Print

[Xiphirx]

Xiphirx

Spamz

Well, you guys might as well delete the board. It has barely any activity.

and probably has about 10 people that can access it anyway.

For The Swarm (StarCraft II Zerg strategy)

I whip my hair back n forth

• 

[CrystalAngel04]

CrystalAngel04

Re: Spamz

Oh no, god forbid people post somewhere else besides spam >.<

• 

[Xiphirx]

Xiphirx

Re: Spamz

Oh no, god forbid people post somewhere else besides spam >.<

...

So should spam even exist anymore?

For The Swarm (StarCraft II Zerg strategy)

I whip my hair back n forth

• 

[Porkchop]

Porkchop

Re: Spamz

It's only dead people no one submits stuff (probably because a lot of them find it stupid to submit stuff to access spam).

I'd be surprised if even 3 people can access it right now.

!@#$% I lost my entire post, god dammit.

[Dumb_Ass]

Dumb_Ass

Re: Spamz

5 things... kinda harsh, especially for the people who've been here and know how to control themselves outside of spam. : /

[FISSURE]

FISSURE

Re: Spamz

It's only dead people no one submits stuff (probably because a lot of them find it stupid to submit stuff to access spam).

I'd be surprised if even 3 people can access it right now.

It's also the fact that the count resets every month.

So if you want to stay in spam you have to add 5 things every month, which is stupid. But again, no one seems to realize that simple fact.

[4Sword]

4Sword

Re: Spamz

The proactive thing to do would be to either lower the limit so people who submit resources would feel like they had an attainable result rather than a temporal impossibility.  I suggest keeping the monthly-limit expiration on each credit while reducing the number of credits to get into the section down to 3.

[FISSURE]

FISSURE

Re: Spamz

The proactive thing to do would be to either lower the limit so people who submit resources would feel like they had an attainable result rather than a temporal impossibility.  I suggest keeping the monthly-limit expiration on each credit while reducing the number of credits to get into the section down to 3.

Or take away the reducing each month because no one in their right mind is gonna post resources each month just so they can post "fgsgasdfadsf"

[4Sword]

4Sword

Re: Spamz

I used to be in favor of removing the monthly expiration limit altogether if the credit limit to get in was nested at 5 and only incremented when the board became overly populated.  However, this is flawed and counter-productive.  If the limit is ever raised, there will be no new submitters for the same reason that there are none now.  If a number of people get to the limit as staying on it would be easier, then it would detract from the effort of submitting and other boards may lose some interest.  The administration would also have to pay attention to it more rather than a monthly limit setup which for the most part regulates itself.

Having only 3 credits to get in makes it so a submitter doesn't have to supply as much while they still have submitted plenty.  It also would either have no effect or it would benefit the amount of things getting submitted each month as it was more feasible.  If a user got tired of seeing the Spam forum and was not submitting things that much any more, then it would go invisible after the expiration happened. 

The point being, the administration does not have to offer Spam and reducing the limit benefits them and those who want to view Spam more than getting rid of the expiration period.

[Bludleef]

Bludleef

Re: Spamz

Or we could maybe change the month expiration to a quarter so that the credits expire once every quarter. I think it is reasonable to make 3-5 resources in 3 months.

SOME LINKS
 -> Bludsoft Productions

• 

[Mamoruanime]

Mamoruanime

Re: Spamz

I think the system needs a bit of work; I personally think you should get credits for each item added to the download section of an item posted, and perhaps the goal # should be 3 submissions; but otherwise, eh... People just need to get off their asses and submit resources. It's not that hard.

I ripped full megaman tilesets in under 10 minutes :\ I'm sure other people can rip stuff using the tools Windy has made.

[FISSURE]

FISSURE

Re: Spamz

I used to be in favor of removing the monthly expiration limit altogether if the credit limit to get in was nested at 5 and only incremented when the board became overly populated.  However, this is flawed and counter-productive.  If the limit is ever raised, there will be no new submitters for the same reason that there are none now.  If a number of people get to the limit as staying on it would be easier, then it would detract from the effort of submitting and other boards may lose some interest.  The administration would also have to pay attention to it more rather than a monthly limit setup which for the most part regulates itself.

Having only 3 credits to get in makes it so a submitter doesn't have to supply as much while they still have submitted plenty.  It also would either have no effect or it would benefit the amount of things getting submitted each month as it was more feasible.  If a user got tired of seeing the Spam forum and was not submitting things that much any more, then it would go invisible after the expiration happened. 

The point being, the administration does not have to offer Spam and reducing the limit benefits them and those who want to view Spam more than getting rid of the expiration period.

Then they should take spam away, instead of offering a half assed way to get in. Or remove the limit altogether.

You already heard the words "It barely has any activity."

Again, no one wants to basically for spam. Especially not each month. It's pointless.

[4Sword]

4Sword

Re: Spamz

Removing the limit would create a scenario in which there would be overpopulation in that section to which the remedy would be to increase the limit to get it; no new submitters would submit anything because then the overall limit would be too high.  In that system, only those who had existing access would be able to keep access. 

Simply lowering the limit means more people get into Spam, potentially more resources are going to be submitted as there is less futility in submitting them, and with the expiration standing there is no a situation where people would pool there.  Nobody is going to be totally satisfied either way, but I think that my solution is favorable to both sides.  You get a little for giving a little, rather than getting nothing for giving something or getting a lot for a little.  It just seems fairer that way to me for everybody.

[FISSURE]

FISSURE

Re: Spamz

Removing the limit would create a scenario in which there would be overpopulation in that section to which the remedy would be to increase the limit to get it; no new submitters would submit anything because then the overall limit would be too high.  In that system, only those who had existing access would be able to keep access. 

Simply lowering the limit means more people get into Spam, potentially more resources are going to be submitted as there is less futility in submitting them, and with the expiration standing there is no a situation where people would pool there.  Nobody is going to be totally satisfied either way, but I think that my solution is favorable to both sides.  You get a little for giving a little, rather than getting nothing for giving something or getting a lot for a little.  It just seems fairer that way to me for everybody.

Yes, but spam isn't a reward. It's spam, a place to post nonsense. No one wants to pay resources every month to get into spam. The only reason why you need to pay resources to get into spam is because apparently the site is hurting for resources. So the admins thought of a Cop out to get more resources by making people pay every month to get into it.

A spam board shouldn't be a "reward" for posting resources every month, frankly because spam isn't a reward, it's just a little fun thing for people to post things that would get modded in any other forum.

[4Sword]

4Sword

Re: Spamz

The way I see it, the administration has the right to determine whether or not Spam exists at all as they run the place, and rather than remove it entirely, allowing you to get into it for a little bit of effort is a win-win.  People who do submit resources should be rewarded though, and having an unmoderated board in which to do whatever they want for the most part is a nice offering. 

The administration isn't catering to those who spam, but offering those who want to have a place to spam the option of getting there all while giving those who submit resources something.

[Vash]

Vash

Re: Spamz

I used to be in favor of removing the monthly expiration limit altogether if the credit limit...............

I fell asleep after 'credit limit'. -- Are you running for Office?

Anyway, It's existence really doesn't harm anything.. I suppose, like all boards, once it becomes absurdly inactive it will just be chopped off and removed.

~The Gaurdians of ZFGC~
Kirby, metallica48423, Max, Vash, walnut100

[FISSURE]

FISSURE

Re: Spamz

The way I see it, the administration has the right to determine whether or not Spam exists at all as they run the place, and rather than remove it entirely, allowing you to get into it for a little bit of effort is a win-win.  People who do submit resources should be rewarded though, and having an unmoderated board in which to do whatever they want for the most part is a nice offering. 

The administration isn't catering to those who spam, but offering those who want to have a place to spam the option of getting there all while giving those who submit resources something.

Yes, but like i said, Spam isn't a reward, it really shouldn't be one. It was basically just a cop out, they admins saw people wanted Spam, they saw that  the site had no resources. So they decided to make people pay spam and get resources for the site. It's not a reward, it's basically just to get resources. It's desperation.

Honestly, i don't care that much since i didn't post in spam a lot anymore, but it just seems stupid to me.

[4Sword]

4Sword

Re: Spamz

FISSURE, I am saying that rather than give those who submit resources nothing, giving them a board to post in which is unmoderated is at least something.  If there was something better that could be offered, then I would be for that.  Also, repeating the phrase "Spam isn't a reward" doesn't make it any more true; Spam is not a good reward, but it is still a reward.  You are still getting something rather than nothing out of submitting resources.

And Vash, I could dumb my words down for you if it would make it easier to read them.

[Vash]

Vash

Re: Spamz

The way I see it, the administration has the right to determine whether or not Spam exists at all as they run the place, and rather than remove it entirely, allowing you to get into it for a little bit of effort is a win-win.  People who do submit resources should be rewarded though, and having an unmoderated board in which to do whatever they want for the most part is a nice offering. 

The administration isn't catering to those who spam, but offering those who want to have a place to spam the option of getting there all while giving those who submit resources something.

Yes, but like i said, Spam isn't a reward, it really shouldn't be one. It was basically just a cop out, they admins saw people wanted Spam, they saw that  the site had no resources. So they decided to make people pay spam and get resources for the site. It's not a reward, it's basically just to get resources. It's desperation.

Honestly, i don't care that much since i didn't post in spam a lot anymore, but it just seems stupid to me.

From that view point, one could only determine that the quality of resources the site gains, wont be that great in the end.

I don't know why we have spam, but I don't know why a lot of things happen.

~The Gaurdians of ZFGC~
Kirby, metallica48423, Max, Vash, walnut100

[FISSURE]

FISSURE

Re: Spamz

FISSURE, I am saying that rather than give those who submit resources nothing, giving them a board to post in which is unmoderated is at least something.  If there was something better that could be offered, then I would be for that.  Also, repeating the phrase "Spam isn't a reward" doesn't make it any more true; Spam is not a good reward, but it is still a reward.  You are still getting something rather than nothing out of submitting resources.

And Vash, I could dumb my words down for you if it would make it easier to read them.

You make a good point, although spam is still moderated, no porn, illegal activities, etc. Although like you said, somewhat unmoderated.

The way I see it, the administration has the right to determine whether or not Spam exists at all as they run the place, and rather than remove it entirely, allowing you to get into it for a little bit of effort is a win-win.  People who do submit resources should be rewarded though, and having an unmoderated board in which to do whatever they want for the most part is a nice offering. 

The administration isn't catering to those who spam, but offering those who want to have a place to spam the option of getting there all while giving those who submit resources something.

Yes, but like i said, Spam isn't a reward, it really shouldn't be one. It was basically just a cop out, they admins saw people wanted Spam, they saw that  the site had no resources. So they decided to make people pay spam and get resources for the site. It's not a reward, it's basically just to get resources. It's desperation.

Honestly, i don't care that much since i didn't post in spam a lot anymore, but it just seems stupid to me.

From that view point, one could only determine that the quality of resources the site gains, wont be that great in the end.

I don't know why we have spam, but I don't know why a lot of things happen.

So basically your saying that people would just submit anything to get into spam and it wouldn't really help the site since the resources wouldn't really be good seeing as how people are just submitting things to get into spam and probably don't care about the quality of them?