Frequently Asked Questions

[Bolt The Cat]

No. You can report it and request for it to be deleted.

That's inconvenient. Suppose your post breaks rules and you want to delete it?

[Diz]

This is part of the reason why we do not allow members to delete their posts on their own. Members may flame others or break the rules even intentionally, and then delete their posts, either wipe them completely off the forum or moving them to the trash can, making us think another moderator already dealt with the trash can's contents or something-something.

You may however still edit your posts. Editing your posts will leave a mark that shows when it was last updated. =)

[Bolt The Cat]

This is part of the reason why we do not allow members to delete their posts on their own. Members may flame others or break the rules even intentionally, and then delete their posts, either wipe them completely off the forum or moving them to the trash can, making us think another moderator already dealt with the trash can's contents or something-something.

You may however still edit your posts. Editing your posts will leave a mark that shows when it was last updated. =)

That doesn't solve the problem, though, because they can do the same thing by editing. You're only making things more inconvenient for yourselves.

[Velotix von Skruviktorrius]

Mods can read each version of a post, so they will be able to verify that offending material was posted. Removing the post removes the evidence. Consequently, members cannot, and never have been able to, delete posts on this forum.

This particular policy has been in place as long as I've been using this site, and I've been here on and off since 2005, so I don't think challenging it is going to do anything.

I also recommend, speaking as an individual and in general, not to be so crass as to register to any forum or community service and then promptly try and tell the staff how to do their jobs properly; especially in the case of volunteers. It's bad if you've been a member for years and it's even worse if you're brand new to the community.

In fact, as someone who was believed to be giving the mods grief on this very forum for a very long time, I can describe to you in fine detail how that ends up if you don't realise what you appear to be doing in time. It's even worse if they're not mistaken about what you're trying to do, like they were with me. In fact that's the only reason I'm still here posting pretty much. I still recall the venomous reply I got once on another board when I ran my mouth off regarding admin policy in a PM there some time ago.

TL;DR: Despite not being staff myself, that last post stank enough to offend me anyway. Be more careful next time?

[Bolt The Cat]

Mods can read each version of a post, so they will be able to verify that offending material was posted. Removing the post removes the evidence. Consequently, members cannot, and never have been able to, delete posts on this forum.

This particular policy has been in place as long as I've been using this site, and I've been here on and off since 2005, so I don't think challenging it is going to do anything.

I also recommend, speaking as an individual and in general, not to be so crass as to register to any forum or community service and then promptly try and tell the staff how to do their jobs properly; especially in the case of volunteers. It's bad if you've been a member for years and it's even worse if you're brand new to the community.

In fact, as someone who was believed to be giving the mods grief on this very forum for a very long time, I can describe to you in fine detail how that ends up if you don't realise what you appear to be doing in time. It's even worse if they're not mistaken about what you're trying to do, like they were with me. In fact that's the only reason I'm still here posting pretty much. I still recall the venomous reply I got once on another board when I ran my mouth off regarding admin policy in a PM there some time ago.

TL;DR: Despite not being staff myself, that last post stank enough to offend me anyway. Be more careful next time?

I'm not telling them how to do their jobs, I'm just saying it doesn't make much sense. If that's the basis that they argue for not allowing you to delete your posts, it's not a very good one, because then it's a matter of intentions, something that no one but the poster can know for certain. And as anyone on SEGA forums can tell you, I've had mod troubles in the past (and not too long ago as a matter of fact). I know how to deal with mods, and that is not offensive. It's their prerogative to make the rules, and I can respect that, I'm just curious as to the reasoning

[Diz]

If that's the basis that they argue for not allowing you to delete your posts, it's not a very good one

As I mentioned in my previous post, it is part of the reason as to why members may not delete their own posts. Another reason is that we have done it this way ever since the SSMB was made (as far as I am aware), and it has worked very good up to this point, so you might not see a change for that anytime soon.

The way the forums and its features work has essentially been decided here by the admins, so they may be able to give you a better and more detailed response than I did, as I am just here to enforce the rules and ensure that everyone are having a good time. =)

[Carbo]

I'm not telling them how to do their jobs, I'm just saying it doesn't make much sense. If that's the basis that they argue for not allowing you to delete your posts, it's not a very good one, because then it's a matter of intentions, something that no one but the poster can know for certain. And as anyone on SEGA forums can tell you, I've had mod troubles in the past (and not too long ago as a matter of fact). I know how to deal with mods, and that is not offensive. It's their prerogative to make the rules, and I can respect that, I'm just curious as to the reasoning

Sounds to me like you're just incredibly insecure. Do you think that deleting a rule-breaking post magically absolves you from whatever it is you did wrong, and that giving members the ability to do this doesn't open up the potential for absolutely snide and incredibly backhanded abuse?

[Bolt The Cat]

Sounds to me like you're just incredibly insecure. Do you think that deleting a rule-breaking post magically absolves you from whatever it is you did wrong, and that giving members the ability to do this doesn't open up the potential for absolutely snide and incredibly backhanded abuse?

Like I said, it all comes down to a matter of intentions, something no one else but the poster can gauge. If people wanted to take advantage of breaking rules by instantly taking back what they said, they can already do so by editing. That being said, I don't have much of a problem with not being able to delete my post, I'm just saying the reasoning behind it doesn't make much sense.

[Indigo Rush]

Look, Bolt, the point is that it can be abused. Neg rep was abusable, and the whole system was changed.

If it can be abused, then it's out the door.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Indigo Rush

[Bolt The Cat]

I know it can be abused, but it can be equally abused by editing as opposed to deleting. Explain that.

[Senator NinjaShark]

I know it can be abused, but it can be equally abused by editing as opposed to deleting. Explain that.

[Noir]

Here's the big question that really should've been asked already:

Suppose your post breaks rules and you want to delete it?

[Bolt The Cat]

Here's the big question that really should've been asked already:

Why did you break the rules in the first place?

If the post isn't offensive you can report it and it will be deleted for you. If it is offensive, you shouldn't have fuckin written it.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Bolt The Cat

[Noir]

What if you didn't realize it was breaking rules in the first place?

[Bolt The Cat]

Well you would know... if you read these handy dandy rules right here-o.

[Dark Qiviut]

Well you would know... if you read these handy dandy rules right here-o.

The rules are a great background, but there are some problems.

1. With the way the forum is structured, the way the rules are typed are cluttered together to the point where it's a bit more difficult to know when a paragraph ends or begins. An extra linespace would work much better.

2. They're located on the very bottom of the forum page in a very small type size. If it's posssible to relocate it to the top, perhaps into the navigation bar, then it'd be really grand.

3. They need to be updated with the extra regulations (and tidier grammar and attitude). Since the rules were typed out, the rules have since been altered, and that page needs to be updated to fit them.

There's a fine line between some of those rules (especially flaming, which BTW you don't explain the definition of it particularly well), so sometimes you might post something thinking it's okay but then have second thoughts. There's gray areas to every rule, and it's impossible to know whether or not something is breaking rules all of the time.

I can understand this sentiment. The way I solve this problem are two ways:

1. Possibly edit them to where you don't feel they break the rules.

2. Ask a mod or administrator if the draft of your post follows the rulebook. I've done this on occassion, and it's helped me out quite well.

[Carbo]

This is just beating around the bush if I've ever seen it, and honestly it's becoming increasingly silly.

There's a fine line between some of those rules (especially flaming, which BTW you don't explain the definition of it particularly well), so sometimes you might post something thinking it's okay but then have second thoughts. There's gray areas to every rule, and it's impossible to know whether or not something is breaking rules all of the time.

Exactly what would you win out of this by removing your post?

The only way I see this is being a problem is if you worry so much about your public reputation when staff has to move into a topic and tell you to stop acting stupid, but in that case what is the point to even remove your post if everyone is aware of it, at least to the point of having been able to drop a report about you with the original post if you have broken a rule? The damage is done. Move on. Learn from it. You won't get a strike unless you're a repeat offender. More often than not we verbally warn people before moving in on a strike, and we trust you're not a dolt enough to repeat a mistake multiple times.

Pipe down, chill out, and just have a good fucking time. This isn't Big Brother. Members aren't going to get the ability to remove their posts and trying to pull an excuse that it's just giving us a harder time if a member potentially edits out their entire message upon a second thought two seconds later is a stupid one. That's like patching up a minor hole by ripping apart it's own sheet and stuffing it inside out. You've fixed an incredibly minor inconvenience by creating a big problem.

End of line.

[Bolt The Cat]

The rules are a great background, but there are some problems.

1. With the way the forum is structured, the way the rules are typed are cluttered together to the point where it's a bit more difficult to know when a paragraph ends or begins. An extra linespace would work much better.

2. They're located on the very bottom of the forum page in a very small type size. If it's posssible to relocate it to the top, perhaps into the navigation bar, then it'd be really grand.

3. They need to be updated with the extra regulations (and tidier grammar and attitude). Since the rules were typed out, the rules have since been altered, and that page needs to be updated to fit them.

Yeah, this is what bothers me about the presentation regarding the rules. First of all, I had to do quite a bit of looking around to find them (I know I should've read them when I signed up, but you know how it is, not a lot of people like to read every stipulation, etc., etc. At any rate, I know them now, and that's what matters). If the rules are so important, why are they not easily accessible? Second, the rules are like a contract, and should be treated as such. They should be neat, organized, and clear enough that everyone can understand them. You don't even define what "flaming" is, you just expect people to know what it means coming in as if they've already joined another forum before. Furthermore, there's a fine line between what you consider "tense" and "uncivil", so this definitely needs to be clarified, even as a refresher for users who should already know the difference between the two just in case they every forget.

I can understand this sentiment. The way I solve this problem are two ways:

1. Possibly edit them to where you don't feel they break the rules.

2. Ask a mod or administrator if the draft of your post follows the rulebook. I've done this on occassion, and it's helped me out quite well.

#1 will probably help me in most cases, but what if you can't edit them into a way that they don't break the rules? At any rate, people make mistakes, and being able to fix them before someone else notices would make things easier for everyone.

[Indigo Rush]

#1 will probably help me in most cases, but what if you can't edit them into a way that they don't break the rules?

EDIT: Please trash.

Then report yourself.

Bada bing bada boom.

[Bolt The Cat]

EDIT: Please trash.

Then report yourself.

Bada bing bada boom.

That's not what I'm worried about with this policy. The problem is that even if you did this, you'd still get in trouble.

This is just beating around the bush if I've ever seen it, and honestly it's becoming increasingly silly.

Exactly what would you win out of this by removing your post?

The only way I see this is being a problem is if you worry so much about your public reputation when staff has to move into a topic and tell you to stop acting stupid, but in that case what is the point to even remove your post if everyone is aware of it, at least to the point of having been able to drop a report about you with the original post if you have broken a rule? The damage is done. Move on. Learn from it.

Sometimes you can catch your mistakes before anyone else can. Furthermore, just because something breaks rules doesn't mean it offends every single other user, so they may not choose to report it.

You won't get a strike unless you're a repeat offender. More often than not we verbally warn people before moving in on a strike, and we trust you're not a dolt enough to repeat a mistake multiple times.

This is another "rules should be treated as a contract" issue. This is the first I've heard of strikes only being given for multiple offenses, and everyone who signs up for the site has a right to know that. And even then, how do you decide when enough is enough and actual give out strikes? That needs to be specified as well, saying it's up to the mods' discretion sounds biased.

Pipe down, chill out, and just have a good fucking time. This isn't Big Brother. Members aren't going to get the ability to remove their posts and trying to pull an excuse that it's just giving us a harder time if a member potentially edits out their entire message upon a second thought two seconds later is a stupid one. That's like patching up a minor hole by ripping apart it's own sheet and stuffing it inside out. You've fixed an incredibly minor inconvenience by creating a big problem.

The problem is with this approach you either end up either incriminating innocent users or let trolls get away. But you can never truly tell whether someone really meant what they said, and more than likely they didn't, so IDK why you bother with it.

Edited January 6, 2012 by Bolt The Cat

[Carbo]

That's not what I'm worried about with this policy. The problem is that even if you did this, you'd still get in trouble.

If you've edited something inflammatory, like say, calling someone a dick or any of the kind you feel isn't proper before any of us ever get onto your back about it, then no, you don't get in trouble for it, because you had the decency to quickly take back what you've said. If that is your first offense (assuming that the select offense is a minor one), you get a verbal warning, not something that falls onto your strike record.

And no, we don't get on people's backs if they decide to completely want one of their own posts removed either, if it hasn't been caught by any of us.

Also, criticizing that "flaming" is too vague? I honestly don't know what to say to that; there's only one pure definition of the term if you look it up. We aren't implying any different than that.

This is another "rules should be treated as a contract" issue. This is the first I've heard of strikes only being given for multiple offenses, and everyone who signs up for the site has a right to know that. And even then, how do you decide when enough is enough and actual give out strikes? That needs to be specified as well, saying it's up to the mods' discretion sounds biased.

Honestly at this point I'm not even sure why I'm bothering in humoring you because you're seriously coming across as nothing but paranoid and questioning our intentions.

But clearly you didn't read the rules properly if you say the above isn't specified.

SSMB works on a 3 strike system, one strike for an offense (unless it's small and/or the staff decide to talk to you about it instead). If you're striked by staff 3 times then you're out, permanently, so please don't make us ever get that far; we don't enjoy banning people. If you disagree with a staff members' decision then that's fine, you're free to express that. If you do so in an obnoxious or aggressive way, however, we reserve the right to ignore you. Please note that worst offenders and downright obnoxious people will be banned on sight, no 3 strikes for you. There is a zero tolerance policy towards staff abuse. If you give staff members any hell you will be banned without warning.

The problem is with this approach you either end up either incriminating innocent users or let trolls get away. But you can never truly tell whether someone really meant what they said, and more than likely they didn't, so IDK why you bother with it.

Not even sure what you're arguing for here anymore and this makes no sense. We're not machines. We can tell our peaches from apples, and we can certainly tell trolls apart from users.

[Bolt The Cat]

If you've edited something inflammatory, like say, calling someone a dick or any of the kind you feel isn't proper before any of us ever get onto your back about it, then no, you don't get in trouble for it, because you had the decency to quickly take back what you've said. If that is your first offense (assuming that the select offense is a minor one), you get a verbal warning, not something that falls onto your strike record.

And no, we don't get on people's backs if they decide to completely want one of their own posts removed either, if it hasn't been caught by any of us.

That's something else that needs to be specified. What counts as a "minor offense"?

Also, criticizing that "flaming" is too vague? I honestly don't know what to say to that; there's only one pure definition of the term if you look it up. We aren't implying any different than that.

If it's so simple, why not go through the trouble of explaining it? Not everyone who signs up for this forums knows the term.

But clearly you didn't read the rules properly if you say the above isn't specified.

I did, and it takes less than two minutes to read because of how short and vague the rules section is. It's almost like they're an afterthought. Again, if you think about it, the rules are a contract. You agree to give us access to the site and we agree to follow the rules. So they need to be thorough so they're idiotproof.

[Tornado]

I just looked them over. "Don't be an asshole," which is basically the main force behind 2/3rds of the rules, seems pretty idiot proof to me.

[Bolt The Cat]

I just looked them over. "Don't be an asshole," which is basically the main force behind 2/3rds of the rules, seems pretty idiot proof to me.

Not quite, it's never that simple.

[Carbo]

It has been for over three years now, and not once has rules "being vague" been a problem.

We don't want redundant rules. No one likes wading through 3 pages of Kojima-style redundancy. We want short, concise and to-the-point rules and they've always worked in general terms. This isn't daycare, and people don't need specifications for every word in the book. You've got your own common sense for that. Complaining that "no flaming" and "keeping it civil" isn't specific enough is nitpicking to the nth degree, and to be honest it's kind of laughable, if not incredibly patience-testing.