-= Gametoast.com =-

I like this site. I like it a lot. I've been coming here for years, downloading and trying out hundreds and hundreds of new maps, trying bit by bit (with what little spare time and focus I can scrape up) to learn how to mod myself. There's no other resource on the internet like Gametoast, it's vital to modding for BF2.

But despite how very much I like this site, I come here less and less often as time passes. And every time I make a post, I just feel less and less like ever posting again. When I mention this site to people I know online with similar interests, some of them tell me not to bother with this place, that it's all "rules-nazis and snobs". I kept telling them it wasn't like that. And I still think it isn't like that. But I'm starting to see why some people think that, and that's why I'm giving the feedback I'm giving.

I know -- it's a free site, no one's making me come here, if I don't like it I can leave, etc. I know. And I don't want to make trouble, but I also don't want to bend over backwards trying to avoid making trouble.

MY POINT: I think the micro-managed, rules-laden, hyper-conservative, zero-tolerance management of this site makes it really difficult to use, and actually discourages people from posting and getting involved, unless they are the type of person suited to following stern and harsh rules without question.

We can't finish a post with a couple of letters as a signoff, or we get yelled at.

We can't post the wrong kind of feedback or suggestions to threads where people are asking for feedback and suggestions, or we'll get reprimanded and the discussion will be repressed.

We can't post in a thread that hasn't had posts in 32 days, even to answer a question that was asked, or we get yelled at and the conversation gets locked.

Maybe there are good solid reasons for all these rules and regulations and their rigid enforcement. For four+ years I was the lead moderator of a site of 5000 members, and I'm aware that most site rules have reasons. Maybe there was a massive flame-war some time ago, and all this hyper-legislation is meant to prevent a re-ignition of it. Maybe the signatures issue really was getting so out of hand that it was worth it, or at least seemed worth it, to shut it all down and get harsh about it. Maybe people get so disruptive with posting the wrong kind of feedback that severe interpretation of vague prohibitions is needed.

But the end result is that it makes me, and probably at least some other people, feel discouraged from posting or participating. I don't want to cause trouble, but every time I post I'm treated like a rule-breaker and a troublemaker, when all I wanted was to contribute and be involved.

I don't expect this to change much here, if anything at all. You all seem to be getting along acceptably the way things are. And really, you're the only game in town, you can be as harsh as you want and no one will really have any other comparable alternatives. I just felt like I should express this and let you know it's a factor for at least some people.

Thanks for your time, and everything you all do for the site.

I'm scared even posting in this topic.

But you're right in that every rule has a reason. Some of them fairly obvious (In my opinion) and some I don't really have any idea on why they're enforced.

I agree, though. Battlefront II stuff is what's excepted here, and everything else will be questioned by someone. Me only coming here to contribute to that, "everything else" makes me wonder who will disagree with it, and I usually hope it isn't someone willing to report me / reprimand me. It makes me think twice before posting, and that usually is good, but sometimes it isn't.

JackTHorn wrote:We can't finish a post with a couple of letters as a signoff, or we get yelled at.

No one's going to yell at you, textually or otherwise, but we will tell you not to do it. Why? I can't answer for everyone, but I know that at least in my opinion, in a site dedicated to information and the dispensing of it, adding unnecessary clutter in the format of pictures/words/whatever at the bottom of a post only serves to make things harder to read and browse. I prefer to decide what a person is about by how they post, and it's not like I'm confused as to who they are - they've got their name by every post.

JackTHorn wrote:We can't post the wrong kind of feedback or suggestions to threads where people are asking for feedback and suggestions, or we'll get reprimanded and the discussion will be repressed.

You can post feedback or suggestions in any thread where it is (explicitly or implicitly) asked for. If it's not at least implied, then we try to - again - keep things as clutter-free as possible so that information can be most efficiently shared. A lot of the time, too - and I say this as a modder and not as a staff member - it's really kind've annoying to hear suggestions when you don't ask for it - it's like saying "oh hey this isn't good enough, but my way is better." That's not always the intent, but we try and look out for anyone who comes here and wants to produce content first and foremost.

JackTHorn wrote:We can't post in a thread that hasn't had posts in 32 days, even to answer a question that was asked, or we get yelled at and the conversation gets locked.

In most cases if you are contributing something relevant to the topic or answering a question - even if it is after the one-month period - then it shouldn't get locked. If someone looks like they're genuinely trying to help, I won't lock a topic. Asking another question (except for an FAQ topic) or posting "the link's bad" isn't necessary (as in the latter case we provide threads to update these on) because they add clutter.

It is very rarely you will get "yelled at" for bumping a topic. Despite being one of our rules (in the site rules, which everyone should have read upon signing up), we're always pretty lenient on enforcing it and only if it's a perpetual and consistent offender will we actually give a warning. If we lock a topic that someone bumped, don't take it personally if you just missed where you should have posted. We're just trying to keep things easy-to-use.

JackTHorn wrote:Maybe there are good solid reasons for all these rules and regulations and their rigid enforcement.

I'd like to think that there are; this is a pretty tight community and a very productive one. The people here know their stuff and are usually pretty helpful. Information gets disseminated effectively and people can learn a lot. By at least my measures, those are successes, especially when considering the nature of the site - information first, social secondarily.

JackTHorn wrote:But the end result is that it makes me, and probably at least some other people, feel discouraged from posting or participating. I don't want to cause trouble, but every time I post I'm treated like a rule-breaker and a troublemaker, when all I wanted was to contribute and be involved.

If you feel discouraged from posting then please share your specific concerns with any staff member with whom you feel it is a pertinent discussion. None of the staff here want anything more than to help the site do its best to do what it's supposed to do, and that includes being a community where people feel free to contribute. None of the staff are too hot-headed to approach, trust me. If you have concerns, bring them to us and I promise you we will address them as best we can. If we as staff ever come across as less-than-genial (and I am sure that for me personally, my terseness could occasionally be interpreted as this), I assure you that is just a businesslike manner and it is not an indication of some sort of uncontrolled displeasure. Our ears are open, if a situation pops up just let us know.

"Perhaps you feel you are being treated unfairly?" :vader2:

I actually kind of like the amount of rules this forum has. The rules are not hard to follow, and are easy to understand. They keep most of the idiots out, and keep useless posts to a minimum. I have never though that GT's rules were at all unreasonable. Most of them are just common courtesy and common sense. Most of the people who complain are the people who came here, didn't read the rules, acted like idiots, and were banned. Some others are the people who do not have any regard for any rules, and just don't have respect for people. I, personally, don't mind the rules and how they are enforced. It keeps this community full of respectable, intelligent people who create topics that are interesting and that, for the most part, contribute to the forums.

These are, of course, just my opinions, and I do agree that some of the rules do tend to nitpick. But believe me, they help more situations than they hurt. All of the rules you have criticized do have good reasons for being made. The no-signature rule prevents us from that guy who has a ridiculous signature that takes up more space than all of his posts combined, for example. (I seriously have seen this kind of person on other forums, some just go too far) Another example is the no-bumping rule. I do agree that sometimes useful topics get locked because of this rule, but there are ways of bumping that do not break this rule (like bumping with a post that contributes further to the topic). This rule was in place mostly to stop users from bumping a WIP thread that hasn't been updated in a month because the map is "liek omg teh c00lest ting evar!!!11!!" (<-That used to happen a lot, and still does, despite this rule).

What you also need to consider is that for any system of authority to work, it must be consistent. If the mods/admins only enforced the rule sometimes and constantly made exceptions, the rules would not be taken seriously, and would be broken more often. Another thing to consider is that no set of rules is perfect, and there are always situations in which a rule can be hurtful rather than helpful. That is, unfortunately, the way these things always work. And, like you said yourself, if you don't like it, you can leave. But, like I said, these rules are not all bad either. It really comes down to your preference. I, personally hope you stay.

And please, do not feel discouraged to post. Most of the staff are nice, cool, understanding people. As long as you conduct yourself in a mature, intelligent manner, and contribute to the topics being discussed, you should be OK. And if you are in doubt whether you can post something, PM a staff member.

Edit: Aww...Mav' beat me to the ridiculously long reply. Oh well. I hope I helped too.

Please, allow me to share a personal experience:
I had been a moderator in a relatively small community for some time, and I have to say, it was chaotic, absolutely chaotic; there were next to none active admins or individuals with permissions to ban, give warnings or whatever was required at the occasion, no rules to be enforced (except for the often ignored "try to be polite, please") and no respect between the members, users would simply come and do whatever they pleased. Those forums were pretty much like anything else in the common internet domain: childish, dumb and pointless; flooded with endless "no, you are wrong, I am right!!" arguments and genital enlargement advertising.

I'm completely satisfied with Gametoast's policy, if not only because I have grown tired of the lack of rules in the majority of the internet.

EDIT: in fact (let me add just this one more bit) the sole reason why it took me like... four months... to post anything after I registered in January, was because I was traumatized with internet forums, I didn't feel like joining anything as crazy as an internet forum again. As you can see, that changed, thanks to the very good job of the administradors and moderators of this site, who keep this place clean and sane.

I think the rules are bad. At least the no-political-or-religious-discussion direction. I am not allowed to express my pagan ideas, because then some 10-year-old Clone Wars/Miley Cyrus fan whines about that I am "so blind" and some moderator tells me to keep my ideas to myself. Of course, Gametoast might not be the place for such discussions, but I would love to see it properly done with mature posters. Otherwise, the forum's good, people know what they are doing. A lot of good maps and mods are made here.

YouJediJunkie wrote:I am not allowed to express my pagan ideas, because then some 10-year-old Clone Wars/Miley Cyrus fan whines about that I am "so blind" and some moderator tells me to keep my ideas to myself. Of course, Gametoast might not be the place for such discussions, but I would love to see it properly done with mature posters.

Yes, debating about ideological theories is an interesting activity, however, one should always remember that the world is full of different individuals, with different knowledge, opinions and temperament. There are "infinite interpretations" for anything and everything, as Nietzche would have said it; perhaps not all of them are valid, but you still have to respect the beliefs of others and understand that sometimes they are not willing to listen to what you have to say nor conform to your point of view.

YouJediJunkie wrote:I would love to see it properly done with mature posters.

Therein lies the problem. Not everyone can stay mature and open minded with those kind of discussions. Because of this, they usually turn into flame wars. That's why that rule exists. (As a matter of fact, I was here when that rule was made, and it was because there were a bunch of political/religious topics going around at the time, and they all erupted into flame wars. 100% of them)

I love having philosophical discussions as well, but it usually doesn't work in this type of environment. I'm sure there a forum that is all about that kind of discussion somewhere, though. This is the internet, after all.

Fingerfood wrote:I'm scared even posting in this topic.

See, now, that's funny -- but it's kind of what I'm talking about, too. I've had conversations with a few people now who just feel reluctant to post or contribute, because they just feel like they'll inevitably touch a legislative nerve somewhere and get their second warning. I can see how keeping the membership at least somewhat in that state of fear could be a good thing -- believe me, I can understand the practicalities of that. I just don't feel it's conducive to participation. *shrug*

Maveritchell wrote:No one's going to yell at you, textually or otherwise,

I'll conceded that point, "yelling" wasn't the right term. "Reprimand" or "warn" would have been better. I do appreciate the general civility with which this forum is run.

Maveritchell wrote:...in my opinion, in a site dedicated to information and the dispensing of it, adding unnecessary clutter in the format of pictures/words/whatever at the bottom of a post only serves to make things harder to read and browse. I prefer to decide what a person is about by how they post, and it's not like I'm confused as to who they are - they've got their name by every post.

These are all good solid points. I wasn't here to see how bad the clutter got, so I'm just coming from the perspective of someone who ended a friendly first post with "JT" and got a warning for it, and felt rather baffled and strongarmed. Sure, I should have given the rules more than a glance-over. But I've been part of dozens of forums, and I had never heard of anyone banning siglines entirely until I'd come here. And sure, the site is primarily for information -- but it often seems like there are some exacting and even subjective definitions used for what information and discussion is valid and what is not.

Maveritchell wrote:You can post feedback or suggestions in any thread where it is (explicitly or implicitly) asked for. If it's not at least implied, then we try to - again - keep things as clutter-free as possible so that information can be most efficiently shared.

I can accept that having more rules and more enforcement could ease more problems than it creates. But this driving fear of clutter, to the extent that two letters are reprimanded -- I wonder if the same holds true there?

Maveritchell wrote:A lot of the time, too - and I say this as a modder and not as a staff member - it's really kind've annoying to hear suggestions when you don't ask for it - it's like saying "oh hey this isn't good enough, but my way is better." That's not always the intent, but we try and look out for anyone who comes here and wants to produce content first and foremost.

I can appreciate and agree with that. In this last thread issue, for example (Rends' Mos Eisley), it was not at all my intent to bring up suggestions that were unasked for... I mentioned the hostile fourth side briefly, and Rends replied positively that he had considered that and was wanting to play with the idea and figure out how he could do it. Sure, he also said that he was mostly done with the current version and the non-beta would soon be linked, but since he was talking about playing with the idea of a fourth side it seemed implicit to be that there was at least the possibility of a 1.2 or 2.0 or something. And since I find suggestions from other modders useful when I'm working on plans and designs for maps, whether I end up using them or not, I thought a thread on the topic was a good place to detail those ideas, especially since other posters had also found my ideas interesting and worth responding to. Hence the discussion nature of forums and threads.

Now, if Rends had at any point said that he wasn't interested in ideas for a hostile fourth side, I would never have mentioned anything further about it in that thread. Heck, if he'd even just said nothing about it, I wouldn't have mentioned it. But Rends had said it was an idea he wanted to consider and "play with". And it wasn't Rends who decided my input was spamming the thread -- it was a zealous moderator who was I think interpreting that forum rule rather broadly (though with best intentions, I'm sure, I mean no offense to the good volunteer mods who help out around here).

Maveritchell wrote:In most cases if you are contributing something relevant to the topic or answering a question - even if it is after the one-month period - then it shouldn't get locked. If someone looks like they're genuinely trying to help, I won't lock a topic.

Well, that sounds great, but I must say, it wasn't my experience... one thread I posted to (but failed to notice it was just past the 30-day mark) got locked down, and all I had posted was exactly what the OP had asked for -- reviews of his map after playing it, thoughts on the balance of power, ease of getting around the map, etc. So instead of what could have been a useful and revived discussion on the details of the map, we had a locked thread and a new user who felt shut down for the second time in as many posts.

If it's so important to cut down on clutter, why not move the threads to an Archive forum after 30 days with no posts?

But really, I think it just comes down to a difference of preferences. Some people prefer to minimize content and discussion, pare it down to the bare bones. I personally prefer to have MORE discussion and content in a forum. *shrug*

Maveritchell wrote:It is very rarely you will get "yelled at" for bumping a topic.

Well, it happened the one and only time I ever did it, on my second post or so. I dunno, maybe I just had bad luck.

Maveritchell wrote:If we lock a topic that someone bumped, don't take it personally if you just missed where you should have posted. We're just trying to keep things easy-to-use.

I can appreciate that. And it's possible that I just became overly sensitive after getting three reprimands after just a handful of posts, for infractions that seemed so minor they wouldn't even be mentioned on any of the other forums I've frequented. I'll try to drop that sore attitude.

Maveritchell wrote:I'd like to think that there are (good solid reasons for all these rules and regulations and their rigid enforcement); this is a pretty tight community and a very productive one. The people here know their stuff and are usually pretty helpful. Information gets disseminated effectively and people can learn a lot.

This is all true, I agree.

Maveritchell wrote:By at least my measures, those are successes, especially when considering the nature of the site - information first, social secondarily.

I guess this might be the crux of it -- in my opinion (and in my experience) information needs a certain amount of social lubrication to move as it needs to. It seems we simply disagree as to how much of it is needed.

Maveritchell wrote:If you feel discouraged from posting then please share your specific concerns with any staff member with whom you feel it is a pertinent discussion. None of the staff here want anything more than to help the site do its best to do what it's supposed to do, and that includes being a community where people feel free to contribute. None of the staff are too hot-headed to approach, trust me. If you have concerns, bring them to us and I promise you we will address them as best we can.

This is very reassuring to me, actually. I suppose I'd just felt wary about approaching any given moderator with objections, given the posted attitude of "no arguing with mods" and "zero tolerance for non-capitulation" and so on. Plus I don't really know people here yet, much less know the mods and their personalities. If I can discuss and question a decision without being likely to get ejected mechanically from the site, then it does make a solid difference.

Thanks for your substantial and considered response, Mav. =)

Hebes24 wrote:"Perhaps you feel you are being treated unfairly?" :vader2:

What an excellent quote for the topic. =D

Hebes24 wrote:I actually kind of like the amount of rules this forum has. The rules are not hard to follow, and are easy to understand.

I agree, actually. When I first joined the site, I didn't read the forum rules closely enough, I'll admit -- I just sort of assumed they were the same as most of the other forums I'd been part of, don't be a jerk, don't do personal attacks, maybe no cussing, stay on topic, no spam, no personal harassment, etc. So that was my fault. It never occurred to me that signing off with "JT" would be a problem, or that checking to see whether it had been 32 days or 29 days since the last posted response would be necessary.

And I suppose that after that, I began to feel like no matter what I posted, I was going to get dressed down for it -- I began to feel like this was an environment where everyone got harassed by stringently applied interpretations of the rules in order to keep the fear alive and the people in line. But then I got to wanting to get back into posting here again, and I figured I had the main rules down now, and could avoid crossing the line -- like you said, it's not that difficult. But when my very next group of postings resulted in an admin declaring my suggestions and ideas spam, it just brought that feeling back, like it almost didn't matter what was posted, something was going to be found to pick on.

Hebes24 wrote:They keep most of the idiots out, and keep useless posts to a minimum. I have never though that GT's rules were at all unreasonable... just common courtesy and common sense. Most of the people who complain are the people who came here, didn't read the rules, acted like idiots, and were banned. Some others are the people who do not have any regard for any rules, and just don't have respect for people.

I don't feel like any of those descriptions really apply to me -- an idiot, a useless poster, discourteous, senseless, or someone without regard for rules or without respect for people. In fact, I've been pretty well known as mostly the opposite in most forums I've been involved in. And yet I find myself tangled in these rules that are meant to only catch those who match the above descriptors.

Hebes24 wrote:The no-signature rule prevents us from that guy who has a ridiculous signature that takes up more space than all of his posts combined, for example. (I seriously have seen this kind of person on other forums, some just go too far)

Sure, I can see that. But then why not just make a mid-ground rule, like "Siglines must not exceed one line, and must consist of text only." That way you're not wasting time and energy catching up new posters who might just add initials or a name by habit, but you're still addressing the actual problem at hand. It's like fishing for tuna with a fine wire mesh.

Hebes24 wrote:Another example is the no-bumping rule. I do agree that sometimes useful topics get locked because of this rule, but there are ways of bumping that do not break this rule (like bumping with a post that contributes further to the topic). This rule was in place mostly to stop users from bumping a WIP thread that hasn't been updated in a month because the map is "liek omg teh c00lest ting evar!!!11!!" (<-That used to happen a lot, and still does, despite this rule).

Right, that makes sense. And if, as Mav mentioned, the general rule is for worthwhile and substantial bump-posts to be allowed while only the trivial, pointless bump-responses get a reprimand and/or a lock, then I've got no real problem with that. I just know that, if I were posting and asking for feedback on my map, and after the first few responses 31 days went by before someone came along with something to say, I'd still want to hear what that later person had to say about my map, and be able to respond and have a conversation about it all. That's what the forums and the threads are for, after all.

Hebes24 wrote:What you also need to consider is that for any system of authority to work, it must be consistent. If the mods/admins only enforced the rule sometimes and constantly made exceptions, the rules would not be taken seriously, and would be broken more often.

You make a good point, and I have considered it. And I agree. However, I think this just makes it all the more important to express and frame the rules carefully, otherwise you bind yourself to enforcing rules you have no real interest or reason for enforcing. Rules that are expressed narrowly let too much slide, rules that are expressed broadly let too little slide, but rules that are defined clearly and intentionally are usually pretty efficient and useful.

Hebes24 wrote:I, personally hope you stay. And please, do not feel discouraged to post. Most of the staff are nice, cool, understanding people. As long as you conduct yourself in a mature, intelligent manner, and contribute to the topics being discussed, you should be OK.

Thank you, seriously. I do intend to stay, and will try to be less sensitive about the posting issue, as well as trying to be more conscious and observant of what I can see of how the rules are manifested. Thank you for your responses, and the consideration you've shown.



And to respond to Nihillo:

Nihillo wrote:Please, allow me to share a personal experience:
I had been a moderator in a relatively small community for some time, and I have to say, it was chaotic, absolutely chaotic; there were next to none active admins or individuals with permissions to ban, give warnings or whatever was required at the occasion, no rules to be enforced (except for the often ignored "try to be polite, please") and no respect between the members, users would simply come and do whatever they pleased. Those forums were pretty much like anything else in the common internet domain: childish, dumb and pointless; flooded with endless "no, you are wrong, I am right!!" arguments...

Very true! As I said, I've been part of many forums, and all too many are really just ineffectively moderated settings for flamewars and drivel. Even the one I was lead mod for over a number of years, which had thousands of active members, was too worried about offending its members or providing "loopholes" to declare any really firm or solid rules -- the Sysops constantly told me that they needed to keep the rules vague and loose so that the mods could interpret them, which of course meant that there was little or no consistency, because some mods would rule with an iron fist while others were devoutly laissez faire. I was appointed to bring a sort of balance actually, in hopes that I could provide a consistent groundwork, though in the end there was little I could do without clearly expressed rules to work with.

In that regard, I suppose the GT forums as we have them are preferable to the other extreme, as I described above. I'd rather have rules I think are too broad or too harsh, but that I know clearly what they are, than to have to constantly wonder.

Nihillo wrote:I'm completely satisfied with Gametoast's policy, if not only because I have grown tired of the lack of rules in the majority of the internet.

I can understand what you mean; however, I find myself equally dismayed at finding a site that actually has clear rules, and finding that it seems to go to the other extreme.



And YouJediJunkie:

YouJediJunkie wrote:I am not allowed to express my pagan ideas... Of course, Gametoast might not be the place for such discussions, but I would love to see it properly done with mature posters.

Actually, I can totally understand the rules against political and religious discussion. First of all, it's totally unrelated to modding and BF2, which is the general topic of these forums -- as you said yourself, Gametoast isn't the place for such discussions, really. Second, some sites set up an Off Topic forum and allow that sort of unrelated discussion to go on there, but many don't, because really, is there any better way to start a total flame war on the internet than to discuss either religion or politics, or worse, both? It rarely works out well, probably because in general there is such a dearth of "mature posters" on all sides.

YouJediJunkie wrote:The forum's good, people know what they are doing. A lot of good maps and mods are made here.

I'll agree with that. =)



(edited to put in a missed end-quote tag)

JackTHorn wrote:

Maveritchell wrote:In most cases if you are contributing something relevant to the topic or answering a question - even if it is after the one-month period - then it shouldn't get locked. If someone looks like they're genuinely trying to help, I won't lock a topic.

Well, that sounds great, but I must say, it wasn't my experience... one thread I posted to (but failed to notice it was just past the 30-day mark) got locked down, and all I had posted was exactly what the OP had asked for -- reviews of his map after playing it, thoughts on the balance of power, ease of getting around the map, etc. So instead of what could have been a useful and revived discussion on the details of the map, we had a locked thread and a new user who felt shut down for the second time in as many posts.

Generally, rules and leniency tend to vary among the forums. When Mav said "answering a question," I think he was implying the modding forums where it could help many people. Also, you didn't do it once, you did it 4 times in a row over three days. Contrary to what you say ("or that checking to see whether it had been 32 days or 29 days since the last posted response would be necessary"), or at least imply, it was by 3 months twice and four months twice. Are you really that surprised at a warning?

While I understand that you don't like the current rules blanketed across all situations, you can't turn around and say that what you what to do is alright in all situations. That's contradicting yourself! You've got to look at each situation and see if it's worth the information you provide. A two year old map that was briefly revived five months ago? I think not. The map of an author who hasn't posted in five months? Also, no. Another where the author posted once in the last four months and three times since that map? You can see where this is going. Invest some time into doing research instead of making yourself look like

JackTHorn wrote:an idiot, a useless poster, discourteous, senseless, or someone without regard for rules or without respect for people.

JackTHorn wrote:Sure, I can see that. But then why not just make a mid-ground rule, like "Siglines must not exceed one line, and must consist of text only." That way you're not wasting time and energy catching up new posters who might just add initials or a name by habit, but you're still addressing the actual problem at hand.

If you didn't like what Mav said in response to this the first time, then you'll just need to suck it up. Other than uber-sigs, there's plenty of reason to keep all forms of them away.

My opinion about the signature is:
WHY?????
I mean seriously, what's the point of them? Sure, if you have made a cool sig, you want to show it. That can be done in the Graphic Art topic, or you can make an avatar out of it. Sure, you'd want to tell people your name/initials or you want to make a whitty joke about your current status. You can do that over there <-. Sure, you'd want to let other people see what you have achieved. That can be done by making maps and posting them in the release/WIP forum.
Gametoast is a small, cohesive forum. This means that it is not necesary to continuously remind people about who you are and what you have done. Because of the small number of users, you can build up an idea yourself of who's a good skinner/moddeller/mapper/reviewer/bugtester. It's one of the things I like about this site.

I've never really been involved in a forum before, but from what I gather from other people, Gametoast is doing a mighty fine job at keeping the forums spam-free. And almost everybody here has good intentions. Sometimes those don't come over too well, but other people attend that person to that and he'll be given hints about how he could prevent misunderstandings.
I personally think all these rules are great. I am yet to find a situation that's been dealt with unfairly, because all actions can be discussed with a moderator.

mswf wrote:My opinion about the signature is:
WHY?????

That's my thought too. It's just opinion and my thoughts aren't so much GT policy, but sigs clutter things up and are unnecessary. Both kinds of sigs sorta bother me. On the one hand I could put "-Teancum" at the end of every post, but everyone already knows who I am because my name's right above my avatar. The other kind of sigs -- the ones with images -- REALLY bother me. I don't want to look for an answer to a question only to see a retardedly huge, overly animated signature every three posts. They bother me so much I use AdBlock Plus to block every single signature I see on any forum.

Again, that's just how I feel. If I remember right we started enforcing this policy for a few reasons; 1) removal of clutter, 2) faster page load times, and 3) to not bog down the GT server.

Hi. I'm Epena (as my username dictates) and I used to be an active staff member here.

I can totally see where you're coming from.

I've been an active member on a lego creation forum since June 2004. There's something, apart from my continued interest in building lego creations that has kept me coming back time and again for five and a half years. What is that characteristic? It's a sense of fun. That forum has only one rule: no porn or otherwise offensive images. Very little moderation is required. What that means is that religious debate is fair game, flaming other members is fair game, going completely off topic for three pages of a thread is fair game. Occasionally a topic will be split or discussion ended by means of gang-based-insults. Somehow, throughout all the carelessly tossed insults and pointless rants, nobody really gets offended. That is because it is a very small, invitation based closed community. When we see an up and coming builder elsewhere on the internet, we invite them in based on popular vote. Sometimes they join, sometimes they don't. That forum will give you the very best critique on your lego creation you can find anywhere on the internets in addition to being a great social place.

Here's how it works.
1- small closed group of people that were most likely affiliated with each other on other sites previously
2- not concerned about expanding member list. if that happens, all the better. it's just not a priority
3- community based site primarily designed for social relations

Here's how Gametoast works, and why we can't get away with a similar no rule set policy

1- medium sized group (at least 3x the number of active members than the forum I was discussing) in a semi-closed environment (as far as I can tell, currently you can only get in based on invitation or during small openings in the registration process)
2- demographic is less selective. ages vary greatly and that must be taken into account to keep site parent - friendly
3- information based site primarily designed for the casual and serious modder who wants a good source of resources

Because of the size, not everybody knows each other. Offense can easily be taken. Therefore, certain rules must be enacted.

Because pretty much anybody can participate here, we don't know your posting styles. Do you have a massive, annoying signature? Do you feel the need to type in neon green and size 32 font? Do you have stupid ideas that must be propagated in every WIP thread? Do you actually know jack squat about what you're talking about? Thus, general post format rules must be set.

Because this community is based on accomplishment, the less obstacles the better.


Now I haven't been here in a while, so I don't know how the general user behaves these days. but I remember when three out of four users was a mongering noob with bad, unrealistic suggestions. I remember flame wars. The idea is to keep people sane on the site, and because of history, some really tight, annoying rules had to be set in place. If that drives people away that's bad, but the important thing here is to keep it a clean work environment.

Maybe things could relax a bit. Maybe they will. Or maybe another flood of immature members will set things further back.

Know that staff appreciates your concern and that we have and will continue to talk about it.

I personally am very proud in the way JackTHorn addressed his concerns, and how Maveritchell replied. I have seen a fist post on a forum where the poster calls the very new company (they had around 6 employes) idiots right off the bat because they weren't able to make some release dates. Another person's first few post was a practically flaming the creators because he didn't like the way the rules played (war gaming). Both of these instances divided the forum and dove into flame wars with in two posts. Every instance that even remotely involved this subject would turn into a Flame War. I am very impressed how this has handled by both parties. I personally can see where JackTHorn is coming from. Having zealous Moderators is a good thing, but when it comes to interfere with new people, it is very disheartening. The exact same thing happened to me. My very fist topic on another forum (Hi I'm new) was in the general forum, and I got severely reprimanded by several members and moderators for not putting it in the "Introductions" thread (which I never saw). That really threw me off, and by my 100th post or so, I just haven't gone back. Having moderators that are understanding like Maveritchell is very nice. I must admit that I resurrected around 20 topics that where over 160 days old. I never got yelled at or reprimanded, they just gave the new guy some friendly advice.

I don't mean to criticize anyone, but Frisbeetarian's post does have the sort of attitude that reminds me of the above mentioned flame posters....... It takes two to start a flame war, and on both instances even if one person was right, it was a lack of respect that real sent everything into a spiral.

JackTHorn wrote:I suppose I'd just felt wary about approaching any given moderator with objections, given the posted attitude of "no arguing with mods" and "zero tolerance for non-capitulation" and so on. Plus I don't really know people here yet, much less know the mods and their personalities. If I can discuss and question a decision without being likely to get ejected mechanically from the site, then it does make a solid difference.

Attitude is much more important - if not to the entire staff, then definitely to me personally - than the nature of what's been posted. I don't mind if a user thinks I'm straight-up wrong and completely disagrees with my decision. If they make that displeasure known in a way that's respectful and polite, then I'm always willing to, if not change my mind, then at least give them consideration, and I certainly won't give them a hard time for disagreeing. (Really! Try me. And if I do give you a hard time there's no better response than my own words.) I am much more likely to respond in kind to a disagreement with staff if the user is rude or presents himself in a disrespectful manner. That's the user that's going to get a PM from me that quotes the site rules and gets a warning.

We as staff are all more than capable of responding to users with disagreements in a cooperative, diplomatic fashion. There is a little bit of a Catch-22 in that we desire users (even new ones with no experience with us) to trust us to enforce the intent behind the rules and not merely the letter, and to do so in a fair manner. Asking for that trust (even if doing so tacitly) isn't easy because it requires a "first step," if you will, on the part of a new user, and it is certainly not something people are necessarily conditioned for, based on other online forum experiences. Many new users often make gaffes in assuming that the best way to approach a strict rule enforcement is to push back equally, and in those cases they will find out they are incorrect - sometimes it is just serendipitous that users who might do this manage to spend enough time here before breaking a rule to come to trust the staff. Unfortunately there are those who might slip through the cracks, who, if they had known the staff's natures better might not have.

The thrust of this is all to say again, what I said above - the staff is all trying our best to be fair and make good decisions for the site. If any given user can understand that position and respond to us and our decisions with that in mind, we're not going to respond out-of-proportion to any given situation. I know that I (and I am sure many of the other staff) appreciate you coming forward with an issue you have presented in a sincere manner, and that's all we really want to see.

everyone is banned.
just kidding

In the beginning we had tons of new people , alot from other sites that allow people to spam, rant etc.. it was more then we could moderate, now the site is clean and on a new server

regarding tiny replies clutter, i dont really mind the short replies thing but when 50 people like a map image and they all make a single post saying YAY, or neato, we get a 21 page topic that is just a map that may or may not ever be released. Its just too much and no one (that isnt 12 and has nothing better to do) wants to sort thru.

the removal and banning hammer : its insane i know it , there is not a single site or forum on the web in my 12 years doing online work that drops people, blocks isps, or puts the rules so strict as GT, and here is why, Abuse. The site gets piles of email. Each moderator gets piles of pms, it seems people wont even look or read they just "come from some other site and want what they want right then" so the pms and emailing like "im on a mac and want to use the mappack tell me in detail what to do from the point i turn my mac on" , without a 7 page note on this, we had to make the site strict due to people on the site acting out of control, rude, and almost purposely wasting moderator and admins time, its a rule that literally is the only way we can keep the site up otherwise no one could respond to the insanity that is the "annonomous internet"

about the site :
Its been here since 2004 , i have ran a web company since 1999 , the rules in place here are what is required based on years of web use and business a.k.a experience... signatures would fill each topic with piles of trash between useful words, thats just not helpful to someone trying to make a map or learn. the avatar is place where any users can put a smaller ..creative image or rant in the space provided. nuff said on that. no decent reference site allows sigs. sowwy
the server has been slammed in the past with new users, that dont read rules and people who come to just post ads for body part enlarging so pretend your in my place...your a 30 something guy trying to make a profit as a web guy , you like star wars and you have a busy site but the game is old already and your done modding it, your real business is making money but every minute you have free your getting tied up removing abusers, deleting piles of mail, posting updates that may or may not ever be read or adhered to, banning ip rangers for spammers, reading the list of people who need warnings for things like booby avatars and posting literally 5 things in a row just yelling in all caps "I WANT A NEW COMPUTER" or whatever. its just insane if you think about it, we get maybe 3 donations a year, the site uses 500 gigs of bandwidth a month which if you dont own your own server would cost about $200 a month for a 100mbps server with 4 processors etc.. i lose on that end, and I donate my time, and then it goes further , forums and code need updating, we need more or less moderators, someone linked to a virus etc.. its endless.' anyhow...with everything in real life i do , i get about 20 minutes a day free and i spend it instantly at Gt. I still love the site and that is mostly due to the fact that I know its running smoothly , with excellent site moderators and leaders and that its a place I can share things with others and not get 1. some stocker after me, 2. laughed at or told that my views suck...if you dont post about religion or politics (which are both spam in my view) you actually can get nice feedback from people here and its just a good close family. I feel like if people cant hang...with the simple rules that are a must due to continuing abuse ...then they just cant hang. I know there are many other sites online...that let people do what they want...i bet you $20 Gt will outlast all of them! (cuz even if its just me here It aint going no where LOLZ)

i love this place. I think 1836 other people do to.

^true to every single word (especially the last ones)

I do think it's good you brought this up, Jackthorn. I mean, I don't agree with you, but there are also people who don't agree with me, but we accept that and live in peace with eachother .
But seriously, it's good you brought this up because you were asking this yourself and it's good that it has been clarified, so that this topic may be used in the future for clarification to other "new" users who also put question marks behind the rules.

My first thought on seeing this topic was "Oh, it's Epena, haven't seen him in a while". But then I read it.

I definitely see where you're coming from, and I know exactly how you feel.
I run a forum where debating about politics and religion is allowed (it's a religious website), and it gets really tough sometimes. Things have gotten really heated, which is when I have to step in a tell everyone to take a step back, cool down, and sometimes even lock the topic if things get out of hand. I don't want to shut down this debating because it has sparked some great discussion and learning, though.

However, Gametoast - a gaming/modding website. Yes, debating can still be fun and interesting, and I admit that I don't agree with the no-religion rules, but that's the rules. This is not a "share-your beliefs" website. This is a modding website.

To be blunt the reason religion and politics are not allowed is because we have a few users that aren't mature enough to keep their cool and discuss things civilly. Rather than play babysitter to those few we just nixed it altogether, as it became a huge issue.