Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
Would be funny as hell!!!
Dave the tourist: Excuse, could you possible tell me where I can find a gas station. Jackass the flamer: WTH OMG YOU AAARGH... WTH IS WRONG WITH U, U MOFO!!! Dave the tourist: Uhm... <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html//emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif' /><!--endemo--> wah? Jackass the flamer: O-M-G WTH!!! WHY ME, KEEP ASKING THE ME, WHY!!! NOOO U MOFO. GET THE HECK OT OF HERE!!! Dave the tourist: Hmmmkay *drives of thinking what did he say?*
i have a suggestion and an observation which may add to this cagey.
first, if you are worried about people not reading the faq even if forced to (by having it pop up before they can post) you could take an extra step by making a timer on the link so that if they just skip to the bottom and try to pass it up they get a message saying:
You Tried to click this too fast, you may not click this link for X seconds, look through the faq to see if the answer to your question is there, if you dont find it in that time you may click the link and proceed to post. The reason for this is.....
second, upon clicking this button you could warn them that if they post something in the faq that THEY will recieve a ban/ suspension. Take it out at the root so to speak.
that first idea is a good one, a lock of 15 minutes on the button to be shure the users will read more, or the first 15 minutes they get linked to the faq with a warning.
it's no good banning people to quick or harsh warnings, it's a feedback for some talentet yet unknown newbie mappers and the lost of good ideas.
I think a 15 minute posting lock will do little more than frustrate and confuse anybody. Maybe we should just have a warning stating that repeated posts that are in some way against the faq (whether it's questions asked without searching or other faq violations) could result in your posts being deleted or locked and you being banned from the mapping forum. To me that seems like incentive enough for people to read that faq. Since it doesn't explicitly state that it applies to new mappers it also should serve a reminder to the rest of us to put the kid gloves back on, and keep them there.
<!--QuoteBegin-Reese+Feb 14 2004, 08:34 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Reese @ Feb 14 2004, 08:34 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I think a 15 minute posting lock will do little more than frustrate and confuse anybody. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm going to make any system I do implement as unobtrusive as possible--the idea is to get those people who didn't see the FAQ link a chance to view the questions that it answers before they try to ask something redundant, not to annoy people.
If someone has already seen the FAQ according to the frequency that wins the poll (currently since the last update), the FAQ-view-on-new-topic system will be completely invisible; look at the FAQ on your own and you'll never see it.
No automated system is going to fix the arrogance of someone who refuses to use a reference and demands a personal answer to something they could look up in 15 seconds by themselves; I'm hoping that making the FAQ more visible will help those people who just didn't know the answer was there. Getting the answer from the FAQ will be faster than waiting for a thread response anyway.
To continue the analogy from earlier in this thread, I might give a lost traveler a map (a document which is designed to answer common questions about how to get someplace) if they want directions rather than telling them which streets to use... if they yell at me for doing that in real life the way some people have exploded when told their answer is in the FAQ, I don't think I'm the one with the problem.
If the person has problems understanding the map, I'd be willing to help them after giving them a chance to see if the standard explanation solved their problem. It'd be faster for both of us to use the ready resource on hand if it answers the question.
the 15 sec (or whatever time) doesnt have to be annoying. Ive been to several sites that did this and although at first it was annoying I quickly got over it because a) it was their site and they can do what they want b) it was obvious why they were doing it c) im easy going
maybe the majority of people would get frustrated and im giving them the benefit of the doubt they dont deserve
How about, if someone asks a question that is already answered in the FAQ...we simply dont post in it, AT ALL. Only a moderator may type a simple respose saying "read the FAQ" with a link to it.
BTW. I must say that it is sad that this is even a problem. Just chill people <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Parasite+Feb 17 2004, 04:36 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Parasite @ Feb 17 2004, 04:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> How about, if someone asks a question that is already answered in the FAQ...we simply dont post in it, AT ALL. Only a moderator may type a simple respose saying "read the FAQ" with a link to it.
BTW. I must say that it is sad that this is even a problem. Just chill people <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Why should we even have a stupid post there in the first place? Best thing is for action, and Xp-Cagey has taken a step forward on that.
Comments
Dave the tourist:
Excuse, could you possible tell me where I can find a gas station.
Jackass the flamer:
WTH OMG YOU AAARGH... WTH IS WRONG WITH U, U MOFO!!!
Dave the tourist:
Uhm... <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html//emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif' /><!--endemo--> wah?
Jackass the flamer:
O-M-G WTH!!! WHY ME, KEEP ASKING THE ME, WHY!!! NOOO U MOFO. GET THE
HECK OT OF HERE!!!
Dave the tourist:
Hmmmkay *drives of thinking what did he say?*
... yeah <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html//emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif' /><!--endemo--> nevermind
first, if you are worried about people not reading the faq even if forced to (by having it pop up before they can post) you could take an extra step by making a timer on the link so that if they just skip to the bottom and try to pass it up they get a message saying:
You Tried to click this too fast, you may not click this link for X seconds, look through the faq to see if the answer to your question is there, if you dont find it in that time you may click the link and proceed to post. The reason for this is.....
second, upon clicking this button you could warn them that if they post something in the faq that THEY will recieve a ban/ suspension. Take it out at the root so to speak.
it's no good banning people to quick or harsh warnings, it's a feedback for some talentet yet unknown newbie mappers and the lost of good ideas.
I'm going to make any system I do implement as unobtrusive as possible--the idea is to get those people who didn't see the FAQ link a chance to view the questions that it answers before they try to ask something redundant, not to annoy people.
If someone has already seen the FAQ according to the frequency that wins the poll (currently since the last update), the FAQ-view-on-new-topic system will be completely invisible; look at the FAQ on your own and you'll never see it.
No automated system is going to fix the arrogance of someone who refuses to use a reference and demands a personal answer to something they could look up in 15 seconds by themselves; I'm hoping that making the FAQ more visible will help those people who just didn't know the answer was there. Getting the answer from the FAQ will be faster than waiting for a thread response anyway.
To continue the analogy from earlier in this thread, I might give a lost traveler a map (a document which is designed to answer common questions about how to get someplace) if they want directions rather than telling them which streets to use... if they yell at me for doing that in real life the way some people have exploded when told their answer is in the FAQ, I don't think I'm the one with the problem.
If the person has problems understanding the map, I'd be willing to help them after giving them a chance to see if the standard explanation solved their problem. It'd be faster for both of us to use the ready resource on hand if it answers the question.
b) it was obvious why they were doing it
c) im easy going
maybe the majority of people would get frustrated and im giving them the benefit of the doubt they dont deserve
BTW. I must say that it is sad that this is even a problem. Just chill people <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
BTW. I must say that it is sad that this is even a problem. Just chill people <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why should we even have a stupid post there in the first place? Best thing is for action, and Xp-Cagey has taken a step forward on that.