[Aeolian]

Mmmmh I don't know. I don't agree to the gravedigging rules anyway.

I mean I hate gravedigging but there should be more clear rules instead of "no gravedigging allowed" in general for all topics.
I hope you guys understand that almost 99.5 % of the forum's content is locked or members can't reply on because of the gravedigging rules.

That's to prevent people from posting on old threads.

The point is so people create new topics & ideas which keeps the forum live with fresh content.

I'd be really shitty if I saw the same thread I had posted on continue being posted on for 5 months straight for example. When I log into Sinister I'm ready to post on the new things the members have created.

[Bish0pQ]

That's to prevent people from posting on old threads.

The point is so people create new topics & ideas which keeps the forum live with fresh content.

I'd be really shitty if I saw the same thread I had posted on continue being posted on for 5 months straight for example. When I log into Sinister I'm ready to post on the new things the members have created.

Of course and I understand that, all I'm trying to say is that a lot of content is getting lost like this.

For example, if there's a tool where the download link is from expired or someone found an updated method for something. Or when suggestion needs to be made for a tutorial, it would be nice if it was allowed.

Maybe there is something possible that would show today's post (like we have now, without threads 90+ days), and one category that would include those. A lot of members are missing out on content. With some gravediggers, no I do not support them fully, I actually landed on some interesting threads I didn't come across before, it's ashame if the content isn't active anymore, if a tutorial or method isn't working anymore and no one can comment on it / do suggestions, than why keep the threads? To make it "look" like we have a lot of threads.

I just don't really see the point in duplicating threads. If someone has a version of Sentry MBA 1.0.0.0 and someone has version 1.0.1.0, do they really need to create a seperate thread for that? I have seen many (halve) duplicates on sinister.li lately and I just don't know if it's the right way we should be dealing with this. Also I think it's logic that it's not allowed to reply on threads (90+ days) that are posted in "Random Discussion", "Giveaways" and things like that.

Don't get me wrong, it doesn't matter to me and I will follow the rules either way, but this was just something that crossed my mind.µ
This is purely my opinion in case someone feels offended.

[Blink]

That's to prevent people from posting on old threads.

The point is so people create new topics & ideas which keeps the forum live with fresh content.

I'd be really shitty if I saw the same thread I had posted on continue being posted on for 5 months straight for example. When I log into Sinister I'm ready to post on the new things the members have created.

Of course and I understand that, all I'm trying to say is that a lot of content is getting lost like this.

For example, if there's a tool where the download link is from expired or someone found an updated method for something. Or when suggestion needs to be made for a tutorial, it would be nice if it was allowed.

Maybe there is something possible that would show today's post (like we have now, without threads 90+ days), and one category that would include those. A lot of members are missing out on content. With some gravediggers, no I do not support them fully, I actually landed on some interesting threads I didn't come across before, it's ashame if the content isn't active anymore, if a tutorial or method isn't working anymore and no one can comment on it / do suggestions, than why keep the threads? To make it "look" like we have a lot of threads.

I just don't really see the point in duplicating threads. If someone has a version of Sentry MBA 1.0.0.0 and someone has version 1.0.1.0, do they really need to create a seperate thread for that? I have seen many (halve) duplicates on sinister.li lately and I just don't know if it's the right way we should be dealing with this. Also I think it's logic that it's not allowed to reply on threads (90+ days) that are posted in "Random Discussion", "Giveaways" and things like that.

Don't get me wrong, it doesn't matter to me and I will follow the rules either way, but this was just something that crossed my mind.µ
This is purely my opinion in case someone feels offended.

Hmm... Maybe gravedig posts can be reviewed, instead of blocking them.
But... This doesn't block them, it just makes a banner with a checkbox saying you aknowledge the rules.

[Bish0pQ]

Hmm... Maybe gravedig posts can be reviewed, instead of blocking them.
But... This doesn't block them, it just makes a banner with a checkbox saying you aknowledge the rules.

Yes of course, that's a good thing either way. I think it would make new users more alert regarding our gravedigging rules.

But you do understand what I'm trying to say right?

[Blink]

Hmm... Maybe gravedig posts can be reviewed, instead of blocking them.
But... This doesn't block them, it just makes a banner with a checkbox saying you aknowledge the rules.

Yes of course, that's a good thing either way. I think it would make new users more alert regarding our gravedigging rules.

But you do understand what I'm trying to say right?

Seems to me like you are trying to say that the rules should allow gravedigging if it is still relevant or improves the quality of the thread.

[Bish0pQ]

Hmm... Maybe gravedig posts can be reviewed, instead of blocking them.
But... This doesn't block them, it just makes a banner with a checkbox saying you aknowledge the rules.

Yes of course, that's a good thing either way. I think it would make new users more alert regarding our gravedigging rules.

But you do understand what I'm trying to say right?

Seems to me like you are trying to say that the rules should allow gravedigging if it is still relevant or improves the quality of the thread.

Yes, something like that. Don't you think a lot of content gets lost this way?

[Blink]

Yes of course, that's a good thing either way. I think it would make new users more alert regarding our gravedigging rules.

But you do understand what I'm trying to say right?

Seems to me like you are trying to say that the rules should allow gravedigging if it is still relevant or improves the quality of the thread.

Yes, something like that. Don't you think a lot of content gets lost this way?

Quite a bit, I don't think it's that important though.

[Sikom]

If I am not mistaken the rules about grave digging is that it is allowed if the content is beneficial for the thread. So I think the rules are there to stop people from saying things like "Good share" or whatever.

Also if this get's implemented we could add a setting to turn it off so you don't have to check a box. For the users that find this annoying. But no matter what I think the grave digging banner should be more clear either way.

[Oni]

I think it's a nice idea, but probably not necessary.

The people that gravedig in a negative manner, are generally dumb or silly enough to tick the box anyways.

[Sikom]

I think it's a nice idea, but probably not necessary.

The people that gravedig in a negative manner, are generally dumb or silly enough to tick the box anyways.

If you think that, then why do we have the dark box that tells us about the last time someone posted was over 90 days ago? For one, it is so hidden that it is really hard to see it. Second part, if we actually add the box then it would be harder to say stuff like "I didn't see it", and therefor the people that does it would get more easily punished for their wrong doing.