Regzal
Greater Being
{S=0}Death Bringer
[img src="http://i50.[tinypic.com]/2nuj4lx.gif"][img src="http://i50.[tinypic.com]/2nuj4lx.gif"][img src="http://i50.[tinypic.com]/2nuj4lx.gif"][img src="http://i50.[tinypic.com]/2nuj4lx.gif"][img src="http://i50.[tinypic.com]/2nuj4lx.gif"][M:3200]
Posts: 251
|
Post by Regzal on Jul 20, 2009 14:38:51 GMT -5
That's true so you could also give percentage acording to the degree of flame
|
|
|
|
Post by ~Kill3r~ on Jul 21, 2009 12:19:02 GMT -5
good point... how about certain percentage of warning for bumping... (1 month = 5%...2 months = 10%... etc...)
|
|
Regzal
Greater Being
{S=0}Death Bringer
[img src="http://i50.[tinypic.com]/2nuj4lx.gif"][img src="http://i50.[tinypic.com]/2nuj4lx.gif"][img src="http://i50.[tinypic.com]/2nuj4lx.gif"][img src="http://i50.[tinypic.com]/2nuj4lx.gif"][img src="http://i50.[tinypic.com]/2nuj4lx.gif"][M:3200]
Posts: 251
|
Post by Regzal on Jul 21, 2009 13:56:39 GMT -5
I think it would work and you should increase per number of bumps ,eg: first bump 5% . . . second bump 10% . . . . third bump 20% etc . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jul 21, 2009 18:08:55 GMT -5
Complicated, though...
|
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jul 21, 2009 18:23:35 GMT -5
Ah, and equation! Sounds reasonable.
|
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jul 21, 2009 21:15:48 GMT -5
You've also got how much the person is known for flaming.
|
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jul 21, 2009 22:20:30 GMT -5
That looks like it would work okay...
|
|
|
|
Post by GGoodie on Jul 21, 2009 23:47:45 GMT -5
I think that the bumping one is good, but writing equations takes away the judgement in it. The equation may be structured, but aren't staff picked because they show responsibility and good judgement? I think that equations for minor offenses like spam and bumping are okay, but the more complicated offenses like flaming and harassment should be left up to the staff member.
|
|
|
|
Post by ~Kill3r~ on Jul 22, 2009 7:39:09 GMT -5
good point... but this could really work
|
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jul 22, 2009 10:26:21 GMT -5
It's been working up till now, I'm sure it can continue to work.
|
|
|
|
Post by ~Kill3r~ on Jul 22, 2009 12:51:09 GMT -5
ok. it's a good system...  |
|
|
|
Post by votehim on Jul 23, 2009 12:51:04 GMT -5
if i modify a post on a dead topic is it considered post revival ?
|
|
|
|
Post by I wuv M4( Satar Jaèoèdoæ) on Jul 23, 2009 13:35:55 GMT -5
I say the bumping table is bad.
Does really mater how old the bumped thread is?
No, if time does matter we should use a logramatic equation.
W=5•floor(n•log(t))
Ps. E and ln are retarded and are only useful for compounded interest. Take that Euler! You suck!
|
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Jul 24, 2009 0:56:42 GMT -5
What does this have to do with rules?
|
|
|
|
Post by soleildeimos on Jul 24, 2009 20:48:30 GMT -5
AWESOME.
|
|
Regzal
Greater Being
{S=0}Death Bringer
[img src="http://i50.[tinypic.com]/2nuj4lx.gif"][img src="http://i50.[tinypic.com]/2nuj4lx.gif"][img src="http://i50.[tinypic.com]/2nuj4lx.gif"][img src="http://i50.[tinypic.com]/2nuj4lx.gif"][img src="http://i50.[tinypic.com]/2nuj4lx.gif"][M:3200]
Posts: 251
|
Post by Regzal on Jul 25, 2009 12:28:12 GMT -5
Posts under about five words are considered spam so please don't spam here plus that wasn't even on topic
|
|
|
|
Post by alp on Aug 9, 2009 15:40:23 GMT -5
Looks like I gotta revise a whole lot of rules, but hey gotta have rules to survive.
|
|
KuraiOorora
Supreme Member
{S=39}[M:575]
Grand Mist Samurai
Posts: 322
|
Post by KuraiOorora on Aug 9, 2009 16:15:29 GMT -5
Revise? Are you sure you know what the word revise means?
|
|
|
|
Post by -M4- on Aug 9, 2009 18:52:15 GMT -5
It made sense to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Qwerty on Aug 10, 2009 3:55:05 GMT -5
Who knows, he may become staff one day and revise some rules.
Posts under 5 words long are NOT automatically called spam.
|
|
[img src="http://i25.[tinypic].com/10ygymt.png"]
[img src="http://i42.[tinypic].com/oq9gkj.png"] Fàêå Ñóÿilliñ 
