Why are you lot still discussing this? Nearmiss has spoken.

I've probably missed it, but can I check how this will be communicated to the forum? I'd suggest that admin start the Update thread, with a post about the new rule, telling no one to reply to the post until Oleg has posted (/made 2 posts).

It would be a shame if the thread is going well, then on the 4th page someone says how great it is that there's been no off topic chat, and they're suddenly banned for a week (because they haven't read this thread).

Some of the best moderated forums i've ever frequented used the "split topic" method, with bans reserved for personal attacks and rude behaviour. Whenever people went off topic in a thread where it was critical to maintain on-topic-ness, a mod would just cut the offending posts or parts of a post and paste them into a new thread made for just that purpose, with an easy to identify name. In our case, this would be "xx-yy-2010 Friday update pruned and off-topic posting".

People can still ramble on about whatever they want if they can't contain themselves, but it's easy for those not interested to just side-step it and focus on the main theme.

In any case, this new rule is only for the update threads. In fact, it was very recently that it was announced the rest of the forum would be open to more off-topic discussions in an effort to keep a healthy exchange going at all times, so it's not like we're being stiffled here. After all, we are the ones asking for a tighter grip on the update threads.

I still wouldn't do it this way (outright bans) but then i'm not the one who has to spend time enforcing the new rules and since we have the rest of the forum open to a wide variety of other subjects, it's all good and fine by me.

However, i totally agree with you that this had to be communicated in a clear fashion. Just how much straying from the screenshot is going to be allowed is something everyone needs to be made aware of before they start reading and posting in the update thread.

For example, if someone posts references to back up their claim that a cockpit gauge needs a correction, is this on topic or not? Or what if someone posts historical references that pertain to tactics and employment of certain weapon systems (for example "this kind of flak gunner emplacement only had one gun of type X and not two")? Same for purely technical matters that pertain to the accuracy of 3d models, etc. Finally, posting the usual praise can pretty repetitive ("thanks for the update","awesome work, keep it up" etc), is this going to be off limits with the thread focusing exclusively on discussing the update's content, or not?

I'm all for imposing some limits on the update threads, it's just that they need to be clearly communicated so people know what to expect.

Somebody that hasn't got time for moderating shouldn't be a moderator at all. There's nothing worse than a lazy mod who isn't interested in reason and just hits ban because they can. Those types usually have people leave in droves.

"Off with their heads"
http://unrealitymag.com/wp-content/u.../07/alice2.jpg

nearmiss

I believe that the problem has more to do with the number of posts some people make in the up-date thread. Same people each week, 70, 80, 90. posts (from each of them) in the thread. That's the clutter...I don't think you should ban someone if he strays a bit off topic. Give this a little thought:grin:

What if all the posts are relevent? In any sense, such numbers of postings can just be a result of the thread going O/T, and when the thread stays on topic this never happens.

Yes philip, you are one of those people that I mentioned or was referring to. I believe that you mean well, and do bring a bit to the table. But I must tell you though, that you post so often, that I just skip over your posts.:-P

I wasn't refuting that, but then again most of those posts were in response to people arguing against my opinion. My point is that, looking at this weeks topic, I only posted a few times and all my posts were related to the update. The idea was to stay on topic, and because no-one started any arguments it stayed that way.
The past is behind us, now. We should look to the future ;)

Well, 48 hours after I made this thread the percentage of people expressing their wish for more moderation was already at 74%. That is a large majority, and ever since it has stayed at around 70%. It can't be made any clearer that many people are frustrated with the way most update threads turn. It took another update thread going down the drain for the mods to realize the issue was real and serious for many here. I am happy they take actions now.

Having been moderator and admin on other forums in the past I would recommend first and forall that mods make themselves easier to indentify. There should be something in their avatar or signature. Personally I just know Nearmiss for example. If there is another one I have failed to recognize him/her. That is already a problem.

Second, people should be warned progressively and clearly visible in their own posts with fat red moderator letters if needed. Then, in steps, 3 days "in the box", 1 week, one month, and finally permanent ban. Sentences like "that terrain looks like painted by a child with watercolors" for example is enough for a first 3 days in the box. That is my personal opinion.

Third, I think we need more moderators. This forum is very active and fast paced by times.
No way 1-2 mods can make the job which is needed. I think it needs at least 4, better 5, best in different time zones, so there is a chance there is always someone around.

Therein lies the primary problem, IMO. Good idea. I'd nominate Oleg himself if he had the time.