Update To Off-Topic Rules

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: vab423 

Skigeek, you said it yourself ... in a DIABETES thread, there is a specific topic.  In a topicless thread, there is no topic. Which is why I'm confused as to how one can say "even topicless threads have a topic."  Isn't that an oxymoron?quote>

 

Now, I'm confused.  Who said "even topicless threads have a topic"?  

I said that "even off topic threads are supposed to have a topic."  (Diabetes being one of many examples of an off-topic topic.)

The concern here is the forums are getting cluttered with conversations that are little more than "Hey, what's up?"  "Nothing.  How are you?"  "Fine."

Page after page of that is not only boring, it is using up resources for no particular purpose.

[vab423 8]

er, yup, you're right, of course, Skigeek - you said "off-topic threads have subjects."  My bad; liking topicless a little too much, I guess.  My point is that SOMEONE set up the banter-type whatever thingamabobber for just such a reason, so why start crying foul?  

I'm merely offering a 3rd party disinterested opinion - I don't participate in those topics because I'm not particulary fond of them myself.  I'm just saying that if the reason is as beebs, the moderator, said is because (s)he doesn't like reading through it, then don't make it sound so sinister by calling it "spam."  Just say "we are making this rule because we don't like reading such nonsense."  I wouldn't claim to be in the know or anything, but as far as it using up resources, I would imagine that is the site owner's judgement.  I don't  have a plethora of knowledge regarding web sites, but certainly one-line posts aren't as much of a resource hog as shareable files or pictures in CJs, right?  Anyway, moot point since the word has been handed down.  Thanks for your time.

@sloppet:  oxymoron is a phrase comprised of contradictory terms, such as "government intelligence" or an "educated guess"

[owenluby 1]

What we need is a clear, precise definition of what SPAM really is.

[callagrafx 3]

Apology to Sloppet:

I am sorry for my comments aimed at you, they were misdirected frustration (I think we all know at what) and you are right, you've been away for a while and I forgot your posting style. You could help that by coming back more often you know

[s.i.X 13]

Maxis better release a new game soon, you guys are at each other's throats here. 8O

[Voar Tok 4]

Originally posted by: owenluby What we need is a clear, precise definition of what SPAM really is.quote>

Such a definition is technically impossible as spam can easily vary from one instance to the next.  Some have defined spam according to the traditional ideals that it is unsolicited junk email and nothing more.  As you can see, the staff's opinion here is that spam can and does entail more than just junk email.  For example, making posts that have absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand are a type of spam.  Many times, the topic will be what helps to determine spam.  However, if a person makes a post that effectively reads nothing at all, that is a type of spam.  This all has to be done at the disgression of the staff.

As Ski said up above, we aren't interested in being a bunch of power hungry meanies who are out to kill everyone's fun.  If that were the case, we'd just close the threads.  This rule wasn't enacted because the OT moderators are getting lazy and don't want to be bothered with reading a few more posts.  Think about it, how long does it take to read a page full of posts that basically have one sentence per post?  That'd be about five minutes at max.  If the issue really was that we were tired of reading all of this and wanted an easy answer to fix the problem, we'd just do like Ski said up above and close the threads down.  That would be far easier than enacting a new rule.  Think about this - new rules actually increase work for a while, so if we were all lazy, that would be counter-intuitive.

Also, as Ski said up above, post after post after post with ridiculously short replies like the examples she gave just suck up system resources.  That's basically what Microsoft does when they make all these little noises and stuff so that your computer can beep at you when you tried to do something it didn't like.  Multiple that by a few hundred requests being sent from all over the world, and it adds up quickly.  There were a number of things that were done after the upgrade to help cut down on the strain on the server because the community is so large.

[callagrafx 3]

Also, as Ski said up above, post after post after post with ridiculously short replies like the examples she gave just suck up system resources. quote>

Actually, the reverse is true. If text is being stored in a computer, it is usually stored as a string (a series of ASCII characters, each one of which is stored as one byte). The formatting characters such as space, carriage return and line feed may be included in the string. Therefore the shorter the sentence, the less resources are being used.

[Eastwinn 6]

I'm defining a topicless chat thread as a thread that did not have an intended topic to discuss when posted. I only read through these threads and possibly post in them when I can state what the current topic(s) being discussed is(are). I don't consider threads where I can't do this out of control, useless or spam because they are a form of social interactment, just not a form that is always praised apon in a forum. I'm going to support this new rule because I believe that it may cause these threads to form topics, but I can't be certain, we'll just have to wait and see.

[MC6Ash 4]

As the staff do not fully agree on this rule and how it should be applied and when, It will most likely be amended. 

I posted earlier in this thread that all posts pertaining to the possible amendment of this rule will be concidered - it appears that my post was ignored. 

I now post again, but I will expand upon it.

---

The rule is probably going to be amended to be more precised. I do not agree that all posts should be governed alike. If a conversation is the stereotypical:

Josh: Hi

Jessica: Hi

Josh: How are you?

Jessica: I'm fine...

Josh: Oh.quote>

Then I 100% agree that the new rule should apply.

BUT, however, there are times in which a discussion is between two people, but is much more complex than the above. Such a thing occured in the "Kabin" thread and has led to a very heated debate

For example:

Josh: Hi, Jessica, How are you?

Jessica: Im fine Josh, hey, did you see the red sox game last night?

Josh: Yeah, I did! I cannot believe that Jimmy Bowel stuck out in the 9th inning, I was devastated!

Jessica: OMG I know! Ben was screaming at the television!quote>

Please notice that in this example, Josh and Jessica had a good discussion about the red sox game. With the new rule, Josh would have had to wait for someone else to post before posting his "Yeah, I did!" comment. I do NOT believe that this is fair, as it is a huge block in the social process.

---

Having said that, I put the floor open to anybody who wishes to help on this. What I want to do is come up with a precised rule and what it pertains to.

I would like a user-defined definition of what is and isn't "spam" so that the moderators can set a standard to follow

I would like a user-defined definition of what pertains to the "Two-post rule" and what doesn't

An example of what I want for the definition of what pertains to the rule is as follows:

i.e. a post that contributes to the debate, discussion, or conversation with more than a simple statement, will be acceptable. This post must expand upon its topic and not be a simple post such as "Hello there, how are you?" (the other replies, then you reply with) "I'm fine, thanks for asking." But instead. "Hello there, How are you today?" (the other reply, and then you reply with)

"I'm great, thanks. Hey, did you see the red sox game last night?"

[Eastwinn 6]

I find that the best definitions are the ones that can be 100% understood without examples. I'm going to start my definition with this:

A post that contributes, expands and continues the discussion in some way.

And build up on it later trying to keep examples out of the equation.

[MC6Ash 4]

Eastwinn: I want a good definition, I just thought that examples might make it easier for users to understand.

But that still can't define it, who decides if a post contributed, expands, and continues the discussion? Posts that we delete that obviously do none of these get pointed to and said "that wasn't spam, why did you delete it?"

Ash

[Eastwinn 6]

I agree, examples help, I was just stating that the definition should be the most clear part. I must of typed that wrong.

Anyway, you made a good point. Maybe it would just be best to leave it up to the mod what is acceptable and what is not?

[MC6Ash 4]

Eastwinn: it is up to the mod right now, and many people are complaining about it.

Ash

[Voar Tok 4]

Originally posted by: callagrafx

Also, as Ski said up above, post after post after post with ridiculously short replies like the examples she gave just suck up system resources. quote>

Actually, the reverse is true. If text is being stored in a computer, it is usually stored as a string (a series of ASCII characters, each one of which is stored as one byte). The formatting characters such as space, carriage return and line feed may be included in the string. Therefore the shorter the sentence, the less resources are being used.quote>

But compare that to a consolidated post like what Vandy showed, and it uses more.  Compare that to what it would take in the chat, and it really uses more.  Look at SkiGeek's post at the top of this thread.  It takes the server only one line of code to render the entire contents of her post up there, but there are about fifty lines of code necessary to render everything else that you see (for example, her avatar, CML, and the like).

The issue with system resources is that all of that has to be rendered also, and since a lot of that takes up more bandwidth than text, you really are sucking up more system resources.  We're not complaining about people posting, but the contents of the posts tends to be conversation in a form that is better off in the chat room.

[owenluby 1]

Voar Tok: Thanks for your info

Everyone: This is just madness! Why don't we all just settle down a bit, eh?

[DuskTrooper 314]

So, how's the implementation of this going along, eh?

[s.i.X 13]

Eh, Dusky? Eh? Eh?

Hi Skigeek!

[Gaston 0]

Okay,

   I have read through this forum of off-topic rules and am now more confused as to what I can and can't post then I was.     Quite obviously, by my number of posts and join date, I am still a "$%&^!" as it were.     That being said,   It seems to me (and this is just my humble opinion) that the obvious has been overlooked.    That being:  Are these "new rules" being enforced to save space and bandwidth OR because of something else.   If it is to save space for SC4 related topics only, then that is what needs to be defined, not what "spam" is.    Do we need to define what type of forum is apropriate for this site?   

    It seems to me (once again, only my humble opinion) that some of the staff/moderators do not like the "off topic" forums and that is what the problem is, not the possiblity of someone spamming.   If that is the case, then couldn't it be better moderated by someone who sees the merits in those types of forums?    The "off-topic" forum are set up for topics that are exactly that, "off-topic", aren't they?   They are still created by people who have the common interest of SC4.   SC4 is what brought us all here.   This is what makes us Simtropians.    "Many cities, One community."      "Off-topic" conversatios will still occur in other forums, but at least in the "off-topic forum" you know that that is what it is about to begin with.   I wouldn't go to a a forum about baseball and start a conversation about sewing, and expect everyone to join in.     At the same time, by the way these rules have been defined so far; The City Journals are all in violation.   I have seen lots of "wow kool pics" and "thats amazing" posts.     Are those "creative" posts?   Hmmm, not in my opinion.     But I skim right over those and don't really think about them.    At the same time,  I have made several friends in those same CJ's by sharing bits of psuedo-relavent information.  

    At least the off-topic threads are what they are... "off topic".     Moderation of these forums should be much more relaxed and less rigid.   Yes, there should be a set of clearly defined rules .   Clearly defined being the key part of that phrase.    What do the people who come here want?   Maybe have some polls and find out what we want out of this site.    After all, aren't we why we came here in the first place?    Okay that was a bit confusing , but I think you know what I mean.

    I will end this by thanking everyone for reading this post.    I tried very hard not to make anyone angry.    If anyone feels that I have attacked them, I apologise.   I did not intend to target any one individual or group.    I am just hoping that this will help to direct the discussion of rules toward a useful conclusion.   As I stated at the beginning, "these are only my humble opinions".    Hopefully we can all have our own opinions and still get along.   After all... Many cities, One community.

---Gaston

[Mikeaut1 261]

Gaston, thanks for that post!! I liked your insight in that post a lot. And you did it in a manner thats relaxed and calm!

I think the rules for this forum are quite simple... Just don't post one worded posts, and don't violate the new two post rule! It's so simple, but yet it spawns debate like the Great War.

If you look back to the beginning of this thread where the edit occurred, moderators and even an administrator approved and agreed with the rules. Guys, its the rules. It's not hard to follow, at all! And it keeps the forum in balance, how? By eliminating spam. What's spam? I would think "spam" in this forum includes one worded posts. Or maybe its a violation of the two post rule. And hey, the staff isn't going to chop your head off because there was a server error and you posted twice!

All the rules state here is that the two post rule is in effect here; that's all. It's a simple rule to follow, and I think it's a fact. I don't know why there is so much debate over a simple rule that is simple to follow. I don't think this debate is pointless whatsoever, because this is an opportunity to get the community's response to the updated rules, and that's always a good thing!

But, I think the continuous bickering over something so simple is not worth it, that's all.

[MadTV_Freak 0]

You know something... Mike is right... And I quote this without actually using the quote button (Is this a first on Simtropolis?)

"But, I think the continuous bickering over something so simple is not worth it, that's all."

Now, back in the old days, when Simtropolis was a little village of about 15,000 members (I was one of them ), there weren't that many rules to follow, because with such a small little community, there weren't many rotten apples (not that there are rotten apples now, just a couple of bruised ones ...) now, 3 years later.. with a booming community of over 150,000 people (many of which are clones, hey.. just telling the truth)... of course there are going to be rules.. come on, we all get the urge to act bad once in a while, there cant be a 150k pop and then somebody such as Dirk or SkiGeek is like "Do whatever you want children, just dont touch that llama, it's been acting really mean lately" So of course there are rules.

Now, of course, not every last person is going to agree with the rules.. but come on, its not like the mods are saying "You must only post at 5:32:46.87 AM EST, if you fail to post at this time. you will be FOREVER BANNED from Simtropolis" So with rules that are so easy to follow, I don't see what all the huss and fuss is about. When Dirk created this website he wanted it to be "Many Cities, One Community" not something like... "Many Members, One Ball of Chaos", so if Dirk were to come on one day, wouldn't he want the site to be running as smooth and as calm as possible? I surely think so.

So come on.. we are a community, we can deal with these rules, they're not that hard to follow. And if you have any questions, and I mean important questions, not questions like "How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop?", then you can always feel free to PM a member such as... I wont even name a member, because there are SO MANY wonderful Mods, & Admins that can help you with any problem you have, so dont be intimidated by the mods, or admins, just ask them, and they'll solve your problem.

So.. with us being the biggest SC4 website on the web (Yes children, the web is very big), Lets be "Many Cities, One Community"

My name is MadTV_Freak, and I approve this message (Ok, I know its not a campaign, but Ive always wanted to say that)

[PhilsCafe 8]

First of all, I'd like to thank the staff of Simtropolis for making this site a safe community with a polite environment. There is only few flaming and people are mostly treated with respect as far I can tell. I 'm well aware that keeping this community clean probably is a difficult job with members from ages of 13 to 70 or something like that but you generally, you're doing a great job.

But there is my concern. Maybe it's because I'm libertarian, however, I think too many rules restrict our freedom too much and I think this could drive away members, especially more mature members. This is counterproductive for the ambience on the forum. Of course, no fool like an old fool, even mature people make mistakes but that's what the moderators are here for and there are many more responsible members who can politely sort that out (talking about self-policing). Although this new rule doesn't really affect me beacause I rarely post in the OT forums, I think it goes too far. Some people are offended by this new rule, mature people and long-time members here and I can't even blame them for that because I would be too if I were them...

There already are rules against spamming and when people are following them, this new rule isn't even necessary. I think it's a matter of common sense to combine posts for example when you're not allowd to make posts with less than four words... if someone doesn't do that however, let's make them aware of that possibility. This works in other parts of Simtropolis, I'm sure it would work in the OT as well. But sometimes I think the site staff is overreacting... sometimes a public information would be better than introducing new rules every few weeks. The punishing and 'further action' should be reserved for real issues like real inappropriate behaviour.

PhilsCafe

[DioAngel 1]

To me this place is nothing but a war house! I tottaly agree with Cal, Jacky, PhilisCafe , and Gaston who are in complete protest. This two post rule is Bogus and I'm also here who is against this rule. I can't even post anywhere because of this and the rest! We are NOT in some strict playgroud for god sakes!....  I've have so many rules in RL why having more here which is less fun?! Give me a break!!

~edited~ moderator

[Kippis05 2]

Originally posted by: MadTV_Freak

So come on.. we are a community, we can deal with these rules, they're not that hard to follow. And if you have any questions, and I mean important questions, not questions like "How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop?", then you can always feel free to PM a member such as... I wont even name a member, because there are SO MANY wonderful Mods, & Admins that can help you with any problem you have, so dont be intimidated by the mods, or admins, just ask them, and they'll solve your problem.

So.. with us being the biggest SC4 website on the web (Yes children, the web is very big), Lets be "Many Cities, One Community"

quote>

 

Ok, well, I agree that rules need to be enforced on Simtropolis for situations like spamming and other junk, such as large and obnoxious sig pics, or oversized images in a post, and with such a large and still rapidly growing Simtrop. population rules need to be in place. And yes, mods and admins are there for a reason, helping a new member with troubles they may have with the site, as an example. The Admins and Moderators, as well as normal, everyday ST members contribute to this site to make it a great place to gather as a community.

BUT, let me express deep concern for one rule in the O.T. Forum that I'm concerned with: The Double-Post Rule. I know that there has been several incidences in the past that resulted in the temporary lock-down of several threads, including, but not limited to: (Jacky's Kabin and The Moose Factory, just to name a few) 

Posted by: DioAngel  To me this place is nothing but a war house! I tottaly agree with Cal, Jacky, PhilisCafe , and Gaston who are in complete protest. This two post rule is Bogus and I'm also here who is against this rule. I can't even post anywhere because of this and the rest! We are NOT in some strict playgroud for god sakes!....  I've have so many rules in RL why having more here which is less fun?! Give me a break!!quote>

I do agree with DA... The double-post rule is pretty rediculous in a social thread like the O.T. Many times people have to say something but must wait for periods of time, sometimes hours at a time, before they can add something... It just doesn't add up to me.

Well, that's my rant, so...

WHO WANTS A PIECE OF THIS!?

[crazychickensc12 84]

I have to disagree, the two post rule is really not that big of a deal, you can always PM each other if its not your turn to post, you can always edit you would just have to keep checking back to the thread..plus the kabin actually benefitted because it brought a lot of new people into the kabin, sure somedays are slow but its a lot more fun now because you can talk to more people instead of just a back and forth convo with one person

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

If people are female dogging about the lock on the New Moose Factory, let me be the first to agree that Ash had every duty to lock it.  DA broke the rule deliberately.  Bad boy, DA!  (male or female). 

This is like a traffic rule.  Only scofflaws speed on highways, and only fools violate rules of this board when they know there is stringent policing in the dirktatorship.

As one of the traffic cops around here, just see what happens when you do something stupid in my areas of responsibility.  We are all bound to do our duty even if it is distasteful.

[Kippis05 2]

Originally posted by: crazychickensc12 I have to disagree, the two post rule is really not that big of a deal, you can always PM each other if its not your turn to post, you can always edit you would just have to keep checking back to the thread..plus the kabin actually benefitted because it brought a lot of new people into the kabin, sure somedays are slow but its a lot more fun now because you can talk to more people instead of just a back and forth convo with one person quote>

 

I guess you're right (I can be really annoying and distracting by manipulating the PM system )

[Nerd_Guy 4]

This 2 post rule is bad for major virtual establishments!! i.e. the Kabin and Moose Factory.

It should be revoked until the mods can think of a better way to sort spam from meaningful conversations!!

[DioAngel 1]

Good one Nerd Guy!

[TheCrybKeeper 300]

This thread is 16 days stale, but after reading every single bit up to this point, I still saw only Vandy and the mods really understanding it all.

I actually have asked a clarification on just what Spam entails here at ST and got no replies at all.

 It may be an old brand of meat(questionble) and household name, but the cyber delimma of Spam is brand new and not only canned biproducts, but undefined and mis-understood in way too many forums, where I have asked this very same question; "What is spam anyways?".....

To this day, no one has answered. So, I went and began to research Spam.

Here is what I did find
Spam is flooding the Internet with many copies of the same message, in an attempt to force the message on people who would not otherwise choose to receive it. Most spam is commercial advertising, often for dubious products, get-rich-quick schemes, or quasi-legal services. Spam costs the sender very little to send -- most of the costs are paid for by the recipient or the carriers rather than by the sender.

There are two main types of spam, and they have different effects on Internet users. Cancellable Usenet spam is a single message sent to 20 or more Usenet newsgroups. (Through long experience, Usenet users have found that any message posted to so many newsgroups is often not relevant to most or all of them.) Usenet spam is aimed at "lurkers", people who read newsgroups but rarely or never post and give their address away. Usenet spam robs users of the utility of the newsgroups by overwhelming them with a barrage of advertising or other irrelevant posts. Furthermore, Usenet spam subverts the ability of system administrators and owners to manage the topics they accept on their systems.

Email spam targets individual users with direct mail messages. Email spam lists are often created by scanning Usenet postings, stealing Internet mailing lists, or searching the Web for addresses. Email spams typically cost users money out-of-pocket to receive. Many people - anyone with measured phone service - read or receive their mail while the meter is running, so to speak. Spam costs them additional money. On top of that, it costs money for ISPs and online services to transmit spam, and these costs are transmitted directly to subscribers.

One particularly nasty variant of email spam is sending spam to mailing lists (public or private email discussion forums.) Because many mailing lists limit activity to their subscribers, spammers will use automated tools to subscribe to as many mailing lists as possible, so that they can grab the lists of addresses, or use the mailing list as a direct target for their attacks.
[CONLUDED]

 Notice, there is nothing about forum spam being double posts, or signatures in your posts that lead to your personal webspace. Afterall, that webspace is an extension of you and it is your post with your sig.  This should only become a problem, if your signature is an advertisement for personal profits of a monetary nature.

Double posts are double posts, NOT spam and a waste of bandwidth and also storage, as it is a saved piece of useless data.

As for meaningless posts, save those for chatrooms where the data can be erased periodically and isn't much of a problem.

Forum posts that say, "Yeah, I agree" are obviously meant for live converstaion or a live chat room and not in a forum. Forums are for information not conversation and that does include the Off Topic Thread, which is a viable and informative topic genre. I'll agree some may be useless information, but it is still information and not simple basic conversation.

Take into account, non-profit websites as your sig.  Lets say  your signature is link to The Cancer society? This could still be or not be spam. This is a forum we are talking about, which means, the administration has to clarify there specific definitions of spam for this forum.

The moderators cannot say or even dare answer mine or others' questions on spam, because Spam is so difficult to clarify. There just aren't any specifics on spam in many forums.

Basically, I have started a great guideline for ST above already. Maybe the admins and mods can work on something to help with this.

My Signature is my personal webspace and non-profit. You may notice I am pushing the boundaries on spam with my sig. Here again, there are no boundaries set, so there is this loop hole of non-clarity roaming about.

FORUM SPAM needs statutes and limitations established.

Paaece guys,
Mike

 EDIT: See this green is for editing and editing is the best way to be safe when you get real excited about the topic and can't resist adding just another two cents worth. The other participants will notice the green is an edit or amend before replying back to it.

Spambots are automated programs designed to register on forums, disseminate spam, and leave. They usually supply a fake name, freebase email address, and sometimes mask their true IP address. Spammers can set the message that the spambot will post. Most spambots target one specific forum software or hosting company. Spambots are easy to identify by the nature of the message they leave, or the links in the signature. A typical post contains no topical content, but is accompanied by either spam links in the post itself, or in the user's signature. Some spambots will never post, and rely on the links in their signature to increase their search engine visibility. Looking up the spambot's user name with a search engine will often reveal thousands of registrations in unrelated forums.

Wikipedia on Forum spam, posting advertisements or useless posts on a forum. 

See? I was wrong above Double Posts are SPAM! Eeeek!! Darned that wiki.

[Rymac91 15]

Ok...veering off from the debate to ask a question...What does the ST Closet count as? It's a social non topic based thread but at the same time it is based on a single topic...also...basing off this logic...does the house of worship count under this aswell?