Double Posting

With the recent surge of newcomers, there was evidently a greater likelihood that the forum rules were going to be disregarded (and thus broken). Is it possible to immediately redirect newly-registered users to the forum rules, or perhaps have them answer a ridiculously-simple test consisting of four questions before they are even allowed to post? They'd be forced to look at the rules then, at least. Maybe I'm in over my head, but this is coming from someone who has spent a lot of time moderating the TI-Basic section, and who also believes that an IQ test should be passed before someone is even allowed on the Internet. :P

To support my reasoning, here are some specifics regarding the above six posts:

Time between each double post (in minutes):

• 1 min.
  
• 3 min.
  
• 29 min.
  
• 4 min.
  
• 6 min.
  
• 2 min.
  

Initial words in each second post:

• Oh!
  
• [response to a different person per post]
  
• By the way
  
• Nevermind
  
• please try to keep comments
  
• OOOOOO and
  

Number of posts by the author at the time the second post was made:

• 15 posts
  
• 20 posts
  
• 8 posts
  
• 8 posts
  
• 4 posts
  
• 3 posts
  

Number of days since the author's "Joined" date at the time the second post was made:

• 4 days
  
• 3 days
  
• 2 days
  
• 3 days
  
• 0 days
  
• 0 days
  

Final note: These are all within the month of May, and are
the last ones to remain as I don't have control over them.

:lol:

[EDIT]

Agh, it looks like another one showed up while I was writing this. 8)

I've also had to edit one of negativezero48's double-posts today with his messages being something like 6 minutes apart. Has anyone warned negativezero48 and antifaith about the multiposting problem?

Oh, there were more double-posters. In fact, I have reason to believe that several of them came from the same circle of friends... Anyway, as for contacting the people who don't follow the rules, I figured that merging and editing their posts with a message and a link would actually get the point across. As it turns out, they probably never go back to the old posts they've made—either that, or they blatantly don't care.

Regardless, there's a gap somewhere along the line of someone joining the forums and his knowing how to properly behave in the forums, which is something I feel needs to be mended before an outbreak occurs and the activity should get out of hand. What frightens me is that such a thing might be looming around the corner... I'm being overly-dramatic with this, but emphasizing how I feel might better get the intended point across.

I used to throw around my "no multi-posting" sign. The problem is getting kind of widespead (actually it was a 3rd person I corrected and not antifaith or negativezero48). I think we should reply with one warning each (or better yet, PM) and either edit or WarnLevel++ next time it happens. I really don't expect it to go that far though.

I might make a version of this that's wide instead of tall...

I found out recently that I can't increase warn levels. :|

At any rate, here is what I'm sending out:

[quote name='Weregoose']Hello, [insert name].

If you haven't looked over the Forum Rules already, you ought to at least direct your attention over to this one:
[quote name='Forum Rule #3']You must not double post or multi-post without considerable time between your posts, unless you have a very good reason.[/quote]You need to follow this rule consistently—as you should with all the other rules—but you've neglected to do so on more than one occasion. I'd appreciate it if you go back and look through all the posts you've made, find the adverse ones, make the necessary edits to remedy them, and then proceeded to adhere to the instructions whenever you make your posts from now on. Further disregard for these rules will lead to warnings and a possible ban! We value your membership at United-TI and encourage you to do your best to contribute, but at the same time we also ask that you continue to uphold the rules of the board as previously set by the administrators.

If you have further questions, please feel free to ask a moderator or staff member using your Personal Messenger.

Sincerely,
–Weregoose <span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'>(TI-Basic Moderator)</span>[/quote]
[EDIT]

They have been sent out—word for word like those above, but with the names changed.
Antifaith and negativezero48 both received one, plus I titled them simply, "Forum Rules."

Oh man.... I feel bad for not being so active lately and missing all of this.

Perhaps bringing back the warn system is in order?

Enforcing good behaviour on forums with large userbases:

Make a brief summary of the posting issues: (no more than 6 or so points)

- double posting
- vague topic titles
- single/few-word-replies
- etc..

Place it in the top of a stickied rules/readthisbeforeposting/READFFS topic in each subforum, where applicable. In bold. With no more than a single sentence detailing each point. ("Welcome newcomers" isn't urging enough imho)

Ideals are broken:

- close topic/delete post
- warning message (in topic or pm or both because they may not read either)
- if too often -> (temp) ban or require mod approval for posting

How often you allow it and how quick the consequences are (edit takes longer than delete) depend on how huge the userbase is. With thousand+/thousands of users it's usually a delete+warning the first time, temp ban the second.

---

The test could take the form of a <form> in the forum rules page (the one that is already shown when you register). The submit button could have a javascript inserted (onClick) that simply checks all the following questions are answered with "no":

- Are you going to double post?
[] Yes [] No
- Are you going to spam?
[] Yes [] No
- Are you going to use vague topic titles?
[] Yes [] No
- Are you going to reply with single word posts?
[] Yes [] No

if( yes_answer_found() ) {
alert( "You should revise your stance on the rules before you can finish your registration" );
return 0;
} else {
form.submit;
}

I agree with what you did Goose. And yes, negativezero was warned by IAmACalculator in this post right here:
http://www.unitedti.org/index.php?showtopi...indpost&p=80287


Edit: I have also noticed that negativezero didn't even say anything regarding that post. It seems like he just doesn't care. Have you warned them?

[quote name='Brazucs' date='May 25 2006, 08:28 AM']Perhaps bringing back the warn system is in order?
[right][post="80549"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]I can see my warning level so I'm assuming the system is up and running. ; )

its there allright, but mods can't change warning levels. Back in the days we were able to change peoples warning levels in the blink of an eye.

[quote name='PM']Dear negativezero48,

It seems that you have double posted many times at UTI despite being warned both in the forum and by PM.

Consider this your last warning. Next time you double post, your warning level will go up.

--Brazucs[/quote]

Too harsh?

Not harsh enough in my honest opinion.

Warnings before warnings before increasing wanring levels before more warnings before action?

"Are you going to behave? Yes/No. No? OK, goodbye."

Sure if they show willingness to improve, but from what I gather they don't really do that.

edit:assuming a well established system of order is in noticable effect. While that is being fixed, give them all the second chances you want, sure. But from the moment a lot of effort has been put in to make it as easy and obvious as possible what the rules are it is no longer subject to discussing during issues. Most of us can remember several times where that wasn't very usefull.

I'll monitor his actions carefully and wait for a PM. One more and it's warninglevel++. There hasn't been a warning since, what, agility?

[quote name='Brazucs' date='May 25 2006, 11:40 AM']I'll monitor his actions carefully and wait for a PM. One more and it's warninglevel++. There hasn't been a warning since, what, agility?
[right][post="80571"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


That's pretty bad if he's the first since then!

Consider this: your warning level is a warning. It's meant as a visible indicator that someone's doing something wrong, before they get suspended or banned. Warning level by itself doesn't seem like something to threaten with to me, especially considering no one else except mods/staff can see it, so I think it's okay to use it even without prior notice.

The warning system is in fact enabled, and all Staff, Super Moderators, and forum moderators should be able to warn people.

I like Arcane Wizards idea for how the quiz should work.

I dont mind occasionally requesting that people use the Edit button, but that gets annoying after a while.

Without much more on my mind to address, I'll conclude by saying
I, too, advocate Arcane Wizard's rendition of the registration test.
At what point (and in what fashion) should it be brought to them?

Along with accepting the general rules and stating that you're over 13, perhaps?

Btw, negativezero48 PMed me back and said that he didn't see any of the warnings until this morning, that he's sorry, he's never gonna do it again, blablabla...

[quote name='Brazucs' date='May 25 2006, 09:52 PM']Along with accepting the general rules and stating that you're over 13, perhaps?[right][post="80601"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]That's what I had in mind.

Isn't there an IPB mod that automatically merges double posts? The Vera forums seem to do this.

[quote name='Arcane Wizard' date='May 25 2006, 05:21 PM'][quote name='Brazucs' date='May 25 2006, 09:52 PM']Along with accepting the general rules and stating that you're over 13, perhaps?[right][post="80601"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]That's what I had in mind.
[right][post="80605"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right]
[/quote]I edited those rules just now in an attempt to attract more attention as well as address the more pertinent concerns. Unfortunately, I can't implement the checkboxes idea, that would require actually editing the php code.

I could see a few problems with an automatic merge. A lot of project topics like in the "Featured" section are used by developers to post progress updates. If it maybe distinguished between delayed multiposts and the rapid-rate "++ my postcount" type, that might help, but we've got enough mods to stay on top of the situation IMHO.

[quote name='Brazucs' date='May 25 2006, 04:52 PM']Along with accepting the general rules and stating that you're over 13, perhaps?

Btw, negativezero48 PMed me back and said that he didn't see any of the warnings until this morning, that he's sorry, he's never gonna do it again, blablabla...
[right][post="80601"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


The usual...so he says he didn't see the warnings. Sure. But umm...I think you should make the rule of double posting really noticeable. A lot of people don't read the Terms of Service. So maybe like this:
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>
No Double Posting</span>

And maybe change the colors of the words...:lol:

[quote name='IAmACalculator' date='May 25 2006, 05:42 PM']Isn't there an IPB mod that automatically merges double posts? The Vera forums seem to do this.
[right][post="80609"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

Yes, but:
<span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'>Invision Power Board v2.0.3 © 2006 IPS, Inc. - Licensed to: www.unitedti.org</span>

<span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'>Invision Power Board v2.1.3 © 2006 IPS, Inc. - Licensed to: Umass Lowell - jpena</span>


[quote name='DarkerLine' date='May 25 2006, 05:47 PM']I edited those rules just now in an attempt to attract more attention as well as address the more pertinent concerns. Unfortunately, I can't implement the checkboxes idea, that would require actually editing the php code.[right][post="80611"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


Very Nice:

We might want to broaden #3 to include two-word fodder like "O RLY."

Two edits and one deleted post later, I got this PM:[quote name='Ultimate Shadow']guess i made a bad 1st impression.  :dry:
I was kinda pissed off at you for a while but i finaly came to my senses and found out how much of a jerk i was. :|
So i'll start off fresh...
Sup, my name is Jason
lol :D[/quote]
My reply to that:[quote name='Weregoose']Hey, Jason! I like to consider a renewed visit with anyone as a fresh start.

Learning to get along with others in a respectable environment takes a different spin than merely blending in with a chat room crew. It requires patience and practice—but how much those act as requirements can have an inverse relationship with the amount of experience one has had, real-life scenarios included. In that light, it's cool to think that becoming a better person in a forum can help to create a better person in the real world, too.

The important thing to remember is that the forum is more than just an IRC channel or a "comments" section of a MySpace account. We are all given as much time as we need to express what's on our minds in a clear and concise manner. Providing all the necessary details is usually the preferred method in making others understand whatever ideas you're trying to get across, or what exactly you need help with. Contrarily, lacking in detail can give the wrong impression entirely.

As you know, the rules of the forum are listed. You have the links for that. However, there are also guidelines that apply universally—forum or otherwise. They can be found here. It's a lot to rummage through (you should try the quiz), but it's actually close to all a person would ever need to be able to stand out as a respected member of the online community.

So, that all having been said...

I deleted your post which read: "o". I know it wasn't really a one-letter reply before today (I'm glad you can edit posts now), but, as such, it failed to be productive towards any means (hence its removal).

Regarding these actions, the other moderators and I were discussing ways to approach any newcomers with the do's and do-not's before they should approach us first, so to speak. We hope to make these warm-welcomes a less jarring process for future United-TI members, so at the very least you can say you contributed to that end in your own way.

Don't think we're not glad to have you here.
–Kenny Hammond (Weregoose)[/quote]
My point: People can turn around. It's only a toss-up as to who decides to.

We'll see if he continues in the right direction.

Hmm, looks like I completely missed this the first time around...

At least one version of the double-posts could be solved if users knew what the [+ QUOTE] button did. I didn't figure it out for a while, and just manually used

Then it can't be anything interactive. HTML email for the loose.

Maybe a validation link to a validation page with that questionnaire on it, which when submitted and filled in correctly goes to the actual forum's validation page.

http://www.unitedti.org/index.php?showtopi...indpost&p=82039

I propose an amendment to the forum rules:

3. You must not double post (i.e., make two posts that are back-to-back) or multi-post without considerable time between your posts, unless you have a very good reason.

Secondly, I'm not able to take any more action against double posters than merging posts and sending verbal warnings, but, at this point, even though Ultimate Shadow did plead ignorance, I would bring up his warning level for having multiple violations. He obviously didn't read the Netiquette link I gave him, so I think he needs to get his act together in listening to authorities. I'm not mad at him, but this seems to be the best—perhaps the only—way to instruct him.

We should probably list a couple examples for good multi-post reasons. And mabye revise the "considerable time" part to read "like...a few days." Not in those words.

[quote name='Weregoose' date='Jun 12 2006, 03:56 PM']Secondly, I'm not able to take any more action against double posters than merging posts and sending verbal warnings...[post="82076"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/quote]You can always just contact one of the Super-Mod's and we'll do it for you. He's been warned twice already (although one was taken away)

add a thing with "No Multiple Accounts"

that is getting old too.

How about: "multi-account holders will be kicked in the head." Except Brazucs. He's cool.

[quote name='Digitan']How about: "multi-account holders will be kicked in the head." Except Brazucs. He's cool.[/quote]Of course, we'd have to define "multi-account holder." :roll:

How should we push forward the idea of searching other topics and reading the FAQ before bringing up new topics? I've considered the possibility of a default value for the content field, but I have a hunch that threads would turn up with the value still apparent—not erased, and appended to.

Perhaps we should take anyone who clicks to make a New Topic to one of those redirectional pages that says "Please wait while we transfer you... (Or click here if you do not wish to wait)" with the following message:

"Please be sure that you have read the FAQ and that a similar topic does not exist before making a new topic. Click here to search for other topics. Lastly, be mindful of the Forum Rules when writing your message!"

Heck, we don't even need to automatically redirect people from that page. If someone means to make a new topic (which doesn't occur nearly as often as regular posting), then he really shouldn't be distraught by an added step. Make the person click on a link to move on.

If someone were to then make a topic that is already known to exist, then we can identify him as someone who might possibly disregard other rules. But, I digress—It's better to not jump the gun.

Any thoughts?

[quote name='Weregoose' date='Jun 14 2006, 12:04 AM']<snip>
Any thoughts?  [post="82168"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/quote]It doesn't actually sound too bad, but there should be a way to turn it off, either after x posts or becoming a UTI Member or maybe editable by a mod.


[quote name='DigiTan']How about: "multi-account holders will be kicked in the head." Except Brazucs. He's cool.[/quote]We can kick leenie in the head and leave Mr. Cool alone

EDIT: What's wrong with my quote tags?

[quote name='alexrudd']It doesn't actually sound too bad, but there should be a way to turn it off, either after x posts or becoming a UTI Member or maybe editable by a mod.[/quote][s]How about x topics? Three sounds good to me.[/s]

Allow me to digress again. I'm leaning towards never having the message removed.

[quote name='alexrudd']What's wrong with my quote tags?[/quote]Two start tags and three end tags. Remove the one just before your edit.

[quote name='alexrudd']We can kick leenie in the head and leave Mr. Cool alone[/quote]Leenie's a girl, in theory. Isn't that enough to keep her safe? :(