=Discussion= So I've noticed a Loophole in one of my Rules

[Guest JoshIcy]

No I'm not stickying this one like I do them all. The current sticky slots are full (4 maximum).

 

Ive noticed that despite my best efforts to keep bland and ignorant posts down (such as the crazy tightness of a specific rule that was always there). There is a slight loophole that's getting to me.

 

And that's that people put the bare minimum on what they can about a card, and merely comment on OCG only, resulting in very little direction for every cardmaker here.

 

Their effects ultimately suffer due to the strain on this whole OCG garbage since they care so much about how people see their wording, and balance also takes a relative beating due to fallacies in card design that have no merit whatsoever.

 

Now... I've got 2 solutions that should end it unless people want to step up and offer another solution that solves this dillema (you must post here; any and all PM or MSN messages will be disregarded).

 

My Solution

• Option A: Automatic 50% Warning for any and all users who dodge the hole and continue as normal. Such warning will be labeled as something I havent yet figured out. Custom though. This means 2 such posts is an obvious 3-day ban no questions asked.
  
• Option B: Ignore the loophole and warn any and all posts by a single user regardless on how much warnings he/she may have and continue labeling them as +20% Mild Spamming by default.
  

 

Well... Yeah, talk it amongst yourselves. And if you don't like Option A or B, offer another alternative that solves the problem.

[Guest Zeonark]

Honestly, when I was still a somewhat beginner Card Maker, I got maybe 1 or 2 OCG only posts. I've seen a couple of OCG only posts in some other threads too. It kinda annoys me, even though I used to do it myself. And probably still do.

Why can't everyone do what Griffin does? Not care about OCG as long as it doesn't conflict with the Rulings. >_>

 

Anyway, both options aren't... good. But I can't think of anything else, so Option 2 seems a bit better. Option 1 is just asking for a quick ban.

[Eury]

About time this was taken care of...I've been waiting.

 

Now I might actually come back to RC.

 

I, personally, <3 Option A.

[Guest JoshIcy]

About time this was taken care of...I've been waiting.

 

Now I might actually come back to RC.

 

I' date=' personally, <3 Option A.

[/quote']

 

Same =3 but... Im letting this stay open to save Roxas from having to deal with it and we'll talk about it later based on everyones comments. And the fewer people comment the less choice they have to influence.

[Master White]

okay, So what are you saying exactly? Are you saying anyone that corrects the OCG gets a warning or what? I'm kind of lost.

[Guest JoshIcy]

okay' date=' So what are you saying exactly? Are you saying anyone that corrects the OCG gets a warning or what? I'm kind of lost.

[/quote']

 

Anyone who comments on JUST the OCG. And such minimal one lines based on the card are not dodging this rule, however it could be considered a loophole.

[The-Wick!]

I just didn't get it, people correcting OCG? I mean, so what's the problem? The person is helping the other how the correct form would be. If you are not up to real YGO (As the name already say, Realistic Cards) I just don't understand. If you really are in this for YGO, or if you are a mod just because of the power? This just seens odd to me.

[JG.]

I am failing to understand this...

 

EDIT: WAit, I get it... Well done Icy.

[Master White]

Okay, What are you. If you want to know more, click the spoiler and see what I think, but you will have to use goog translator, that is.

 

[spoiler=What I think you are?]

איך טראַכטן דו ביסט אַ מאַכט הונגעריק יבער מאָד אַז טאָן נישט וויסן ווען צו פאַרלאָזן זייער פּיסק פאַרמאַכן און אַקשלי לאָזן אַלעמען אין די רק און דעם פאָרום אַליין. אַזוי איך טוט מיר דאָ צו זאָגן איר אַז איר דאַרפֿן צו לערנען ווי צו אַדאַפּט אָדער נעמען זיך אַזוי ווילד אַז איר וועט פאַרבאָט פון אַלע פון רק און אפֿשר אַ ביסל מער. צי איר טאַקע וועלן אַלע די מענטשן דאָ ווילד ביי איר? אַף אַן עמעס, אויב איר ינסטרומענט אַז, איר וועט האָבן צו פאַרבאָט אַלע פון רק און עטק. אָה, אויב איר ווילט צו פאָרזעצן צו רעדן אין ווייטער רעדן, רעדן דורך פּמס בלויז, אַ דאַנק. טהאַץ ווי איך פּאָטרייַ איר רעכט איצט, אפילו כאָטש איר האָט העלפֿן מיר זיך אויף אַ ביסל טינגז וואָס האָט מינערדיקע. אַזוי פאַרבאָט מיר אויב איר ווילט, איך טאָן ניט זאָרגן. איך נייע דאָס צו מיין ציל מיילע, צו ווערן אַ לעדזשאַנדערי און האָבן אנדערע וויסן מיר. אויך, אויב דו האַס מיר פֿאַר ווערטל דעם, ווי איך טוט מיר זיכער איר וועט פאַרבאָט מיר אָדער געבן מיר אַ יינריס ווארענונג ווייַל איר טראַכטן דעם איז ספּאַממיג און אויב איר גיין פאָרויס און גייט, דאַן איר זענט ספּאַממינג אויף די אַזוי גערופֿן ספּאַם איך האָט , און זאָל באַקומען דער זעלביקער באַהאַנדלונג. האָט איר כערד פון, "טריט אנדערע דעם וועג איר ווילן צו זיין טרעאַטעד" מאַטאָו, איך האָב און איך צוקלעפּן צו אים. איך טוט מיר בעינג מיר און פּוינטינג זיך דיין גרויס פלאָ און אַלע. אויך, אויב איר גייט דאָס, דאַן גיין דורך די נייַ צאַוואָע, וווּ אויב איר באַקומען סלאַפּט, מאַך אויף אַנשטאָט פון דאָינג די אָרע פֿאַר אַ אָנקוקן, וואָס איז פאַלש. אַזוי איך האָב האָפענונג דעם קלירז איר אַלע אונדזער און וואָס צו לאָזן איר וויסן איינער מער זאַך, "פּאָווער איז דיוויאַנט אַן וועט שלינגען איר גאַנץ, אַז ס 'בייז וואָרצל געדויערט איר אין און קיינמאָל לעץ איר זיך, קיינמאָל ..."

 

 

Also, I posted in spoilers because I know that you won't click it because i saw a post that said you didn't even look because of it, and I wonder why? I hope that concludes everything.

[JG.]

Epic random spam much?

 

PS: Google doesn't havew that language.

[ProSora]

I would say A and B as in give them 20% warning with out questions, 5 times your out

[Alzeid]

Would this apply only to someone who says "Your OGC is wrong." or someone who goes and actually fixes it for the card maker? I'll assume both (or the latter):

 

If that's the case, then yes, punishment should be due. You're going to sit there reading the card's effect just to fix the "Grammar" and not the "thought"; then you're not helping the card at it's core. If you're proofreading a high school essay (yes yes, it sucks, we all know, but it's the best metaphor I got), you can fix all the grammar you want but the teacher won't care if there's not point to it right?

 

Personally, given I'm not gonna sit here and memorize the entire list of OCG "what to do", I generally comment on the effects/balance of the card(s) in question since, come on, it's what matters. I could say "Draw two cards." or "You, player activating and using this card, can pick up the top to cards of your deck and add them to your hand."; one's more preferred than the other, but they both get the point across: "Pot of Greed". (xD)

 

Then there's some out there who don't grasp "logic" too well and the OCG fixing is the most they can do. Considering that, I suggest Option A (maybe 33.33%?) but when:

 

A: a post just says "the OGC is wrong"

B: someone (pointlessly) mentions the OCG bit if someone has previously commented/suggest fixes for the card.

 

rather than punishing someone that just posts about the OCG but does provide fixes for the errors in question.

 

(I hope that makes sense, it's late. -_- Actually, I'm not even sure I understand the whole question, but maybe my thoughts can prove useful?)

 

(Oops, mixed them up. -_-

[Master White]

Epic random spam much?

 

PS: Google doesn't havew that language.

 

Actually, it does. I used google to do that language, but oh well. I tried and failed with my intention of it. It wasn't meant to be spam, but it ended up being so. Oh well.

[Guest JoshIcy]

Okay' date=' What are you. If you want to know more, click the spoiler and see what I think, but you will have to use goog translator, that is.

 

[spoiler=What I think you are?']

איך טראַכטן דו ביסט אַ מאַכט הונגעריק יבער מאָד אַז טאָן נישט וויסן ווען צו פאַרלאָזן זייער פּיסק פאַרמאַכן און אַקשלי לאָזן אַלעמען אין די רק און דעם פאָרום אַליין. אַזוי איך טוט מיר דאָ צו זאָגן איר אַז איר דאַרפֿן צו לערנען ווי צו אַדאַפּט אָדער נעמען זיך אַזוי ווילד אַז איר וועט פאַרבאָט פון אַלע פון רק און אפֿשר אַ ביסל מער. צי איר טאַקע וועלן אַלע די מענטשן דאָ ווילד ביי איר? אַף אַן עמעס, אויב איר ינסטרומענט אַז, איר וועט האָבן צו פאַרבאָט אַלע פון רק און עטק. אָה, אויב איר ווילט צו פאָרזעצן צו רעדן אין ווייטער רעדן, רעדן דורך פּמס בלויז, אַ דאַנק. טהאַץ ווי איך פּאָטרייַ איר רעכט איצט, אפילו כאָטש איר האָט העלפֿן מיר זיך אויף אַ ביסל טינגז וואָס האָט מינערדיקע. אַזוי פאַרבאָט מיר אויב איר ווילט, איך טאָן ניט זאָרגן. איך נייע דאָס צו מיין ציל מיילע, צו ווערן אַ לעדזשאַנדערי און האָבן אנדערע וויסן מיר. אויך, אויב דו האַס מיר פֿאַר ווערטל דעם, ווי איך טוט מיר זיכער איר וועט פאַרבאָט מיר אָדער געבן מיר אַ יינריס ווארענונג ווייַל איר טראַכטן דעם איז ספּאַממיג און אויב איר גיין פאָרויס און גייט, דאַן איר זענט ספּאַממינג אויף די אַזוי גערופֿן ספּאַם איך האָט , און זאָל באַקומען דער זעלביקער באַהאַנדלונג. האָט איר כערד פון, "טריט אנדערע דעם וועג איר ווילן צו זיין טרעאַטעד" מאַטאָו, איך האָב און איך צוקלעפּן צו אים. איך טוט מיר בעינג מיר און פּוינטינג זיך דיין גרויס פלאָ און אַלע. אויך, אויב איר גייט דאָס, דאַן גיין דורך די נייַ צאַוואָע, וווּ אויב איר באַקומען סלאַפּט, מאַך אויף אַנשטאָט פון דאָינג די אָרע פֿאַר אַ אָנקוקן, וואָס איז פאַלש. אַזוי איך האָב האָפענונג דעם קלירז איר אַלע אונדזער און וואָס צו לאָזן איר וויסן איינער מער זאַך, "פּאָווער איז דיוויאַנט אַן וועט שלינגען איר גאַנץ, אַז ס 'בייז וואָרצל געדויערט איר אין און קיינמאָל לעץ איר זיך, קיינמאָל ..."

 

 

Also, I posted in spoilers because I know that you won't click it because i saw a post that said you didn't even look because of it, and I wonder why? I hope that concludes everything.

 

Notice how my Sig contains 3 spoilers, while the main bit(s) are not? Yeah... You took what I meant by spoilerwhoring right out of context and applied an ignorant usage to it. I clicked it and seeing as you effectively spammed and mildly harassed me, translate it please.

 

EDIT: Apparently the language is Yiddish (Hebrew). Unfortunately the translation for major sites is choppy. You still have to translate.

[wero-vasto]

With respect:

 

The option A is just an excuse for Ban more people... so I suggest to be more restrictive with that.

 

And the option B seems better for me.

 

But then, actually, I dislike both Ideas. I mean, seems such an agressive way of resolving some problems. I agree with Zeo about Griffin's Idea of just let the OCG away unless it makes conflict with rules or can't be understand.

[Guest JoshIcy]

With respect:

 

The option A is just an excuse for Ban more people... so I suggest to be more restrictive with that.

 

And the option B seems better for me.

 

But then' date=' actually, I dislike both Ideas. I mean, seems such an agressive way of resolving some problems. I agree with Zeo about Griffin's Idea of just let the OCG away unless it makes conflict with rules or can't be understand.

[/quote']

 

As I pointed out, offer a solution then. Because there's obviously a problem and it needs to be fixed. So if you don't like A or B, offer your version of C etc.

[wero-vasto]

With respect:

 

The option A is just an excuse for Ban more people... so I suggest to be more restrictive with that.

 

And the option B seems better for me.

 

But then' date=' actually, I dislike both Ideas. I mean, seems such an agressive way of resolving some problems. I agree with Zeo about Griffin's Idea of [i']just let the OCG away unless it makes conflict with rules or can't be understand.[/i]

 

As I pointed out, offer a solution then. Because there's obviously a problem and it needs to be fixed. So if you don't like A or B, offer your version of C etc.

 

Actually, the BOLD part is the option I choose.

And the BOLD and ITALIC part is the one I offer.

 

EDIT: But if it's neccesary a punishment, I suggest that START with the 20% of Warn. Then if the posts continue, even if it is not the same person, increase the warn.

[Sephiroth_The_Legend]

well ive had a few like that..... people saying just a rating or saying "ocg is wrong" without actually pointing out any fixes whatsoever....

 

i dont know about a 50% ban though....seems a tad extreme really...

[Guest JoshIcy]

With respect:

 

The option A is just an excuse for Ban more people... so I suggest to be more restrictive with that.

 

And the option B seems better for me.

 

But then' date=' actually, I dislike both Ideas. I mean, seems such an agressive way of resolving some problems. I agree with Zeo about Griffin's Idea of [i']just let the OCG away unless it makes conflict with rules or can't be understand.[/i]

 

As I pointed out, offer a solution then. Because there's obviously a problem and it needs to be fixed. So if you don't like A or B, offer your version of C etc.

 

Actually, the BOLD part is the option I choose.

And the BOLD and ITALIC part is the one I offer.

 

EDIT: But if it's neccesary a punishment, I suggest that START with the 20% of Warn. Then if the posts continue, even if it is not the same person, increase the warn.

 

*murmurs* Eyes not working this time of night.

[Kinkorox]

I know that I, personally, comment a lot about picture and name and credit, and such and such, but I've taken to commenting on OCG and being vague. I like option A because it'll prevent comments that don't help at all.

[wero-vasto]

I know that I' date=' personally, [b']comment a lot about picture and name and credit, and such and such,[/b] but I've taken to commenting on OCG and being vague. I like option A because it'll prevent comments that don't help at all.

 

Now that the bold theme has been touched...

 

I suggest to apply this to the Pic Obly Comments =/

[Kinkorox]

I know that I' date=' personally, [b']comment a lot about picture and name and credit, and such and such,[/b] but I've taken to commenting on OCG and being vague. I like option A because it'll prevent comments that don't help at all.

 

Now that the bold theme has been touched...

 

I suggest to apply this to the Pic Obly Comments =/

 

The bad part about the internet is that it's hard to detect sarcasm.

[-Griffin]

I suggest that Realistic be closed to anyone who doesn't have good enough TCG knowledge to make deep and insightful comments about balance, because allowing people to just enjoy the section is silly and nothing less than perfection and 100% playability should be addressed.

Yes, sarcasm

[wero-vasto]

I know that I' date=' personally, [b']comment a lot about picture and name and credit, and such and such,[/b] but I've taken to commenting on OCG and being vague. I like option A because it'll prevent comments that don't help at all.

 

Now that the bold theme has been touched...

 

I suggest to apply this to the Pic Obly Comments =/

 

The bad part about the internet is that it's hard to detect sarcasm.

 

Even if it's sarcasm, I'm talking serious.

 

I suggest that Realistic be closed to anyone who doesn't have good enough TCG knowledge to make deep and insightful comments about balance' date=' because allowing people to just enjoy the section is silly and nothing less than perfection and 100% playability should be addressed.

Yes, sarcasm

 

But then, we shouldn't close the doors of the section to the people who wants to create new Ideas. WAIT...should we?

I Agree with Griffin, all people who don't know about playability should stay at AoC =/

[-Griffin]

You know, this might not be the "best" idea, but I'm going to state another possibility just to see what people think:

 

Idea

Realistic Cards is renamed to "Custom Cards" or something, and is fused with Any Other Cards. It becomes the standard place to post cards and is a relaxed, casual environment for people to make cards just for fun, without too many picky comments on playability and such.

 

Any Other Cards is renamed to... something, and becomes a more serious place where people post cards if they want them to be entirely playable and would be interested with dueling over YVD with them/ect, a section where balance and such plays a more major role and such.

 

That way, RC, the top option in the CC forum, will still attract the majority of members and people can enjoy themselves without complaining about people requiring too much knowledge of balance, but for those of us who want to play with cards from time to time and consider balance a high priority, there's somewhere for us too.