• Please note that this section is for questions regarding the forum itself - it is not for fan game-related questions. If you have a question about a fan game, ask in the appropriate thread.

  • Our friends from the Johto Times are hosting a favorite Pokémon poll - and we'd love for you to participate! Click here for information on how to vote for your favorites!
  • Scottie, Todd, Serena, Kris - which Pokémon protagonist is your favorite? Let us know by voting in our poll!
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

Why is it illegal to post on a thread that is more than a month old?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Along with what was said above... being the person who gave the warning in the first place in this instance (said instance involving a thread nearly half a year old since the previous post, never mind the usual month limit), I don't see how it was too harsh. As every automatic warning message states after all (because you get notified of it via PM):
Warnings are different from infractions; they don't actually add any points or count towards your record for getting suspended. We're giving you this warning so you can have a chance to see what you've done wrong and improve before you receive infraction points. If you have any questions about warnings or infractions (or the difference between them), take a look at this thread and feel free to post any questions there. Further information about the infraction system can be found by clicking here (you can also ask any questions you have about the system in that thread.)
Click to expand...
Given that explanation I'd say it's pretty clear to people who get warnings the nature of them. Certainly in the grand scheme of things for usual members who pay attention to them, they mean very, very little - warnings are just more noticeable than the verbal method.

Also, it's not easy to be able to take into account people who may still take warnings too strongly or whatnot - that'd require knowing each person's personality and/or mind reading abilities, to put it simply. I don't believe I should not give warnings just because someone might be upset with it - I try to give people a similar treatment for doing the same thing, no matter who they are, if I know them or not, and so forth. Hope that explains it somewhat?
 
But although they may feel that way, the fact remains that it's not the first step to being banned, and it's not a harsh punishment. If they're upset over the warning they can contact the staff member that gave it to them and have it explained, but PC can't build its warning/infraction/ban rules off of people that are overly sensitive to any kind of correction, no matter how much or little it counts against them.
 
I don't know. Just seems to me like warnings are a little more serious than they are pushed to be.
I mean, if banning from the forum takes a simple three steps, the steps shouldn't be so loose.
I understand what you all mean about getting warned being different from getting an infraction, but it just seems to me like it's serious.
 
Well, it's usually more than a simple 3 steps - most infractions are only worth a few or couple points and you need to hit a limit (9 for these forums for the first time) to actually get banned. So it's more warning/s, infraction and then ban for multiple infractions. And again, it's hard to get an infraction after a warning if you simply take note of the warning as well - you can only get an infraction if you ignore it which would suggest you're just not paying attention to the rules on purpose.
 
Ohhh ok. I thought it was like "You get an offense = warning, another offense = infraction, another offense = ban"
Like, three steps and done, no questions asked.
 
emberjed said:
I was recently given a warning for this. It seems like a pretty stupid issue, especially since it's a pain to start new threads and have people comment on them when there's a perfectly good old thread. Why is it illegal?

Another question: What will happen to me if I accidentally do it again?
Click to expand...


ha! you're not going to believe this but the whole reason i got kicked out of the other gaming forums for doing that crap. i didn't intentionally bring up old crap but sometimes some of the people who posted those things still haven't gotten answers or will repost sometime in the future anyway so i don't see the problem. i won't fight the system here because it's not worth it but i totally agree with you. it's stupid. the way i see it is: if it pisses you off and you don't like it, then don't reply. the person will find out on their own if the topic is to be discussed any further. just let them be, i always say. my only suggestion is to keep you from doing it again always check the dates and if the post is more than like 2 pages back, you shouldn't respond to it.
 
ringu217 said:
ha! you're not going to believe this but the whole reason i got kicked out of the other gaming forums for doing that crap. i didn't intentionally bring up old crap but sometimes some of the people who posted those things still haven't gotten answers or will repost sometime in the future anyway so i don't see the problem. i won't fight the system here because it's not worth it but i totally agree with you. it's stupid. the way i see it is: if it pisses you off and you don't like it, then don't reply. the person will find out on their own if the topic is to be discussed any further. just let them be, i always say. my only suggestion is to keep you from doing it again always check the dates and if the post is more than like 2 pages back, you shouldn't respond to it.
Click to expand...

That sucks. :cross-eye: Your idea seems like something that would only work if it is a well-established motto; that way everyone will do it and people will learn not to post the kinds of topics that piss others off, I guess.

The main issue I have with the rule, though, is the fact that it causes a huge backlog of abandoned threads that could probably be reduced to a couple hundred if people were simply allowed to post on threads whenever they wanted. Oh well.
 
emberjed said:
The main issue I have with the rule, though, is the fact that it causes a huge backlog of abandoned threads that could probably be reduced to a couple hundred if people were simply allowed to post on threads whenever they wanted. Oh well.
Click to expand...

People who are complaining about the ruling and calling it 'stupid', have you stopped to think why other forums have the same ruling?

If you post in a topic that is over a month old, there is a good chance the reason for the thread has become obsolete. It is old news and there is a reason that it hasn't had a reply in a month. The chances are, that the member has found an alternate solution to their problem, if that was the original nature of the thread.

If you get a warning/infraction because you have bumped up an old topic, then this isn't out fault. The rules clearly state that if you do, then you will be dealt with.​
​
 
^ Ok, what you said sounds completely different than what the last guy said. The last guy said something that actually made it seem fair, the way you say it, you sound like Hitler No. 2 :S
 
^ Ok, what you said sounds completely different than what the last guy said. The last guy said something that actually made it seem fair, the way you say it, you sound like Hitler No. 2 :S
Click to expand...

He's not trying to sound mean. He's probably tired of having to repeat what's already been said in this thread dozens of times. Just cause there's not any smilies or anything and someone is talking sternly, it doesn't make them "Hitler 2" or anything. To be honest, I couldn't have worded it any better than Fabio did. If a thread hasn't been posted in in over a month, it's dead because no one really cares anymore. The discussion died. There's nothing more to say about it. I don't see how this thread has even gone on so long. Everyone's just repeating what's already been said at this point.

Also, according to Godwin's Law, comparing someone from the other party in a forum discussion to Hitler means you automatically lose the debate. Oops.
 
Last edited:
forum can add a very easy system. thread will be showed to the normal users as locked if 1 month passed. only thread owner will be able to post. but in my opinion this rule is totally unlogical.
 
Sydian said:


He's not trying to sound mean. He's probably tired of having to repeat what's already been said in this thread dozens of times. Just cause there's not any smilies or anything and someone is talking sternly, it doesn't make them "Hitler 2" or anything. To be honest, I couldn't have worded it any better than Fabio did. If a thread hasn't been posted in in over a month, it's dead because no one really cares anymore. The discussion died. There's nothing more to say about it. I don't see how this thread has even gone on so long. Everyone's just repeating what's already been said at this point.

Also, according to Godwin's Law, comparing someone from the other party in a forum discussion to Hitler means you automatically lose the debate. Oops.
Click to expand...

Actually, a comparison to Hitler just means that they're being dictators. How the bloody hell does that mean you lost the debate? :paranoid:

-Anyway, all I'm saying is, if you're a mod, you should be more professional and not sound like you're agitated or annoyed, even if you are. I've been a mod 6 times on different forums now, you don't solve problems by acting all high and mighty, you try to be reasonable and gently explain it, not lash out. For instance, BobandBill is probably the most professional mod I've seen yet, he doesn't go around locking threads and then bugging people about it, he either moves it, or locks it but offers advice like "You should try doing this and etc..", if I came off as rude, I apologize, just saying.-
 
Last edited:
Actually, a comparison to Hitler just means that they're being dictators. How the bloody hell does that mean you lost the debate?
Click to expand...

Lighten up and take a joke, please. And for the record, we're not acting like "dictators." Mods don't make the forum-wide rules, we just enforce them. Chillax.

-Anyway, all I'm saying is, if you're a mod, you should be more professional and not sound like you're agitated or annoyed, even if you are. I've been a mod 6 times on different forums now, you don't solve problems by acting all high and mighty, you try to be reasonable and gently explain it, not lash out. For instance, BobandBill is probably the most professional mod I've seen yet, he doesn't go around locking threads and then bugging people about it, he either moves it, or locks it but offers advice like "You should try doing this and etc..", if I came off as rude, I apologize, just saying.-
Click to expand...

But he didn't lash out, that's what I'm getting at. That's how you took it, okay, but I didn't think he was lashing out. You would know if he really was. And we may be moderators and staff etc., but we're still human. We get agitated and not all the time we think to cover it up. Doesn't matter if you've modded in 6 different places. I've modded, super modded, and admined elsewhere, but that doesn't make a difference when I'm here. Personally, I just think you're taking things to heart too easily. Use Iron Defense!

Back to the point of the thread though, I think everything that needs to be said has been said. If a thread hasn't been posted in in over a month, it's dead. Done. Deceased. Wilted. Kicked the bucket. Just don't post in it. It's not hard to check the the date of the last post that was made in the thread and then make a new one if it's too old. I don't see why this is having to be such a big issue. I'm surprised this thread is still even open at this point.
 
I think this thread has well-outlived its usefulness...if it had any to begin with. I see nothing constructive coming from it and it's starting to get nasty, so...
Locked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top