 

Tim Major

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
5,381
Location
Melbourne, Australia
WCA
2010MAJO01
(and maybe a few secret admins you guys don't know about)

Shhhh... you said you wouldn't tell ~nervous glance~.
1. So if a mod isn't around. Why are 5 Half Mods around?
2. Do you know how many people this would take?
3. Do you know how low the standards for Half Mod would have to be?
1. The half mods would be picked from different timezones.
2. 5
3. I'm sure there are at least 10 people on this forum who are respectful and responsible. Are you saying the forum is terrible at all times, and the mods are the only good posters?

Aron is your name so it would be right to capitalize it.
Ok InSAnE569, since username formatting no longer matters.
 

insane569

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
432
Location
Don't Worry About It
WCA
2011LUEV01
YouTube
Visit Channel
I facepalmed at that post insane569

OK.

So instead of creating a filter for the threadmaking. You wanna delete the threads after they are made.

However, you wanna introduce a new Mod status of Half Mod.
It takes multiple half mods to vote to close the thread.
By the time the thread has been made and enough mods have seen it to vote. I guarantee that the thread has already been trolled, vandalized, shot and killed, murdered, raped and anything else.
Having a group of people vote on the thread won't get the thread taken down quickly.
In order to actually have enough people to be able to respond quick enough you would need to make the whole site Half Mods.

With my idea, the threads aren't ever made, thus they are never trolled.

Thus,

Problem solved.

OK then. Make anythread that gets flagged 10 times hidden until a mod reviews it in which case it will either be removed or allowed to join the forum. Putting a time limit on new cubers is just a waste since some members still make bad threads. Its not just the newbs.

Ok InSAnE569, since username formatting no longer matters.

It is supposed to be InsAne569 so yea make it as insane as you want.
 
Last edited:

HelpCube

Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
496
Location
My Stackmat
YouTube
Visit Channel
What if when anyone pressed the create a thread button, there was a sort of option menu that came up before you came to the thread creation page, and you would be able to select if the thread was either informational or if it was a question. If you select informational, a dialog box pops up telling you to search, and if you select a question, a dialog box pops up to tell you to check (and links to) the One Answer Question Thread. It doesn't have to be exactly like this, but I think something like this would be a step in the right direction. And maybe this would only happen if you had less than 100 posts, or if you have had an infraction in the past week or two. Thoughts?
 

insane569

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
432
Location
Don't Worry About It
WCA
2011LUEV01
YouTube
Visit Channel
What if when anyone pressed the create a thread button, there was a sort of option menu that came up before you came to the thread creation page, and you would be able to select if the thread was either informational or if it was a question. If you select informational, a dialog box pops up telling you to search, and if you select a question, a dialog box pops up to tell you to check (and links to) the One Answer Question Thread. It doesn't have to be exactly like this, but I think something like this would be a step in the right direction. And maybe this would only happen if you had less than 100 posts, or if you have had an infraction in the past week or two. Thoughts?

Sounds like an idea. Informing a thread creater to search before making a thread. But there will still be useless threads made that aren't simple questions. Maybe if they had a warning before the thread is made telling the poster the consequences of making a useless thread.
 

Robocopter87

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2010
Messages
220
Location
New York
WCA
2013KUNK01
But then it becomes a dictator ship that nobody will want to go on any more.

You wouldn't be willing to wait, I dunno, two weeks, to be able to post threads? Is that really that hard to deal with? Is that really too much to ask?

Tim Major said:
1. The half mods would be picked from different timezones.
2. 5
3. I'm sure there are at least 10 people on this forum who are respectful and responsible. Are you saying the forum is terrible at all times, and the mods are the only good posters?

1. That doesn't guarantee that they are on.
2. If it takes five half mods to vote to shut a thread down, and you only have five half mods. If four are on the thread is unable to be closed. By the time you get five people to vote on a thread, a Mod has already seen it.
3. Okay. You just totally blew my words out of proportion. Yes there are 10 people who are respectful and responsible, I would say there a lot more than that too. But are Mod standards are pretty high, otherwise there would be a lot more Mods, no? I'm saying by dropping the standards of the Mods. Creating this whole complex idea you got here, you get more problems than you started with.

HelpCube said:
What if when anyone pressed the create a thread button, there was a sort of option menu that came up before you came to the thread creation page, and you would be able to select if the thread was either informational or if it was a question. If you select informational, a dialog box pops up telling you to search, and if you select a question, a dialog box pops up to tell you to check (and links to) the One Answer Question Thread. It doesn't have to be exactly like this, but I think something like this would be a step in the right direction. And maybe this would only happen if you had less than 100 posts, or if you have had an infraction in the past week or two. Thoughts?

Now thats a solution. I'd be for this.

I see why your username is HelpCube
 

Tim Major

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2009
Messages
5,381
Location
Melbourne, Australia
WCA
2010MAJO01
Sounds like an idea. Informing a thread creater to search before making a thread. But there will still be useless threads made that aren't simple questions. Maybe if they had a warning before the thread is made telling the poster the consequences of making a useless thread.

Did you know the Facebook terms and conditions is over 60 pages long? No, because you've never seen it. You didn't want to read rules, you wanted to join Facebook. Nobody reads rules before doing something for the first time.
 
Top