Inactive Topic Ban alliance members from using the alliance forum

DeletedUser23649

Guest
Proposal: To grant or deny players from using the alliance forum at all.

Have you Checked the DNS and PSI lists in the Archives? Is this idea similar to one that has been previously suggested?
No, considering the are 37 pages of active suggestions :(

Reason: Occasionally you get a disruptive member on the forums and there is no way to discipline him/her other than ejection from the alliance.
Having a way of banning them from the forums would provide a tool to keep players in line.
No different than any other BB board including this one.

Details: In the members tab create a new privilege to tick that would allow players to post in the forum.

Visual Aids: none, sorry.

Balance: It could cause a canned player with legitimate concerns (an attack) from posting for help, but this player always has PM or MM to fall back on.

Abuse Prevention: Restrict the use to founders.

Summary: The Founders, leaders, and FM's can't please everyone in the forums. Some players get a little excited/over-zealous and sometimes wont take no for an answer.
This solves that problem.
 

DeletedUser53365

Guest
Why do you want to keep these players in your alliance ? :)
 
Rachel.L

Rachel.L

Phrourach
i'd rather have them mouth off in the forum than cause trouble by telling secrets to the enemy
let them vent, have the alliances mods clean it up, back to business
there can be alliance punishments and if they don't behave, then kick them
if they are really bad seeds, better eat them or to get rid of them
 

DeletedUser23649

Guest
Someone mouthing off isn't necessarily a reason to kick them if they are otherwise a good player.
Just looking for leverage to force them to follow forum rules.
Rachael, what alliance punishments would you suggest?
 
Rachel.L

Rachel.L

Phrourach
well, i think it depends on what privileges they have and what your surroundings are like
wouldn't do this to a smaller player but next time someone is inactive/ leaving, the misfit can't take internals
has to only take enemy cities for a while... grow thru hard work and earn back into leaders' good graces
if someone is an op leader or has a position of power but not a founder or council member, strip them of that position until they support X number of sieges by fellow members
if you have an academy, send them there and make them earn the right back to the big leagues with good behavior
make them more team players and understand what it's like to be a little guy again
those are just a few; it really depends on your alliance structure/ size and things are run

all these keep them in the alliance but say you need to work on a few issues before you are back to your previous status
not sure if any work for you but they might give you some ideas
 

DeletedUser54886

Guest
When I had players who were completely recalcitrant... we would enact a no support rule for them... (no resources, no defence, and no help in attacks for a month) they soon learned you follow the rules and work with the team or the team doesn't work for you...

We had one player that really didn't get it and tried to give our enemies intel when he was punished... when we caught him we took all his cities except one and farmed it every day the enemy supported him for a while but we kept it up till he quit... but that was an extreme case...

Having said that, some more detailed permissions in the forums is not a bad idea... the ability set a forum to read only/ read write / edit / administer by player for each tab is not a bad concept that would be of use in managing the alliance...
 

DeletedUser54192

Guest
Well, if you want to make a certain tab just for leadership posts/announcements, the best thing to do is to lock the threads in that tab. It won't bar anyone from making new threads in that tab, but it would be simple to delete any thread not created by leadership, that was put in that tab. Of course, if you want some regular members to be able to post and some not to, then that would make it more complicated. I doubt that Grepo would let you be able to select for each forum tab, as that would require a fair bit of work, I imagine.

I have to agree with Rachel here. I think there are ways to do it without muting a player on the forum. Yes, it may be tempting, in order to avoid dealing with some of the annoying things that this player may post, but it also makes it harder for said player to communicate with the alliance during an actual emergency. Taking away privileges, such as access to internals, is a fairly easy way to hammer home a point.
 
Rachel.L

Rachel.L

Phrourach
kreeos your solution led to the player quitting and abigaill specifically said she didn't want to get rid of the members

you can already have hidden tabs for leaders to see and no one else in the alliance ("access internal forms")
and there are read only privileges already (no "forum moderator")
and if there is something you don't want changed, lock threads as kal said

my suggestions were options that kept the member in the group and let them earn their way back in
as i said, they may not work for you or your alliance but i was trying to fit abby's criteria

however, once someone feeds intel to an enemy, they are done
eat fast and don't look back
 

DeletedUser54886

Guest
I agree - softly is the best approach, but some people just don't listen and learn and some times you have to get nasty and cut them off... I was just offering a more drastic option if she needed it...
 

DeletedUser54886

Guest
Kal Gordon said:
Well, if you want to make a certain tab just for leadership posts/announcements, the best thing to do is to lock the threads in that tab. It won't bar anyone from making new threads in that tab, but it would be simple to delete any thread not created by leadership, that was put in that tab. Of course, if you want some regular members to be able to post and some not to, then that would make it more complicated. I doubt that Grepo would let you be able to select for each forum tab, as that would require a fair bit of work, I imagine.

I have to agree with Rachel here. I think there are ways to do it without muting a player on the forum. Yes, it may be tempting, in order to avoid dealing with some of the annoying things that this player may post, but it also makes it harder for said player to communicate with the alliance during an actual emergency. Taking away privileges, such as access to internals, is a fairly easy way to hammer home a point.
Click to expand...

I agree Kal, it would be a bit of work, not that much though... and it would offer a lot more options, but I also agree its not necessary, but does offer more options for control... as any IT person will tell you, granular permissions are a pain to manage, but often the best way to really control what users can do... and yes I know about locking threads and restricted forums etc... but that is all very high level permission especially if you have a large alliance...
 

DeletedUser54192

Guest
True. While I think granular permissions (never heard the term before as I don't know much about IT, so I hope I am using it right) would be nice, I highly doubt it will ever happen. 1 more level of forum use might be interesting. Not sure if they'd add it, but it would have it's uses for battle group leaders, temporary OP leaders, and any other role that you want to have a bit more permission in the forums, but not the ability to do some of the things a leader can do. It'd need a fair bit of working over, but it could be an interesting idea. I'm sure I saw a thread similar to this idea once before, so I might have a look and see how far they get.
 
Rachel.L

Rachel.L

Phrourach
understood, kreeos, and i like you proposal
was just saying it didn't fit what abby wanted
but it would really teach a lesson

another layer of permissions in the forum might be a good/ useful thing
granular permission is a pita so i wouldn't want to deal but can understand why it would be wanted

otoh, not to be a debbie downer, but we have a forum filled with ideas and asks, queries on updates from months ago, improvements needed to the app
none of these (some VERY simple) have not been implemented, fwded to dev, or answered
so i doubt this will get done
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top