Now, I understand the point of this, don't get me wrong. It's to make sure nobody can impersonate a mod and whatnot etc. etc. yadda yadda, and I can understand Admin being filtered, I mean, there are only 2 of them, not counting The Almighty Ghan, but, for one thing, this can be a huge problem in usertitles as they can create misunderstandings in them; for instance, 'Moderator of your Nightmares' becomes '********* of your Nightmares' or 'Not an Admin' becomes 'Not an *****', 'Administering Sedative' becomes '*****istering Sedative', even Former Moderator becomes 'Former *********', which really, really makes it seem like something very naughty is being said. There are two things I suggest, one I'd greatly prefer over the other, but either is fine; 1st suggestion, preferred: Get rid of the censors altogether, stress in the rules (Which should be made a required read upon registration, as was discussed ages ago) that moderators/admins are ONLY people with a specific colour (Purple for Specialty mods, Light Green for chat mods, Green for Normal Mods, Red for Admins, Blue for Radio Staff) and to only take those individuals seriously in matters of moderation. Having coloured names but censored usertitles makes no sense, and it can also help separate the crooks from the wheat. 2nd suggestion, though I'd hate for this to happen, is to prompt normal users that keywords such as 'Admin', 'Administrator', and 'Moderator', cannot be used in usertitles, and make them choose another one. However, this would also prevent an ex-staff member from doing 'Former Moderator' or 'Retired Moderator/Admin' and something similar, which is... well, I'd prefer that not to happen. I like having a bit of pride in my service. Or 3rd option, you can just completely ignore this and go about your merry day like nothing was ever posted, it's your choice! Have fun, toodles. ~Saikyo
[video=youtube;pSaWuLiV4mw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSaWuLiV4mw[/video] I honestly don't mind the censors at all.
A simple 'I disagree' would suffice. No need for the tidbit at the end. It's a preventative measure, not complaining about nothing by any means; all it takes is one out-of-context usertitle and misunderstandings can happen; it's best to come up with a solution before it even becomes a problem, assuming it'd be one in the first place. So please, kindly don't say that I'm 'Complaining for the sake of complaining'. It bodes ill on my conscience.
So you want the staff to work out a solution for a problem that may or may not even become a problem now that you brought it up after all these years we've had censors for usertitles and no problem ever occured? There is no problem and there never has been, so it doesn't need a solution. What needs to be prevented? What could be out-of-context? What misunderstandings can happen from a censored usertitle? I honestly think MORE misunderstandings will happen if people will be allowed to have "moderator" or "admin" in their usertitles for whatever reason they think is necessary.
As I recall, it's been an issue before, albeit a veeeery small one. Frankly, if what you're afraid of is misunderstandings on both sides, option 2 suits best, but that limits creativity. Instead of saying 'It's not a problem why are you doing this' try to see how it could become one. You of all people know how some people (teehee) like to take things out of proportion and make hasty actions and/or consequences. To prevent problems before they start is the goal of pretty much everything. If you allow problems to happen and only try to find solutions for them when they appear, you'll soon be swamped, no matter how minor. Things can get out of hand really quickly, even if something seems insignificant at first. That's kinda what I'm trying to avoid here. I'm not saying that things HAVE to be done; that's why I put down suggestions, not 'Here is what you should do.' I don't know why I put this in the complaint box actually. I meant to put this in normal site discussion.
I don't see how it could even become a problem. As for former staff members wanting to make people aware of their service to the site, the word "staff" isn't censored.
There shouldn't be any misunderstanding. Don't use those words in the title. If they see stars, obviously it should tell that individual that they should pick something else. It is. There's a link above the I agree checkbox when you register. It literally says "I have read, and agree to abide by the Everypony forum rules. *checkbox*" You click that, we assume you read them.
This is assuming that everyone who joins is going to: 1. Notice 2. Have the capacity to understand that they shouldn't be using them. I'm talkin' forced redirect. To a lot of people, the rules are like the Terms of Service; they don't read 'em because they're just mumbo-jumbo. At least if it's a forced read, they can't claim ignorance. Not like it's an excuse, but still. Like I said, folks, I ain't saying it has to be done, I'm just giving potential solutions to something that may, or may not, become a problem in the future. The nature of this thing may have been skewed by this being put in the complaint box when I meant to put it in ordinary little Site Discussion. That's my bad. Not trying to start anything here.
The size of this problem is like adding an extra centimetre to a step. Most people will ignore it, but very rarely some might trip on the extra bit. That doesn't mean the step needs to be redesigned. It just means people need to be more observant. As for the rule reading on registration (though off topic), all a forced redirect will do is add another step to ignore. If people don't read the rules the first time, they're not going to the second. We have never allowed 'not reading the rules' to be an excuse and an extra chance to read and/or ignore it just means there's even less reason for us to allow the excuse. Other than that there's no real way to force someone to read the rules except make a password to complete your registration out of various words in the paragraphs, something I know no one would like. This isn't a problem, it's an inconvenience at best. I hope I don't come off high and mighty or disrespectful, but there's a perspective to keep. Nothing is going to be perfect, and while it's nice to try, some things you have to let go to look at the bigger picture.
1. Why wouldn't they notice it if it's above their name on every post they make? Plus they can see it right away when they click save. 2. Draw an inference? That's essentially the same thing as making people scroll to the bottom of software TOS. It doesn't prevent ignorance in any way. You click the button, it's assumed you read that 'mumbo jumbo'. In the end, it's on you.
Didn't really think about it that way. As usual. Don't worry about seeming high and mighty, I know that isn't your intent, and I personally don't see it that way anyway. With this in that perspective, it does seem to be, at most, a small inconvenience, so to hell with it I suppose. I suppose if it does need to be addressed, someone else can do it better than I can should it be a problem. Baby steps...
