Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

is it unreasonable of me to expect mods might read/reply to pms? who are we supposed to contact about things that shouldnt be posted publicly?

I wouldnt say no, however...

When ive been busy with work, non-SAU life and a quite annoying illness which doesnt let me do much over the past month... (on top of the 40-50PM's im averaging a week, some of which are a month old now without reply) it happens.

I've now replied.

thanks...i had contacted the for sale moderators (buster had full pm box, neil and blitz never replied) without result so was wondering if id missed some sticky that says "dont pm mods, you should instead submit requests 'here'" or something to that effect. all good, thanks

  • 2 weeks later...

Oops should of read this before posting my topic, sorry, I can see why you would implement this new system however I think a lot of people would miss the ability to edit their posts, at first I thought this might have been phpBB where I've had little experience in however I noticed your using Invision IP Board where I have even less experience in however I think you can add the ability that any deleted text in an edit post, instead of removing it it just strikes it out just an idea I wanted to swing by the mods, and I guess for extra security you could program it to add a time stamp of the change?

  • 1 month later...

Having read most of this thread I can understand why the editing rules exist.

Perhaps a more permanent editing function could only became active for users with 200+ posts. I know that won't remove the risk altogether and that some people who don't post very regularly could be disadvantaged but surely it will remove scammers who join, post items for sale, take peoples money and then bail. Just a suggestion (I hope it wasn't made in the thread already).

  • 2 months later...

When is this problem going to be addressed? I've tried to have posts in the for sale section edited by reporting the post but the mods don't take any notice.

Not being able to edit posts is VERY VERY GAY! Fix it!!!

  • 3 months later...
  • 6 months later...
Oops should of read this before posting my topic, sorry, I can see why you would implement this new system however I think a lot of people would miss the ability to edit their posts, at first I thought this might have been phpBB where I've had little experience in however I noticed your using Invision IP Board where I have even less experience in however I think you can add the ability that any deleted text in an edit post, instead of removing it it just strikes it out just an idea I wanted to swing by the mods, and I guess for extra security you could program it to add a time stamp of the change?

This is a fantastic idea. What do you think of this mods? Dodgy traders will be obvious from attempting to edit out their posts along with other users being able to edit their threads!

Another great idea mentioned earlier would be after you have say 200-300 posts that you get a proper edit function. Dodgy traders aren't going to bother making 300 posts just so they can edit their posts.

If both of these ideas were implemented we would solve the problem at hand AND fix the BIGGER problem of everyone sending 1000 reports/PMs clogging up admins inbox's because they want their posts edited.

edit: (Lol) I only noticed this thread after this feature seemingly working on and off (didn't realise the 2 hour thing) for the past month thinking it was a bug so I went searching. Perhaps it should be made a sticky and the first post updated to give clear concise reasons why this has been done, that would stop users skimming the thread and posting in here asking the same questions multiple times.

Edited by Rolls

IPB 3.0 is coming - so there won't be anymore Dev work on the current version. It is due Q1 2010 hopefully.

So... SAU 3.0 will give us a LOT more flexibility to do things we simply cannot.

As part of the test setup all the Admins will be getting thier hands dirty, some probably will just fall asleep, but either way it's something we will look into.

Oh and as for thread edits. I've not had ONE in over 2 weeks. So it is hardly as big of a problem as people make out. I'm hardly getting 1000 PM's about it :blink:

Ah but touche...

We have less than 1% of users complaining about it. ;)

In the overall scheme if it protects the other 99% of people, that is a win for SAU and the majority.

Mothers minority group's won't win here - this aint parliament ;)

Ah but touche...

We have less than 1% of users complaining about it. ;)

In the overall scheme if it protects the other 99% of people, that is a win for SAU and the majority.

Mothers minority group's won't win here - this aint parliament ;)

You could just enable post editing for users that have lots of posts and clearly aren't dodgy traders ?

Sometimes I get the impression you like being difficult to get a reaction.

Current forum version does not allow this. It requires me to manually setup a group, manually add people. That would mean weeks of work to add all the users who would want to be added. If not months.

Bigger picture is all im trying to get some people to see here, there are more pros than there are cons for this issue.

How you say?

Dodgy trader complaints have virtually disappeared since this was implemented along with the PM restrictions.

Those two changes alone has enabled SAU to go from having 1-2 dodgy people a month, to a now 2 or 3 dodgy traders in over 12 months.

Honestly - i cannot see how users are against these changes.

Yes it is a pain, yes its annoying... but it is undoubtably working better than we could have imagined.

SAU goes above and beyond most other forums with regards to user protection from online trading where we are honestly not required too.

We do this for the good of the community as a whole. SAU 3.0 will see even further tightening and enhancements to the process (i promise these will be nicer and no where near as annoying, they will actually benefit user experience)

Whilst not every change is as well received as we would hope...we make these changes within the current resitrctions. Restrictions in this case is forum code itself.

It does not allow much flexibility without "hacking" it up, something that takes a lot of time and often brings us more problems than it fixes.

Honestly - i cannot see how users are against these changes.

Nobody is against changes that result in less trading scams, they are just against not being able to edit their posts. Perhaps you could start that group and only add users when they make a request or annoy you in this thread (like me ;)).

Only take you a minute to start that group and put me on that list ;)

Pros and cons.

Pros, I get to edit my posts and you don't have to listen to me complain anymore! Cons, no one else's problem is fixed. Seems fair to me!

Edited by Rolls

if mods are actually editing posts when people report them with required edits then thats good enough (i know for quite a while it was useless reporting them because no one was doing the edits for reported posts requiring edit)

There have been a number of changes in the Mod & Admin team recently. ;)

Everything in For Sale will be actioned, i give you my word as i now run it with Blitz.

About 2 months ago we removed approx 15 General mods, and 3-5 Admins due to inactivity as part of the ongoing improvements we have been doing over the past couple of months.

Most of the changes at the moment surround business traders, we will get to the members based things soon enough. We gotta keep the site running, so businesses take the priority as we want to make changes to hosting, that costs money ;)

We still have mods for every section, and far as i know they are doing it. If not then feel free to escalate to an Admin if you've reported for edit.

Admin will then check - if the mod is not doing the job - out they go :)

We will be appointing new mods once i finish going through what area's need extra help based on volume... not as simple of a task as i envisaged it would be

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...