Forum Posting Guidelines: ALL Members Must Read!

[Maximus]

Hate to add another sticky to the forum, but it needs to be done.

OK, so there are new rules coming into effect about posting rumours/sales numbers and sourcing them.

Sales numbers must be from NPD, GfK, Enterbrain (Famitsu), Media Create or Sinobi for first day Japan sales. Other sources like VGChartz are not acceptable and linking or quoting them will earn you a one week holiday.

Rumours should be from reliable sources, what is deemed reliable is up to the user, but if a moderator deems the source unreliable expect the thread to be locked or the thread title changed.

Ban list:

VGChartz sales numbers - Their figures are always wrong. Always. LBP has sold 1.98m according to them, I heard from Sony that they have sold just over 1.5m... Oh dear.
SurferGirl (and his/her many incarnations) - See above...
Nexgenwars - See above
David_Jaffe - Fake Twitter account. (the real account no longer exist)
PlayStationUniversity - For being utterly stupid. Really stupid.

Posting/linking/quoting anything from this list repeatedly will most likely earn you a suspension maybe more depending on how bad a mood we mods are in.

Post at your own risk:

Hiphopgamer - Is wrong a lot, so all threads must be marked as "[HHG Rumour]"
Playstationlifestyle - Lots of blogspam and non/old news presented as news.
Joystiq - All news = BIG NEWS AWESOME MUTHA ****IN' AWESOME!!!!!!
Kotaku - Do I really need to explain?
IGN - See PSP2 rumours, Killzone 2 review, GTA4 review - GTA4 was Oscar worthy apparently, I think the Academy should tell Danny Boyle that his movie has no chance, GTA4 is'a comin'. :/, and favorite my : "MGS R 360 exclusive sorry fanboy"
PS3center.net - Wrong a few times from what I remember, but I may be mistaking them for some other website.
The Inquirer - After their latest Intel4PS4 rumours (which are completely and utterly unfounded) I think they deserve a mention...

This list, while not banned, isn't recommended. Reviews, rumours and general news can be classed as poor. You are more than welcome to link or quote this list, but if something you have quoted from them turns out to be misleading or wrong well, it's your reputation and you can't say we didn't warn you. Especially Kotaku!

I'll leave the thread open so I can gather feedback and if anybody has any reasons to add or remove any website from the current lists then they can make their voices heard...

Welcome new members and old, on the PS3 forum we will have a new rule in the future. We want to make Blu-ray.com a source of reliable information for all of our users. To do that though we are asking for your help! Please refrain from posting from the following sites that we know to contain nothing but false information and vague rumors that will never come to pass based on numerous posts in the past that have all been proven wrong: (list sites here). Your help in this matter is appreciated that so in the future when you see something on this site, you can be assured that it is the closest to truth that we can provide.

Put very well by Marquoz!

New rule:

Making a thread about a game or event is cool, no problem. If you want to call it a "megathread" or "official thread" the first post must be kept up to date with the newest information and media by the OP.

New rule:

To be added to a Beta/Demo waiting list you must have a post count of 100 or above or have been a member for at least 50 days. Either is fine, I will repeat, only one of these requirements must be fulfilled.

New scans less than a month old or from leaked magazines are now banned and a bannable offence.

If someone posts a thread about or quoting an article can the OP not quote the whole thing, instead quote only part of it and link the rest. We don't like it when people copypasta our Blu-ray reviews on other forums, so we should show other websites the same respect.

Lists updated.

[xtop]

sounds good to me

[neos_peace]

seems senceable to me

[Toxa]

very strict rules

[saprano]

Hiphop gamer? i understand the rest but at least he's trying to come up. give him a chance, he's new.

[jamclaur]

banning seems lame for posting numbers. A warning maybe, or 3 days for repeat offenders. But to get 5-7 days on post 1 is a bit extreme especially if the person DIDN'T read this thread.

I don't post numbers, so I'm ok.

[mjbethancourt]

Not that I'll ever be in a position to catch trouble over these rules, but Jeez! I think you just crossed the line into "thought police" (as if you guys weren't already facing that image-problem). I can think of so many things that are much more annoying than citing bad sources, and some of your posters might not know any better... you're literally threatening to punish people for receiving bad information and passing it along. What about the jerks that deliberately make up bad information and post it here? Can they continue doing that, since it's not from one of your banned sources? What about other terrible sources that aren't on your list? Why banning? Why not just delete it, like you do with every other post that you don't like? Or how 'bout letting it sort itself out: usually when someone posts B.S., it's called out by everyone else, (that is, unless one of the mods or admins posts it).

Of course, you can do whatever you want with your website, but isn't this awfully arbitrary and perhaps a little half-cocked? In particular, look at your comments about IGN: I hate them because they are in the tank for Xbox, but it seems you're basically banning rumors and reviews that annoy you specifically... that should come at some cost to your own credibility, you become a little bit more of what you claim to be trying to fight. Just something to think about.

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by jamclaur

banning seems lame for posting numbers. A warning maybe, or 3 days for repeat offenders. But to get 5-7 days on post 1 is a bit extreme especially if the person DIDN'T read this thread.

I don't post numbers, so I'm ok.

The reason VGChartzzz are on the ban list is because they ruined any chance of of people receiving game sale info from outside the top 20. NPD used to give the information out quite freely upon request, but now they are very guarded because they keep getting jacked by VGChartzzzzz.

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by saprano

Hiphop gamer? i understand the rest but at least he's trying to come up. give him a chance, he's new.

Hey if he comes up with something legitimate post in this thread or PM one of us and we'll take him off the list, but as of now he hasn't got a single thing right.

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by mjbethancourt

Not that I'll ever be in a position to catch trouble over these rules, but Jeez! I think you just crossed the line into "thought police" (as if you guys weren't already facing that image-problem). I can think of so many things that are much more annoying than citing bad sources, and some of your posters might not know any better... you're literally threatening to punish people for receiving bad information and passing it along. What about the jerks that deliberately make up bad information and post it here? Can they continue doing that, since it's not from one of your banned sources? What about other terrible sources that aren't on your list? Why banning? Why not just delete it, like you do with every other post that you don't like? Or how 'bout letting it sort itself out: usually when someone posts B.S., it's called out by everyone else, (that is, unless one of the mods or admins posts it).

The idea is that by making sure the banned sources don't get linked they won't get as many hits and their websites get less money from click-through/adsense etc... The gaming forums at Blu-ray.com are the second most popular after the Blu-ray movie discussion, we generate a significant amount of traffic for any one link. Why send it to someone who is making stuff up?

If a website warrants being placed on the ban list then just mention it here and if is worthy it will be added!

Of course, you can do whatever you want with your website, but isn't this awfully arbitrary and perhaps a little half-cocked? In particular, look at your comments about IGN: I hate them because they are in the tank for Xbox, but it seems you're basically banning rumors and reviews that annoy you specifically... that should come at some cost to your own credibility, you become a little bit more of what you claim to be trying to fight. Just something to think about.

Is IGN on the ban list? I'm just saying be careful with what you post from them as reviews are inconsistent, rumours are generally wrong and their copy editor (if they have one) needs to be shot.

[Blu Jacket]

This seems quite heavy handed and controlling, imposing one person's opinion on what is valid upon everyone. This is part of why I am coming here less and less every day. "Dodgy" modding and "my opinion is more important than yours" does not suit a community well. Feels like a maximum powertrip. Cya.

[u_nick]

I agree with weeding out false numbers and such, but... I dont know... The whole banning thing just seems a little... extreme? I dont know if that's tthe right word... I just really didnt expect it from you guys here.

How about, and it's just a suggestion, if you're going to take the time aside to find the post, go over into your admin panel and ban someone that doesnt know anybetter, why just use the admin powers to simply tag the posts. Just hit edit, and bold a little mod note down at the bottom saying the site isnt really a trsuted source of numbers and whatnot?

I dont know. Good luck with this though.

[Marine Mike]

Isn't banning a little extreme? Wouldn't it be better to just lock the thread and send the person who posted it a warning?

[Tsmith13]

Hey nice to see guidelines

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by u_nick

I agree with weeding out false numbers and such, but... I dont know... The whole banning thing just seems a little... extreme? I dont know if that's tthe right word... I just really didnt expect it from you guys here.

How about, and it's just a suggestion, if you're going to take the time aside to find the post, go over into your admin panel and ban someone that doesnt know anybetter, why just use the admin powers to simply tag the posts. Just hit edit, and bold a little mod note down at the bottom saying the site isnt really a trsuted source of numbers and whatnot?

I dont know. Good luck with this though.

We tried that, people kicked up a fuss about having their posts edited.

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by Marine Mike

Isn't banning a little extreme? Wouldn't it be better to just lock the thread and send the person who posted it a warning?

I said "most likely earn you a ban" so first time offenders will probably be warned unless it is a very obvious attempt at trolling.

The problem with posting rumours from less than credible sources is people believe them, get excited and are inevitably let down and blame us mods for not clamping down.

We edit posts/thread titles without warning OPs get pissed at us for some reason or other.

I don't understand what the fuss is all about, this thread just formalises what was being done already, VGChartz was already an auto 1-week ban, Kotaku was always pretty dodgy, and IGN have always been inconsistent!

Are there any websites in the ban list that are worth keeping around anyway, why would anyone in their right mind want to send traffic their way?

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by Blu Jacket

This seems quite heavy handed and controlling, imposing one person's opinion on what is valid upon everyone. This is part of why I am coming here less and less every day. "Dodgy" modding and "my opinion is more important than yours" does not suit a community well. Feels like a maximum powertrip. Cya.

How is it heavy handed, you posted a rumour (without labelling it as such) from a pretty dodgy place, it turned out to be wrong (EA denied) people were disappointed.

Allowing misleading threads and posts from known bad sources would be a pretty poor way of moderating.

[Marquoz]

I think it's a little dragoon in the immediate future, but once people get used to not seeing the garbage numbers, and relying more on solid accurate information, it will have been worth it. I understand the idea behind not giving somebody clicks to drive them ad revenue for essentially nonsense they pulled out of thin air.

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by Marquoz

I think it's a little dragoon in the immediate future, but once people get used to not seeing the garbage numbers, and relying more on solid accurate information, it will have been worth it. I understand the idea behind not giving somebody clicks to drive them ad revenue for essentially nonsense they pulled out of thin air.

That's the idea!

The amount of misinformation and generally wrong information in the gaming industry is pretty amazing right now, and it really is up to forums to stamp it out.

Apple is a pretty good example, the Apple rumour industry used to be huge and full of unreliable blogs and websites trying to make a quick buck by misleading people, eventually the people that ran the forums decided enough was enough. They outlawed most blogs and only let in rumours from credible websites. Now there are fewer and fewer instances of dodgy info on Apple goods because the rumour blogs lost all of their traffic and shut down. Now all that is left is a few usually credible sites/blogs who clearly do get inside info from time to time.

[Marine Mike]

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

I said "most likely earn you a ban" so first time offenders will probably be warned unless it is a very obvious attempt at trolling.

The problem with posting rumours from less than credible sources is people believe them, get excited and are inevitably let down and blame us mods for not clamping down.

We edit posts/thread titles without warning OPs get pissed at us for some reason or other.

I don't understand what the fuss is all about, this thread just formalises what was being done already, VGChartz was already an auto 1-week ban, Kotaku was always pretty dodgy, and IGN have always been inconsistent!

Are there any websites in the ban list that are worth keeping around anyway, why would anyone in their right mind want to send traffic their way?

Well as long as its not first time offenders getting auto-banned, then thats fine with me.

Also I don't understand why people get upset with their threads being edited, lol. Especially when its a thread just posting someone else's article. Now if it was an article that they personally wrote or something, thats a different story.