Cynthia Posted December 22, 2008 Share Posted December 22, 2008 I was thinking a little more clarification on the "No ATTN topics," rule. I think it should only be limited to topics that address something to someone that chould have been said in a PM to a specific person. For example if I had a question about say, computers, and I posted a topic asking if anyone knew who to fix my problem, it would be ridiculous to have to go from person to person to ask who knew anything about it. Basically if something can be said in a PM it shouldn't need a topic of its own, but if you're stating a public opinion or a public question, then it should be fine. As long as "ATTN," isn't in the title. Otherwise any question or suggestion could be set as an "ATTN," topic. I know some of the staff informed me it was sort of like this already, but I don't think everyone is aware of it as of now. I think it'd be better to have it pointed out a little more so that people aren't confused and think any topic that is directing attention to any one person or group falls under this. If you think about it any topic you make about yourself is an "ATTN," topic if you think of it without this. You're directing attention to a specific member. So in other words perhaps a little more clarification on it so people aren't confused, as I saw a few people that didn't fully understand this rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deity Posted December 22, 2008 Share Posted December 22, 2008 Attn topics were removed because peeps here would abuse them. You'd see like ten of them in the spam section, and that was annoying. It got old pretty fast. I believe that if you have somn to say to a member, you can use pms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cynthia Posted December 22, 2008 Author Share Posted December 22, 2008 Attn topics were removed because peeps here would abuse them. You'd see like ten of them in the spam section, and that was annoying. It got old pretty fast.I believe that if you have somn to say to a member, you can use pms. I didn't ask to remove the rule, I asked to have it explained a little better because people were confused. I even said if something can be said in a PM it should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deity Posted December 22, 2008 Share Posted December 22, 2008 I already explained part of it in my message. ^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cynthia Posted December 22, 2008 Author Share Posted December 22, 2008 You explained something that I already made perfectly clear though, so I'm not getting the point your making... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deity Posted December 22, 2008 Share Posted December 22, 2008 You explained something that I already made perfectly clear though, so I'm not getting the point your making... Yes, though I really dont get what other clarification there is to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VincentASM Posted December 22, 2008 Share Posted December 22, 2008 I'm thinking this is a question best answered by a member of staff. I would have responded, since I made the rule in the first place, but I can't right now >___< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lolDeath Posted December 22, 2008 Share Posted December 22, 2008 From what I see the only thing enforced is "No topics with ATTN in the title" so it's a little pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cynthia Posted December 22, 2008 Author Share Posted December 22, 2008 From what I see the only thing enforced is "No topics with ATTN in the title" so it's a little pointless. Well what I'm saying is that and that if it can be said in a PM then it's not needed, but NOTHING else. Otherwise there would be a ton of topics that shouldn't be made. It makes discussion very difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meteor Posted December 22, 2008 Share Posted December 22, 2008 From what I see the only thing enforced is "No topics with ATTN in the title" so it's a little pointless. "Confrontational topics" have been locked left and right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lolDeath Posted December 22, 2008 Share Posted December 22, 2008 I still have absolutely no idea what those are supposed to be. I have seen quite a variety of topics get locked as soon as someone screams "confrontational topic!". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wist Posted December 22, 2008 Share Posted December 22, 2008 I want to ensure I understand your concern correctly. You are saying that the rule regarding Attention topics doesn't differentiate between threads addressed towards a specific individual versus those seeking help from an individual unknown to the topic creator, and that the rule should be adjusted to clarify that only messages which can be conveyed through private message are disallowed, right? I would have assumed it evident that any question for help is perfectly permissible but I can see how the mandate might be confusing, especially to those who aren't familiar with ATTN topic fad that plagued the forum a couple of months ago. Assuming I interpreted your posts correctly, you bring up a valid concern and the rule will most probably be rewritten in the near future. In regard to confrontational topics, I consider a thread contradictory to the rule if it is disparaging, or otherwise exists to promote attacks or complaints, towards a member. I assume the other moderators take a similar stance to this, but we all most probably have different tolerances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lolDeath Posted December 22, 2008 Share Posted December 22, 2008 So when a moderator locks a topic using that reason when it is obviously not I should report the moderator then? :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wist Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 (edited) Can you link to a specific occurrence regarding this topic in which you might cite a questionable reaction on the part of a moderator? Edited December 23, 2008 by Wist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lolDeath Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 If 1,000 topics were not created per day in FFtF I would. Don't worry, if it comes up again you will see, if not even better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts