</Marked for Modification>

[Mehmani]

Good evening. Well, it's evening here in London anyway. After clicking this thread - go and check the Comments & Suggestions section. You'll find a thread there on RC Advanced Clause. It is still in early stages and the details are quite sketchy, but the rough outline is as follows:

- Minimum of four sentences
- Each a minimum of twelve words
- Each much must make a meaningful point (?) or sufficiently reiterate a previous point
- If someone else has already posted what you were thinking, you may quote their post. However, you must provide a minimum of two twelve-word sentences stating why you agree and building upon what they say.
- If someone else has posted comments about the card you disagree with, you may quote their post and provide a minimum of two twelve-word sentences stating why you disagree and how you would comment.

What do you think? How can we improve on this? Are you in favour of an RC Advanced Clause? What impact on the standards of the section might it have?

I'm going to bed now - in the morning I expect to see some feedback. Good night ;D

[Althemia]

I'm all for a testing period, as long as no other moderators from outside of the section(s) which this will affect decide to tamper with the rules. If they do, chances are that no-one shall have the correct amount of knowledge required to participate in the entire test.

Also, could you not just make the last bullet point the same for disagreements? Seeing as how this will help to establish debating skills throughout RC and might actually make some sufficient discussion appear.

[Welche the crab]

While I was the instigator of this idea, it has recently been brought to my attention that last time a major comment reform policy came into effect, there was a case of over enforcing. Thus I will advocate now for this to be a guideline that isn't TOO strictly enforced if there is a reasonable reason for the post being too short.

[Mehmani]

[quote name='-Tsubaki-' timestamp='1321062524' post='5633950']
I'm all for a testing period, as long as no other moderators from outside of the section(s) which this will affect decide to tamper with the rules. If they do, chances are that no-one shall have the correct amount of knowledge required to participate in the entire test.

Also, could you not just make the last bullet point the same for disagreements? Seeing as how this will help to establish debating skills throughout RC and might actually make some sufficient discussion appear.
[/quote]

Moderators from other sections won't have a direct say in how RC is run. I have too much pride to let that happen. However, PikaPerson01 has done a sterling job fixing up TCG and Rinne's finest hour was introducing the Advanced Clause in Role-Playing. We should learn from their experiences and take advice, but I assure you that there will not be any hi-jacking of CC by moderators of other section.

As for the disagreement over quotes points, that's an excellent idea. I'm adding it immediately.
[quote name='Welche' timestamp='1321069958' post='5634190']
While I was the instigator of this idea, it has recently been brought to my attention that last time a major comment reform policy came into effect, there was a case of over enforcing. Thus I will advocate now for this to be a guideline that isn't TOO strictly enforced if there is a reasonable reason for the post being too short.
[/quote]

You can still enforce rules and make exceptions provided there is a good reason. We aren't stupid. If your house was burgled by an armed robber and you killed him in a scuffle, you break the law but you won't be punished because there was a reason - in that case, your life was in danger and you fought to stay alive. It is perfectly possible to enforce this Advanced Clause and not end up warning everyone who bumps their thread. Moderators aren't stupid machines. We don't moderate in a mechanical way. We adapt to fit every situation we face. I understand your cause for concern, but I can assure you that such a scenario is not going to happen.

[DARKPLANT RISING]

So basically, tl;dr Bumping threads is okay, right?

In that case I agree by all means. All of MY posts in RC are like that from the start, and I'd love to watch ragnarok burn.

That plus, it's probably a good idea to kill the spam that's going on in here.

[Mehmani]

[quote name='Darkplant - FEAR' timestamp='1321096507' post='5634478']
So basically, tl;dr Bumping threads is okay, right? [b]Yes.[/b]

In that case I agree by all means. All of MY posts in RC are like that from the start, and I'd love to watch ragnarok burn. [b]As would I.[/b]

That plus, it's probably a good idea to kill the spam that's going on in here. [b]That's the aim of the project - to improve the environment and quality of reviews. My theory (the theory that got me this job, in fact) is that with better reviews come better cards; better cards means more activity and a better place. Showcase was a pretty poor place until the standards of booster production went up. It became more active and there was more incentive to post there. I'm hoping that the same will happen to CC.[/b]
[/quote]

[DARKPLANT RISING]

trudat.

[Master White]

Well, so lets say all you got is going to say something like, I like this card and would like to see more if you have thought of it? Or are we supposed just pm it...If so, then we'll be seeing a lot more people in the RC just looking and not posting as of this new advance clause not allowing them to specifically speak their mind....Really, isn't that what a forum is to do, is speak their mind....

I understand that without there is a lot of spam, but I don't see at all anymore, not in this area as b/c it is more dead then anything....Really, instead of making more rules, you should be trying to advertise more things....

Also, here is a little thing....

Rulebreaker child: Destroys everything in his dads room
Dad grounds him
Rulebreaker child: Gets even more mad, destroys his moms room

or

Guy gets stopped by the cop for speeding, gives him a warning, whats that person going to do?

C). Sometimes be a good Citizen and not speed
D). Still speed as he can get away with it

The answer not lye in adding more laws, America has already proven that, as adding more laws makes more people become law bandits, [b]it lyes within the people.....[/b]

Its the old saying, new laws is not going to hold them back, its going to make them do more.....

So, really, I wouldn't care, but I'm just going to say this, its not going to do anything but make more people becomre rule breakers and kicked out of the forum for just speaking their mind, gee, so right now Welche would be kicked out b/c he's now following the RC rule, POST Realistic and Balanced cards, as this thread was more an advertisement then a card....

Hope my points count as more adversely they probably won't or are different and the people on here just think there idea is more better no matter what the case....Mine is not the best, but its not entirely wrong either....

Think about it, if you got a cookie, then tossed it on the ground, got grounded, would you want to do it again b/c you know the consequences would just be the same, and even not, you'd still want do it....

[Mehmani]

[quote name='White Archaic Dæmon' timestamp='1321136386' post='5635682']
Well, so lets say all you got is going to say something like, I like this card and would like to see more if you have thought of it? Or are we supposed just pm it...If so, then we'll be seeing a lot more people in the RC just looking and not posting as of this new advance clause not allowing them to specifically speak their mind....Really, isn't that what a forum is to do, is speak their mind.... [b]This clause doesn't say you can't do anything, it merely says what you can do. If what is in your mind is "nice card, make more", then perhaps you could provide some genuinely useful advice instead of a mindless +1 post count? You are acting as if the Advanced Clause is a gagging order.[/b]

I understand that without there is a lot of spam, but I don't see at all anymore, not in this area as b/c it is more dead then anything....Really, instead of making more rules, you should be trying to advertise more things....[b]RC is not dead. How can you possibly say that one of the most active sections on the site is "more dead than anything"? Most new threads only last a couple of days.[/b]

Also, here is a little thing....

Rulebreaker child: Destroys everything in his dads room
Dad grounds him
Rulebreaker child: Gets even more mad, destroys his moms room
[b]Child has clear anger management issues.[/b]

or

Guy gets stopped by the cop for speeding, gives him a warning, whats that person going to do?

C). Sometimes be a good Citizen and not speed
D). Still speed as he can get away with it

[b]You are basically saying that if AC is implemented, all people will do is try to get around it. Well, this is impossible to get around. If you ignore the guidelines, we warn you and then punish you. Simple as.[/b]
The answer not lye in adding more laws, America has already proven that, as adding more laws makes more people become law bandits, [b]it lyes within the people.....[b]And might one add that "the people" are reflected entirely through what you post. If we change the way posting is done, we change people.[/b][/b]

Its the old saying, new laws is not going to hold them back, its going to make them do more.....

So, really, I wouldn't care, but I'm just going to say this, its not going to do anything but make more people becomre rule breakers and kicked out of the forum for just speaking their mind, gee, so right now Welche would be kicked out b/c he's now following the RC rule, POST Realistic and Balanced cards, as this thread was more an advertisement then a card....[b]You are really, really single-minded and selective here. Did you bother to read anything I posted previously in this thread? Do you understand basic human psychology? Moderators adapt to fit every situation they face separately. We aren't going to ban people for speaking their mind. This is the internet, not China.[/b]

Hope my points count as more adversely they probably won't or are different and the people on here just think there idea is more better no matter what the case....Mine is not the best, but its not entirely wrong either....[b]Oh, you poor tortured soul, a martyr to your revolutionary ideas.[/b]

Think about it, if you got a cookie, then tossed it on the ground, got grounded, would you want to do it again b/c you know the consequences would just be the same, and even not, you'd still want do it....[b]You've lost me here.[/b]
[/quote]

[.Rai]

Basically, love the idea, but I'm pretty certain RC will lose a lot of activity.

ragnarok, despite everyone hating him, is one of the very few posters there.

Everyone else has a generically short comment.

So, how to fix activity?

[Althemia]

[quote name='Cursed Reaction' timestamp='1321137458' post='5635736']
Basically, love the idea, but I'm pretty certain RC will lose a lot of activity.

ragnarok, despite everyone hating him, is one of the very few posters there.

Everyone else has a generically short comment.

So, how to fix activity?
[/quote]

Promote for the TCG crowd to try and help here? Also, I'd like to at least add a minimum line limit to the first post. So that you can detail how a (custom) archetype is played or so you can describe how a card would fit into certain decks or change the meta game.

[Master White]

[quote name='Dт. Михаи́л Ботви́нник PчD' timestamp='1321137140' post='5635722']

[b]You are basically saying that if AC is implemented, all people will do is try to get around it. Well, this is impossible to get around. If you ignore the guidelines, we warn you and then punish you. Simple as.[/b]

Wrong....And even if you warn and punish them, it won't help, they'll keep doing it, oh look, its a warn, I'll do it again...Then once they get banned, they'll come back with different name and etc and start all over, so in essence, all this would do is make double accounts numerous times....

[b]The answer not lye in adding more laws, America has already proven that, as adding more laws makes more people become law bandits, it lyes within the people.....And might one add that "the people" are reflected entirely through what you post. If we change the way posting is done, we change people.[/b]

No, it won't, again, to change a person's mind one has to see that persons mind and act on it, and then make them think it was there own idea...Because everyone has one thing in common, that is, "That there idea is better and no one will change it"
[/quote]

Ugh, I should of known, more people on here think there idea is the way to go when its going to be there downfall....Well, when this falls, its alright....B/c i'll be in RL enjoying earth while it still lasts....If it does that is the way the world is now.....

[Ieyasu Tokugawa]

[quote name='White Archaic Dæmon' timestamp='1321138723' post='5635786']
Ugh, I should of known, more people on here think there idea is the way to go when its going to be there downfall....Well, when this falls, its alright....B/c i'll be in RL enjoying earth while it still lasts....If it does that is the way the world is now.....
[/quote]
Well you lost me.

I do think that the guidelines are a bit strict, but it's in testing and I have no real ideas to "fix" it so go ahead.

[Master White]

Good evening. Well, it's evening here in London anyway. After clicking this thread - go and check the Comments & Suggestions section. You'll find a thread there on RC Advanced Clause. It is still in early stages and the details are quite sketchy, but the rough outline is as follows:

- Minimum of four sentences-[b]Fine[/b]
- Each a minimum of twelve words[b]-Fine[/b]
- Each much must make a meaningful point (?) or sufficiently reiterate a previous point[b]-Fine[/b]
-[b]List Things that count:[/b]
[b]A. Example: Well, this card is very well thought out and I'd sure like to see some more..blah blah[/b]
[b]B. Example 1: Well, I see some issues within the card..First, I see...blah blah[/b]
[b]-List things that don't count[/b]
A. Great Card, 8/10
B. Fail Card, 0/10000
C. Etc.....
- If someone else has already posted what you were thinking, you may quote their post. However, you must provide a minimum of two twelve-word sentences stating why you agree and building upon what they say.

[b]Yea, this one is really going to get a lot of older members plus newer ones...I've seen lots of 5 star members post one sentence....Its a very viable idea, but I'm just going to say you are going to lose people....[/b]

- If someone else has posted comments about the card you disagree with, you may quote their post and provide a minimum of two twelve-word sentences stating why you disagree and how you would comment.

[b]This one is fine, as it is viable in its own way...[/b]
[/code]

That is my suggestion, take it or leave it, edit, but as what I'm saying, I thought RC was okay as it is, as I've hardly seen any spammers or spam bots in a 3 months.....

I know its to better it, but why make something better when it was alright in the begin with?

[Northern Sage]

...One small thing bothers me here. If you happen to have one or several sentences where it's not quite twelve words and you still post something constructive, should you get punished for that?
Chances are, more threads will wither just because no one can post good (enough) feedback, which would be counter-productive and against exactly what this clause is trying to promote, [i]namely making people get better at card making[/i]. Continuing problem would possibly lead to the entire section dying.
Sorry, felt like being a devil's advocate here.
...Or maybe I'm just completely wrong and will be shot down by [s]TCG[/s] people. In that case, please do.

[This Account is Unplayable]

[quote name='-Tsubaki-' timestamp='1321137631' post='5635747']
Promote for the TCG crowd to try and help here? Also, I'd like to at least add a minimum line limit to the first post. So that you can detail how a (custom) archetype is played or so you can describe how a card would fit into certain decks or change the meta game.
[/quote]
This, along with saying that this should definitely be tested sums up my thoughts pretty much entirely.

The entire theory behind this would be something to bring RC out of the hell-hole it currently is most of the time.

[Sander]

[quote name='White Archaic Dæmon' timestamp='1321139908' post='5635854']
- If someone else has already posted what you were thinking, you may quote their post. However, you must provide a minimum of two twelve-word sentences stating why you agree and building upon what they say.

[b]Yea, this one is really going to get a lot of older members plus newer ones...I've seen lots of 5 star members post one sentence....Its a very viable idea, but I'm just going to say you are going to lose people....[/b][/quote]


It's worth losing people that aren't willing to put work into their posts and make them into good comments. Quality over quantity.

[quote name='White Archaic Dæmon' timestamp='1321139908' post='5635854']
That is my suggestion, take it or leave it, edit, but as what I'm saying, I thought RC was okay as it is, as I've hardly seen any spammers or spam bots in a 3 months.....

I know its to better it, but why make something better when it was alright in the begin with?
[/quote]

You want to know why AC was introduced to RC? Because RC isn't all [i]fine and dandy[/i] as make it out to be. There are a lot of people posting useless comments, mostly not constructive at all, and most of the time, these people don't even know what they're talking about.

[quote name='White Archaic Dæmon' timestamp='1321139908' post='5635854']
I know its to better it, but why make something better when it was alright in the begin with?
[/quote]

Why settle with somethings "good" form when you can improve it? People ALWAYS strive to improve everything and yet, you're complaining about AC, the very thing that's designed to make RC better.

Really, this was predictable. Some person doesn't want to put work into their comments and starts whining that AC shouldn't be introduced to RC, since all of that happened when AC was introduced into RP.

[Northern Sage]

To further my point, there has been a notable aversion towards posting in any topic where there isn't someone doing something radical (e.g. making god cards) or a well-known member posting it or both. (Or at least minimal posting generally). My firm belief is that any feedback the creator can work with is good feedback.

[Althemia]

[quote name='Clear Vice Dragon' timestamp='1321144337' post='5636112']
To further my point, there has been a notable aversion towards posting in any topic where there isn't someone doing something radical (e.g. making god cards) or a well-known member posting it or both. (Or at least minimal posting generally). My firm belief is that any feedback the creator can work with is good feedback.
[/quote]

I'm a well-known member yet I never get any feedback on my cards. Care to explain?

[Northern Sage]

[quote name='-Tsubaki-' timestamp='1321144400' post='5636114']
I'm a well-known member yet I never get any feedback on my cards. Care to explain?
[/quote]
Of course I can explain, I am the god of the Internet who knows everything (/sarcasm mode).
No seriously, what kind of question is that? What should I respond to that kind of question? I'm a 4-star member on a site, not an expert psychologist who has good understanding of the entire thing.
Also, that wasn't the point of my post.

[Althemia]

[quote name='Clear Vice Dragon' timestamp='1321145114' post='5636158']
Of course I can explain, I am the god of the Internet who knows everything (/sarcasm mode).
No seriously, what kind of question is that? What should I respond to that kind of question? I'm a 4-star member on a site, not an expert psychologist who has good understanding of the entire thing.
Also, that wasn't the point of my post.
[/quote]

Yet you are supposed to be one who can back up your argument when trying to make a point. However, since you have proved little to no evidence as to why I get no comments, you have proved your own point invalid through lack of confirmation.

[Ieyasu Tokugawa]

[quote name='Clear Vice Dragon' timestamp='1321144337' post='5636112']
To further my point, there has been a notable aversion towards posting in any topic where there isn't someone doing something radical (e.g. making god cards) or a well-known member posting it or both. (Or at least minimal posting generally). My firm belief is that any feedback the creator can work with is good feedback.
[/quote]
I've seen plenty of members posting in decent card topics. If I like a card, I post in it.

And no, I don't comment on god cards. At least not with this in place since all I really say is "Da fuq r u on?", which is probably a good thing.

[Mehmani]

Wrong....And even if you warn and punish them, it won't help, they'll keep doing it, oh look, its a warn, I'll do it again...Then once they get banned, they'll come back with different name and etc and start all over, so in essence, all this would do is make double accounts numerous times.... [b]I don't really know how to say this any other way, but you're an idiot. You don't understand basic convention on YCM. If people break the AC, they get a warning. After that, we punish them with a 3-day posting ban in CC. If they deliberately break it for malicious intent, we kick them out. There is no repeat offending when you kill the repeat offenders. It's an idea that doesn't work IRL but works perfectly on the internet. And your problem is clearly that you think of RC as a microcosm of real society, which it isn't at all.[/b]

No, it won't, again, to change a person's mind one has to see that persons mind and act on it, and then make them think it was there own idea...Because everyone has one thing in common, that is, "That there idea is better and no one will change it" [b]Again, you take what I am saying and apply it to real life. YCM does not deal with direct person to person contact. Unlike RL, on YCM you get a chance to consider your ideas in detail before you post them. You can't read body language. Here, putting a filter on what people can say is absolute. IRL, bans on words are easily broken. You also seem to think that everyone is as single-minded as you. The truth is that the vast majority of people are willing to adapt their ideas to fit situations. That's why this thread exists.[/b]

[b]If you need any more confirmation of this, go and look back at what people said in Role-Playing when they introduced Advanced Clause there. It's exactly the same.[/b]

[Icy]

It is vital to know, that said restriction is removed for a user once they have posted the required limit on said topic. And gained again when posting in another topic. So you just have to post your first post proper, after that you are free to discuss freely and as you please in that topic (within common sense and within the rules with some degree of relaxedness because of the obvious effort involved for most users). As well as anyone under 300 posts or been here for 1 month, whichever is more beneficial to the user, will be reduced to only needing to post just 3 points and 1 personal remark, without any sentence requirements.

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

A problem I see, is that it's possible to post constructive things, with less than 4 sentences of 12 words apiece. I can see people trying to comment but not being able to come up with a forth sentence and giving up and not posting. I think this may be a bit too much to be asking. Also remember that many members are middle-high schoolers. This makes posting seem like one of those dreaded report papers.