Are we talking about the popular game threads in the 'General Discussion" area here?  You know, those that several people frequent regularly to help keeps the boards ticking over.... cos without them that particular forum is virtually dead?

OK, so this is a skinning site, but what exactly is 'off topic' in a forum (General Discussion) that invites and encompasses just about every subject known to man... woman as well?  Furthermore, one man's trash is another man's treasure, so while the fun threads may not appeal to all, there are others who do enjoy them. Besides, in a World that's full of doom and gloom, war, abject poverty and violence, what's wrong with a bit of harmless fun anyhow?

@ recode.

Objectionable, eh?  OK, hypothetically speaking, I see a WIP (work in progress) thread and give the poster/skinner some negative karma because I find it objectionable that I am being teased with an unfinished item and don't have the patience to wait for the finished product.  Well why not, it fits with the model you're calling for... and if 9 others feel the same way, we have an important member of our community exiled for no good reason.

And like sydneysiders said, what may be objectionable to some is not necessaritly objectionable/offensive to others... and to try impose a form of censorship on such a varied community with people of different interests and from all walks of life is flirting with disaster.

I find it objectionable that some come here purely to whinge and complain... just because they can.

Not really.

The problem with saying "this is a <type> site" is that many forums are shared between all sites-Elemental, GC2, Sins, Wincustomize, Impulse, JoeUser, etc.

Mumblefratz did quite a lot of work in figuring out the forum structure, but since then Elemental was added, and to be honest it's more than anyone would ever want to know anyway.

That's sad...wanting to ban someone from a game forum....that's the sign of the apocalpyse...

Having just deleted quite some number of posts on GameFAQs, this idea as suggested needs some serious work.

- Taking karma or anything other sort of negative action cannot be up to the normal users. That sort of action needs to be reviewed by an (ideally) disinterested third party to remove the personal attack aspects.

- Waiting for an offending user to run out of karma is a bad idea, nor could karma be freely given as it is now. It *could* be used as a factor in deciding the course of action for any given violation.

- Ideally, there would also be repercussions for someone continually marking posts that are not violations, to the point of losing their marking ability.

- This sort of system should only apply to specific forums; the game forums, the technical forums, etc. Including the entirety of Joe User in the system would require a mod staff much larger than anyone really wants. I'm speaking from experience there, remember I do this on a *much* larger forum with ~90 volunteer moderators handling 15-20k moderations (not posts, moderations) per week. Limiting the system to the narrow interest boards would keep the time investment for moderators to a minimum.

Speaking from that perspective, I don't think Stardock really needs this big a hammer to deal with the occasional malcontents here (or at least the ones I see. I avoid JU like the plague). As the company owning a private web site, they can pretty much set any rules they want, and enforce them pretty much however they feel like. In a lot of ways, GameFAQs is one of the most restrictive sites I've ever seen (there's a list of words banned from the site, and most methods of bypassing that are also moddable). On the other end of that is the infamous 4chan, where anything that isn't a federal crime is allowed, even encouraged. Picking a middle road, defining where the "too far" line is, and what to do about people who cross it pretty much on an individual basis seems to be working the way they are doing it.

I haven't delved deep into the user options on this forum yet but is there an ignore list?  That I think would cover issues of reasonable people being annoyed with someone.

yep.. an ignore option would be handy. Objectionable is a relative, not absolute adjective. Varies from person to person, mood to mood, etc.

As SS pointed out one must remember that Sd has something like 13 sites that are linked together through many forums, the Ot being just one of them.

IIRC there are even several OT forums.

As for what i consider "trash" and what others deem as treasure, i'll grant that point. There obviously must be an audience for these types of posts to live on. Thats doesn't mean that threads with thoughtful titles such as "Shut Up!!!", "Apples?" and "Hot!" that are obvious spam threads (they are all by the same poster) should not have been moderated.

My annoyance with such things is that these threads take valuable room on the recent topics list, a list which many use as their point of call on whatever forum they may be on.

Actual on topic threads relevant to the site in question can be burried by these posts, though appropriatley placed in OT they are nothing but spam. Many even admit this.

Whats wrong with some Harmless fun? Nothing, if thats what you choose to call it. I call it needless spam that takes the emphesis(sp) away from the intended site. Thye games you mention, though for my likeing can get out of hand, are fine.

OT threads with an actual topic is one thing, senseless spam is another.

I responded from within Wincustomize... didn't realise it was a cross-thread, hence the 'skinning site' thing.

Still, my thoughts apply to JU and other forums... you can't censor against 'objectionable' because it is many things to many people.  Personal attacks/insults, however, are a different matter and should be dealt with accordingly... as with any other infringements that contravene Stardock site rules... posting advertising spam, etc. However, ten people getting somebody banned for 3 months over a joke that thousands laughed at is wrong IMO.

+1 on an Ignore feature.

Removing ones subscription to a thread would be nice too. Having threads still in your "My Replies" list that have outlived your own involvement is another PITA that could go hand in hand with an ignore feature.

JoeUser has a blacklist function...I'm not certain how it works on the other sites, though, as I strangely enough haven't had sufficient reason to test it.

The day people get banned from a gaming forum will be a sad, sad day indeed!

guess who is goin to get a flaming -10?

Self-evidently true, and not remotely the point. The point was to demonstrate that the intended effect, which is the removal of those recode finds "objectionable," would not be the only outcome of his proposed forum change. Quite the contrary, it'd be open season on everyone, and he'd be among the first targets on many peoples' lists. Total chaos serves no one's interests, which is why the presence of a moderating staff is to everyone's benefit.

If it's the same blacklist option that is on Impulse-Driven then that list allows to specify users who cannot reply to any threads that you post. They can read then still but to them your posts would appear locked.

and that's open to pettiness abuse as well....don't agree with it at all.....if it's an open forum...it should remain open....sort out your problems another way....