|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Mar 28, 2016 1:49:56 GMT
Mountbatten , the only people who guest-post with names containing "Mountbatten" are spammers. Like it or not, you do not have an army of productive guests who use your name Doesn't matter. Remember in elementary when the teacher would say no food in class unless you have food for everyone? It's the same thing for this. You can't impose a rule on one singular person in a community. It really isn't. We're not imposing a rule on you (Unless it was you, but I doubt that). And we know they use your name, so we can use common sense. If they start going by "Picard's thigh" or "Desophaeus's Pope", we'll add those to banned names. |
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Mar 28, 2016 2:23:31 GMT
Doesn't matter. Remember in elementary when the teacher would say no food in class unless you have food for everyone? It's the same thing for this. You can't impose a rule on one singular person in a community. It really isn't. We're not imposing a rule on you (Unless it was you, but I doubt that). And we know they use your name, so we can use common sense. If they start going by "Picard's thigh" or "Desophaeus's Pope", we'll add those to banned names. I endorse the ban of "Desopheaus' Pope" heartily! At the very least, if an account is banned due to spamming/trolling then if there's another account that comes up soonly with a very similar name, ban that one as well when it comes to the point of making an inappropriate post, no second warning on that second account or subsequent ones as well that may come up in future with more rule-violating posts. |
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Mar 28, 2016 2:37:25 GMT
Honestly, we should ban usernames like "_____'s servant" where __________ is any member, not just Mountbatten. I doubt "Picard's Servant" would have better Intention's than "Mountbaten's Servant"
|
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Mar 28, 2016 2:46:48 GMT
Honestly, we should ban usernames like "_____'s servant" where __________ is any member, not just Mountbatten. I doubt "Picard's Servant" would have better Intention's than "Mountbaten's Servant" Is that possible to create a ban on a catchall? Idk if the forum client programming would allow that. Better double check with tech support. Catchall - Ie. "*'s servant" would then ban whatever says instead of the * in its place but that depends on the syntax of the interface for saltin. |
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Mar 28, 2016 2:49:10 GMT
Honestly, we should ban usernames like "_____'s servant" where __________ is any member, not just Mountbatten. I doubt "Picard's Servant" would have better Intention's than "Mountbaten's Servant" Is that possible to create a ban on a catchall? Idk if the forum client programming would allow that. Better double check with tech support. Ie. "*'s servant" would then ban whatever says instead of the * in its place but that depends on the syntax of the interface for saltin . Sure does. It'd be nice if it's possible. If not, we'll need to manually hunt down Trolls that register and mods will have to play whack-a-mole with ones that don't |
|
|
|
Post by Jean Lannes on Mar 29, 2016 2:09:14 GMT
Is that possible to create a ban on a catchall? Idk if the forum client programming would allow that. Better double check with tech support. Ie. "*'s servant" would then ban whatever says instead of the * in its place but that depends on the syntax of the interface for saltin . Sure does. It'd be nice if it's possible. If not, we'll need to manually hunt down Trolls that register and mods will have to play whack-a-mole with ones that don't But what if somebody would just use a grammatical difference? |
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Mar 29, 2016 2:10:23 GMT
Sure does. It'd be nice if it's possible. If not, we'll need to manually hunt down Trolls that register and mods will have to play whack-a-mole with ones that don't But what if somebody would just use a grammatical difference? We'll add those to the filter |
|
|
|
Post by Mountbatten on Mar 29, 2016 10:05:37 GMT
But what if somebody would just use a grammatical difference? We'll add those to the filter There are unlimited grammatical alterations though |
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Mar 29, 2016 13:24:38 GMT
We'll add those to the filter There are unlimited grammatical alterations though But only a finite amount resemble the Original |
|
|
|
Post by Jean Lannes on Mar 29, 2016 20:55:22 GMT
But what if somebody would just use a grammatical difference? We'll add those to the filter Or just make it a bunch of variations inclusive and ban the rest manually |
|
|
|
Post by Bismarck on Mar 30, 2016 0:40:57 GMT
Ok, but what if I want a servant?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Mar 30, 2016 0:46:50 GMT
Ok, but what if I want a servant? Do you want a spamming servant? |
|
|
|
Post by Bismarck on Mar 30, 2016 1:09:09 GMT
Ok, but what if I want a servant? Do you want a spamming servant? A little bit  |
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Mar 30, 2016 1:42:51 GMT
Do you want a spamming servant? A little bit A spamming, racist, bigoted, homophobic servant? |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon Bonaparte on Mar 30, 2016 4:36:01 GMT
A little bit A spamming, racist, bigoted, homophobic servant? (mod around  ) |
|
