» Menu
» OB/Site News
» Articles
 |
» Barafranca News
 |
|
article
Are you sick of all the "anonymous" spam in articles? Or the people who are to lazy to register a nickname?
Then this function is something for you!
At the Preferences page we added an option which allows you to hide posts from anonymous users.
Click here if you want to activate/check it right away!
Then this function is something for you!
At the Preferences page we added an option which allows you to hide posts from anonymous users.
Click here if you want to activate/check it right away!
Wicked. Now just a "Hide posts from users who's name starts with A-Z /0-9" and then I'm completely satisfied.
"Anonymous" (01:53:20 - 18-07)
Make me needing to find a name instead of automatically putting "Anonymous"
irrelevant (21:51:17 - 17-07)
That just irrelevant!!!
Not all people want to register, simple as that,
if you want all to be non anonymous, just force the registrations and end with anonymous posts
simple!!
Not all people want to register, simple as that,
if you want all to be non anonymous, just force the registrations and end with anonymous posts
simple!!
easier to take them out of the convo for the time ur reading then skipping every 2 posts :P
Rix at 19:57:26 on 17/07:
Number of reasons:
-I don't expect much people will use this option
-Sometimes non-logged in users (this option blocks those as well,not just by "Anonymous") are actually helpful/non-spam.
-This option is great for a temporary measure, for instance when there is a discussion or so with a lot of anonymous users in it who just talk bullshit and you want to shut them off for the time the discussion lasts.
Of course disabling non-logged in posts is, as always, a good subject for discussion, and we should always re-evaluate our policy on it.
Tycho at 19:52:36 on 17/07:
Why not just disable it?
Sometimes they're not logged in, or indeed too lazy.
Better just too disabled it.
Why not just disable it?
Sometimes they're not logged in, or indeed too lazy.
Better just too disabled it.
-I don't expect much people will use this option
-Sometimes non-logged in users (this option blocks those as well,not just by "Anonymous") are actually helpful/non-spam.
-This option is great for a temporary measure, for instance when there is a discussion or so with a lot of anonymous users in it who just talk bullshit and you want to shut them off for the time the discussion lasts.
Of course disabling non-logged in posts is, as always, a good subject for discussion, and we should always re-evaluate our policy on it.
But i agree on it and reason
Anonymous at 19:55:36 on 17/07:
If someone non anonymous reacts on someone anonymous, you won't get what the hell they are talking about, either delete the anonymous people, or let them be there. This option is useless :)
If someone non anonymous reacts on someone anonymous, you won't get what the hell they are talking about, either delete the anonymous people, or let them be there. This option is useless :)
several people asked me for this option, but there are always 2 sides of the medal ofcourse
Anonymous at 19:55:36 on 17/07:
If someone non anonymous reacts on someone anonymous, you won't get what the hell they are talking about, either delete the anonymous people, or let them be there. This option is useless :)
If someone non anonymous reacts on someone anonymous, you won't get what the hell they are talking about, either delete the anonymous people, or let them be there. This option is useless :)
Then i prefer a "stay-logged-in" thingy then hide anonymously ppl
Anonymous at 19:55:36 on 17/07:
If someone non anonymous reacts on someone anonymous, you won't get what the hell they are talking about, either delete the anonymous people, or let them be there. This option is useless :)
If someone non anonymous reacts on someone anonymous, you won't get what the hell they are talking about, either delete the anonymous people, or let them be there. This option is useless :)
Tycho at 19:52:36 on 17/07:
Why not just disable it?
Sometimes they're not logged in, or indeed too lazy.
Better just too disabled it.
Why not just disable it?
Sometimes they're not logged in, or indeed too lazy.
Better just too disabled it.
-I don't expect much people will use this option
-Sometimes non-logged in users (this option blocks those as well,not just by "Anonymous") are actually helpful/non-spam.
-This option is great for a temporary measure, for instance when there is a discussion or so with a lot of anonymous users in it who just talk bullshit and you want to shut them off for the time the discussion lasts.
Of course disabling non-logged in posts is, as always, a good subject for discussion, and we should always re-evaluate our policy on it.
Anonymous (19:55:36 - 17-07)
If someone non anonymous reacts on someone anonymous, you won't get what the hell they are talking about, either delete the anonymous people, or let them be there. This option is useless :)
Why not just disable it?
Sometimes they're not logged in, or indeed too lazy.
Better just too disabled it. Or remove this function again xD
Sometimes they're not logged in, or indeed too lazy.
Better just too disabled it. Or remove this function again xD
Anonymous (19:50:28 - 17-07)
nooooo:(
howe must i troll now
howe must i troll now