K50 wrote:I wish we could delete that as well. Unfortunately that is a rule that our forum host has set for us and we can't remove it, as far as I know. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Unless forumotion has forced you to keep it enabled due to spambot attacks you should be able to turn that off,
I was able to with my forumotion forum. It was under the AdminCP: General > Forum > Security > "Unauthorize members with less than a week registration to post external links and emails" and select "No."

Having it enabled has advantages and disadvantages. All up to the admins.

Well if we want to remove it, I'm fine with that. I enjoy banning those useless spam bots anyway

I just want to enjoy the site Besides, the staff here are having a great job running the site

LOL Admin If you really want to buy that leather jacket one spambot advertised last year... xDxDxD

111222333444 wrote:
LOL Admin If you really want to buy that leather jacket one spambot advertised last year... xDxDxD

a Q/A at registration (using very easy questions of course) could prevent spambots from registering altogether.

However though, they can find a way (either by a person registering it and using the account as a spambot)

well, it prevents automatic registrations at least

YAY! Thank you for my promotion to and admin

I don't know what I did to be promoted

Thank you Admins

mayorm wrote:YAY! Thank you for my promotion to and admin

I don't know what I did to be promoted

Thank you Admins

Oh, mayorm.

mayorm wrote:YAY! Thank you for my promotion to and admin

I don't know what I did to be promoted

Thank you Admins

Don't look at me

Why not- Its your site

actually it's mayorm's site

We've had some ambiguity about image size restrictions. K50 had a poll about whether the image size restrictions should be lifted, and overwhelmingly, Simmania members voted to have them lifted.

The image size restriction has officially been lifted, but not all moderators were informed of the change. We do ask that you use discretion before posting. The moderators will use common sense to determine whether an image is too large, and 4000x3000 images are obviously too large. 1024x768 pixels is definitely alright now, however. We apologize for the confusion.

Please see the updated rules regarding chat at the bottom of the first post. Thanks.

-sl

I just realized we didn't have a Filecave guideline series up yet either, so that's up as well.

I know nearly all of you won't violate those rules Link and I just put up, but they're good to have, so if it seems strict, I understand. And as always if you find a rule to be unfair you can feel free to talk about it here... politely

I honestly think the disciplinary action for the whole using a completely foreign nick/spamming thing is a bit too strict. I think a warning for the first time is enough, maybe a short ban for the second. As far as staff doing it or refusing to stop though, shouldn't be tolerated IMO.

It's not my decision though, so whatever you choose to do, I'll live with.

I'd like Link to comment because he put the chat rules out, not me. I did reword it a little but I tried my best to keep what he said, so he might be a better person to talk to. Thanks for your concern by the way

Here is where I think Link came from with this rule; if someone took the name of someone (especially a staff member) and started breaking rules, we'd run the risk of punishing the wrong person. We don't want to ever assume something is true or not, we want to know, which makes it easier if everybody kept their name as is. If we ban the wrong person for something, it snowballs very, very quick into a giant mess, and the opinions of the integrity of the staff by the community could be brought down, which is obviously the worse case scenario for any site. If somebody has the wrong name on chat, it's a good (and probably the only) safeguard to keep them out of the chat to prevent this.

I'm not worried about the staff breaking this or any other guideline because the reason they are staff members is because they are good role models. Obviously

Does that make any sense?

The chat is set up so that no-one can use moderator powers without their password. Basically, similar to an online client such as Mibbit, most users simply enter their chat username and go in. What I've done here is set it up so that moderators have passwords, and will not be allowed to access moderator powers unless they use that password. We do have good staff members, and as K50 said, I'm not that worried about staff members violating the rules.

The inconvenience of having to log in separately is due to the fact that we cannot access the database for our current forum host. I have not been able to integrate the forums and chat yet, so the chat is running in "standalone" mode. Basically, the chat is set up to protect staff members from their usernames being taken, however. I'm still working to improve the protections against that (all changes must be made in code, so this takes time), but for now, if you see someone under a staff member's name without having mod powers, it's either because the staff member forgot their chat password, or they are someone different altogether.

K50 wrote:I'd like Link to comment because he put the chat rules out, not me. I did reword it a little but I tried my best to keep what he said, so he might be a better person to talk to. Thanks for your concern by the way

The rule came from a discussion we had in chat last night. I thought since it was such a major problem, it should be added to the rules - mayorm agreed. As such, I added the rule that you need a recognizeable username in chat, that way we know who you are. As for the punishment to people who violate this rule, I was not involved in that decision, as the rule was added afterwards.

K50 wrote:
Here is where I think Link came from with this rule; if someone took the name of someone (especially a staff member) and started breaking rules, we'd run the risk of punishing the wrong person. We don't want to ever assume something is true or not, we want to know, which makes it easier if everybody kept their name as is. If we ban the wrong person for something, it snowballs very, very quick into a giant mess, and the opinions of the integrity of the staff by the community could be brought down, which is obviously the worse case scenario for any site. If somebody has the wrong name on chat, it's a good (and probably the only) safeguard to keep them out of the chat to prevent this.

Essentially, K50 you said it perfectly. We want to know who you are, and if you pose as someone else who actually is a member here it could pose a problem. While it's unfortunate we had to have a retroactive rule, I guess that's part of the growing pains as a site grows. This rule is just to make sure everything is fair for everyone going forward.


If you have any questions about the new rules, please feel free to ask me here or PM me and I will try to respond as quick as I can.

I see your point.

I'm just saying if someone poses as someone completely random just to goof off a little bit, and we know for sure who the actual person is, it shouldn't earn someone a ban (even still, this sort of behavior is annoying, which is why I suggested a warning), but if you're posing as someone else, here on SM or elseware, or as a staff member for the purpose of trolling then stricter action should be taken.

Cheeseguy wrote:I see your point.

I'm just saying if someone poses as someone completely random just to goof off a little bit, and we know for sure who the actual person is, it shouldn't earn someone a ban (even still, this sort of behavior is annoying, which is why I suggested a warning), but if you're posing as someone else, here on SM or elseware, or as a staff member for the purpose of trolling then stricter action should be taken.

Absolutely agree, that's what I was trying to say when I added the rule. Sometime I just end up with awkward phrasing that makes things seem harsher than intended. That will be the course of action taken in the future, if need be.

Thanks for your input.

We are definitely not trying to ban anyone. The main problem we had is that the username wars and stuff like that, as the chat logs confirm, went way too far last night. We are setting new rules as a preventative thing, to keep bigger problems from rising as the site grows.

I've significantly updated both the site rules and staff list to be much more organized and up-to-date. Please let us know if there are any mistakes.

Thanks Blake, it probably needed one Especially the non-existent staff list

I'm not a mod, but my name's green. I guess it should be blue?

Not sure how that happened, it should be fixed now. Thanks for telling us