You are not logged in. Please login or register.
AudioGames.net Forum → Site and forum feedback → A new forum was added just for trash?
I can’t find anything on the forum that explains when this was added, or why. I just noticed it while scrolling, so I’d like more information please. There obviously is a lot of spam, but why not just delete it? Why is it in a separate place now? I would like to know which administrator added this, and their thoughts as to what was intended. Usually there would be a post about it in the news section or the site and forum feedback.
Wait let me get this straight, does this mean we'll be able to eventually delete our own topics, therefore it will end up in the trash forum? If that's not the case, then why bring a dedicated form just for spam topics when all of this can be removed at once, unless someone has already implemented an automatic garbage collector for the entirety of the forum
Over the last couple of weeks, a few people created literally thousands of duplicate troll topics, so they couldn't delete it one by one without it taking forever, so the "trash" room was intended to keep them out of other rooms.
I can't state this definitively but it may be easier with the current software to move multiple topics, as oppose to just deleting them.
Your guess is as good as mine as to what they want to do with it in the long term.
From what I can tell, it's Sendermen who came up with the idea. I also don't have a definitive answer, and yet as staff, we should. There wasn't anything about it in staff communication channels.
Perhaps this will all be revealed in time? This is strange.
@4: Great, now even part of the staff team doesn't know what the hell is going on here. Sorry but this is no way any staff member of a website should act.
From what I understood... A bunch of spam topics were made and that was a good place to put them since they can't mass delete topics by a user, only by forum.
@7: I do get why this was necessary, but Sendermen should have said something about it publically (that's what the changelog sticky topic is for, after all).
@Cornettoking There is really no need to make a fuss about every single small item. He in fact did say something about it. Post 48 at https://forum.audiogames.net/topic/5133 … ng/page/2/
Sticky, Closed: Changelog - Changes to the site
2023-08-10 13:42:49
by cartertemm
@6/@9:
I completely agree. I took a quick browse through your post history, and, yeah - if you wonder why the mods of this place seem inactive, it's because of entitled little rants like these. If you smell shit, and it seems to follow you around, then maybe take a look at your shoes. Maybe go to one of those sensory deprivation tanks, I've heard they're good for calming down
@12: Before getting on the offensive, I'd suggest you read post 4 again. As Aaron said, the staff wasn't informed. And am I seriously supposed to read every post in every topic in this place? And why do these posts make me entitled exactly? I just make a sarcastic (you'll probabbly need to google that) comment about not even the staff knowing what's going on here. Makes me think: Maybe entitled isn't even the right word and that's just the only insult you know from reading posts on this forum?
Sorry for the double post, but @10: As someone else said, the last post in that topic was in October 2023. Not exactly a long time ago.
You don't have to read every post, but then you also don't have to complain about everything either.
Like, oh god, they came up with a temporary room to quickly filter spam until a better solution is found, how dare they before they first spend months asking the community what they think.
@13, the community as a whole was informed in the relevant topic discussing it. So what's the big deal? It's not like this was some big major thing that he did. It's a quick and simple solution to a problem that could have literally spelt the end of the forum. AT this point just about any thread I see you in I can assume with 99% certainty it'll be you ranting and raving about non-issues or things that have already been addressed or solved.
@15: Okay, since you apparently can't read, I'll say it again: I have no problem with the "trash" room, but since I only relied on post 4, which said: "...I also don't have a definitive answer, and yet as staff, we should. There wasn't anything about it in staff communication channels.", I came to the conclusion there wasn't enough transparency.
Yes, I should have probabbly checked the relevant topic, but that's no reason for people like @15 or primarily @12 to come at me like this.
@Cornettoking Seems like the people who should complain about not enough transparency are the people who are a part of that communications channel, if they feel like it.
@18: Since he said there was nothing about it in the staff communication channels, I assumed there was nothing on the public forum either.
Why are we splitting hairs? Semantics, folks. Who gives a shit who said what or why? We now have a trash room. It is a way to cut down on the spam around this place. If it helps, I for one think it's good to have. If it turns out to be a waste of time, it needs to go. A trash room just seems like an experiment to me.
The answer is yes, this room was a method to filter spam as moving is quicker than deleting. After discovering the moderate forum button things aren't as bad, but it is still quicker to move over delete. Topic deletion takes approximately one minute per operation to complete. Movement is less than a second to complete an operation.
OK, so let me clear the air.
I'm guilty of this one myself too, going to the forum before the staff. The public topic was the first place I learned about it. What I mean is, there was no heads up/pre-warning on staff channels that this was going to happen, so I woke up to the same conversation the previous evening only to go to the topic to see how things were going over there and learn about a whole new area of the forum. I then broke the news on the staff channels.
AudioGames.net Forum → Site and forum feedback → A new forum was added just for trash?
Generated in 0.019 seconds (58% PHP - 42% DB) with 9 queries
