The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
In the past when Tony suggested this it received a negative feedback and many didn't like the idea.
That was the past, I would like to release my idea for a forum that would solve and increase the quality of all the forums....
The new forum will only have the 'real' regulars in it, these regulars can post topics, replies and opinions as they please, these 'real' regulars are users who Tony feels don't post spam or ruin the quality of topics. The forum will be readable by other regulars and newbies, but they can not contribute.
What will make this forum special is the fact that every so often a selection of users from the other forums will have a chance to post in the new forum and if they don't muck around they can have the privilage of staying there. I think with this we would see an increase of the quality of the current FOG's as users will want to get into the new forum and talk gaming with the likes of pb, Edgy, Ant, RBS etc...
For it to work though the users who are allowed will still have to contribute to the current FOG, and reply to newbies topics and posts, this will cause it still to be like it is today but with the bonus of the new forum for users to relax and talk serious gaming in.
Come on, it would work, as long as the 'real' regulars still post in the current forums.
Thanks
er-no
That was the past, I would like to release my idea for a forum that would solve and increase the quality of all the forums....
The new forum will only have the 'real' regulars in it, these regulars can post topics, replies and opinions as they please, these 'real' regulars are users who Tony feels don't post spam or ruin the quality of topics. The forum will be readable by other regulars and newbies, but they can not contribute.
What will make this forum special is the fact that every so often a selection of users from the other forums will have a chance to post in the new forum and if they don't muck around they can have the privilage of staying there. I think with this we would see an increase of the quality of the current FOG's as users will want to get into the new forum and talk gaming with the likes of pb, Edgy, Ant, RBS etc...
For it to work though the users who are allowed will still have to contribute to the current FOG, and reply to newbies topics and posts, this will cause it still to be like it is today but with the bonus of the new forum for users to relax and talk serious gaming in.
Come on, it would work, as long as the 'real' regulars still post in the current forums.
Thanks
er-no
Page:
Grix Thraves wrote:
> Michael Corleone wrote:
"a forum should be about discussion,
> and not about ranking"
Perhaps, but without ranking, there
> are no aspirations. People will work harder to become a regular, and
> their discussion abilities may end them up one day as a notable.
>
It's good for people on here to realise that their views are
> recognised.
Nicely put.
> Michael Corleone wrote:
"a forum should be about discussion,
> and not about ranking"
Perhaps, but without ranking, there
> are no aspirations. People will work harder to become a regular, and
> their discussion abilities may end them up one day as a notable.
>
It's good for people on here to realise that their views are
> recognised.
Nicely put.
Give him a prize? more like remove any prize he has ever won, and ban him from SR for 6 months.
'(.)'
'(.)'
If a forum is empty then it is no fun. So people ignore it and it stays empty.
We saw this with MIST. It was stagnant before we changed t to FOG (chat).
It was actually Your Honour's suggestion to combine the forums. I have been attempting to get feedback on this to decide whether to give him a prize!
We saw this with MIST. It was stagnant before we changed t to FOG (chat).
It was actually Your Honour's suggestion to combine the forums. I have been attempting to get feedback on this to decide whether to give him a prize!
Tony, but what disadvantage is there in having more forums?
'(.)'
'(.)'
Yes, but its not the quality which people become regulars, 'spider II' being a classic example.
Maybe SR could take the idea from the SI forum of having a golden post section where moderators select the best posts in a particular forum which are then voted for by all members, which would in effect produce better quality posts and less 'spam'.
'(.)'
Maybe SR could take the idea from the SI forum of having a golden post section where moderators select the best posts in a particular forum which are then voted for by all members, which would in effect produce better quality posts and less 'spam'.
'(.)'
Tony wrote:
"(does anybody here thing he is somebody else?)"
Possibly... I'm beginning to agree with you Tony...
"(does anybody here thing he is somebody else?)"
Possibly... I'm beginning to agree with you Tony...
Michael Corleone wrote:
> A particulary good point, if i may say so young petersson.
> Antidisastablishmentarianism. yes, a bringing down of the
> co-alition. but more to the point, a forum should be about
> discussion, and not about ranking, one example of why this is faling
> is the mergers of all the topics together, which produces a messy
> gunk of mixed posts, which is contuer productive. I believe there
> should be no mergers, any of which have taken place should be
> removed. I am loosing confidence in what was once a fine
> institution.
'(.)'
The other forums will be demerged only when they have built up sufficient "traffic" to support a split. Then the two Nintendo forums will have a bridge and the two Sony forums will have a bridge, and so on.
'(.)'
> A particulary good point, if i may say so young petersson.
> Antidisastablishmentarianism. yes, a bringing down of the
> co-alition. but more to the point, a forum should be about
> discussion, and not about ranking, one example of why this is faling
> is the mergers of all the topics together, which produces a messy
> gunk of mixed posts, which is contuer productive. I believe there
> should be no mergers, any of which have taken place should be
> removed. I am loosing confidence in what was once a fine
> institution.
'(.)'
The other forums will be demerged only when they have built up sufficient "traffic" to support a split. Then the two Nintendo forums will have a bridge and the two Sony forums will have a bridge, and so on.
'(.)'
Michael Corleone wrote:
"a forum should be about discussion, and not about ranking"
Perhaps, but without ranking, there are no aspirations. People will work harder to become a regular, and their discussion abilities may end them up one day as a notable.
It's good for people on here to realise that their views are recognised.
"a forum should be about discussion, and not about ranking"
Perhaps, but without ranking, there are no aspirations. People will work harder to become a regular, and their discussion abilities may end them up one day as a notable.
It's good for people on here to realise that their views are recognised.
It's not a bad idea er-no but it would be a real pain trying to work our who was in and who was out.
And there would be a lot of arguments.
One step at a time eh? Let's see if we can get FOG prime topics working without new topics from Newbies and take it from there.
Maybe we should also just continue asking people like Spider II (does anybody here thing he is somebody else?) to post on the chat forum (which he is now also messing up).
And there would be a lot of arguments.
One step at a time eh? Let's see if we can get FOG prime topics working without new topics from Newbies and take it from there.
Maybe we should also just continue asking people like Spider II (does anybody here thing he is somebody else?) to post on the chat forum (which he is now also messing up).
Mike ? What the hell are you blabbering on about?
Page: