By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Website Topics - Profile Privacy on VGChartz

Kasz216 on 17 May 2013
Barozi said:
KHlover said:
Carl2291 said:

Simple request for the team.

When someone gets banned, make it so that they have no profile privacy. Id like to see what they got banned for. When, why, who by. Or alternatively, just remove the profile privacy option all together. This is VGChartz, a videogame forum, not Facebook.

Its not urgent, it doesnt have to be done right now. Im not asking that much. Within the next 2 hours would be fine

For people who will complain saying "But I dont want this guy posting on my wall!". Tell them not to. If they persist, report it to a moderator.

But you can see this in the monthly ban report? What they should add is the actual post which got them banned to the record^^

That would be too much work. The ban list doesn't include that, so I'd need to visit each violator's profile to get the post number etc.
Though I guess I could do it on request.
But that already happened in past reports, mostly for people were permabanned (either by request or violation of the rules).


Since we can see any profile we want, we don't even know which users have set their profile to private.

Well... sort of.   Technically if you try to go through users profiles in certain ways it will bounce back to a different screen if their profile is set to private.  Even for mods.



Around the Network
KHlover on 17 May 2013
Barozi said:
KHlover said:
Carl2291 said:

Simple request for the team.

When someone gets banned, make it so that they have no profile privacy. Id like to see what they got banned for. When, why, who by. Or alternatively, just remove the profile privacy option all together. This is VGChartz, a videogame forum, not Facebook.

Its not urgent, it doesnt have to be done right now. Im not asking that much. Within the next 2 hours would be fine

For people who will complain saying "But I dont want this guy posting on my wall!". Tell them not to. If they persist, report it to a moderator.

But you can see this in the monthly ban report? What they should add is the actual post which got them banned to the record^^

That would be too much work. The ban list doesn't include that, so I'd need to visit each violator's profile to get the post number etc.
Though I guess I could do it on request.
But that already happened in past reports, mostly for people were permabanned (either by request or violation of the rules).


Since we can see any profile we want, we don't even know which users have set their profile to private.

Ah, I understand. Thank you for the answer^^



Some useful VGChartz tweaks

Member of the "An Unbiased Review" Database team

Conegamer on 17 May 2013

Eh, I can see both sides to the story but it's still a gaming forum. There's not going to be anything private on there, so I don't see the point.



 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

badgenome on 17 May 2013
Barozi said:
Nothing we can do, but I could revoke your badges if that is what you want.

Prove it!



Carl on 17 May 2013
Kasz216 said:

Well... sort of.   Technically if you try to go through users profiles in certain ways it will bounce back to a different screen if their profile is set to private.  Even for mods.


Well, this just puts the icing on the cake. Its stopping mods from doing the job in the quickest, most efficient way! Remove it!

Seriously though. There is no reason why people need to have a private forum on a videogame forum. People may like privacy, yeah. But people like to be nosey too!

I think the "Privacy is removed upon ban" option is best.



                            

Around the Network
Proclus on 17 May 2013

While I'm indifferent to the matter, a case could be made that the specific mod that issues a warning or a ban to a user gets the post id and pm's them to Barozi at the end of the month to add to the ban report.

However a case could also be made that it is A: Too much work, and B: Some members may be against the ban report because of the fact it stores their infraction publicly "permanently".



Conegamer on 17 May 2013
spurgeonryan said:
I understand where the poster or OP is coming from.
But I do not want people from my work or anyone else just going willy nilly on my wall if I am banned. The ban is punishment enough. This is a world site, so the rules should go by American Standards. No double Jeopardy.

It's a UK site actually. So it should go through either EU rules (because that's where more than half the mebers on this forum live) or UN rules.

Or, you know, just being sensible is enough.



 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

Carl on 17 May 2013
Proclus said:
While I'm indifferent to the matter, a case could be made that the specific mod that issues a warning or a ban to a user gets the post id and pm's them to Barozi at the end of the month to add to the ban report.

However a case could also be made that it is A: Too much work, and B: Some members may be against the ban report because of the fact it stores their infraction publicly "permanently".


Those members against the ban report would only be against it because it would name and shame them for what they are.

These people need naming and shaming.



                            

Jaywood2010 on 17 May 2013
Carl2291 said:
Proclus said:
While I'm indifferent to the matter, a case could be made that the specific mod that issues a warning or a ban to a user gets the post id and pm's them to Barozi at the end of the month to add to the ban report.

However a case could also be made that it is A: Too much work, and B: Some members may be against the ban report because of the fact it stores their infraction publicly "permanently".


Those members against the ban report would only be against it because it would name and shame them for what they are.

These people need naming and shaming.


Mine isnt private and i dont really get banned either yet im against it.

As I said, I do get curious but not so much that i care either.  These people set there profile to private for a reason.




       

Busted on 17 May 2013

I disagree