** More stringent enforcement of forum rules will be in effect **

[jafomofo]

Only start a thread if it's your own political party. There's no logical reason to start a thread about a political party you don't belong to. It will only lead to arguments and we wouldn't want that, now would we?

this man makes a good point. There are also many legitimate reasons why people would take interest in a religion that is not their own.

[ODBM]

Wouldn't it be interesting if forum members were unable to access the R/P until reaching a post count of 50, the same way they are restricted from posting images and links until such time? Surely that would solve not only the issue of distasteful publicity, but also the trolls who love to drop by this section.

Consider it.

[boseador]

Wouldn't it be interesting if forum members were unable to access the R/P until reaching a post count of 50, the same way they are restricted from posting images and links until such time? Surely that would solve not only the issue of distasteful publicity, but also the trolls who love to drop by this section.

Consider it.

What about no reds in the R/P?

[ODBM]

What about no reds in the R/P?

As nice as that would be, I'm trying to identify with the concerns of the company rather than our own. Their concern seems to basically boil down to, "If potential customers see their race or creed being questioned on our forum, they are less likely to spend money in our store."

Reds are largely irrelevant in this particular concern, but I don't disagree with your suggestion.

[eltigar]

What about no reds in the R/P?

It would take one neg from someone like the newbie and then you would be red yourself.

[Harbinger]

It would take one neg from someone like the newbie and then you would be red yourself.

TheNewbie negs are about -125, hardly enough to make boseador red.

[anonymous]

Wouldn't it be interesting if forum members were unable to access the R/P until reaching a post count of 50, the same way they are restricted from posting images and links until such time? Surely that would solve not only the issue of distasteful publicity, but also the trolls who love to drop by this section.

Consider it.

Actually, that's not a bad idea. It would be fairly simple to do. Lol, we could even make it a member's only section and password protect it.

[SpiritFighter]

This comes from way up on high although not like it wasn't needed beforehand.

I really appreciate the help though. For as much as it may seem like it, we really don't like banning a ton.

Lol, just a little bit tho amirite?

[spadelexus]

What about no reds in the R/P?

Not a bad idea. I wonder if the forum platform they use has the ability to deny access to certain sub forums based on the users reputation power.

Getting turned red would put you in the sandbox, which could be the main misc., and there you would have to learn proper etiquette and build up enough rep power before you get permission to access the R/P..

Prolly has to be coded.

[GreatOldOne]

Actually, that's not a bad idea. It would be fairly simple to do. Lol, we could even make it a member's only section and password protect it.

You could monetize it. Make people use an order # or something as the password lol.

[HaythamKenway]

Speak for yourself.

I'm salavating at the thought of mass banning 90% of RP.

I wish I knew wtf "salavating" means.

[HaythamKenway]

Wouldn't it be interesting if forum members were unable to access the R/P until reaching a post count of 50, the same way they are restricted from posting images and links until such time? Surely that would solve not only the issue of distasteful publicity, but also the trolls who love to drop by this section.

Consider it.

That is the first time I've ever seen anyone suggest such a thing, but it makes sense. The R/P is perhaps the most inflammatory section due to obvious reasons, similarly to how the colon can be a particularly inflammatory region after eating at Chipotle.

[817TexasBrah]

Actually, that's not a bad idea. It would be fairly simple to do. Lol, we could even make it a member's only section and password protect it.

Dude, this is a great idea and I'm reccomending that dude for a big rep. Are there any downsides of preventing people with less than 50 posts from posting here?

[DizzySmalls]

Dude, this is a great idea and I'm recxomending that dude for a big rep. Are there any downsides of preventing people with less than 50 posts from posting here?

I'll play doubles advocate here

Could increase spam/tag-along posts across the entire board for people getting to 50 posts just to come here to troll.

[anonymous]

Dude, this is a great idea and I'm recxomending that dude for a big rep. Are there any downsides of preventing people with less than 50 posts from posting here?

Probably minimal. I'm also considering making this a "member's only" section or something, maybe even hide it from Google results. Let's be honest, no one will just lurk a R&P section, if you're that involved, you'll have something you just have to say. Making it more exclusive might help bring up the quality.

[DizzySmalls]

Probably minimal. I'm also considering making this a "member's only" section or something, maybe even hide it from Google results. Let's be honest, no one will just lurk a R&P section, if you're that involved, you'll have something you just have to say. Making it more exclusive might help bring up the quality.

I probably would have never found it. We get some good new posters in here from time to time, and quality posters from the past stop posting altogether. I also lurk from locations like work where I'm a bit scared to log in/post on my work computer, but not scared to simply browse the site.

Just one perspective, I like the idea of a minimum post count a whole lot better personally

[ODBM]

Dude, this is a great idea and I'm recxomending that dude for a big rep. Are there any downsides of preventing people with less than 50 posts from posting here?

Much love brah.

[boseador]

I probably would have never found it. We get some good new posters in here from time to time, and quality posters from the past stop posting altogether. I also lurk from locations like work where I'm a bit scared to log in/post on my work computer, but not scared to simply browse the site.

Just one perspective, I like the idea of a minimum post count a whole lot better personally

What about no reds in the R/P?

[anonymous]

What about no reds in the R/P?

Reputation isn't an option to determine thread access, at least not natively. Plus, I'll readily admit rep distribution is nowhere near perfect so some reds may not deserve it (a small percentage but still).

[Harbinger]

Reputation isn't an option to determine thread access, at least not natively. Plus, I'll readily admit rep distribution is nowhere near perfect so some reds may not deserve it (a small percentage but still).

What does "isn't canon" mean?

[Spartan5364]

I agree with 50 post limit to post in the R/P.
Having said that, I'm pretty sure it's the high post, high rep, R/P regulars that caused this whole ordeal in the first place

[rocker1]

Reputation isn't an option to determine thread access, at least not natively. Plus, I'll readily admit rep distribution is nowhere near perfect so some reds may not deserve it (a small percentage but still).

I can write the most benign thing such as "Obama drafted an executive decision that may have positive effect to do (the following)..." and I would receive 5 negs in an hour.

Reps have a purpose when someone gives me a good diet tip that can really be of benefit to me. It's pointless "political tribalism" in the R&P.

[DizzySmalls]

What about no reds in the R/P?

People would abuse it. High rep posters would gang up on low rep posters that have unpopular (relative to R/P) opinions. Plus, the randomness of the regular misc negging could send some legitimate posters into the perma-red for a couple of posts

[GregariousWolf]

You could monetize it. Make people use an order # or something as the password lol.

Platinum Account!

[HELIX35]

Everyone loves censorship as long as it's leaning in their direction

[Harbinger]

Everyone loves censorship as long as it's leaning in their direction

Not me!

[Iceman1800]

I agree with 50 post limit to post in the R/P.
Having said that, I'm pretty sure it's the high post, high rep, R/P regulars that caused this whole ordeal in the first place

This is correct.

[Apeus]

Probably minimal. I'm also considering making this a "member's only" section or something, maybe even hide it from Google results. Let's be honest, no one will just lurk a R&P section, if you're that involved, you'll have something you just have to say. Making it more exclusive might help bring up the quality.

A "member's only" type of thing would be really awesome.

I mean, if you don't consider the troll accounts, there's probably only like 20 of us who post here daily. And majority of us have been posting here daily literally for years.

[HaythamKenway]

Reputation isn't an option to determine thread access, at least not natively. Plus, I'll readily admit rep distribution is nowhere near perfect so some reds may not deserve it (a small percentage but still).

Thanks for realizing that. There are some good Reds out there.

[tk217]

Thanks for realizing that. There are some good Reds out there.