Ask a mod

[j w 0]

A bug in "NK Nuclear tests"-thread:

JW

http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif' alt='smile_o.gif'>

[ralphwiggum 6]

Taken care of

[Commando84 0]

will you guys put up a mission making thread in the arma section of the forums also? And how about screenshot thread in general? will it be for arma screens too?

[shadow 6]

Arma will have pretty much the same set of sub-forums OFP has.

[mp_phonix 0]

It's not that related to the forum rules but I wanted to ask why if the BI forunms URL so long ? couldn't it be something like

www.flashpoint1985.com/forums.php [or any other extinsion]

?

{i'm not complaning, just think a shorter url with be more comfortable]

[j w 0]

IkonBoard forums is not a PHP-system, works in another way, therefore the long URL is probably needed.

AFAIK, forums could be reached by http://forums.bistudio.com or http://forums.flashpoint1985.com, but it was taken away.

Meanwhile, I'd suggest you to put the forum firstpage into your bookmarks, and it'll all work out nicely

[Placebo 28]

forums.bistudio.com was broken during the attempted upgrade, a search would have found the answer.

I made a mini URL for to access the ArmA forums directly: http://www.armedassault.com/Forums/2006

[j w 0]

If you still have the subdomain "forums" why not put a page that says;

"Redirecting to forums, or click here of you do not wish to wait."

And then it sends you to the forums after 5seconds...

Could it work?

JW

[shadow 6]

If you still have the subdomain "forums" why not put a page that says;

"Redirecting to forums, or click <a href="#" target="_blank">here</a> of you do not wish to wait."

And then it sends you to the forums after 5seconds...

Could it work?

JW

Because the new forum which isnt finished yet is there

[shadow 6]

test

If you want to test-post then you can PM yourself instead of posting on the boards  

[Placebo 28]

That was me testing his account

[Balschoiw 0]

OMG you can remote an account ?

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

Yep, so if I ever say anything stupid... You know it MUST be one of the mods playing around

[Journeyman 0]

Yep, so if I ever say anything stupid... You know it MUST be one of the mods playing around

Yep, and got absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with  

[PainDealer 0]

not that this would be any of my business but this really made me think (that's not normal, or even possible at most times). the starter of the skull thread below got a straight ban for posting pictures of BONES. what if someone visited a museum with egyptian mummies and wants to share the pics he took with us, would rule 5 get him banned as well?

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

not that this would be any of my business but this really made me think (that's not normal, or even possible at most times). the starter of the skull thread below got a straight ban for posting pictures of BONES. what if someone visited a museum with egyptian mummies and wants to share the pics he took with us, would rule 5 get him banned as well?

Moderating decisions are not discussed in public. If you have questions, feel free to PM me.

[PainDealer 0]

As you might have noticed we have revised the current forum rules. If you have any questions about the new rules, post them in this thread and we'll try to answer them to the best of our abilities.

what does this mean then?

ok I won't bother you guys anymore, it's just me being silly/curious again

[j w 0]

It simply means that this thread was created due to the big change in rules back when this thread was started (I was not forum member then yet, so I don't really know when).

This thread was mainly created for the reason to discuss those rules, but has slowly changed into a Ask a mod-thread (duh, I know that the threads name already is that ) where we can ask the most stuff about the forum instead of creating new threads each time.

Atleast that's what I think it is, maybe there is an evil plan behind the thread.

Ey, placebo?

JW

[Placebo 28]

It means we're happy to discuss the rules themselves for the purpose of clarifying any issues but we don't discuss in public actual moderating decisions.

[Heatseeker 0]

not that this would be any of my business but this really made me think (that's not normal, or even possible at most times). the starter of the skull thread below got a straight ban for posting pictures of BONES. what if someone visited a museum with egyptian mummies and wants to share the pics he took with us, would rule 5 get him banned as well?

Moderating decisions are not discussed in public. If you have questions, feel free to PM me.

This got me thinking too. (about the rules and not moderating decisions), someone could post pictures of ancient mummies or bone fragments found in archeological dig sites without realising that they could be breaking the forum rules, an old skull or some other bone fragments with no blood or flesh in it?

Stuff that can be found in movies with a low gore/violence rating i guess, shouldnt be enough reason to give a user the ultimate punishment (ban)?

Where does one cross the line here?

[Journeyman 0]

Yep agreed! Was the poster even aware that rules were being broken? This is quite different from malicious spamming or deliberately using the forum for redirecting to other sites etc. that would be different IMO. But a grey area like whether a photo is potentially offensive or not?

Is this a banning offence in itself or does it depend on a posters history/past warnings? Clarification would be useful for all those now hesitating about posting other material!  

[JdB 151]

Yep agreed! Was the poster even aware that rules were being broken? This is quite different from malicious spamming or deliberately using the forum for redirecting to other sites etc. that would be different IMO. But a grey area like whether a photo is potentially offensive or not?

I have often heard the remark "Since you are new here, you might want to read the forum rules" or "Please read the forum rules to prevent actions being taken against you in the future" etc.

You can never really tell whether someone is: A. Unaware of the existence of the rules, B. Unaware of violating a rule (if the rules were to be fully written down it would more resemble/weigh the laws of any developed country), C. Doesn't care about the rules. Moderating is most of the times making a calculated guess.

[-TheOne- 0]

Err, I hope this is the right spot, but could an admin/mod change my nick into MehMan, instead of [TheOne]?

[j w 0]

They can't change nicks, but you can register the new one, PM a moderator, and they'll lock your old user, and transfer postcount to new one.

JW

P.S. Just for safety-reasons, PM a moderator first with a heads-up

[-TheOne- 0]

Ok dokey, thank you!