Criticism of Moderation

[X-Codes]

I don't like those systems for this site.  As many posting members as we have on this forum, we have exponentially more lurkers and people who just come here for the Handbooks.  I think it would result in less traffic for the site if we spammed them with advertising just because they don't have an account.

EDIT: Granted, I have no real say in this sort of decision, just an opinion.  I really can't afford to give monetary compensation.

[veekie]

Depends on the ads I guess. Non-animated ads(particularly plaintext ads) at the top/bottom generally don't get in the way much, but tend to be low revenue.
Some boards go overboard, with ads that actually turn parts of posts into inline links to their sites, which is enough to make you quit(or at least get adblock, which defeats the purpose).

[littha]

Another forum I spend time on has an interesting take, a banner and footer add but nothing else. There seems to be enough ad traffic for it to stay afloat (it is a much smaller forum though)...

[veekie]

Most modern ad systems(other than the intrusive ad systems like pop ups and in-line ads) only count revenue by actual click-through purchases. You have to click the ad and actually buy something, while suggesting that users click the ads specifically would also breach the terms of agreement.

[Risada]

Personally, I prefer the donation option. Or the ads that do not force me to click on them all before I see anything on the forums...

[zugschef]

make a thread with bets... the wager is a donation to the site...

This is actually illegal in some states. So that would be a no go there, but I do like that you are being creative with ideas for it.

? how can that be illegal, when it is a donation?

let me explain how this works (i know some sites which use this model effectively) by a simple example: i say team x wins its next game, and i wager 10 dollars, euros, whatever. if i'm right, i do not donate, if i am wrong i donate 10 *insert currency* to the forum. you can also bet with another forum member, say it's packers vs. ravens in the super bowl and one says ravens win, the other says the packers win. the wager is donned to the boards by the one who lost the bet.

how can this be illegal??

[sirpercival]

A lot of states have sports betting as illegal.

[archangel.arcanis]

make a thread with bets... the wager is a donation to the site...

This is actually illegal in some states. So that would be a no go there, but I do like that you are being creative with ideas for it.

? how can that be illegal, when it is a donation?

let me explain how this works (i know some sites which use this model effectively) by a simple example: i say team x wins its next game, and i wager 10 dollars, euros, whatever. if i'm right, i do not donate, if i am wrong i donate 10 *insert currency* to the forum. you can also bet with another forum member, say it's packers vs. ravens in the super bowl and one says ravens win, the other says the packers win. the wager is donned to the boards by the one who lost the bet.

how can this be illegal??

It is online gambling, even if not in the traditional sense. Several states have laws against that. It is actually part of the reason many of the online poker sites went away.

[zugschef]

A lot of states have sports betting as illegal.

you wanna tell me that if i bet with you with a hypothetical wager, that that's illegal?

[veekie]

A lot of states have sports betting as illegal.

you wanna tell me that if i bet with you with a hypothetical wager, that that's illegal?

Legally speaking, yes.

[Sinfire Titan]

A lot of states have sports betting as illegal.

you wanna tell me that if i bet with you with a hypothetical wager, that that's illegal?

The recent Republican debate has a really good example of this.

[zugschef]

*lol* that's fukken stupid.

[SorO_Lost]

A lot of states have sports betting as illegal.

you wanna tell me that if i bet with you with a hypothetical wager, that that's illegal?

Because it's not. Gambling is defined as wagering money or anything of value and you flat out are betting real dollar values at that. Like an idiot you're just trying to use an euphemism to cover your rear and it never works.

Consider for instance a guy being pulled over and he has a bag of crack on his dashboard. His tells the cop "it's not cocaine officer, it's candy" and guess what happens next.

[zugschef]

Because it's not. Gambling is defined as wagering money or anything of value and you flat out are betting real dollar values at that. Like an idiot you're just trying to use an euphemism to cover your rear and it never works.

Consider for instance a guy being pulled over and he has a bag of crack on his dashboard. His tells the cop "it's not cocaine officer, it's candy" and guess what happens next.

Hi Welcome

[EjoThims]

Since it didn't get ported with the rest, just wanted to reiterate that BB was correct about my note on the douche meters, I had meant I agree it would be nice to personally see where I stand, but I would not like to bring back the negative karma function and all the abuses (and whining) that it entailed.

[X-Codes]

The only whining about it that I remember is that someone made a really poor-taste joke about pedophilia or something and their rep dropped from something like 5 to -20 within a week.  I don't know... I guess I just never really cared all that much about rep one way or another.

[veekie]

Negative rep was removed mostly because well, people who see they have been losing rep due to whatever reason do not generally look to correct their behavior to deal with the rep change, instead, they get outraged that someone lowered their arbitrary number on the internet and proceed to engage in actions that lower rep even further(such as arguing and insulting with the suspected rep-lowering agents), causing an implosion in their scores and temperament.

[Tshern]

The only whining about it that I remember is that someone made a really poor-taste joke about pedophilia or something and their rep dropped from something like 5 to -20 within a week.  I don't know... I guess I just never really cared all that much about rep one way or another.

Strangely enough, that wasn't me. Usually bad humour is my specialty.

[zugschef]

The only whining about it that I remember is that someone made a really poor-taste joke about pedophilia or something and their rep dropped from something like 5 to -20 within a week.  I don't know... I guess I just never really cared all that much about rep one way or another.

Strangely enough, that wasn't me. Usually bad humour is my specialty.

i love poor taste jokes.

[Childe]

The only whining about it that I remember is that someone made a really poor-taste joke about pedophilia or something and their rep dropped from something like 5 to -20 within a week.  I don't know... I guess I just never really cared all that much about rep one way or another.

Strangely enough, that wasn't me. Usually bad humour is my specialty.

i love poor taste jokes.

Sadly not everyone does. I was actually warned for one once on another forum, and it wasn't even that bad (as far as poor-taste jokes go). In fact, I used completely scientific terminology to be incredibly neutral as part of the joke and apparently people (or at least one to report it) were made uneasy and were offended by it. BG in theory is more tolerant, and the people running it certainly are, but the average forum-goers are just as moderate as anywhere else, online or not.