Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'rule'.
Found 3 results
So here I am, technically "necroposting" on a thread discussing necroposting. This is the most recent thread (maybe the only thread) on the topic, it is still relevant, and it was left without any kind of conclusion. So should I have created a new thread instead? I don't think so. There are several situations where the rule needs to be relaxed, or at least left to moderator discretion. Situations where continuing an existing (and still relevant) discussion makes more sense than starting a new one (such as here). This reduces topic spamming (which is also against the rules, and often directly conflicts with the necroposting rule). Situations where people have asked an unresolved question that now has a resolution. Example: https://board.dualthegame.com/index.php?/topic/12349- technical-amd-gpu-rendering-issues/&page=2&tab=comments#comment-103748 I trust our moderators to be able to make judgement calls like this. So why not let them?
A little foreword Hello there, The following is likely rather nitpicky. Since people can (mis?)judge purely written communication in different ways I'd also like to add this isn't a huge concern for me. It's simply something I noticed and that could be potentially be improved sooner than later. I also thought about mentioning it via PM to NQ first but on the other hand I think there can be sufficient public interest and input to this, while NQ is of course free to set the rules as they deem necessary. But if public input can perhaps improve or clarify, then why not? Last but not least, since rules are mentioned it is not only something we have to keep in mind and follow as community members; it would also be some kind of "procedure book" for moderators that have to enforce the rules after all. So while there might be bigger problems and more interesting (game related) suggestions to consider, it's something perhaps not completely trivial either. But I let you decide now. »Short summary of suggestion and solution 1) Recap Change / reword a current forum rule to allow what is now technically considered "necroposting" in some situations that would be deemed widely acceptable however. Further info and reasoning below. 2) Suggested solution/s Reword or add a clause that allows this in specific situations or exclude situations where it would not be necroposting. Here's suggestions, highlighted in blue: (III) Following actionsa re prohibited: [...] Necroposting on old threads (unpinned threads in which the last reply is older than 2 months) with the exception of player organization and on-going idea threads. Necroposting on old threads (unpinned threads in which the last reply is older than 2 months). Moderation can see to exceptions or enforcement on a case-by-case basis depending on the topic. Necroposting on old threads (unpinned threads in which the last reply is older than 2 months). An old thread can be considered as an exhausted or completed topic. Posting in old exhausted threads that have not seen activity in 2 months; exceptions can apply to certain threads including player organizations or projects and game suggestions [...] Other suggestions from the community for an "improved wording" (None at this time) Further explanation or reasoning aka: "Okay, what the heck are you talking about now?" Rule snippet as of 11th August 2018 - mostly referring to bulletin point 2 and 3 The recent posting in the "DU real life" thread referred to a not so old rule addition regarding necro posts. Granted, it makes sense. But in some situations it could ironically conflict with the rule following afterwards, specifically sentence nr. 2. Long story short, it's this: Sometimes necro'ing old threads doesn't make sense and should not be done or forbidden or rewarded with a lock. But sometimes it should be formally and practically okay. Ironically following that particular rule could in a wider sense sometimes conflict with "creating multiple discussions on the same topic [...]" - if you cannot strictly necropost because 2 months have passed, then you have to kinda recreate threads, which clutter the forums however and is generally frowned upon anyway, when the alternative could just be posting even after 2 months since the last reply have passed. So we either have gaps exceeding 2 months between some posts or we have multiple threads on a subject if 2 months have passed between replies at one point. Or we let a topic die indeed, but some topics are on-going, and especially in an early game stage may not see regular posts all the time not exceeding 2 month gaps. Again, it is likely trivial or obvious when it is okay and not to some but let's put it this way: With a mild edit in rewording it could, for the far future, set things formally or technically right and perhaps not confuse some people who read the forum rules and take them at face value, as you kinda or often have to anyway. A mild change or elaboration would also prevent rather nitpicky players possibly reporting others for technical rule violations that are completely tolerated or accepted things however. In short, with a very mild amount of work now in rephrasing or elaborating, you can probably save yourself a bit of more work in the long run while making it apparent when moderators (or players) have to act or not. The community and mods might be at ease (or have clarity). Win/win. To keep it short and to get to a closing note, here's an example of what might be technically a necro posting but should be widely accepted - or is likely widely accepted, but technically breaking rules: Posting in your organization or player project thread (after 2 months) Posting in an idea thread or similar that revolves around a specific aspect (after 2 months; instead of creating a new thread then) Off-topic threads regarding other specific games, tv shows, technology and other topics (health, preferences, etc, comedy such as DU centered 'memes', etc.) Likely other scenarios On a last note I also understand there is a certain disclaimer that says: "IMPORTANT: Forum content is moderated at Novaquark's sole discretion, and content may be modified, removed, or otherwise restricted by Novaquark employees and/or moderators." meaning it allows exceptions or actions at the discretion already, but in this case I think it's good to mention it in the specific rule to have that rule be more clear. I also understand you could now start various discussion or suggestion threads about all kinds of other rules and ask for elaboration. But for me that is kind of stretching the goal here. So for now this is all about necro posting. I guess that sums it up. If I oversaw any flaws or aspects or if you want to rant about it being (insert whatever here), I guess you can do so here Thanks for consideration
This is Elector Cale(wars) speaking. Lets say you decided to go blow a planet up on a server like DU. There would be no rules again'st it. What i'm saying is what server wide rules would there be, or would it be all player ran depending which territory you are in. Just like real life. Cloning a human is illegal in every country, but lets say you clone someone on mars. It's still illegal. The point is will there be massive server wide rules, or would rules be dependent upon Universal nations. I would assume the basic NO HACKING or don't abuse exploits would be added to a universal server rule list. IT may not even be. It may be completely player ruled. IF you like this post The Opean Federation offers many jobs for those who join our org. Find our discord to find a job from the varity we have.