See, that's the kind of posts I miss. Good job, rant buddy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

=D>

That's all for now. (is it my immagination or have most of my replies to rants become long ramblings about nothing? Could someone please tell me that what I just posted made sense?)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

nup. none of it. nice metaphor though.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i joke. its all good. and perfectly applicable. although it could be tip.it policy to lock threads instead of deleting them. only posts that strongly break the rules are moved to a secret hideout only the mods and admins can see.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

however, it leads me to thing: if a person sees that their thread is missing, might they not realise what they have done and continue to post again?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

but honestly, what reply other than "this isnt a rant" can you give to "p0mg m0r3 phr33 st00fs $ f2p!!!1"?

 

 

 

Quite simply - none. Don't post anything. As I said, the mods are better equipped to deal with this, and they do a pretty good job. By posting a flame all you have acomplished is to keep that thread active on the front page for a little bit longer, contributed to the non constructive clutter and wasted a little more of the forum space you mentioned.

 

 

 

To my way of thinking, flaming a post because it does not seem to fit in the guidelines is a form of vigilanteism and should stop.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's a lot easier to think that a mod is at fault when there's no one else telling you that you're wrong. However, if you get a barrage of insults from local pyromaniacs prior to the locking you'll either:

 

 

 

Learn not to post something that stupid ever again

 

 

 

or (if posting intelligently is beyond you)

 

 

 

Leave, and never come back

 

 

 

While I in no way encourage flaming, and believe that the people who flame are monstrously annoying, they do still serve a purpose.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i have to agree with zubedoo on this one. but it isnt neccesarily flaming. like zebra said ive posted links to this thread in various crappy rants. i dont consider that to be flaming. id like to think that them reading this and understanding their mistake is better than "p0mg ch00b."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

seeing as how some some people have stated that pop-up rants guides are objectionable, and that rewriting tag-lines and the rants guide can only go so far, perhaps passive moderating by the rants forum community can serve to be another solution to the spam problem.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wasn't singling anyone out on this. There are too many to list. Whilst I understand that for those who read the rants regularly, poor or innapropriate posts can be tiresome, I do not believe that putting such posts to the torch is something that they have a right to do or is in any way constructive.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i didnt say you were, i said i was guilty of it though. as per above, (mild) flaming can be constructive in this case.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

zebra, i think we agree to disagree on this one.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Then it's mere laziness, unfortunately. Either way, the goal is to send the message that says something like, "look at this Rant Guide right here! You know you want to, and it'll help you."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

neon lighting is the answer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

neo, i dont think "f2p vs p2p was your first post though. im certain i remember you posting before that. perhaps all your other posts got beleted.

what the heck?! *more or less*

 

 

 

Trojan_Zebra's made some comments that many of the ranters in question have a fair post count or have been around for some time, so they can't really be classed as "casual users" - those who just stroll in and post right away.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Basically what I'm shooting for right there is that post count (in total, as well as rant board specific) and length of membership don't directly dictate how casual or serious a ranter is, or vice versa. There is a rough connection, and it might be a fairly strong connection at that, but there are glaring exceptions. Like, say, you. ...I'm thinking maybe I need to elaborate what I say a little more. That's a pain though, because I'm long-winded as it is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Welcome to the fray, Zubeedoo. We've been expecting you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Omg what the hell did that mod lock it for?"

A little skeptical on that part. When people reply to the spam, by the time the moderator shows up, there often isn't much new to say other than "loxors 4 teh roxors", and that's a little bit of a self-perpetuating situation. New users see the flames, think it's commonplace, do it themselves, and the mods still have no reason to explain themselves. Those new users are then potentially in danger of being banned for imitating moderators, in the case that they get a little carried away or whatever. Speaking from experience on another forum, sadly. However, when a mod gets the jump on the flamers thanks to a timely report, they've got the opportunity to lay out the problem civilly. I personally remember a few instances where Philip and Alduron have done so. Even if the mod keeps it short with with something like, "Please read the Rant Guide sticky before authoring a rant", though, the deed is essentially done. The ranter has the right to PM moderators concerning a decision, if they're unclear. If the busted ranter won't read the sticky, or can't figure out why the sticky justifies the lock, they're a lost cause in the first place. They'll leave eventually, though an administrator might have to help them to the door.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sure they get locked, but they still show up on the front page. The problem thread hasn't been dealt with so much as it's been highlighted.

...So, considering Trunksrs' words earlier, what mods are doing is going, "Hey! You, you stupid, lazy person! See this? This is an example of what not to do! You could learn a lot from this, bucko. Read it, or at least acknowledge the title! Then maybe you won't make the same mistake, you lazy, stupid person, you!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Silly, I know. I've just never been the kind to think that you can clear up ignorance by censoring it. As things stand, the people who aren't beyond help have a good opportunity to smarten up, and those that are... :-$. Which relates a lot to my first post, but I'll not go there just now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

is it my imagination or have most of my replies to rants become long ramblings about nothing? Could someone please tell me that what I just posted made sense?

Believe me, you're in good company. :-w

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edit: So I noticed a minute ago that only five locked threads remain on the rant board's first page. Curious, I checked the second page, and saw no locked threads at all. So I'm thinking either locked threads are instantly deleted when they fall into page two, or a number of them which I don't remember too well have been unlocked/deleted manually. In either case, the point here is the numbers I've thrown out there regarding Trojan_Zebra's post are not necessarily accurate. *grumbles*

So I noticed a minute ago that only five locked threads remain on the rant board's first page. Curious, I checked the second page, and saw no locked threads at all. So I'm thinking either locked threads are instantly deleted when they fall into page two, or a number of them which I don't remember too well have been unlocked/deleted manually. In either case, the point here is the numbers I've thrown out there regarding Trojan_Zebra's post are not necessarily accurate. *grumbles*

 

 

 

Locked threads are not automatically removed. I for one, manually remove locked threads from the popular forums once they hit page two. This provides enough time for the author to have the opportunity to see the moderator's lock post/reason. If someone changes their title or first post to something like "lock this" or "nevermind", I'll removed it straight-away since they requested the lock/removal.

Firstly - welcome back Zubeedo. I am glad your absence was only temporary.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On people flaming in rants that don't follow the guidelines:

 

 

 

It's not nearly as bad as it seems. If someone posts a horrid rant, and no one says anything (as it's spam) and a mod comes along and locks it, do you know what the person is going to think?

 

 

 

*Uses psychic powers to read would-be-ranter's mind*

 

 

 

"Omg what the hell did that mod lock it for?"

 

 

 

It's a lot easier to think that a mod is at fault when there's no one else telling you that you're wrong.

 

 

 

However, if you get a barrage of insults from local pyromaniacs prior to the locking you'll either:

 

 

 

Learn not to post something that stupid ever again

 

 

 

or (if posting intelligently is beyond you)

 

 

 

Leave, and never come back

 

 

 

While I in no way encourage flaming, and believe that the people who flame are monstrously annoying, they do still serve a purpose.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As Ard_Choille has just stated, the locked posts are left on page 1 to die a natural,(and mostly well deserved) death so that the poster can see the reason it was locked. I don't see the need for the "barrage of insults" or even the well intentioned "please read this post before posting again" replies. A poster who does not believe the reason a mod has placed on the lock is unlikely to care what the horde of angered tip.it readers have to say. Such idiots can wade through endless barrages of flames unscathed - the ability is genetically encoded to allow them to survive through puberty.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The only real usefulness in these type of replies is they can 'force-lock' some threads. A mod comes along and looks at the thread... hmmm - nothing but scorch marks here, and bang goes the lock. Effectively kills bad rants - yes, but also has the ability to kill rants that may have actually had a place here. As you yourself said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Plus let's not forget the fact that there have been some very well written rants that have been against the board's rules (especially with things like pking) that have brought up very active discussions, as well as dozens, if not hundreds, of rants that followed the rules and still sucked.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I wonder if all of those "well written rants that have been against the boards rules" would have survived to develop into good debates if the first twenty or so replies were all guideline flames.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A final argument against this is that flamers can get it wrong. Simply because they perceive a rant to be in breach of the guidelines does not mean they are right - an example would be the post i refer to in my first reply here. Nothing but ashes after the flamers were through with it, even though I had successfully argued that, though poorly worded, the post actually had a viable rant in it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I still maintain that it should not be the place of individual users of this board to attack posts in this manner. Though I can see your point, I am unconvinced that it is strong enough to allow individual posters to control the content of the board. I remain convinced this should be left to the discretion of the mods. As I said before - I think they do a pretty good job.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's all for now. (is it my immagination or have most of my replies to rants become long ramblings about nothing? Could someone please tell me that what I just posted made sense?)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As always - yes - your posts make sense. (Your worried? The last three posts i have made on this board weren't competed til after 1am. Nescafe have been calling asking if I would like a wholesalers discount! :shock: )

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One final word for Stallion4589 on this: Yes we probably will continue to disagree... I have been known to be a pretty disagreeble person at times :lol:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As for what to post instead of a flame,(or your not so gentle nudge into this post :wink: ) Jaklumens comments sound pretty good -

 

 

 

The only thing I can think of is to quickly steer such posts to more thoughtful discussion, if possible. If it could be a great topic, then posters might ask for or suggest more clarification on the problem, and potential solutions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sounds good to me... what about you? Whilst I understand why you have tried to send them to this post, I am not sure it can do any real good. I have read it, and; good as it is, I have not become a pulitzer prize author because of it.... perhaps it takes a little more time.

 

 

 

Point being, that simply reading this post will not automatically make your second attempt a whole lot better. Maybe instead of leaving the guy floundering, we could offer some constructive ideas that push the post closer to its full potential. Just a thought.

So your complaining about how people are complaining in the rants forum :-s ? Irnoic if you ask me. =;

So your complaining about how people are complaining in the rants forum :-s ? Irnoic if you ask me. =;

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Naw, we're 'Debating' about how people are complaining in the rants forum. Makes all the difference! ;)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Haha, well i'd just like to say it's GREAT to see some of the changes discussed here already being implimented. TIF mods pwn, k?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I hope that the re-worked description/ranting guide will make a tangible difference.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As for the hoard of flamers who pounce upon unruly topics? Well, perhaps I HAVE been guilty on a few [under-exageration?] counts. TBH I put it down to the itchy trigger finger syndrome. After seeing so many 'Rants' full of cliched nonsense, it becomes hard just report and pass on by.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I remember a particularly interesting thread about 'Honour in the wilderness' that changed a lot of my previous opinions about the subject. And after reaching some [What I consider] pretty insightful conclusions on the subject - It's entirely irritating to see twelve other, totaly 'New' rants spring up the second that it reaches the second page of the board.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm quite a confrontational person. PvP Addict. You know the score.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Heck, I believe in forced conscription - I'm a bloody FASCIST! o.O]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

However, perhaps being 'irritated' isnt a very good reason for exploding at a forum newb who didnt read the sticky/use the search button corectly.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Will. Try. Harder. *Cuts off trigger finger*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Back to the problem off the same same 'rants' being spammed out?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I've been thinking. [Zomg, NO WAI?]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Perhaps it's due to the limited set of things to rant about

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Runescape, while being pretty large as games go - IS still just a game. I mean, theres only SO much to talk about at the end of the day. It seems quite logical that the same rants should keep appearing, they are being made by [Generalization ahead - Proceed with caution] the same body of players, who play the same game, and get irritated by the same things.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I know that I left the rants board, largely because of this 'Same' factor. And I can guess that people like Raichase and Toxicologist did too.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We can relate to older debates like the F2P v P2P and Wilderness rants, but newer members of the board can't. They DIDNT debate these issues.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why not let them? We may have come to conclusions, but others may not have.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A CAD forum i occasionally lurk in has this in their sticky:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Our goal in The Water Heater is learning through constructive debate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Debate

 

 

 

 

 

 

n 1: a discussion in which reasons are advanced for and against some proposition or proposal; "the argument over foreign aid goes on and on" [syn]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2: the formal presentation of and opposition to a stated proposition (usually followed by a vote) [syn] v 1: argue with one another; "We debated the question of abortion"; "John debated Mary"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The goal is important as it keeps us on the issues ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Ãâ and off each other. The goal inspires learning rather than grudges. It educates and informs. It seeks to empower the mind.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Isn't learning through constructive debate pretty much the aim here too?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Let's not be selfish. We're all learnt up. Let's let others learn now?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:lol:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Or, not?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8-)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- Gid.

I find ranting and complaining to be the same thing... :3>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But I will say that your post is the best I've ever read on this forum! :XD:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Plus let's not forget the fact that there have been some very well written rants that have been against the board's rules (especially with things like pking) that have brought up very active discussions, as well as dozens, if not hundreds, of rants that followed the rules and still sucked.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I wonder if all of those "well written rants that have been against the boards rules" would have survived to develop into good debates if the first twenty or so replies were all guideline flames.

The funny thing about well written rants is that against the rules or not, they usually repel forum trolls. You make a rant full of valid points, and it becomes much harder for trolls to do their thing (and much easier for others to ignore it).

 

 

 

See it only really takes a few good responses to both repel trolls and forum mods' locks, as there have been more then a couple threads involving topics that are against the rules that have remained open (as well as relatively flame/spam free). The only real exeption to this is things that are really,really against the rules (like that thread about item transferring that got locked to stop any more people from admitting to having broken the rule). Even if it is technically against the rules, mods tend to let it slide if the discussion's good enough (a good example would be this very thread, as it's a non-game related rant, and I've seen quite a few threads get locked for ranting about similar subjects,the only difference being that there was no real discussion and the rants themselves were poorly written)

 

 

 

Point(s) being:

 

 

 

Flamers alone can't trash a thread

 

 

 

Mods alone usually don't (and shouldn't) trash a thread

 

 

 

A well written rant, with some well written replies can avoid both flamers and locks, even if it is against the rules

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A final argument against this is that flamers can get it wrong. Simply because they perceive a rant to be in breach of the guidelines does not mean they are right - an example would be the post i refer to in my first reply here. Nothing but ashes after the flamers were through with it, even though I had successfully argued that, though poorly worded, the post actually had a viable rant in it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Flamers can be wrong.

 

 

 

So can mods.

 

 

 

Mistakes happen.

 

 

 

Nobody's perfect.

 

 

 

However, for a rant to be falsely flamed, and then get locked, both parties need to be mistaken, which is highly unlikely. If the mod who locks it is mistaken, the person will assume just that. They won't see it as wrong (and they may well bring it up again in the future, or end up pming the mod). If the flamers are mistaken, then a mod can simply either clean up the thread, or do nothing. If the mod does nothing, and no discussion arises to cover up the flaming, then the topic wasn't going anywhere anyway. If a rant is viable, a couple of flamers aren't going to change that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I still maintain that it should not be the place of individual users of this board to attack posts in this manner. Though I can see your point, I am unconvinced that it is strong enough to allow individual posters to control the content of the board. I remain convinced this should be left to the discretion of the mods. As I said before - I think they do a pretty good job.

You're right, it shouldn't. However, what I'm saying is not that I agree with flamers, but that they do actually accomplish something. Would we be better without them? Probably. Should we focus on removing them, rather then horrid rants that serve as kindling? Not a chance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's all for now. (is it my immagination or have most of my replies to rants become long ramblings about nothing? Could someone please tell me that what I just posted made sense?)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As always - yes - your posts make sense. (Your worried? The last three posts i have made on this board weren't competed til after 1am. Nescafe have been calling asking if I would like a wholesalers discount! :shock: )

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TBH I've been worried for quite a while now that my posts have been off. Posts like this one I don't worry about, as it's simply me responding to what someone else has said (which is what ALL of my good early posts on TIF were). It's the ones where my post is a solid chunk of text that I worry about. I have a tendancy to drift off topic without realizing it (IRL as well as on forums), and long posts make it very easy for me to switch topics from the morals of pking to what type of pop I like with my pizza.

hey, zub, gid, stal, swamp, and any of the other "old ranters" that have been around for a while, if i havent said so already, nice to see you all again :)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

anywho, i really actually quite like the debate and discussion that im seeing here. IMO, this is much better than my last thread, which was pretty much full of kudos and nothing more. there, i could inflate my ego at will. here, i can watch, speculate, debate, and come up with new ideas. its a good thing \

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

anyway, heres my latest idea. i was reading through the rants guide, and while it does tell us a great deal about what we cant rant about, and a bit about how to rant, im not sure if its clear enough to provide new ranters who actually want to try and rant properly with the knowledge to do so effectively. let me elaborate a bit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How to Rant on this Forum

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Search for your rant topic before starting a new thread and reply to an existing one.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

State your problem, provide facts to support your statement and make suggestions about how to correct your problem. Keep these things in mind when you post:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Don't just write a quick blurb saying, "It stinks". First think about and post the facts about WHY IT STINKS or you have no foundation for your rant. Secondly, think about how the stink can be fixed and make suggestions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Write your rant in such a way that invites others to provide suggestions for fixing whatever has you steamed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Write clearly. It's hard to make a reasonable point if all that's coming out is gibberish.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A well-written rant will allow others to identify with it even if they don't fully agree with the rant.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nitpicking, complaining, whining and gossiping do not qualify as rants.

 

 

 

now, this is a good start, ill admit, but i think we could probably clear it up a bit more. remember, a good guide is a detailed guide. what if we were to add examples to the guide? ill give one here. if i were to follow the rules that i quoted above, as well as the list of things your not supposed to rant about, then i can easily come up with an example of a poor rant thats not against the rules, such as this:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(ill use an idea taken from a recent thread i saw. anything in parenthesis(sp?) is me pointing out things within the example)[beginfakerant]i HATE being tag teamed in the wildy! the reason why i stay in the single combat areas is so i can fight other pkers one on one and they have to go and tag team me and heal up while the others kill me!(Don't just write a quick blurb saying, "It stinks"....post the facts about WHY IT STINKS) i can handle being pk'd in the wildy, but when im in single combat areas and its by a group of people, then its stupid! jagex should make it so you have to wait longer to attack different targets!(make suggestions)[/endfakerant]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

as you can see, it didnt blatantly break any of the rules of the rant guide, but i can easily see people flaming this rant for being about getting pkd in the wildy, when its clearly about the method of tag teaming. not only that, but i could see many shouts of "then dont go into the wildy if you cant fight" and other such one line sizzlers. if i were to rewrite this the way i personally wouldve written it, then it wouldve gone more like this:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[beginfakerant]well, while i do know that the wilderness is a dangerous place that is very likely to see me get killed, i always thought there were certain rules that even it had to abide by. the particular rule that i now have a problem with is the rules of single and multiway combat zones.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

today, i was walking up through the levels of the wilderness deep in a single combat zone, looking for things to pk when i was mobbed by a pack of pkers. "no problem" i said, "i can take a few of them out before running". well, i got the first guy down to about half health and he begins running. i run after him, but after a few steps, another guy begins attacking me. i begin pummeling him when i notice the first guy eating and healing himself. "oh no" i thought, "im being tag teamed!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

well i realized that i couldnt defeat them this way no matter how hard i tried, so i began running, but soon died anyway when my energy ran out. my problem with this doesnt lie with my being pk'd but the fact that i was pk'd by a group of them in a single combat zone. it always seemed to me that if you in a single combat zone, you should only be able to attack, and be attacked, by one person at a time. i think that if jagex were to increase the time that you have to wait between attacking a target and attacking a new target, then this may at least help the problem out a bit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

suggestions? questions? comments?[/endfakerant]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

i suppose there could be better examples, but you get my point, right? the example of a good rant that ive put here would still have gotten a few flame posts by the trolls, but i think it couldve sparked some decent conversations and debate. it may or may not have been locked, but it still stood a much better chance than the bad rant example.

It's entirely irritating to see twelve other, totaly 'New' rants spring up the second that it reaches the second page of the board.

Perfect! I didn't bring this up earlier, because I didn't want to single you out, but since you're voluntarily laying the vittles on the chopping block...^_^

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I remember one such 'new' rant quite clearly. It was mediocre at best. One of those "It's Okay to pray because there's no rule against it!" types - you know. I remember Gidion coming along, and laying out pretty much all of the information that existed on the opposing side of the issue (the part I remember most clearly was, "sure, there's no rule against it, but don't expect me to stand around and take it while you suck the fun out of my gaming"), and yeah, it was a little above lukewarm. I remember someone posting, "wow, Gid. Isn't that a bit...excessive?". His reply, as best as I can remember it, went something like, (and seriously, read this part nice and slow :P ) "It is. But you know...I've been here. I've done this. And I know exactly how I feel on the subject."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You know what happened to the rant? It up and freakin' died. If Zubeedoo's thoughts on flaming hold water (and in at least some respects, they do), then please, please let it happen like that. I can guarantee that some of the bigger contributors to that 'wildy honor' thread that's been mentionned a few times weren't just casual posters - like Gidion, they've been there. (iMeR and Lim Dul come to mind - just figured I'd qualify this. It sounded quite....empty.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edit: I was going to test this ^^^ out to see how well it stands these days, and Philip laid a lock down on the thread about thirty seconds before I got my post off. Gosh darnit, geez... :x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edit#2: I figured I'd give it the old school try anyway, and PMed the fellow with my thoughts on the matter. His response consisted of two notes: 1) I write too much #-o, 2) It's no surprise that I follow Guthix #-o #-o

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maybe instead of leaving the guy floundering, we could offer some constructive ideas that push the post closer to its full potential.

Yeah!

 

 

 

We can relate to older debates [...], but newer members of the board can't. They DIDN'T debate these issues.

Yeah!!

 

 

 

Why not let them? We may have come to conclusions, but others may not have.

Yeah!!!

 

 

 

Let's not be selfish. We're all learnt up. Let's let others learn now?

UP-SIDE, IN-SIDE OUT - LIVIN' LA VIDA LOCA! YES!! \This sounds awfully familiar, mind you...but it's great to see I'm not some lone heretic.

 

 

 

Should we focus on removing them, rather then horrid rants that serve as kindling? Not a chance.

Should we focus on rescuing as many as will be rescued from their ignorance (like I was), so that the remaining heavy flamers revert to the lackluster minority they once were? If the mods can handle it - Absolutely! :3>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Says I.

 

 

 

...I'm gonna go see about getting the sugar out of my system now.

Trying this sticky out for as a place to post about noobs instead of a plethora of lock-fodder threads being created...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New Players (NOOBS) Getting A Bad Rap? - Post here!!!

Trying this sticky out for as a place to post about noobs instead of a plethora of lock-fodder threads being created...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New Players (NOOBS) Getting A Bad Rap? - Post here!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks Ard!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Worth a try I guess, but I see a couple of pretty inflamatory comments have already hit it - and those are steerring it into another direction,(no-lifers)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It is too early to tell, but I think this might not work too well.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If this was in response to my suugestion in an earlier post on this thread, it wasn't quite what I had in mind. I suggested stickies based on the restricted topics in the guidelines, but I actually meant for them to be locked. In the sticky would be a selection of threads dealing with the topic from any/all angles. This would allow newer posters to see what had already been covered and what the general reaction to those views were.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

An added advantage of this is that these stickies would then serve as a storage place for the truly exceptional posts that may come our way. I am truly dissapointed that the honor in the wildy post referred to here - apparently posted by Neo - is not available. I would like to have read it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Once again, thanks for the efforts. I am sure everyone serious about getting a good rants board is just as pleased by your,(and the other mods), attention to this thread :thumbsup:

i think we have to wait and let time tell if the sticky works. it certainly wont show overnight.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

perhaps if we asked someone to write a balanced response to an issue, then have that as a locked stickied post? for example, neo could rewrite the "f2p vs p2p" rant, and that could feature as a sticky for people to view. the same thing could go for the other rants forum veterans. maybe a well written, balanced argument would help more than a sticky full of spam?

If this was in response to my suugestion in an earlier post on this thread, it wasn't quite what I had in mind. I suggested stickies based on the restricted topics in the guidelines, but I actually meant for them to be locked. In the sticky would be a selection of threads dealing with the topic from any/all angles. This would allow newer posters to see what had already been covered and what the general reaction to those views were.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

An added advantage of this is that these stickies would then serve as a storage place for the truly exceptional posts that may come our way. I am truly dissapointed that the honor in the wildy post referred to here - apparently posted by Neo - is not available. I would like to have read it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

well the problem with that is that there was something like that in the rants guide where links to raichase's and my threads were posted, but those fell off the backend of the rants board and were never seen again. however, if, instead of posting links to threads, we actually had the thread be the sticky, then that may work out. who knows, it could work.

 

 

 

perhaps if we asked someone to write a balanced response to an issue, then have that as a locked stickied post? for example, neo could rewrite the "f2p vs p2p" rant, and that could feature as a sticky for people to view. the same thing could go for the other rants forum veterans. maybe a well written, balanced argument would help more than a sticky full of spam?

well, the only problem i see with that lies in my writing style. see, my problem is that while i can write great things on the spur of the moment, i cant rewrite them very well. i could make a try at rewriting my f2p vs. p2p rant, but i know it wouldnt be as good as the original as id be lacking the original feelings and attitude that i had when i wrote it. it is a good idea, though, and i would be happy to try to write my veiws on some things and see how they compare with other great ranters like zub and gid.

 

perhaps if we asked someone to write a balanced response to an issue, then have that as a locked stickied post? for example, neo could rewrite the "f2p vs p2p" rant, and that could feature as a sticky for people to view. the same thing could go for the other rants forum veterans. maybe a well written, balanced argument would help more than a sticky full of spam?

well, the only problem i see with that lies in my writing style. see, my problem is that while i can write great things on the spur of the moment, i cant rewrite them very well. i could make a try at rewriting my f2p vs. p2p rant, but i know it wouldnt be as good as the original as id be lacking the original feelings and attitude that i had when i wrote it. it is a good idea, though, and i would be happy to try to write my veiws on some things and see how they compare with other great ranters like zub and gid.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

true. but im sure we wouldnt mind helping you edit it. and i honestly think it would be a good idea to have these reposted. hell, can we get this topic stickied?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

edit: so so so so so off topic, but congrats ard choille on becoming an admin!

 

If this was in response to my suugestion in an earlier post on this thread, it wasn't quite what I had in mind. I suggested stickies based on the restricted topics in the guidelines, but I actually meant for them to be locked. In the sticky would be a selection of threads dealing with the topic from any/all angles. This would allow newer posters to see what had already been covered and what the general reaction to those views were.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

An added advantage of this is that these stickies would then serve as a storage place for the truly exceptional posts that may come our way. I am truly dissapointed that the honor in the wildy post referred to here - apparently posted by Neo - is not available. I would like to have read it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

well the problem with that is that there was something like that in the rants guide where links to raichase's and my threads were posted, but those fell off the backend of the rants board and were never seen again. however, if, instead of posting links to threads, we actually had the thread be the sticky, then that may work out. who knows, it could work.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Actually, that was exactly what I meant - as a way of preserving good existing threads on a topic

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

perhaps if we asked someone to write a balanced response to an issue, then have that as a locked stickied post? for example, neo could rewrite the "f2p vs p2p" rant, and that could feature as a sticky for people to view. the same thing could go for the other rants forum veterans. maybe a well written, balanced argument would help more than a sticky full of spam?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Can't back this one. As mentioned, I sadly missed Neo's original rants. From this particular rant, I can see he writes a pretty good topic starter. This thread is unusual. Not simply because it is well written, but because it has gained as near a universal acceptance of its concept as I think could be possible on a board like this. Even so, it has had one or two replies that argue against some of the points Neo has made. Though we may disagree with those couple of posts, they are not automatically wrong. They simply represent different views, and as such, are vital to the thread as a whole. Just as important are the replies in support of Neos views that offer suggestions and or refinements/expansions to his original post. This idea of creating a sticky to preserve such threads didn't come from Neos post - it came from my reply to it - and I didn't post the reply simply in response to Neos original post either. It came to me after reading several replies that reminisced about good threads that are no longer here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In essence, that is what a good thread is all about. It starts with a good well written post such as Neos that stimulates argument/ discussion/ debate on a subject and is carried by those arguments.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Without the replies, the stickies would - no matter how well written - contain a single viewpoint. The original reason for the sticky suggestion - to serve as guides to what has already been discussed - is lost with Stallions suggestion. It would hold only one view, to which,(if I were to read it) I would feel perfectly justfied to post a rebuttal to, not knowing my line of argument had been used before.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Obviously, I still favour the idea, but not if it only contains one thread with one post and no replies for and against.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(If someone else has posted this idea(stickies as a guide) before in another post - or worse, on this thread :shock: - please accept my deepest apologies :oops: )

well, heres a thought to add to trojans ideas. the price check sticky, which gets questions and updated practically everyday, is generally "cleaned out" whenever it gets to more and two or three pages. i have "cleaned out" with quote marks because what happens is the mod just comes in and deletes everything but the first post and has the thread just restart itself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

perhaps we could do something similar to that, where we have the starter post, then a few(perhaps that first pages worth) replies to it explaining different viewpoints, suggestions, etc. etc. and then we sticky the thread and leave it open for debate. after it gets a few pages long, a mod simply comes in and deletes everything but the first page, allowing the topic to stay alive and basically reseting it for future debate. this way, the topic can be debated for a few days, and the people involved can get all their viewpoints across, then after its all said and done, the next set of people who didnt get to see the first debate can have their own debate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

hows that fair for an idea?

 

 

 

perhaps we could do something similar to that, where we have the starter post, then a few(perhaps that first pages worth) replies to it explaining different viewpoints, suggestions, etc. etc. and then we sticky the thread and leave it open for debate. after it gets a few pages long, a mod simply comes in and deletes everything but the first page, allowing the topic to stay alive and basically reseting it for future debate. this way, the topic can be debated for a few days, and the people involved can get all their viewpoints across, then after its all said and done, the next set of people who didnt get to see the first debate can have their own debate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

hows that fair for an idea?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Great idea :thumbsup: One possible modification, perhaps? The original post gets cleared of any one liner flames that don't show a point of view other than for or against. This allows the post to have more "real" opinions on it. When the post is 'cleaned', the mods can exercise the option of allowing a newer reply to remain if it had something new to add. This way, newer users to the board will see them and know it has been done before?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, the post will get longer, but that should slow down as there can only be so many truly original ideas on any given subject.

hmm... yeah, maybe that would work. see, the big problem with the open stickies, as stated by Ard, is that they need constant maintanence(sp?) and cleaning.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the idea behind a full delete of all new posts is that it is probably much easier to delete them all, rather than sift through them one by one to filter out the spam and flames. i suppose that if theres a really riveting, controversial, and/or well thought out post, and the mod notices it, then it could be added to the originals and used as a part oft he original example, but the entire idea is to make as little work for the mods as possible.

hmmm.... maybe Ards looking into a plausible solution. lets try and advance things a bit more.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

heres an idea: you know how we have a weekly tip.it times, right? well what about a weekly tip.it rant? every week, well have a different author (or possibly the same guy if we can find an angry enough person) write a rant concerning a different aspect opf runescape, such as scamming, glitches, rudeness, etc. etc. the rants will, of course, be well written, and have a clear opinion to them that other tip.iters can reply to and express their views.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

what do you guys think of that?

We had "Rant of the Week" for a while (I think it was the second time), and my Pixels rant got the call. I was so proud. Then a mod deleted it. I was so ticked.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now, I'm so supporting that idea.

wait... we actually did have a rant of the week? why wasnt i informed of this? was it just one of tip.its many hidden updates?

You disappeared, actually. :D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It didn't do so well. I got stickied, and then no one posted. It lost visibility.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Then some triggerhappy mod deleted it. Gah.

Agreed most people are posting about being called a noob, dealing with noobs,macroers (I mean we all know they are annoying) getting banned etc... The list is really long:wall: