So any thoughts on making a forum for all spam/chain threads??
It would clean up the forum so much.
More sales.
More sales.
More sales.
More sales.
More sales.
More sales.
More sales.
More sales.
More sales.
More sales.
More sales.
More sales.
More sales.
More sales.
More sales.
More sales.
*ahem*
I think the site needs to return to its sales roots, everything else should be an aside. I would say remove VGC Pro, but that will never happen. But, at least give us the ability to see individual weekly sales for a game, and to create our own graphs to comapre SW/HW sales, like the good ol' days!
| Gilgamesh said: So any thoughts on making a forum for all spam/chain threads?? It would clean up the forum so much. |
Not the words I would use, but I think a forum for Forum Games (mafia, elimination, perhaps Greatest User) is a good idea.
(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective 
| Conegamer said: More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. *ahem* I think the site needs to return to its sales roots, everything else should be an aside. I would say remove VGC Pro, but that will never happen. But, at least give us the ability to see individual weekly sales for a game, and to create our own graphs to comapre SW/HW sales, like the good ol' days! |
Id like to add to this.
More sales.
Carl2291 said:
Id like to add to this. More sales. |
It was what brought a lot of creative threads, we don't have much to work with now :(
| Conegamer said: More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. More sales. *ahem* I think the site needs to return to its sales roots, everything else should be an aside. I would say remove VGC Pro, but that will never happen. But, at least give us the ability to see individual weekly sales for a game, and to create our own graphs to comapre SW/HW sales, like the good ol' days! |
I cannot agree more.
Gilgamesh said:
It was what brought a lot of creative threads, we don't have much to work with now :( |
Hey, it's plenty of fun having doom threads and "Top 50 X of Y!" threads which take a needlessly long amount of time to finish! 
In all seriousness, I'd be more attracted to visit the site if more sales tools were provided, and I'm sure many other people would as well. It's the site's USP, and it seems to have lost that as of late.
I would prefer to see a few changes, ordered by importance:
1. Merge most of the sub-forums so that we have something like this:
Gaming - For general gaming talk.
Sales - For general sales talk.
Online/leagues - For gaming communities, clans, etc. to form.
Website - For keeping up with the happenings of the site. This is a unique feature to this website that I very much like, as it creates a strong beyond between the staff and the community.
Off Topic - Everything else.
2. Limit or remove sigs entirely. For example, GameSpot has a built in cut off point for sigs, so that even if a user makes a sig that's HUGE, only a portion of the top will appear on the actual boards. Also, maybe make it so that .gifs can't work in sigs? All sigs end up being, imo, are an unnecessary and often annoying breaks in the conversation in each thread. But I'm content with the ability to turn them off.
3. Get rid of a lot of the clutter surrounding a user's name and avatar, and prevent avatars from being really damn tall.
Khuutra said:
I'm the guy who spurgeonryan's whole "Don't listen to the veterans!" thing is about, because I stand against everything he stands for The idea is that the rules of the forum, as much as the mechanics of it, will greatly shape the kind of discussion had therein. A few ideas: 1. Much harder cracking down on trolls. One would not, for instance, go into a Valkyria Chronicles topic and go "Man VC just ain't that great, geez." That's trolling, even if subtle by this site's standards. It's another thing entirely if one is in a Fire Emblem topic and goes "Man Fire Emblem is way better than VC, geez." That's at elast context-appropriate, and isn't in the middle of a crowd that is going to want to fight you for saying that. Same concept applies to trolling hardware or companies. Away you go! 2. Crack down on spammers. Make them hurt. Is that by banning spammers? No. You just take away the venues by which they spam, which means No More Spam-Ass Forum Games. The Person Above You and Elimination Threads, specifically, would need to be destroyed. Keep the Mafia games, or other games which are actually constructive games that promote discussion, but they need to be cordoned off from the main topic forums. There would be no exceptions to this. 3. One game, one thread. We do not need multiple topics about, for example, TANK! TANK! TANK!. They could all fit in one thread. Same with ME3, or Zelda, or Fire Emblem. The same could be used to talk about larger collections - M.U.G.E.N.'s Vita thread is the perfect example of this at work. Long thread, perfectly civil, has all the information one could want, plenty of good discussion, and people are glad to share news with someone instead of makign them search for a specific post. Have a Vita thread. Have a Resistance thread. Do not have more than one of each. Duplicate threads would be locked. Repeated offenders would be banned. 4. Enhanced moderator accountability. The moderators need to be policed by the administrators in the same way regular users are policed by the mods. Now, admins are there primarily to support the mods, but they're also there to review complaints and make sure that no mod is overstepping their bounds. If they are, they get their shit kicked out. Moderators would not be elevated to that status because they are friends of current moderators, they would get the job because they seem like the best pick, and they have the right combination of friendliness and ambivalence. This enhanced accountability would be necessary, because: 5. Enhanced moderator discretion. "Trolling" is fuzzy as a concept and no hard-and-fast definition will catch all of it, except for maybe "Being as big an asshole as possible without technically breaking the rules". It's up to the mods to decide what trollign is, and it's up to the mods to ban the Hell out of trolls. 6. A definite, concrete limit on sig sizes. For instance, one would be allowed no more than one image totalling less than 150 pixels in height and 600 in width - or probably smaller. One would not have a block of text larger than such an image. Users who break this rule get their sigs turned off. ALSO NO GIFS ABOVE A CERTAIN KB SIZE. There are other changes I might make, but those are the primary tenets right there |
On the whole, I like your thoughts here. I'll make a few additional points:
1. I somewhat fear going too harsh on trolling, because in the past I've seen trigger happy moderators crack down on posters for "trolling" even though they are actually genuinely interested in discussion. For example, conflating something like "I don't like VC at all. Can somebody help me figure out what I'm missing?" with "VC just ain't that great." and moderating a user for it. Or expressing discontent with news that could legitimately deserve such a response (sometimes shit just sucks). However, #5 should make that a non-issue.
2. Agreed.
3. This has its issues as well, with OPs eventually becoming overloaded with too much information. You'd have to have a really dedicated OP to make this work well. I was the one that encouraged M.U.G.E.N. to first start editing the title and OP of the Vita thread back when such functionality was first implemented, and it was working quite well at first, but the title and the OP of the thread have become quite bloated over time. Of course, that's a thread dedicated to an entire system as opposed to a single game.
I like the idea of limiting information to as few threads as possible to avoid redundancy, and I think mods should be encouraged to help with that via thread merging and post deletion (which ties into #5), but when really big news comes out about a certain topic, I think a new thread is perfectly fine, if not necessary to ensure people hear about it.
4. Honestly, I think this doesn't go far enough. Over and above mods being held accountable for their mistakes, they should also be held accountable for certain inaction.
To clarify, I've come to believe that mods should lead by example through their own post and thread content, and they should actively encourage, if not instruct others on how to better their posting. For example, I really like when certain moderators on one board I frequent go out of their way to demonstrate to others how a certain style of debate is unconsructive or logically fallacious, and we need people like that. Moderators that don't just moderate, but further show why a post/person was moderated, and how other users could handle themselves in a better manner.
Of course, I wouldn't go after moderators for general inactivity. Some of our best candidates for mod might not have the time to be very active, but when they are active, they should generally handle themselves like the above.
6. My other post covers this.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
