A Weird Rule That Should Be Modified

[wackyracer]

I have just about had it with this one stupid rule that I had no idea about.

I was posting around the Xbox Modding Tutorials section, and yes, that section tends to be dead and I thought I'd give it some liveliness, seeing there were some good threads on the *first page*. The threads I replied to were definitely in the Top 5 going down from the first page, so I did NOT suspect anything wrong with posting in these threads, but apparently if a thread has not been posted in for 1 month-ish, then the person who bumps it gets an infraction. This rule is understandable, BUT, what I do not understand is that my bump did not cause any grief to the section, as it's already pretty dead, and the post that I "bumped" was still on the first page, last 5 threads in action! So it's not like it's a serious bump as if I dug it up from 5 pages into the section! Not to mention, I had no clue that this was against the rules, I thought since it was on the first page all would be okay.

I want to suggest that this rule be removed or modified to suit this forum better, like, if the thread is still on the first page then this rule does not apply. If it was not on the first page and it was 1 month+ old, then this rule does apply. I find it absolutely SILLY if a thread is clearly on the first page and is one of the first few threads and IS NOT CLOSED, someone will receive an infraction for just posting in there. If it's so against the rules, have the damn Moderator CLOSE the thread, simple!

If you still don't like my suggestion, then how about this one?--I suggest that Dan implements an auto-closing function for threads. It will detect if it gets too old for posting and it will lock the thread up. If you want to keep the rule as it is, then I say do this to prevent possible accidents like mine from happening.

Thanks for reading!

[MentaL]

[Grenadier]

Jamie is a good moderator, your just mad. Your not allowed to bump old threads weather they are on the first page or not.... :/

[wackyracer]

Jamie is a good moderator, your just mad. Your not allowed to bump old threads weather they are on the first page or not.... :/

Do you really think that? Even if they are on the 1st page? -_-

[Shoelace]

The bumping rules is there for a reason, if your going bump which is going make a good contribution to the thread say like theres an error or something in the thread like coding or your going add a new update to the thread then i think that should be fine but if your just going say " Thanks Tyler " then that is spam. Also Jamie is a good MOD and i have had no problems with him.

[Hejula]

He's just doing his job obey the rules and you'll have no troubles with him. If you want to contribute to the section post a new thread instead of bumping month old ones! First page or not he is there to enforce the rules and you have just informed the senior staff that he is doing his job correctly... I'm sure they will thank you! :)

[wackyracer]

The bumping rules is there for a reason, if your going bump which is going make a good contribution to the thread say like theres an error or something in the thread like coding then i think that should be fine but if your just going say " Thanks Tyler " then that is spam. Also Jamie is a good MOD and i have had no problems with him.

So if I appreciate something my good friend Tyler does, that's against the rules? No, it isn't, and I have seen hundreds of other people say Thanks to someone in a thread and not get infracted.

EDIT: Alright, you know what, if no one is going to see what I see on this matter about this Mod Jamie person, then I say just forget about it, and let's focus on the rule.

I never said this rule is entirely stupid, I think it's useful for people who bump topics that are old and 5 pages deep in the forum! Not when they are on the first page, that thread is still "new" to the section, even though that section may be dead!

[Hejula]

So if I appreciate something my good friend Tyler does, that's against the rules? No, it isn't, and I have seen hundreds of other people say Thanks to someone in a thread and not get infracted.

EDIT: Alright, you know what, if no one is going to see what I see on this matter about this Mod Jamie person, then I say just forget about it, and let's focus on the rule.

I never said this rule is entirely stupid, I think it's useful for people who bump topics that are old and 5 pages deep in the forum! Not when they are on the first page, that thread is still "new" to the section, even though that section may be dead!

The thread is not new though, it is months old despite it being on the first page. The sooner you accept the rules the sooner you can get along with the moderator in question and have no problems in the section. Your post makes it sound like he does everything correctly (i.e. warning before infraction).

[wackyracer]

The thread is not new though, it is months old despite it being on the first page. The sooner you accept the rules the sooner you can get along with the moderator in question and have no problems in the section. Your post makes it sound like he does everything correctly (i.e. warning before infraction).

Okay, so what you're telling me is that you don't think that my little suggestion for improving this rule should be taken? Do you want to keep it this way? Seriously?

[Hejula]

Okay, so what you're telling me is that you don't think that my little suggestion for improving this rule should not be taken? Do you want to keep it this way? Seriously?

No, I don't like your suggestion and I think the rules should stay as they are, including the rule about bumping threads. Just obey the rules and you'll have no problems.

[wackyracer]

Then I suggest that Dan implements an auto-closing function for threads. It will detect if it gets too old for posting and it will lock the thread up. If you want to keep the rule as it is, then I say do this to prevent possible accidents like mine from happening.

[Hejula]

Then I suggest that Dan implements an auto-closing function for threads. It will detect if it gets too old for posting and it will lock the thread up. If you want to keep the rule as it is, then I say do this to prevent possible accidents like mine from happening.

It wasn't an accident though you said you got 2 warnings followed by an infraction, the 2 warnings are your warning to not bump threads again. You obviously didn't listen to the warning so you got infracted? It makes sense.

[Over 9000]

It wasn't an accident though you said you got 2 warnings followed by an infraction, the 2 warnings are your warning to not bump threads again. You obviously didn't listen to the warning so you got infracted? It makes sense.

You didn't read his post correctly.

[wackyracer]

It wasn't an accident though you said you got 2 warnings followed by an infraction, the 2 warnings are your warning to not bump threads again. You obviously didn't listen to the warning so you got infracted? It makes sense.

That is not what happened, let me explain in better wording.

I post in 2 different threads in the Xbox Tutorial Section. I did not realize the threads were old. Jamie comes along and warns me for one of my posts saying that I should be careful and not do it again. So I took his advice, and did not do it again. 2 days later, Jamie comes and infracts me on the other post I did in that section.

[Ron]

If mods are going to infract people for bumping threads then they can take the half second to close old threads by double clicking the thread icon. I did that in RF and never had any problems.

Makes more sense, don't feel bad for you getting infracted though. The time it takes to close a thread is the same amount of time it takes to check the last reply date.

[wackyracer]

If mods are going to infract people for bumping threads then they can take the half second to close old threads by double clicking the thread icon. I did that in RF and never had any problems.

Makes more sense, don't feel bad for you getting infracted though. The time it takes to close a thread is the same amount of time it takes to check the last reply date.

Exactly! In fact, there are still many open "old threads" in the section I posted in. Your post definitely cheered me up :)