DemonGoddess

QC=Quality Control Now, thing is, because we don't censor, and pretty well anything goes here, that means QC is not an option either. I agree with PW, I'd be running away, as fast as I could, if I had to do that too. Nope. No way in hell.

Something else everyone seems to be losing sight of here, is that AFF doesn't QC. I think that's rather obvious, yes? So, because we don't QC, one cannot expect us to treat things in the same manner which a site which DOES that, will.

I don't even even know where to start looking for that particular bit of code, honestly. I'm sure I could find it, but it'd take time. On top of that, there are enough changes in the scripting from the original Storyline, that it's hard saying which file this even LIVES in any more, if it even exists as a line of code. Without going through it all, I couldn't say. As to not getting in touch except via the review board, I honestly think that's a bit of laziness. Think about it. There's a contact page. There are NUMEROUS email addresses published to that contact page. If/when someone has an issue, they have any NUMBER of ways to get in touch with any moderator, me, or Apollo. We're none of us hard to find. For that matter, for me personally, I have so much contact information in my archive profile, it's not even funny. So, someone saying they can't contact me or any other mod except via a review in a review board is pure bullshit. The point is, every site has its own way of review handling. What works at Tth or FFN, or Mediaminer, won't necessarily work here. Again, without doing some reworking, of a rather massive variety it looks like; the reviewing system is going to stay as it is. I don't have the time to mess with it right now. Now, what would be workable in future, as an option, possibly, is leaving it to where the reviewer can delete his or review, a mod can delete any review if the need comes up for it. After all, there is a report button on the reviews too. So if there was a questionable review, a user simply has to click that button, and we look. That's really not so hard to do. Once again, this is something that I'm seriously doubtful will happen any time soon. There ain't 100 hours in a day, and 15 days in a week.

Thing is, as I said before, I'm not interested in anything being added to my workload at the moment. Coding changes add to my work load. It's already tremendous.

That and a few other games are not submitting scores. So what I've done, is moved them to a category entitled "NO Score Keeping". That way users know that high scores will not be submitted.

Jeeezits- Here's the thing. If you dislike the site so damn much, why the HELL are you here? You choose not to listen to or consider what any one person has had to say in this entire topic. The only opinion that seems to matter to you, is yours. You just want to argue with people. Go do that elsewhere.

The point is, you were under 18 when you added them. You were not allowed to be here then in the first place. You're LUCKY I didn't delete everything. Once a record is removed from the database, it's gone permanently.

The issues apply to Safari and Chrome users. For some weird reason, the skin portion of the arcade refuses to draw correctly in Safari and Chrome. It works perfectly FINE in Internet Explorer and Firefox. Anyway, I'll be adding games to this likely throughout the day Disregard the categories, that seems to be inoperative as well for it.

Given that the content was posted by a user who was UNDER 18 at the time is was posted, that would be WHY the story is no longer here. Nor the user.

They were deleted because you posted them when you were underage. As you are WELL aware, the site has strict rules of use regarding the age of the user. Now that you're over 18, you're welcome to repost them.

In that point I disagree. Reviews belong to the story they are attached TO. Which is why they technically then belong to the AUTHOR. Only two people can remove them from the board, in the software. The person who left the review, and the person who's story it's attached to. For ME to remove a review, means I go in to the table, find it, and then delete it. I do agree on the laziness, though. When one considers that recently someone told me they'd leave more reviews if they "didn't have to prove they were human", but don't want to be bothered to have to fill in a recaptcha form. When I actually have time to read (which is very rare these days), even IF I don't leave a review, I always rate the story.

The problem here is that the software is abandonware. The company which originally made the scripts is defunct. So any programming changes have to be made independently. Now, there has been extensive rewriting of many parts of the archive. However, there's only so much any one person can do on any given day. Add to that, that I'm very, very careful before instituting any changes, in that anything drastic has to be tested before being unleashed. Tested extensively, I might add.

I see no reason to make it so that authors are unable to control their content, including the reviews they keep, or don't keep. When it comes to flames, spam or troll reviews, I hope the users report those. Often, they do. In that for instance, yes, they SHOULD leave the review in place. That gives me a place to work from regarding that. As far as spamming review boards themselves, that was a real problem for many years. This is exactly why users are now required to "prove they're human" with recaptcha. I know that people who went through that here for years, would really rather not find they have 300 reviews all saying the same thing which overloads their review board, and is a spam message.

We're looking at thousands to source the programmers and such, if that's how we go about it. Further, the whole thing is, if I rework it to allow reviews and review replies to live in a separate db, that's honestly the only way it'll be doable. That's for STARTERS. The archive database is 7.7GB. That's HUGE.

It looks like the author was as well, if they went by the same pen name. If that's the case, then what would have caused it most likely was the user being underage at time of posting.

I've beta'd in the past as well. I liked doing it, but ended up giving it up because RL commitments made it so I no longer had any time to devote to it. The writers I worked with understood that. We worked out a schedule, which took a bit of adjusting on both ends. I'd give an approximate completion time, they'd tell me if they needed it sooner. If I could manage that, I did. If not, I told them. Communication is of course key when working from either side of it, whether as a writer or a beta. I suppose in that respect I was a bit spoiled. I worked with adults, who UNDERSTOOD real life commitments such as job and family. They sure never gave me grief over it. It sounds like you need to lay some ground rules with the kid (I say that because she sure sounds like one) and tell her if that's not acceptable, to find someone else.

2112 Overture - Rush

Well sure, but when it comes to the art itself, the big thing is to have it acknowledged as good.

Okay, the IP thing. Sure, I can get information from IP addresses, where I need to. But, unless it's for something I have to do, normally I won't bother to look. I'd say the same goes for anyone else with that access. I think Danyealle is right on the "bad boy" thing. Although I'm happy to say that that has never been a factor for me, personally. At least when I was a single person, and dating. I always figured if someone was going to treat me poorly, why in hell do I want to take things further? Then there are the for instances where a person's "true colors" don't show up until AFTER one is involved with them. My answer to that was ....good bye. Don't need the aggravation nor the poor treatment.

Y'see, this is where having to be automatically disqualified from entering because I'm staff is bothersome to me, in that I can't participate. I don't write, but I'm an artist. Having said that though, the staff exclusion is FAIR and I'm the one who insisted on it. I digress. If I were able to do this, the thing which would attract me, is having my original work acknowledged, and seen.

Well, I don't get it either. But then again, I don't write so I have no idea what sparks certain types of character development for writers as plot devices.

Having gone through this story, what you should do, is remove the "other celebs mentioned", and then edit your disclaimer as needed when you add more real people. If you think you're going to end up exceeding the 240 character limit eventually, simply do as I instructed earlier with the "full disclaimer below" statement. By the way, if you add more later, by doing that, if you ADD it to the new chapter where the new real person is mentioned, that works as well. So, say for example you have edited your disclaimer in the field to say "See full disclaimer below". Then, the very first group of text in the chapter would be the disclaimer. IF you should happen to change your story to where you add another real person, or a few more real people, than add the changed disclaimer to the chapter affected. You could go ahead and edit where the disclaimer originally is in your story, but if you simply add a revised one where it's needed, that works just as well.