Final Death of Necroposting

You have a blog on SP, therefore if it's posted in there it's shared with SP. Your blog is the ideal place to store things about yourself and by yourself, including art, because it keeps everything of yours in a single easily accessed place that can be organized and categorized.

Forums are made for conversation and discussion, not personal single thread galleries.

What is the point of even having an art board then, if it's more "ideal" to post my art in a blog?

I appreciate the bump for my thread, but that's not what I was trying to accomplish. I am incredibly hurt that if I don't update my thread in the next three weeks I'll have to ask permission from a mod to get it updated or not be able to update at all due to this "feature." My work is posted exclusively on Southperry, and while that may not mean much to you, it means quite a lot to me. What about threads in the Shady Tree? Felix seems to have stopped updating his story for now, but if it takes him more than three weeks to come up with the next chapter he won't be allowed to post it in the same thread?

It just doesn't make sense to me to hold the Expressive Arts forums to the same standards as the rest of the boards. The creative process is one that can take a considerable amount of time, and that should be recognized.

What? Isn't a moderator's job to moderate? If that's how it's going to be, I don't even see the need for a moderating team. Just completely bar anything that's against the rules, get rid of moderators, etc.
.

Moderators exist to make judgments.
Whether or not a post is outside the allowed timeline is not a judgment, it's math and the forum can do that itself. Adding things to the mods list that the server can do for itself is a waste of everyones time.

Forums are made for conversation and discussion, not personal single thread galleries.



You've described the entire forum.
I've seen an entire one post to a thread older than two weeks, ever, that qualified as a substantial contribution, and it honestly could've been it's own followup thread.

Are you implying that the Shady Tree shouldn't belong on SP because people like Felix should write his stories in a blog? I personally see nothing with anything from the Expressive arts. I see blogs more for little things that people may not care enough about to post on the forums, such as their feelings for a specific day/event or wanting to advertise something.

As for the 2nd part, how have I described all of SP? Take for example the Pokemon subsection. The "Where are you now on your Heart Gold/ Soul Silver playthrough" may be slower now than it was before but there can always be new people wanting to talk about their experiences in the game. As for threads with barely one post, those are usually in something like Maple Q&A, Speakeasy, or even the Funhouse.

Such sections of this forum are meant for short/brief discussion that should not be expanding into an epic debate, in which they can be subjected to the No Necro restriction.

I can understand wanting to save time and trouble from warning/infracting necroposters, but on the other hand, how often a day or even a week in SP has someone or some people decided to necro a long gone thread with a useless post?

Also, how would this stop people from trying to bump up a thread before the 21 day mark because they still think the thread has value, or in the Expressive Arts case the writer/artist is thinking of uploading a new story/artwork but isn't ready yet? Then the Necro restriction will either be reversed or newer stricter rules will be implemented because of people abusing the 21 day limit; this feature is essentially a 21 day thread lock.

Moderators exist to make judgments.
Whether or not a post is outside the allowed timeline is not a judgment, it's math and the forum can do that itself. Adding things to the mods list that the server can do for itself is a waste of everyones time.

Defining the allowed time line is a judgment. A week is old for General MapleStory Discussion, but 4 is not in the Art Section.

Moderators exist to make judgments.
Whether or not a post is outside the allowed timeline is not a judgment, it's math and the forum can do that itself. Adding things to the mods list that the server can do for itself is a waste of everyones time.

The time factor is the only thing the forum can see. There is still judgment to be done in a post, even if it is three weeks old.

"Some posts on older threads can't even be classified as necroposting, because in some cases the posts in question may still contribute to the topic, as in [but not limited to] expressive art archives."

EDIT: Hazzy is also right.

It just doesn't make sense to me to hold the Expressive Arts forums to the same standards as the rest of the boards. The creative process is one that can take a considerable amount of time, and that should be recognized.

I was quite clear that "Certain entire forums may also become exempt from this restriction if sufficient reason is found to do so."

This is the first attempt anyone's made at providing such a reason. Your previous request was "exempt the entire forum just for my one thread", which forgive me, was not particularly moving. It's good to see other people waking up and actually participating now but it'd nice to see people focusing on how to make things work best, rather than just complaining about what they don't want.

Also, how would this stop people from trying to bump up a thread before the 21 day mark because they still think the thread has value, or in the Expressive Arts case the writer/artist is thinking of uploading a new story/artwork but isn't ready yet? Then the Necro rule will either be reversed or newer stricter rules will be implemented because of people abusing the 21 day limit.

Bumping with out adding anything would be spam and there is already a mechanism to address spam.

Forums are made for conversation and discussion, not personal single thread galleries.

The first part of this does not go with the second part since the second part is an opinion of yours. And if you're going to be an owner of a forum you can't have opinions like that.

Before blogs existed forums were created with the idea of people to gather for conversation and discussion, just as you said, but also part of that is for your so called "personal threads" in which people share something they created and for people of the forum to give opinions on. Just because blogs are the new in thing does not mean the purpose of forums change.

Forums can take many shapes and forms and be about all sorts of subjects, but no one owner of any forum can change the main purpose of a forum. To serve the people for their thoughts and ideas even if they're "worthless personal threads/posts".

I don't understand why you can't just have it (assuming this is possible) warn people when they post within a thread that's over 21 days old, instead of closing it automatically. That way all the exceptions don't need to be dealt with personally, since the person posting is posting for a reason, and then any newcomer who posts in an old thread by accident also knows better.

Bumping with out adding anything would be spam and there is already a mechanism to address spam.

Who said the posts would be spam? They can just make contributing posts just for the sake of keeping the thread from getting locked rather than sheerly for discussion, and it can't be considered spam at all because the posts have some level of meaning pertaining to the thread.

I was quite clear that "Certain entire forums may also become exempt from this restriction if sufficient reason is found to do so."

Is it really that much of a hassle for you to sit down and think about which forums are needed to be exempt from this restriction? Clearly this idea isn't very well thought out if such is true. If this is to be a fully implemented idea, you should have thought about which boards may the rule not be applied to, waited for a while to see which boards are most often targeted with necro posts, and then suggested the idea to the forum. You shouldn't need to wait for sufficient reasoning to be found.

The first part of this does not go with the second part since the second part is an opinion of yours. And if you're going to be an owner of a forum you can't have opinions like that.

That would be where you're mistaken. As owner I can frankly have any opinion I want - The site exists to reflect my ideals, just as it did Paul's when it was his. I do in fact dictate the purpose of this forum and all subforums within it.
If I choose to draw the line of what content belongs where that is entirely my prerogative. Blogs are an egocentric successor of forums. They're topical to the interests of the owner, a microcosm of the normal forumscape.

Just because part of the forum existed that sort of served that purpose previously does not mean it will do so in the future, or that it was the ideal way in the first place. Evolution is an ongoing process.

You're welcome to defend why things should remain the way they are - But simply telling me I don't have the option doesn't cut it, because I do. You need to focus on why doing it is a bad idea (and preferrably with better arguments than 'because everyone will leave/quit/hate you').

I don't understand why you can't just have it (assuming this is possible) warn people when they post within a thread that's over 21 days old, instead of closing it automatically. That way all the exceptions don't need to be dealt with personally, since the person posting is posting for a reason, and then any newcomer who posts in an old thread by accident also knows better.

This was the approach I tried first, it didn't play well. A passive warning is useless, it'll be skimmed right over and ignored, then be replied to with "but i didn't see it" when infracted. The checkbox to submit a reply on older stuff was much preferred but didn't work right.

Who said the posts would be spam? They can just make contributing posts just for the sake of keeping the thread from getting locked rather than sheerly for discussion, and it can't be considered spam at all because the posts have some level of meaning pertaining to the thread.

In the scenario you've described there's no problem, so what was the point of bringing it up? If they're contributing and it keeps the post alive it sounds win-win to me.

Is it really that much of a hassle for you to sit down and think about which forums are needed to be exempt from this restriction?

I could've, but you'd just complain I was being dictatorial anyhow by not including the community in the decision making process. You're included now, enjoy.

That would be where you're mistaken. As owner I can frankly have any opinion I want - The site exists to reflect my ideals, just as it did Paul's when it was his. I do in fact dictate the purpose of this forum and all subforums within it.
If I choose to draw the line of what content belongs where that is entirely my prerogative. Blogs are an egocentric successor of forums. They're topical to the interests of the owner, a microcosm of the normal forumscape.

Just because part of the forum existed that sort of served that purpose previously does not mean it will do so in the future, or that it was the ideal way in the first place. Evolution is an ongoing process.

You're welcome to defend why things should remain the way they are - But simply telling me I don't have the option doesn't cut it, because I do. You need to focus on why doing it is a bad idea (and preferrably with better arguments than 'because everyone will leave/quit/hate you').

You having an opinion doesn't mean everyone agrees with it, as you've seen. And them not having a good justification is not a reason to ignore them. Even if you're leading a group of idiots, you still need to lead them in a way that pleases them.

This was the approach I tried first, it didn't play well. A passive warning is useless, it'll be skimmed right over and ignored, then be replied to with "but i didn't see it" when infracted. The checkbox to submit a reply on older stuff was much preferred but didn't work right.

Why do you assume that people will do that? And I was thinking of a pop up that you have to accept to move on to the thread, but again, I don't know if that's possible.

I could've, but you'd just complain I was being dictatorial anyhow by not including the community in the decision making process. You're included now, enjoy.

That is the major complaint about your decisions right now, to be frank.

What of things like my Calculator? I make periodic updates to it, and people chime in with questions/comments/suggestions every now and then.

Why do you assume that people will do that? And I was thinking of a pop up that you have to accept to move on to the thread, but again, I don't know if that's possible.

Because it's really no different from having the limit posted in the R&R and expecting people to abide by it.
A pop-up would be client side and easily circumnavigated by most modern browsers, which then goes back to the "I never saw it" excuse. The solution needs to be server-side to actually work consistently.

That is the major complaint about your decisions right now, to be frank.

I'm aware, but I'm not also not going to sit on my ass and wait for everyone's approval before I do things and I doubt any new administration would've had any less complaints because people hate change, period. I've already demonstrated that I compromise quite easily on negotiables when provided alternatives, so it's really in people's best interest to focus on those alternatives instead of complaining. Not liking it is fine, but I can't use that. Give me other options that still accomplish approximately what I'm trying to do and don't expect them to instantly materialize when they take time and effort to research & deploy.

What of things like my Calculator? I make periodic updates to it, and people chime in with questions/comments/suggestions every now and then.

Stickied.

I'd be curious to see how many actual infractions were handed out due to "Necro posting" to warrant this change. I get that you're on your whole "it's my site I'll do what I want with it" train, but don't undermine threads that have meant a great deal to people long before you ever owned the site. You have a fairly large moderation team, if they can't deal with a few necroposts I'd suggest looking for a new set of people.

...So is this whole thing just going to come down to "If someone makes periodic updates to the thread; STICKIED!" now?

I'd be curious to see how many actual infractions were handed out due to "Necro posting" to warrant this change
You have a fairly large moderation team, if they can't deal with a few necroposts I'd suggest looking for a new set of people.

Necroposting is the #4 most commonly given infraction, below Spam, Flaming and Trolling, making it the single most common, preventable infraction.
The volume of moderators is not relevant to this, it's something they shouldn't have to concern themselves with in the first place.

...So is this whole thing just going to come down to "If someone makes periodic updates to the thread; STICKIED!" now?

No, that was a calculator thread. It should've been stickied anyhow to ever be consistently findable based on precedent.

The reasonings are all sensible in my book, except one thing. Necroposting never was, never is and probably never will be a problem here on SP; why should everyone's time be wasted on arguing over this is it wasn't even a problem in the beginning?

You make a decision, we don't like it, and you have the nerve to attack us and assume that we'll complain?

I'm not even going to argue with you anymore. Have fun with your forum.