Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Regarding the New Kickstarter RuleFollow

#1 Sep 27 2012 at 6:29 AM Rating: Good
Unforkgettable
*****
13,251 posts
With the thread over in the TV, Movies, Anime & Books forum devolving into a ******* match and my questions going unanswered, I figured I'd post here in the appropriate forum regarding the upcoming rule implementation regarding Kickstarter threads.

While I can understand having a rule in place on the expectation that a rash of Kickstarter spam threads occur, I think that an exception should be made for posters having obtained a requisite number of posts on the forums. For what it's worth, this should also apply to survey threads and any other "you must ask permission" types of situations.

Somewhere in the range of 250-500 posts, a poster should be viewed as a contributing member of the forums, and it should be acknowledged that they are not simply a spam or advertising account. The moderators here do a very good job at removing such accounts well before they sniff that kind of a postcount. I would propose that an exception be written into your survey, Kickstarter, etc. rules that would allow for such a poster to create a thread without having to seek permission first. If I make a post about a Kickstarter, I'm not an advertising bot; it's something I'm genuinely interested in and want to share with my fellow forum-goers.

This type of clause would also allow you to have a built-in moderation rule for things like contest posting where a forum poster asks everyone to vote for their choice on an external site, making a thread to inform everyone about their online shop, or any other posting that can be looked upon as borderline advertising.

Since the new rule will specifically target Kickstarters, I'd like some clarification regarding them, mainly:

What differentiates a Kickstarter thread from any other thread in which a poster informs others of a product they themselves are interested in? Is it the link to a site in which a user is asked to spend money? If so, how is that different from a thread about a video game, movie, book, or other product in which a link is placed, leading to a site where that product can be purchased? Can it not be said that any post which contains a link to a non-ZAM-network site could be considered advertising? What specifically about Kickstarters requires implementation of a new rule?

Anyway, I'd hope to get some input from other people here, both users of the forum and various moderators and administrators.

Edited, Sep 27th 2012 8:32am by Spoonless
____________________________
Banh
#2 Sep 27 2012 at 7:56 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Quote:
What differentiates a Kickstarter thread from any other thread in which a poster informs others of a product they themselves are interested in? Is it the link to a site in which a user is asked to spend money? If so, how is that different from a thread about a video game, movie, book, or other product in which a link is placed, leading to a site where that product can be purchased?

My digital download deals thread is screeeeeewwweeeddd,,,,
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#3 Sep 27 2012 at 8:01 AM Rating: Good
Unforkgettable
*****
13,251 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Quote:
What differentiates a Kickstarter thread from any other thread in which a poster informs others of a product they themselves are interested in? Is it the link to a site in which a user is asked to spend money? If so, how is that different from a thread about a video game, movie, book, or other product in which a link is placed, leading to a site where that product can be purchased?

My digital download deals thread is screeeeeewwweeeddd,,,,
I'm sorry, Joph, but you now have to ask permission for each instance in which you post a link.
____________________________
Banh
#4 Sep 27 2012 at 8:44 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,905 posts
The main point of it will be to limit spam. I dont see these decreasing in frequancy anytime soon. I can see an exception for long term posfers. I can also see a clause regarding content of users we banned for cause. I dont know yet how it will look since i havent had a chance to look at it yet. Ill wrife one this weeekend.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#5 Sep 27 2012 at 8:52 AM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,541 posts
I agree that 500 posts is a good rule for someone posting surveys, Kickstarters, etc. By that point they're probably a familiar name on the forum and whatever it is they're doing is something I might actually be interested in checking out.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#6 Sep 27 2012 at 9:06 AM Rating: Good
Unforkgettable
*****
13,251 posts
Wouldn't spam threads fall under current spam rules, regardless of content?

Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
I can also see a clause regarding content of users we banned for cause.
I can't help but feel like the manner in which I posted my thread in the Assorted General Media forum was such that it did not break any current rules, and that rules are being implemented so in the future you would have cause to disallow a similar thread to take place.
____________________________
Banh
#7 Sep 27 2012 at 4:27 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
27,904 posts
Spoonless wrote:
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
I can also see a clause regarding content of users we banned for cause.
I can't help but feel like the manner in which I posted my thread in the Assorted General Media forum was such that it did not break any current rules, and that rules are being implemented so in the future you would have cause to disallow a similar thread to take place.
I'd imagine it falls under section XV of the forum rules. A specific ruling was made regarding this specific content, so I suspect it would stand on subsequent instances barring successful appeal.

Edited, Sep 27th 2012 4:28pm by Poldaran
#8 Oct 02 2012 at 6:48 AM Rating: Excellent
Spankatorium Administratix
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
1oooo posts
Sorry for not getting back to everyone sooner, I haven't had a chance to discuss this at length with Kaolian yet.
____________________________
ZAM: Support FAQ | Forum FAQ | Forum Rules | Mobile
DF: Twitter | FB
KnotKrazy: FB | Etsy
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 23 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (23)