Autobumpers game changing "BAN"

[Mr. Fox]

Nothing has came from the autobumper ban, people are still autobumping their threads in the most blatant ways possible, yet no infractions or bans are to be seen.

As I foretold a month ago - It's very easy to mask automated bumps and now since there is a """"BAN"""" on them, there's even more incentive to do so as there's less people abusing it.

What was the point of the ban if you are unable to enforce it?

 

[S]

Could you show some of these 'blatant' examples, since it's apparently so prevalent?

 

[Mr. Fox]

Could you show some of these 'blatant' examples, since it's apparently so prevalent?

"Could you denenounce individual Sythe members to make them your enemies?"
Come on.

Do some browsing and if you believe that human beings need at least 6 hours of sleep per day and/or don't live on 36h sleeping schedules, you'll find plenty.
Not to mention people who literally( literally) bump at exactly at a specific minute every 4/5/6h.

 

[S]

"Could you denenounce individual Sythe members to make them your enemies?"
Come on.

Do some browsing and if you believe that human beings need at least 6 hours of sleep per day and/or don't live on 36h sleeping schedules, you'll find plenty.
Not to mention people who literally( literally) bump at exactly at a specific minute every 4/5/6h.

If you're going to purport an argument/certain stance, the burden on proof is on you to present your case.

Secondly, I highly doubt anyone cares to be enemies, in regards to you pointing out obvious issues that need to be fixed.

If it's any consolation, everyone has made suggestions that in some way or another, affect certain users, or even one user.

 

[S]

Do some browsing and if you believe that human beings need at least 6 hours of sleep per day and/or don't live on 36h sleeping schedules, you'll find plenty.
Not to mention people who literally( literally) bump at exactly at a specific minute every 4/5/6h.

Also, many business share Sythe accounts, so it doesn't necessarily mean it's the same person btw. Could be 4-5 different people bumping said thread.

 

[Mr. Fox]

If you're going to purport an argument/certain stance, the burden on proof is on you to present your case.

Secondly, I highly doubt anyone cares to be enemies, in regards to you pointing out obvious issues that need to be fixed.

If it's any consolation, everyone has made suggestions that in some way or another, affect certain users, or even one user.

You have in your own sections which you have moderated people autobumping in a manner where you can tell that their bot is broken yet here you are claiming ignorance. If you're incapable of buzzing those cha-cha's in your skull enough to realize that then sorry but you're not adequate enough to take part of this discussion.

You're suggesting that singling out an individual will not have them having amplified emotions towards the entity responsible for it.
Get real.

Also, many business share Sythe accounts, so it doesn't necessarily mean it's the same person btw. Could be 4-5 different people bumping said thread.

You can count these 4-5 people services on your one hand.

 

[S]

You have in your own sections which you have moderated people autobumping in a manner where you can tell that their bot is broken yet here you are claiming ignorance. If you're incapable of buzzing those cha-cha's in your skull enough to realize that then sorry but you're not adequate enough to take part of this discussion.

You're suggesting that singling out an individual will not have them having amplified emotions towards the entity responsible for it.
Get real.

I haven't looked, hence I asked for examples. I never said I can't tell who it is. Ultimately, you're stating people are abusing the system, so the onus is on you to provide some examples.

I've suggested numerous things in the past (which have been approved), which have singled out certain people/groups of people. If you can't take criticism, or people not supporting you, or potentially users bearing ill-will towards you, then you shouldn't really suggest things/post feedback without wanting to actually clearly state the issue - i.e, with examples.

Anyway, you do you.

 

[Mr. Fox]

I haven't looked, hence I asked for examples. I never said I can't tell who it is. Ultimately, you're stating people are abusing the system, so the onus is on you to provide some examples.

If you're able to tell who these are, then why even bother bothering me with the question? I already stated you the( in my opinion very obvious) reason why I decide not to do that.

I am essentially channelling the mantra which you're suggesting:

Anyway, you do you.

I've suggested numerous things in the past (which have been approved), which has singled out certain people/groups of people. If you can't take criticism, or people not supporting you, or potentially users bearing ill-will towards you, then you shouldn't really suggest things/post feedback without wanting to actually clearly state the issue - i.e, with examples.

Very brave of you! The problem exists and you already stated that you're able to find the examples, so again, why are you coming up with this pointless rhetoric here?

 

You’ve already created enemies through your highly condescending, half-illiterate posts. You sound like a broken record, bro. You really need a new song.


“As of today (now) autobumping and other bump services are not allowed. You or your workers/customers are the only people who can bump your thread, once every 4 hours. There was simply too much abuse from people autobumping when they weren't online, this will ensure that bumps come from people who are actually online”

The primary purpose of the rule change was to,
1) prevent users from purchasing third party bump services.
2) prevent users from bumping when they aren’t online.


If you’re concerned that people are auto-bumping then use the “report” feature and have it investigated by staff. If it is as obvious as you say then it shouldn’t be hard for staff to take action against them.

 

[Mr. Fox]

The primary purpose of the rule change was to,
1) prevent users from purchasing third party bump services.
2) prevent users from bumping when they aren’t online.

Very awesome and completely irrelevant as the ends are still the same.

If you’re concerned that people are auto-bumping then use the “report” feature and have it investigated by staff. If it is as obvious as you say then it shouldn’t be hard for staff to take action against them.

That's the whole POINT of this thread. It is OBVIOUS and the staff is NOT taking action against rule violations.

half-illiterate posts

bro.

Out of all words you try to offend me, you chose the one which applies to yourself the most - I have to explain these simple concepts as if I were talking with a 5 year old; yes duckie, if people are autobumping then that means that they are not doing it themselves. Yes, duckie, if they are not online then they are offline. No, duckie, people sleep and cannot bump that much, this is why they have to autobump.

bro.

 

This is the third or fourth thread you’ve made like this, and none of them gain any traction. I really don’t care enough to waste my time arguing with you. In fact, I’m beginning to enjoy watching you make a fool of yourself.

I’ll reiterate what @Dbuffed said on your last thread (which was a stupid suggestion that got shot down) and then be on my way.

I'm just gonna stop, you have no clue rofl.

 

[Mr. Fox]

This is the third or fourth thread you’ve made like this, and none of them gain any traction. I really don’t care enough to sit here and argue with you. In fact, I’m beginning to enjoy watching you make a fool of yourself.

Of course you don't care! Every thread you enter you get slapped and then moan how you don't care.

Funny internet man is shaking head so I must be wrong.

 

Voicing my own two cents on this. I feel the autobumper ban does indeed help and those who are legitimately online are actively bumping. If you or anyone else catch somebody violating these rules then we are free to report them so they can be punished appropriately.

 

Voicing my own two cents on this. I feel the autobumper ban does indeed help and those who are legitimately online are actively bumping. If you or anyone else catch somebody violating these rules then we are free to report them so they can be punished appropriately.

I have privately reported people several times to be told “they are actively online” when they wasn’t, and you can clearly see it’s autobumped.

Kind of a nutsack situation if people are sucking each other off.

 

[Mr. Fox]

Finally some real discussion!

Voicing my own two cents on this. I feel the autobumper ban does indeed help and those who are legitimately online are actively bumping. If you or anyone else catch somebody violating these rules then we are free to report them so they can be punished appropriately.

Of course the forum overview in terms of who is bumping has improved but the aesthetics is all what it has to offer. The problem is that now a small or smaller group gain an advantage over others. Percentage wise, you're condensing more market power to an even smaller group and there's no denying that bumping is the greatest form of power which this forum has to offer.

It's not the forum users duty to comb through competitors threads all the time to see if they autobump. If anything, the current users are really lazy and haven't got around it yet but within an hour of work through a Chrome plugin I can just have the screen minimized and thread bumped after every 4.2 - 5h and there will be no proof of me not being present.
I can do that and many many others can, will, and already do that.

I have privately reported people several times to be told “they are actively online” when they wasn’t, and you can clearly see it’s autobumped.

Kind of a nutsack situation if people are sucking each other off.

I also have reported people but for even the most obvious cases, there's nothing to do as the person can simply refute it with a single line. The only change is that now you don't have 3rd party users bumping nor can you use a 3rd party online tools but that's it - a minor inconvenience at best.

 

Finally some real discussion!



Of course the forum overview in terms of who is bumping has improved but the aesthetics is all what it has to offer. The problem is that now a small or smaller group gain an advantage over others. Percentage wise, you're condensing more market power to an even smaller group.

It's not the forum users duty to comb through competitors threads all the time to see if they autobump. If anything, the current users are really lazy but within an hour of work through a Chrome plugin I can just have the screen minimized and thread bumped after every 4.2 - 5h and there's no proof of me not being present.
I can do that and many many others can, will and already do that.



I also have reported people but for even the most obvious cases, there's nothing to do as the person can simply refute it with a single line. The only change is that now you don't have 3rd party users bumping nor can you use a 3rd party online tools but that's it - a minor inconvenience at best.

Yup, we are told we have to be online if we want to bump/auto bump.

I reported someone who had not been on for 3 days, yet nothing came of it, clear bullshit of rules.

 

Not going to lie, I've seen multiple threads being bumped which haven't offered that service and/or requested that service (that their thread indicates) daily.

Why change this rule is nothing is going to be done about it?

Also, if you want to know which threads you can PM me.

 

[Sypherz]

I predicted this. Those with auto bumpers keep using because the site isn't equip to enforce the ban, and the rest get left in the dust. Autobumpers which check for online status should be allowed.

 

[Mr. Fox]

I predicted this. Those with auto bumpers keep using because the site isn't equip to enforce the ban, and the rest get left in the dust. Autobumpers which check for online status should be allowed.

This does not work, there are hundreds of auto-refresh plugins for every browser. I myself am online 24/7 thanks to one of them.

 

[Sypherz]

This does not work, there are hundreds of auto-refresh plugins for every browser. I myself am online 24/7 thanks to one of them.

I'm sure you could find an autobumper on your own then. It would be much more manageable to enforce.