1756274926
1756274926 Conquer Club • View topic - Flame Enforcement
Conquer Club

Flame Enforcement

Suggestions that have been archived.

Moderator: Community Team

Flame Enforcement

Postby sailorseal on Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:41 pm

Now that flame wars is gone it looks as if CC is taking a kinder stance towards forum activity. The current definition of a flame is
Night Strike wrote:Flames are posts or parts of posts which, directly or indirectly, insult, belittle, bully, name-call, or otherwise attack another user.


Concise description:
  • Flaming needs to be far more strictly enforced with much tougher rules towards flaming. Here is something I am thinking:
    1. Every flame will be mod-edited no matter how petty it may be
    2. Every flame comes with a official warning, quickly amounting to a ban

Specifics:
  • Flaming rules changed to something basically along the lines of
    1. Every flame will be mod-edited no matter how petty it may be
    2. Every flame comes with a official warning, quickly amounting to a ban

This will improve the following aspects of the site:
  • This site seems to be taking a friendlier attitude and this will help accomplish that
  • Forum activity will be more pleasant
  • Flamers will likely leave the site
User avatar
Cook sailorseal
 
Posts: 2735
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 1:49 pm
Location: conquerclub.com

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby ManBungalow on Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:52 pm

We don't want to squeeze every aspect of life out of this forum with endless rules in my opinion.
Image
Colonel ManBungalow
 
Posts: 3431
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:02 am
Location: On a giant rock orbiting a star somewhere

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby GrimReaper. on Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:52 pm

stop posting stupid rule changes
Image
When the first Atom bomb test was complete a colleague of Oppenheimer said: "What an Awesome and Foul display of Power." a moment later he added, "Now we are all sons of bitches"
User avatar
Private GrimReaper.
 
Posts: 913
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 10:15 pm
Location: everywhere

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby obliterationX on Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:55 pm

Sailorfail, just get over yourself. You're coming over as nothing but a wannabe moderator, and, if anything, it's only hurting your chances of acquiring such a position. Stop posting this useless crap that will never get considered / implemented.

Oops, did I flame? Boo-hoo.
User avatar
Colonel obliterationX
 
Posts: 953
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 1:52 pm
Location: Yeah

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby sailorseal on Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:01 pm

=D>
Thank you all for making my suggestion worthwhile
User avatar
Cook sailorseal
 
Posts: 2735
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 1:49 pm
Location: conquerclub.com

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby Serbia on Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:13 pm

You're annoying.
CONFUSED? YOU'LL KNOW WHEN YOU'RE RIPE
saxitoxin wrote:Serbia is a RUDE DUDE
may not be a PRUDE, but he's gotta 'TUDE
might not be LEWD, but he's gonna get BOOED
RUDE
User avatar
Captain Serbia
 
Posts: 12267
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 10:10 pm
Location: Detroit

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby sailorseal on Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:13 pm

Serbia wrote:You're annoying.

Wow, proving the worth of my suggestion will be easier then I thought
User avatar
Cook sailorseal
 
Posts: 2735
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 1:49 pm
Location: conquerclub.com

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby Serbia on Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:17 pm

sailorseal wrote:
Serbia wrote:You're annoying.

Wow, proving the worth of my suggestion will be easier then I thought

You consider that a flame?
CONFUSED? YOU'LL KNOW WHEN YOU'RE RIPE
saxitoxin wrote:Serbia is a RUDE DUDE
may not be a PRUDE, but he's gotta 'TUDE
might not be LEWD, but he's gonna get BOOED
RUDE
User avatar
Captain Serbia
 
Posts: 12267
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 10:10 pm
Location: Detroit

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby sailorseal on Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:18 pm

Serbia wrote:
sailorseal wrote:
Serbia wrote:You're annoying.

Wow, proving the worth of my suggestion will be easier then I thought

You consider that a flame?

The new rule would
User avatar
Cook sailorseal
 
Posts: 2735
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 1:49 pm
Location: conquerclub.com

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby Bones2484 on Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:20 pm

sailorseal wrote:
Serbia wrote:
sailorseal wrote:
Serbia wrote:You're annoying.

Wow, proving the worth of my suggestion will be easier then I thought

You consider that a flame?

The new rule would


I'm all for getting rid of flamers. But this "new rule" sounds rather nazi... ish.
User avatar
Major Bones2484
 
Posts: 2307
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:24 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA (G1)

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby sailorseal on Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:21 pm

Bones2484 wrote:
sailorseal wrote:
Serbia wrote:
sailorseal wrote:
Serbia wrote:You're annoying.

Wow, proving the worth of my suggestion will be easier then I thought

You consider that a flame?

The new rule would


I'm all for getting rid of flamers. But this "new rule" sounds rather nazi... ish.

You have a better way? Honestly not insultingly just how would you do it, it is the goal or this
User avatar
Cook sailorseal
 
Posts: 2735
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 1:49 pm
Location: conquerclub.com

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby Bones2484 on Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:24 pm

sailorseal wrote:You have a better way? Honestly not insultingly just how would you do it, it is the goal or this


Someone who has basically lost control of what they are typing (read: ronc) is a lot different than someone calling you annoying.

The site doesn't need more oversight. It just needs more consistent oversight.
User avatar
Major Bones2484
 
Posts: 2307
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:24 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA (G1)

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby sailorseal on Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:27 pm

Bones2484 wrote:
sailorseal wrote:You have a better way? Honestly not insultingly just how would you do it, it is the goal or this


Someone who has basically lost control of what they are typing (read: ronc) is a lot different than someone calling you annoying.

The site doesn't need more oversight. It just needs more consistent oversight.

Agreed now how can that be achieved?
User avatar
Cook sailorseal
 
Posts: 2735
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 1:49 pm
Location: conquerclub.com

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby mpjh on Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:28 pm

Most of the value of flames is in the eye of the recipient. So how about a flame emotive, just a little red flame, no words?
Cadet mpjh
 
Posts: 6714
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 1:32 am
Location: gone

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby Bones2484 on Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:29 pm

sailorseal wrote:
Bones2484 wrote:
sailorseal wrote:You have a better way? Honestly not insultingly just how would you do it, it is the goal or this


Someone who has basically lost control of what they are typing (read: ronc) is a lot different than someone calling you annoying.

The site doesn't need more oversight. It just needs more consistent oversight.

Agreed now how can that be achieved?


How about a clarification of the rules instead of adding more intense ones?
User avatar
Major Bones2484
 
Posts: 2307
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:24 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA (G1)

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby Timminz on Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:32 pm

We don't need stricter rules, just to protect every Tom, Dick, and Sailor. Sometimes people need to be told they're being ridiculous.
User avatar
Captain Timminz
 
Posts: 5579
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 1:05 pm
Location: At the store

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby Serbia on Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:48 pm

Bones2484 wrote:
sailorseal wrote:
Serbia wrote:
sailorseal wrote:
Serbia wrote:You're annoying.

Wow, proving the worth of my suggestion will be easier then I thought

You consider that a flame?

The new rule would


I'm all for getting rid of flamers. But this "new rule" sounds rather nazi... ish.


Bones just flamed. 36 month forum ban for you buddy.
CONFUSED? YOU'LL KNOW WHEN YOU'RE RIPE
saxitoxin wrote:Serbia is a RUDE DUDE
may not be a PRUDE, but he's gotta 'TUDE
might not be LEWD, but he's gonna get BOOED
RUDE
User avatar
Captain Serbia
 
Posts: 12267
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 10:10 pm
Location: Detroit

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby Bones2484 on Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:50 pm

Serbia wrote:
Bones2484 wrote:
I'm all for getting rid of flamers.


Bones just flamed. 36 month forum ban for you buddy.


Dang it. And I voted no on Prop 8, too.
User avatar
Major Bones2484
 
Posts: 2307
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:24 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA (G1)

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby owenshooter on Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:50 pm

Timminz wrote:We don't need stricter rules, just to protect every Tom, Dick, and Sailor. Sometimes people need to be told they're being ridiculous.

that almost got by me... and if words hurt you, perhaps you don't belong on an internet forum where people play out their bully fantasies...-0
Image
Thorthoth,"Cloaking one's C&A fetish with moral authority and righteous indignation
makes it ever so much more erotically thrilling"
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class owenshooter
 
Posts: 13272
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 6:01 pm
Location: Deep in the Heart of Tx

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby Serbia on Mon Apr 06, 2009 6:00 pm

owenshooter wrote:
Timminz wrote:We don't need stricter rules, just to protect every Tom, Dick, and Sailor. Sometimes people need to be told they're being ridiculous.

that almost got by me... and if words hurt you, perhaps you don't belong on an internet forum where people play out their bully fantasies...-0

If this is addressed to Tim, then something has gotten by you. If it's addressed to sailor, agreed, carry on.
CONFUSED? YOU'LL KNOW WHEN YOU'RE RIPE
saxitoxin wrote:Serbia is a RUDE DUDE
may not be a PRUDE, but he's gotta 'TUDE
might not be LEWD, but he's gonna get BOOED
RUDE
User avatar
Captain Serbia
 
Posts: 12267
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 10:10 pm
Location: Detroit

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby sailorseal on Mon Apr 06, 2009 6:02 pm

Serbia wrote:
owenshooter wrote:
Timminz wrote:We don't need stricter rules, just to protect every Tom, Dick, and Sailor. Sometimes people need to be told they're being ridiculous.

that almost got by me... and if words hurt you, perhaps you don't belong on an internet forum where people play out their bully fantasies...-0

If this is addressed to Tim, then something has gotten by you. If it's addressed to sailor, agreed, carry on.

Sailor hasn't posted in this for a while why would it be addressed to him?
User avatar
Cook sailorseal
 
Posts: 2735
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 1:49 pm
Location: conquerclub.com

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby Serbia on Mon Apr 06, 2009 6:04 pm

sailorseal wrote:
Serbia wrote:
owenshooter wrote:
Timminz wrote:We don't need stricter rules, just to protect every Tom, Dick, and Sailor. Sometimes people need to be told they're being ridiculous.

that almost got by me... and if words hurt you, perhaps you don't belong on an internet forum where people play out their bully fantasies...-0

If this is addressed to Tim, then something has gotten by you. If it's addressed to sailor, agreed, carry on.

Sailor hasn't posted in this for a while why would it be addressed to him?

Witty.
CONFUSED? YOU'LL KNOW WHEN YOU'RE RIPE
saxitoxin wrote:Serbia is a RUDE DUDE
may not be a PRUDE, but he's gotta 'TUDE
might not be LEWD, but he's gonna get BOOED
RUDE
User avatar
Captain Serbia
 
Posts: 12267
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 10:10 pm
Location: Detroit

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby Woodruff on Mon Apr 06, 2009 7:03 pm

sailorseal wrote:Now that flame wars is gone it looks as if CC is taking a kinder stance towards forum activity. The current definition of a flame is
Night Strike wrote:Flames are posts or parts of posts which, directly or indirectly, insult, belittle, bully, name-call, or otherwise attack another user.


Concise description:
  • Flaming needs to be far more strictly enforced with much tougher rules towards flaming. Here is something I am thinking:
    1. Every flame will be mod-edited no matter how petty it may be
    2. Every flame comes with a official warning, quickly amounting to a ban

Specifics:
  • Flaming rules changed to something basically along the lines of
    1. Every flame will be mod-edited no matter how petty it may be
    2. Every flame comes with a official warning, quickly amounting to a ban

This will improve the following aspects of the site:
  • This site seems to be taking a friendlier attitude and this will help accomplish that
  • Forum activity will be more pleasant
  • Flamers will likely leave the site


First of all, ignore the wannabe flamers in this thread...they're just upset still over the recent decision and it will take them a bit to ease down from it (understandably, I suppose).

However, I do tend to agree with Bones. Tighter rules aren't necessary, but consistent enforcement and good clarification of them are. I would also add that the current forum rules on flaming should be applied to in-game flaming. There's no reason for inconsistency between the two. I believe that with the consistency and clarification (so everyone knows where things stand), it will be good.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby Artimis on Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:58 pm

Woodruff wrote:I would also add that the current forum rules on flaming should be applied to in-game flaming. There's no reason for inconsistency between the two.


No thanks, we don't need any thought police around here, that's what the 'Foe list' is for. Further more, no harm is done where consent is given, if two players want to engage each other in a slanging match for the fun of it, they can. If clans want to engage each other in rowdy banter during a clan match they can. It's only a problem when some loud mouth fool picks an argument with someone who just isn't interested(Read: GENERAL STONEHAM), then THAT is a matter for the mods.
==================================================
This post was sponsored by Far-Q Industries.

Far-Q Industries: Telling you where to go since 2008.
User avatar
Captain Artimis
 
Posts: 810
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:09 am
Location: Right behind ya!!! >:D

Re: Flame Enforcement

Postby nagerous on Tue Apr 07, 2009 1:04 pm

sailorseal wrote:
Bones2484 wrote:I'm all for getting rid of flamers. But this "new rule" sounds rather nazi... ish.

You have a better way? Honestly not insultingly just how would you do it, it is the goal or this



Did I catch this right? :shock:
Image
User avatar
Captain nagerous
 
Posts: 7513
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:39 am

Next

Return to Archived Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users