[Suggestion] New Usergroup

[Draik]

Well, I've been thinking. Maybe if we had a usergroup for members who are close to banning but not. Like, an underprivledged member of somesort.

 

[aRedMoon]

They actually have something like it, or at least used it.

It was a usergroup where all the posts had to be moderated - but the staff were too forgetfull and never remembered to check for new posts to be moderated in the ModCP and the member just ended up leaving.

 

[Draik]

It's kind of like my point. But something like, if you get exxcessive warnings and don't get banned, you get put in there. Like, no making topics or something, no posting in serious topics, etc.

 

[Lady Akita]

Wait, what is serious? There's no mature discussions forum or anything..and from my point of view, getting banned is pretty harmful to your self-concept. I'm sure that members who have repeated warnings willl learn to not do it again, instead of getting consequences for it. Sometimes, they just forget to read a rule or two, right? Besides, no offence, PC has an overwhelming load of rules.

 

[Draik]

Pokemon discussion. Meh, I would count that as pretty serious. Just discuss the game =/

Plus, PC doesn't have that many rules to read anyways, only like, 20 or so.

 

[Blaze]

Well there is a vB Hack called "Miserable Users" which gives anyone in this account a bunch of "B/w exceeded* and *we cannot connect* messages.

I tried it out before... it is quite effective D:

 

[aRedMoon]

That's an incredibly nasty hack though, and I'm pretty sure it would get overused...

 

[Blaze]

I agree,

Though I believe I heard they have made a revision where you could change the intensity... However, over using it would totally frustrate the masses and would create a negative effect over the whole community.

 

[Ryoutarou]

Wait, what is serious? There's no mature discussions forum or anything..and from my point of view, getting banned is pretty harmful to your self-concept. I'm sure that members who have repeated warnings willl learn to not do it again, instead of getting consequences for it. Sometimes, they just forget to read a rule or two, right? Besides, no offence, PC has an overwhelming load of rules.

Most of the rules are just plain common sense though, nothing you need to know by heart.

 

[Soul Eater]

Yeah but even if PC did have that don't you think it would be embarrasing having that kind of usergroup for those that are close to getting banned? =/

 

[Sammi]

Yeah but even if PC did have that don't you think it would be embarrasing having that kind of usergroup for those that are close to getting banned? =/

Exactly. That's why I don't like this idea.
It's embarassing, and I know I wouldn't want something like that happening to me. Besides, it could confuse them and make them upset. ._.;

Anyway, like I said, I don't like it. I can see where you're coming from though. ^^;

 

[John Denver]

What a horrible idea. That'd be like labeling a user the whole time they're here. And if they have really learned from their mistake, no one would want to befriend them anyway.

 

[Spectrum]

Plus, PC doesn't have that many rules to read anyways, only like, 20 or so.

That's actually more than about 95% of web communities. PC's strict enough as it is (no offense), which not only would make that usergroup overkill, but also brings up the amount of people who would go in that usergroup.

 

[oni flygon]

Already been talked about a long time ago by the staff, phailed. :O

 

[Rukario]

we would like to hope that our current (system of) warning and talking to abusive (uneducated, spamming, cursing, whatever, etc.. ) members is a lot more effective at creating better users who will WANT to contribuite to PC vs. creating an adversial type of atmosphere where it's the "good" against the "bad" members, that can only result in further abuses and fighting.

No, we'll stay with the current system for now.

 

[Geometric-sama]

We already allow users enough warnings. If they don't heed them, it's their problem.