Zoop

What I typically do when I make a double post in a case like this is to add a horizontal rule at the top of my new post, to give people a visual indication of where the new content was added. Personally, Id say that one day should be the minimum, maybe more.

applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejackapplejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack applejack

Well, apart from your standard array of old consoles... I use a CRT HD television, which I love beyond words or measure, and which I think produces a far more beautiful picture than any LCD or plasma television I've ever seen. It's bloody lovely, even if it weighs over two hundred and fifty pounds. I also use a vacuum tube amplifier for my AKG k701 headphones, because tube amps are delicious. I used to have a Commodore64. I still mourn it.

Honestly, I think the best route for future games would be to focus on games that don't require a lot of folks to be online at the same time in order to be playable. The issue with our TF2 server boils down to this: nobody wants to sit around on an empty server - there's no fun in it. With Minecraft, you can at least build and do your own thing while nobody else is around( the PvE element of the game is fleshed out and enjoyable... unfortunately, games like TF2 and CS cannot claim the same. Just my thoughts on the matter. I'd love to see MLP Forums host addition games, but I'd prefer that we only utilize our resources on games that will actually get played.

I think Scoots covered about everything (and very well, at that), but I just thought I'd chip in and say that there's really nothing wrong with voicing concerns or misgivings about things like this - we won't know what people are concerned about if nobody speaks up, after all, and as such won't be able to do what we can to set those fears aside. It's a bit vague with the present wording. A revision might be worth looking at in the near future. Likewise. Some chickens carry a mean bite.

Given that you apparently have a massive portion of the forum on your friends list, you could always watch the global status feed, that way youll continue to see everyone's status updates, but wont be getting spammed to death by it. To be clear, you are using the friends feature in a way that it was not intended - there is no bug or glitch here, you're simply misusing a feature. It is not intended to house every forum member, just those that you personally know.

Honestly, I very much doubt that many people that use the friends list as it was actually intended have any sort of issue with the notification ceiling as a result of status update notifications. My advice would be to either disable status update notifications, or to defriend a couple dozen folks.

It's only specific warnings we're worried about - feedback topics about the warning point values associated with various warnings are fine. The focus of all of this is squarely on warnings - I've adjusted my initial post to better reflect that. Thanks for bringing that up! Something of that sort would be best brought up with the administration via a moderation dispute ticket. Technically, warnings can be given for just about anything (see: Feldian clause), but we tend to avoid doing that unless there's a very good reason for it. I'd be very interested in knowing if people are getting warnings for things that aren't actually against the rules. That would be NC and Vexx. No, this is a privately owned and operated website. I think you're confusing "criticism" with "ranting, raving, and drama mongering" Quite frankly, if someone wants to criticize us they're free to do so - we have a feedback board in which we welcome and respond to criticism, and an entire system by which people can bring anonymous criticism regarding our moderation team directly to the site administration. Don't agree with something that the staff is doing? Take it to people that can actually do something to address the situation and change it. Criticism? Good stuff - dissent is an important thing; what good are 'yes men' to anyone? Raging drama in response to what is commonly a minor act by a moderator? No - and you'll be hard pressed to find many worthwhile sites that will tolerate that. Nope. Criticism is, after all, perfectly fine.

Eeyup. Besides, you catch more flies with honey than you do vinegar. Honestly, for the sake of consistency I'd say that such things should really be avoided for two reasons: If we allow User A's "aw, shoot" statement to stand, while User B's gets removed for whatever reason, it opens the door to unnecessary claims of bias and favoritism. It's a leading statement - people are likely going to create a discussion around it, which would then defeat the point of keeping warnings private. Soooo... completely private, I'd say. This falls squarely under "stop-causing-drama" - I very honestly don't think that any of the minor explosions we've witnessed on occasion have any significant impact on the forum's (or the moderation team's) overall reputation. Some complaints are to be expected, though I'm fairly confident that most people will see the sense behind the changes. This place isn't meant to be a drama pit, after all.

Way back when, this feedback board served as a place for tech support and site questions in addition to its present function. During this time it was not unusual for folks to get useless and/or bad advice for support issues, misleading and/or incorrect information in response to general site questions (not out of any malicious intent, mind you), and similar. While nobody will claim that all of the posts in response to such threads were bad or otherwise flawed, enough were that it began to turn into a bit of a headache, especially when someone would say something incorrect and it would end up repeated time and time again despite not coming from an official source. Eventually we decided that the ticket system we now utilize would be the best way to ensure that every response to every question that might get asked was one that could be relied upon to be accurate and useful. While the FAQ isn't perfect, we do make an effort to add to it when we receive a large influx of extremely similar questions.

Hi there! This is just a heads-up heads-up regarding some changes we've made to our site rules and FAQ that everyone should be made aware of. I'll go through all of the adjustments and talk a bit about them. If you have any questions about anything, feel free to pose them here. First off: it is no longer permissible to complain about warnings on the public forum, status updates, or blog posts. We don't air our dirty laundry out in the open, and we expect the same from you. If you disagree with an action taken by the staff, you have two options: Open a mod dispute. Create a general feedback topic about the issue you disagree with. Note that feedback topics regarding specific warnings or incidents will be removed, with the poster being referred to the moderation dispute system. Time and time again we've seen people seemingly go out of their way to try and work up a massive storm of drama over extremely mundane and clean-cut warnings. It's okay to be upset about a warning, but it's not okay to take to the public airwaves to rant and rave about them. To reflect this policy, we've made the following change to our global rules: Furthermore, the FAQ item regarding moderation disputes has been renamed to "I've received an unfair warning / How do I appeal warnings?" and now contains the following text: The snippet requesting people to keep their cool was added following a number of very passionate moderation disputes we've received in recent months. Remember - the abusive behavior rule is applicable just as much to members of the staff as it is other members of the forum. TL;DR: Please don't yell at me and call me mean names. With all of that fun business out of the way, the following FAQ entries have been added: Can I revive old threads? How do I submit a banner? Why hasn't the banner been changed? And, finally... the following has been added to the rules: Truth be told this isn't actually anything new per se, we've had a policy against under thirteen registrations for quite some time now, it was simply never reflected in our rules.

What if I refuse?

NC discovers Google Docs. [05:39:13 PM] NewCalamity: Google Docs is crazy, yo [05:39:22 PM] NewCalamity: I'm watching you edit the fuckin' thing [05:39:29 PM] NewCalamity: IN REAL TIME, MAN. [05:39:46 PM] NewCalamity: First time seeing this shit [05:39:55 PM] NewCalamity: Wooooooaaaah [05:39:59 PM] NewCalamity: Marco is adding shiiiit [05:40:02 PM] NewCalamity: Duuuuuuuuuuuuuude

Something to take into consideration before going around adding more and more game servers: at present, neither our Minecraft or TF2 servers are widely utilized. If anything further were to be added, would it actually be used?

I know, right? It's complete and utter nonsense. He needs to be demoted down to a sectional moderator for his transgressions against all that is good upon this planet.

As the community continues to grow, the existing administration has found their attention being constantly tugged away at from numerous different directions all at once. With that in mind, after a bit of discussion and hair-pulling (for those of us with hair to pull, that is) it was determined that the time had come to bring on another Community Administrator. And who better for ensuring the continued harmony of this wonderful community than a bloke named... Chaotic Discord Though recruited as a moderator relatively recently, Chaotic Discord has proven himself an invaluable resource from both a moderation standpoint, and more importantly from a project management standpoint. CD's boundless enthusiasm and energy have proven important beyond measure in getting a couple neglected projects back on-track for integration and deployment. By elevating CD to an administration position we've given him access to the tools he needs in order to get things like the mythical "Octavia's Hall Critics" initiative dusted off and ready to go, allowing him to serve as an unofficial project manager of sorts for the team. Given CD's proven track record of good judgement and even-handedness we have no doubt that he will perform admirably in his new role. TL;DR: Less work for Zoop. Zoop approves.

Recovering chaotic evil. I wasn't always a nice guy. More recently I find that I fluctuate around lawful neutral, with a bit of lawful good and lawful evil. Truth be told, I prefer being Luke Skywalker, but sometimes have to play the role of Darth Vader... for the greater good, of course. :3

My concern with any sort of significant integration of any sort of group add-on would be that they could give off an exclusive vibe, whereas we want the community here to be as inclusive as possible. As it stands, everyone on the forum is a member of the same group, without borders or barriers. If groups are able to have discussion boards and such that are private to that group I fear that it would serve largely to fracture the community as a whole into bite-size bits, with the potential for explosive results when such a group somehow feels slighted in one way or another. While it may seem that my reservations are a result of unfounded paranoia, we have actually experienced such an event here in the past - when we closed our on-site chat room. For our more recent members (and/or those that are unaware, or that may have simply forgotten), we used to play host to a forum integrated IP.Chat system. The chat room was fairly popular, and had about two dozen regulars that would frequent the room quite a bit, to the point that many of them stopped posting on the public forum almost completely in favor of their relatively tight-knit chat room. Eventually we shut down the IP.Chat due to a number of issues we were having with it, which caused a lot of folks in the chat group to go a wee bit atomic, because it was taken as a personal strike against the whole lot of them. Personally, I'd rather avoid a similar situation from being repeated. In addition to that... is there really any reason to keep any posts at all hidden behind locked doors like that? It would be to no gain to the community as a whole if quality discussions became something locked away in secrecy, unseen by anyone. At any rate, speaking solely for myself, I don't mind the idea of group systems of a sort being implemented, but I would be completely and utterly against having private boards for them. If anything, I'd think them best suited to being a means by which people with common interests could find each other, such as an 'Blueblood is best pony!' group for aspiring fans of our favorite Equestrian prince.

Randomly look at index. See 'Zoop and his ancestry' Click ... Become extremely confused.