New forum rule? Maybe?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2011 6:06 AM GMT
    Since there are a lot of no-pic profiles that try to instigate drama in the forums, why not require all profiles have at least one picture uploaded before they can participate in forums? It could cut down on unwanted posting, and would make it more difficult for people to make sock accounts and immediately begin their attack.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2011 6:10 AM GMT
    This could be a good idea.

    But what about people who aren't out yet and do not want to have their picture on the forums but still want to ask questions? I suppose you could do what I once saw someone do on here. This guy had a pancake over his face.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2011 6:24 AM GMT
    It's easy as fuck to steal a face pic from the web. That potential rule has fail written all over it.
  • disasterpiece

    Posts: 2991

    Jan 20, 2011 6:26 AM GMT
    paulflexes saidIt's easy as fuck to steal a face pic from the web. That potential rule has fail written all over it.


    Then allow only verified people to post on forums ?

    I think that may be a little bit too much, but I totally agree with the idea's first purpose. That guy who just ressurected Halloween costumes thread on his first post ever convinced me.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2011 6:31 AM GMT
    What's the point? Someone can just upload a random picture. Also, there have been "verified" profiles in the past that turned out to be fake.

    I still think it's more effective to isolate newbies to a separate sub-forum. They can talk amongst themselves. And when they rack up 50 (or more) posts, they can start posting in the regular sub-forums. This prevents people from creating throw-away accounts on a whim. Now they have to put some effort into it, by hitting 50 posts before they start trolling in the regular forums. Also, add a 30 second delay between posts.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2011 7:08 AM GMT
    ...another rule? Really?...how about everyone exercising some mature restraint and intelligence about what posts your respond to! It is easy enough to tell the serious posts from the flame-bait. No one is forced to respond to ANY post or any thread.....This has not been a problem in the past for anyone except for the uncontrollably OCD members of this site....GROW UP and just figure out how to SAY NO and LEAVE IT ALONE, or maybe spend more time at the gym and less online......whatever, but no new rules! jeeze! icon_cool.gificon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2011 8:48 AM GMT
    OMG, you guys sound like bullies. Even a shilhouette could contribute something but it seems that their post recieve a lot of attention. Wouldn't it be far more effective if you just ignored these profiles?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 20, 2011 6:27 PM GMT
    Another rule? When there is already no consequences for not following the existing rules?

    From Forum Rules:

    3. Topics that are started with the intent to denigrate, belittle, or disparage another RealJock.com member, either directly named or through enough descriptive commentary to be possibly identified, are prohibited. Such topics will be deleted and may result in the banning of the original poster. This includes following another poster around in the forums, posting about past events gone sour, divulging personal information, spreading gossip or rumors, posting email exchanges between users, etc. Keep the drama off the forums.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 21, 2011 1:16 AM GMT
    ^ hey, no carry-over drama from other threads ^_~!
  • TrentGrad

    Posts: 1541

    Jan 21, 2011 2:30 AM GMT
    FearTheFall saidSince there are a lot of no-pic profiles that try to instigate drama in the forums, why not require all profiles have at least one picture uploaded before they can participate in forums? It could cut down on unwanted posting, and would make it more difficult for people to make sock accounts and immediately begin their attack.


    Sorry, but what's the difference between if you're attacked by someone with a photo, and if you're attacked by someone without a photo? Do you need to see a photo of the person in order to mount a retort?

    Moreover, given what you in particular have done with some of the photos (assuming of course you really did create the asinine "RealJock" entry on that equally asinine "Encyclopedia Dramatica" site), you must be on crack if you think that I'd ante up a photo for the "privilege" of exchanging banter with you!

    I do believe there are things that people without photos should adhere to...chief among them, making NO snide remarks about the appearance of those who have posted up photos! And I know for a fact that I have never assailed the looks of anyone on this website...something which can't be said for a good number of posters WITH photographs!

    If you really believe that the site should restrict the use of the forum only to those who have a verified photo, then take it up with whomever owns the website...and if they decide to enact that policy, then perhaps some of us who have not posted up photos will opt to do so.

    I will not be among those individuals however: I have never given anyone a hard time or pressured anyone to share that which they do not want to share, and I'll be damned if I'm going to allow myself to be bullied into providing a photo for the privilage of contributing another opinion to a forum that should, by it's vary nature, crave them!

    I may in time choose to share a photo...but I'll do it when I'm good and ready to do so!