Jump to content
Gaia's Minion

Reading the Rules to be able to Comment.

Recommended Posts

So with the recent change made to the site (take a guess which one :jantran:) there's been a bit of "drama". However, this is not about any of that, but rather, about a suggestion that a couple of people have made, and since None of them has actually made a Suggestion, I'm making this for them.

 

Make Non-Rule Readers (aka (!)Gray users) be unable to comment on raffles until they Read the Rules.

 

This kinda follows the reasoning of the removal of Winning Chances, which was to reduce Spam comments (and also because it was kinda pointless so there shouldn't be big fuss about it).

With this restriction added, the amount of spam comments would pretty much be zero for a while, and those users would still be able to join raffles and use any other feature of the site, so they wouldn't just be "locked out" of the site as a whole. 

 

Now for the quotes of the people who suggested this:

 

hINDUs: "the solution is pretty simply, [(!)] users should not be able to type comments - they did not read the rules, they cannot oblige to them, so why they should be able to post comments?"

 

The Predecessor:  "Honestly, I'd just rather have it so that non-rule readers can't comment.  If you haven't read the rules, then you aren't acknowledging the rules and fundamentals of the site, and thus should be restricted in such fundamentals until remedied in the form of the inability to comment.  Pretty simple stuff."

 

Mr. Ricardo: "Rather, to prevent the annoyance of those type of comments (and it may sound a bit extreme), I say that ! users should not be allowed to comment until they've read the rules. Since they'll be allowed to enter raffles still, I stand behind this idea strongly."
 

So yeah, that's pretty much it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea sounds for the most part solid, since the majority of those who beg/ 'spam'/ comment the same old "hope I win" type of comments consist of, as you stated, (!) Gray users, though I have to point out that some, not a huge percentage of, but some Blue users commit the same acts (!) Gray users do, though that's like... say, 5% of usual Blue users.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well im a gray user does that mean i shouldn't have the right to comment anymore on scrap.tf? like i never spammed the "hope i win" type of comments. dunno why im grey(probably bcoz i didn't read the rules and commited against a rule without knowing) but at least i never spammed that type of comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not entirely sure removing grey users' ability to comment will actually solve the problem, if anything I think it would simply make them try a little harder to "read" the rules and then they would carry on as usual.

 

It's also not quite fair to the grey users who haven't yet read the rules properly, but haven't spammed raffles with those annoying "i hope i win" comments. Being grey in and of itself isn't the problem here, it's dealing with people who have no regards for the rules.

 

The one thing I can agree on here is the idea that there should be something in place to give people incentive to read and follow the rules, as currently, there is virtually no reason to care about reading the rules at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just have a question, if this happens, that means that grey users can't comment on their own raffles, or can they? (This question may be quite obvious but yeah, I just happen to think about that)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, andyw386 said:

First of all, the language differences would mean that those who don't speak English very well would be at a disadvantage (Unless the rules page has translated versions, I'm unsure if it does)

Just checked it by changing the language settings, and the rules are in fact not translated. However, the fact that such an important feature hasn't been translated yet is on scrap.tf's part, and should definitely be updated regardless of this topic's suggested change. 

 

2 hours ago, andyw386 said:

Secondly, as the rules currently stand, they can be a bit contradictory in the way they may be interpreted by those who re-read them, which makes accepting them a little difficult possibly, I cannot go into the details anymore without breaking...well, you know.

The current measures in place are more or less meant to rat out the users who just skip to the bottom of the page and accept them without actually reading. If an user "rereads" the rules and still has the badge of shame, it's obvious that they haven't truly read them. More emphasis on the "You haven't read everything" part would be helpful though.

 

2 hours ago, wolfie said:

well im a gray user does that mean i shouldn't have the right to comment anymore on scrap.tf? like i never spammed the "hope i win" type of comments. dunno why im grey(probably bcoz i didn't read the rules and commited against a rule without knowing) but at least i never spammed that type of comments.

This new implementation is simply meant to improve the quality of comment sections. Even if you aren't part of the issue, you should have no trouble reading the rules properly.

 

1 hour ago, Squidley Studios said:

It's also not quite fair to the grey users who haven't yet read the rules properly, but haven't spammed raffles with those annoying "i hope i win" comments. Being grey in and of itself isn't the problem here, it's dealing with people who have no regards for the rules.

The implementation would help differentiate the ones who are actually polite, and the ones that cause an annoyance for every raffle.  The former should have no trouble removing the restriction through reading the rules, whereas the latter would have to grow some actual manners or be blocked by a community that despises them.
 

1 hour ago, Squidley Studios said:

The one thing I can agree on here is the idea that there should be something in place to give people incentive to read and follow the rules, as currently, there is virtually no reason to care about reading the rules at all.

As far as I'm aware, the only main benefit in reading the rules and becoming a "blue" user is that they can raffle twice as much (from 50 items to 100). Something definitely needs to be implemented to actually reward the few who actually read the rules. 

 

1 hour ago, Pururūto said:

I just have a question, if this happens, that means that grey users can't comment on their own raffles, or can they? (This question may be quite obvious but yeah, I just happen to think about that)

Nothing is set in stone yet. But if I had to choose between the two, they should definitely still be allowed to comment on their own raffles and profile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been discussed and considered many times over the years, and I still think it's too extreme. 

4oilt4nsu7.png

Implementing this would block 96% of users from commenting, and not all gray users just post spam comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Jesse said:

This has been discussed and considered many times over the years, and I still think it's too extreme. 

4oilt4nsu7.png

Implementing this would block 96% of users from commenting, and not all gray users just post spam comments.

I agree with Jesse it is a little extreme. One possible way to reduce spam comments on raffles is to change the rules a little to include that comments on raffles shouldn't be spam. Example, "I hope I win" is a spam comment, because it doesn't contribute to general discussions. A better thing to say is, "Thank you *insert raffler name here* for such a good raffle, I wish everyone luck". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Jesse said:

This has been discussed and considered many times over the years, and I still think it's too extreme. 

4oilt4nsu7.png

Implementing this would block 96% of users from commenting, and not all gray users just post spam comments.

 

Had a bit of a hunch that you'd mention this. 

 

And because of that, I just want to know. Seeing how they are 96% of the site's users, are there any plans to reduce this number via an incentive to read and follow the rules?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just my two cents, but I tend to think the whole "reading the rules" think does significantly more harm than good.  It's a cute little gimmick, but it doesn't really accomplish much.  In this day and age, not reading terms and conditions is just a part of using the internet.  No, it's not ideal, but that's just how it is.  There's really very little in the scrap.tf rules that significantly differs from most other online communities.  When you create this arbitrary hierarchy among the site's users, it's going to make it easy blame the kind of garbage in anyone's comments section on a group of people who may or may not be responsible.  People like to complain about the negativity that 'the grey users' bring to the site, but aren't willing to acknowledge that saying "I hope I win" is no less common to see than "wow grey users this-or-that".  When someone with significant influence supports treating others like this and constantly talks about how it's the grey users' fault, everyone who looks up to them starts treating grey users poorly just so they can be one of the cool kids too.  If negativity is really the issue you're worried about, people need to stop focusing on grey users and really consider whether or not they're part of the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jesse A total userbase is not the same as active userbase, do your job and count comments on raffles / megaraffle with regard of user role, this should give you a more precise look into percentages of userbase attendance.

Anyway its only ~5-10% users (or less?) who do chat, the huge majority just enters and dont bother to interact in anyway, so again, the perspective is shifting as you look closer as to who actually would be hit by this change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hINDUs said:

@Jesse A total userbase is not the same as active userbase, do your job and count comments on raffles / megaraffle with regard of user role, this should give you a more precise look into percentages of userbase attendance.

Anyway its only ~5-10% users (or less?) who do chat, the huge majority just enters and dont bother to interact in anyway, so again, the perspective is shifting as you look closer as to who actually would be hit by this change.

Your argument is how only a select percentage of users from that total are actually active, and even less of those actually comment.

 

Let's say for example, about... 40% of all those (!) Gray users are at least bi-daily 'active' users, and from those users, only say... 15% bother commenting, with 35% average chance of it being related to spam or whatnot.

 

40% of 1,283,921 = [about] 513,568 users

15% of 513,568 = [about] 77,035 users

35% of 77,035 =

(through very rough estimation and examples) a grand total of 26,962 spammers. 

Because 96% of all users are (!) Gray, if we were to use this brief example, that's how many would be blocked from commenting in general. Doing so, would cause severe backlash from the more saltier and hardheaded non-rule reading users, and blah blah blah.

 

My point is, regardless of the active user-base total, Jesse still has to consider the site's reputation and manage the more critical changes to the site, all the while satisfying the majority of the site's common users with somewhat strict, yet still fair rules so there's no exclusion or bias on the actions of a minority of users. To put it all in perspective, out of the actions of 0.02% of the site's more... rule-breaking tendencies, all users of that tier would be punished for their actions altogether.

 

* I may have gotten my math mixed up somewhere, I'm not sure, I'm doing the calculations at 2am, and haven't done much math-related stuff involving percentages in a few years.

Edited by MangoStarco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, [IKEA] Jurassic said:

One possible way to reduce spam comments on raffles is to change the rules a little to include that comments on raffles shouldn't be spam. Example, "I hope I win" is a spam comment, because it doesn't contribute to general discussions. A better thing to say is, "Thank you *insert raffler name here* for such a good raffle, I wish everyone luck". 

Definitely agree. If restricting grey users from commenting would be too harsh, then perhaps encouraging users to comment positively would be a lot better. To be completely honest, I reckon no grey user has a bad intention when commenting "I hope I win". So by informing these users that commenting without contributing to the discussion, commenting spammy comments, etc aren't that helpful, then perhaps it'll help out with reducing the amount of spam. Something like this doesn't seem too harsh, and doesn't seem to risk any backlash occuring?

 

Perhaps this could be implemented by having a message appear every time a grey user clicks on the commenting box, informing about not doing spam comments, with an example, etc. Until the grey user becomes a blue user, then the message will stop appearing. Once again, the message will let the user know what to and what not to comment because I'm sure barely any of them know that such comments are really spammy and not helpful. With this information tip, there should be (in theory) less spammy comments. Just a rough suggestion but I'm sure it can be changed around. Would this idea be alright?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Jesse said:

This has been discussed and considered many times over the years, and I still think it's too extreme. 

4oilt4nsu7.png

Implementing this would block 96% of users from commenting, and not all gray users just post spam comments.

Just out of curiosity, could you share the # of Premium+ and Super Premium users?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, MangoStarco said:

Your argument is how only a select percentage of users from that total are actually active, and even less of those actually comment.

 

Let's say for example, about... 40% of all those (!) Gray users are at least bi-daily 'active' users, and from those users, only say... 15% bother commenting, with 35% average chance of it being related to spam or whatnot.

 

40% of 1,283,921 = [about] 513,568 users

15% of 513,568 = [about] 77,035 users

35% of 77,035 =

(through very rough estimation and examples) a grand total of 26,962 spammers. 

Because 96% of all users are (!) Gray, if we were to use this brief example, that's how many would be blocked from commenting in general. Doing so, would cause severe backlash from the more saltier and hardheaded non-rule reading users, and blah blah blah.

 

My point is, regardless of the active user-base total, Jesse still has to consider the site's reputation and manage the more critical changes to the site, all the while satisfying the majority of the site's common users with somewhat strict, yet still fair rules so there's no exclusion or bias on the actions of a minority of users. To put it all in perspective, out of the actions of 0.02% of the site's more... rule-breaking tendencies, all users of that tier would be punished for their actions altogether.

 

* I may have gotten my math mixed up somewhere, I'm not sure, I'm doing the calculations at 2am, and haven't done much math-related stuff involving percentages in a few years.

you got the math very very wrong

total userbase is a 5 year long trip of collecting 1.33 million users, active userbase is those who actually use the site in given time period

in raffles (or infact in the whole site) you got about a few thousands active users daily, max

out of that 90-95% are silent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2018 at 3:57 PM, wolfie said:

well im a gray user does that mean i shouldn't have the right to comment anymore on scrap.tf? like i never spammed the "hope i win" type of comments. dunno why im grey(probably bcoz i didn't read the rules and commited against a rule without knowing) but at least i never spammed that type of comments.

Well wolfie, there is a special function to let Scrap.tf know you read the rules, you really got to pay attention (I read hard but not hard enough the first time), I , however, can't specifically tell you how to really "read" it, because that would be a violation of the rules 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/18/2018 at 5:33 PM, Rocket scientist said:

Well wolfie, there is a special function to let Scrap.tf know you read the rules, you really got to pay attention (I read hard but not hard enough the first time), I , however, can't specifically tell you how to really "read" it, because that would be a violation of the rules 

 

It seems as though I also am not capable of reading "hard enough". I've been using scrap for only six months but I use it pretty often, and I found this to be a bit weird because I'm able to comment on raffles but I still have the fabled "brainwave badge" for some reason. I went to go read them again, harder this time (as in reading every rule and the non-bolded text twice before clicking accept), but it said I already read them. Yet for some reason I still have that dreaded ! next to my name... and yes I know about the FAQ that says "'I read the rules but it still says I haven't!' That's because you didn't read them hard enough, and don't whine about how it's a bug", yet here I am complaining because I think there actually might be a bug. I left that rules tab open for a solid twenty minutes man, you gotta read it with a microscope if that's not hard enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, AnExoticPancake said:

 

It seems as though I also am not capable of reading "hard enough". I've been using scrap for only six months but I use it pretty often, and I found this to be a bit weird because I'm able to comment on raffles but I still have the fabled "brainwave badge" for some reason. I went to go read them again, harder this time (as in reading every rule and the non-bolded text twice before clicking accept), but it said I already read them. Yet for some reason I still have that dreaded ! next to my name... and yes I know about the FAQ that says "'I read the rules but it still says I haven't!' That's because you didn't read them hard enough, and don't whine about how it's a bug", yet here I am complaining because I think there actually might be a bug. I left that rules tab open for a solid twenty minutes man, you gotta read it with a microscope if that's not hard enough.

 

That kinda just shows that you haven't read the rules carefully. I know you've heard it tons of times, but when you finish reading all the rules carefully then the badge of shame will get removed from your profile. I can assure you that if you "think" there is a bug then it's not a bug, just you not reading the rules. If you know there's a bug in you still having a badge after very carefully reading through all the rules, and for sure 100% know, then contact H&S, and I mean you are 100% positive that there's a site error  because neet doesn't need any spam on the "reading the rules not working" help. I do think that's highly unlikely, however.

 

Just actually read through all the rules carefully and you'll be fine, (don't lie to yourself).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...