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

    • Bit of a pity we don't have good images of the back/front of the PCB ~ that said, I found a YT vid of a teardown to replace dicky clock switches, and got enough of a glimpse to realize this PCB is the front-end to a connected to what I'll call PCBA, and as such this is all digital on this PCB..ergo, battery voltage probably doesn't make an appearance here ; that is, I'd expect them to do something on PCBA wrt power conditioning for the adjustment/display/switch PCB.... ....given what's transpired..ie; some permutation of 12vdc on a 5vdc with or without correct polarity...would explain why the zener said "no" and exploded. The transistor Q5 (M33) is likely to be a digital switching transistor...that is, package has builtin bias resistors to ensure it saturates as soon as base threshold voltage is reached (minimal rise/fall time)....and wrt the question 'what else could've fried?' ....well, I know there's an MCU on this board (display, I/O at a guess), and you hope they isolated it from this scenario...I got my crayons out, it looks a bit like this...   ...not a lot to see, or rather, everything you'd like to see disappears down a via to the other side...base drive for the transistor comes from somewhere else, what this transistor is switching is somewhere else...but the zener circuit is exclusive to all this ~ it's providing a set voltage (current limited by the 1K3 resistor R19)...and disappears somewhere else down the via I marked V out ; if the errant voltage 'jumped' the diode in the millisecond before it exploded, whatever that V out via feeds may have seen a spike... ....I'll just imagine that Q5 was switched off at the time, thus no damage should've been done....but whatever that zener feeds has to be checked... HTH
    • I think Fitmit had some, have a look on there (theyre Australian as well)
    • Hah, fair enough! But if you learn with this one you can drive any other OEM manual. No modern luxury features like auto rev-matching or hillstart assist to give you a false sense of confidence. And a heavy car with not that much torque so it stalls easily. 
    • Actually, I'd say all three are the automatic option. Just the different trim levels. The manual would be RSFS, no? 
×
×
  • Create New...