# Huge icons



## gunnersquad (Apr 10, 2012)

.


----------



## Devious Bane (Apr 10, 2012)

This is why we can't have nice things.

As for the banner page, it may never get updated,


----------



## Mayonnaise (Apr 10, 2012)

D:

But it's nice to look at these huge icons. *:V*


----------



## Draconas (Apr 10, 2012)

Yeah, I TT'ed that shit and a couple of people are already trying to justify fucking doing it


----------



## Xenke (Apr 10, 2012)

Draconas said:


> Yeah, I TT'ed that shit and a couple of people are already trying to justify fucking doing it


----------



## Mayonnaise (Apr 10, 2012)

Ahh well...


----------



## CerbrusNL (Apr 10, 2012)

Journal removed, finding a bug is nice and all, but encouraging users to exploit it... Nope.
Now I forgot the username, could someone send me a quick PM, if he/she remembers? :/


----------



## Draconas (Apr 10, 2012)

CerbrusNL said:


> Journal removed, finding a bug is nice and all, but encouraging users to exploit it... Nope.
> Now I forgot the username, could someone send me a quick PM, if he/she remembers? :/



yeah, firing a pm


----------



## gunnersquad (Apr 10, 2012)

.


----------



## Draconas (Apr 10, 2012)

Edit: re-reading the comments in the deleted journal I was actually wrong, apparently the person who started this mess wasn't mentioned in there.


----------



## LizardKing (Apr 10, 2012)

gunnersquad said:


> Also does anyone know if this page will ever be updated and fixed? http://help.furaffinity.net/article/AA-00215/0/Site-Banner-History.html



You could always look here instead http://www.furaffinity.net/img/banners/logo/archive/


----------



## Ben (Apr 10, 2012)

So was this exploit actually fixed? Because I honestly thought you guys would release a statement about fixing it, and then do so, instead of actually taking the effort to ban hundreds of people. I mean, the whole point was to bring it to the admin's attention, that and it was just some harmless fun. Unless you guys did fix it, and just decided to do both.

I think this might be a bit of an overreaction to something that was meant to be funny, versus something that was a tad more malicious, like Eevee hiding thousands of comments. Although that was a bug that sorely needed to be fixed, I could -sort- of see the sense in banning him? But banning all these people (and the bans aren't even consistent-- some people who were making avatars weren't banned, some who just changed it to one they received were) seems over the top. I know what the rule in the ToS says, but after a point, it honestly just struck me as not worth the effort to ban all those people, instead of just admitting that a mistake was made, and fixing the humourous, non-mallicious exploit. 

I guess it doesn't matter in the end though. It was funny while it lasted, and I only got suspended 2 weeks. I guess my real crime was just not reverting it before I went to sleep (and I honestly thought I would sleep twice as long, so double oops!). Ah well.

EDIT: Uh, my 2 week ban just got upped to a permanent ban, and the only reason I can discern is because it was assumed I was ban evading, even though I signed out of the other account I have immediately to avoid such a thing happening. Like, I stayed signed in to one account on Firefox, and the other on Chrome for convenience, and I signed out of the one on Chrome after seeing the part of my suspension that told me not to ban evade (which I was happy to do!). Can one of the admins please fix this? That account wasn't solely mine either, so I'd appreciate it if the original punishment is reinstated, since this has clearly been a mix-up. :T


----------



## RTDragon (Apr 10, 2012)

Too bad it's already been exploited from some of the large avatars i've seen on people pages.

Wow this is reminds me of those account suicides.


----------



## Dragoneer (Apr 10, 2012)

Ben said:


> I guess it doesn't matter in the end though. It was funny while it  lasted, and I only got suspended 2 weeks. I guess my real crime was just  not reverting it before I went to sleep (and I honestly thought I would  sleep twice as long, so double oops!). Ah well.



Exploiting issues for the "lulz" is what got you banned. You didn't report it to the site, you didn't open a ticket. Instead, you created a journal and promoted people to abuse it. That was your "real crime" as you put it. Promoting, encouraging abuse of the site. That's in violation of the Terms of Service, and that's why you got banned. Add in your previous history of hijinks on the site... and we feel it's best if FA and yourself part ways at this time.


----------



## sandfox (Apr 10, 2012)

benchilla is involved in an art site which will compete with FA, called weasyl.

one of FAs own admins: fay-v is going to be jumping ship to weasyl from FA, it said so on one of benchillas submissions which had a list of people who will be weasyl admins.

Im sure all of this had nothing to do with dragoneers decesion to ban benchilla from the site and the forums and delete everything in his gallery.


----------



## HyBroMcYenapants (Apr 10, 2012)

Draconas said:


> Yeah, I TT'ed that shit and a couple of people are already trying to justify fucking doing it



MAN U SHOULD BE AN ADMIN BRUH


----------



## Takun (Apr 10, 2012)

No one on Weasyl staff has commented on jumping ship from FA because of the site.  Being on the staff does not automatically entail that.  As you can see Dragoneer is well aware of the project and if that was intended, I'm sure all staff involved would have told him so or will tell him if it comes to that.


----------



## sandfox (Apr 10, 2012)

Takun said:


> Dragoneer is well aware of the project



yup, I think that's why he banned benchilla: he's scared of weasyl because fa is so run down and stagnant these days

fa staff like fay-v and ex-fa staff like xipoid are signing up for weasyl and weasyl isn't even finished yet

that says how bad FA is now

the rats are leaving the sinking ship

I think these big icons show how unequal FA is, since some people like benchilla get banned forever and wiped from FA for it, some people get banned for a few days and others don't get banned at all. There is no logic or reason behind what FA admins do.


----------



## Dragoneer (Apr 10, 2012)

sandfox said:


> yup, I think that's why he banned benchilla: he's scared of weasyl because fa is so run down and stagnant these days
> 
> fa staff like fay-v and ex-fa staff like xipoid are signing up for weasyl and weasyl isn't even finished yet


I'm not scared of Weasyl. Competition is good. If I had a problem with other sites I'd have long had issues with SoFurry or Inkbunny.

And Fay is still FA staff, and she's Weasyl staff as well. It's not a big deal. Some people are /making/ it a big deal, but it's really not for us. We knew Fay was Weasyl staff before she joined FA staff. So, uhm...


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Apr 10, 2012)

I do agree there doesnt seem much fairness, someone does a one time offend thing and BANNED, i really feel like a warning should have been supplied.


----------



## Williamca (Apr 10, 2012)

I can understand an increased ban time for someone that told others how to reproduce the problem, but permanent? Ehh...not really fair. Maybe I am too lax honestly. 

The only thing I can say is, Remember the Journal and Submission 'hacks' some months ago? Yeah...
Also the icon glitch has been used and abused long before now and nothing was done. I am sure something will be now since it got public and is being abused.

;(

Addition; you have new site notices you could have said "We have noticed people abusing icon glitch you have til XX to delete the icons. Do not further reproduce. We are aware of the issue."


----------



## CannonFodder (Apr 10, 2012)

sandfox said:


> yup, I think that's why he banned benchilla: he's scared of weasyl because fa is so run down and stagnant these days


......Ugh....
You know how many furry sites have been advertised as "fa killers"?  I don't think Fa has anything to worry about cause there's a large chance that'll get no where.

The only way I ever see a site beating fa is if sofurry gains popularity or someone creates a all-in-one website for furries.  By that I mean a art site, social media site, music site, dating site, game site, video site, etc and in all probability is someone were to do that the site would be horribly broken.


----------



## sandfox (Apr 10, 2012)

Dragoneer said:


> I'm not scared of Weasyl. Competition is good. If I had a problem with other sites I'd have long had issues with SoFurry or Inkbunny.
> 
> And Fay is still FA staff, and she's Weasyl staff as well. It's not a big deal. Some people are /making/ it a big deal, but it's really not for us. We knew Fay was Weasyl staff before she joined FA staff. So, uhm...



FA has 13 admins and they cannot keep up with the trouble tickets

FA can't make a report button to make things easier

If FA admins like Fay-v start to split their time between weasyl and FA things will get even worse, and you're just happy to see that happen im sure

meanwhile the FA forums has TWENTY FIVE ADMINS AND MODS

I think its hilarious that the FA forums have an army of mods and admins when they're so small and insignificant compared to FA itself and the admins on FA just can't keep up

The FA admins and mods are supposed to be recruited to the mainsite, but because FA is so stagnant they don't want to, instead FA staff are going to go to other places like Weasyl. It's hilarious!

Benchilla didn't do anything worth a permaban and he doesnt have a history worth one

the fact remains that people have been dealt with extremely unequally here


----------



## CannonFodder (Apr 10, 2012)

sandfox said:


> Benchilla didn't do anything worth a permaban and he doesnt have a history worth one
> 
> the fact remains that people have been dealt with extremely unequally here


....You obviously don't know ben then.  As of late he's been drifting dangerously towards a temp ban or such.
The fact he posted a site exploit didn't help his case.  If Weasyl is going to add him as a admin then god help them.


----------



## sandfox (Apr 10, 2012)

> ....You obviously don't know ben then. As of late he's been drifting dangerously towards a temp ban or such.



He might possibly be _drifting_ towards a temp ban? Welp we gotta ban him from FA and the forums forever and wipe his gallery, meanwhile we'll temp-ban some of the other people and not ban others at all

consistency!

there is none here



> The fact he posted a site exploit didn't help his case.



dude dragoneer uses this exploit, when he is at convention room parties he sometimes gives someone a giant avatar as a joke. this isn't a big issue like you're making it out to be


----------



## Bluflare (Apr 10, 2012)

CerbrusNL said:


> Journal removed :/


"Your fast, but not fast enough"


----------



## Accountability (Apr 10, 2012)

Dragoneer said:


> Exploiting issues for the "lulz" is what got you banned. You didn't report it to the site, you didn't open a ticket. Instead, you created a journal and promoted people to abuse it.



Because in the past, telling you guys has worked so well.

Like the time Eevee told Yak that there was an exploit present in comment hiding. Yak basically said he didn't care. It was only fixed when it was exploited.
Then Eevee published a list of exploits, including a number of CSRF and XSS exploits that allowed malicious users to force people to post journals, follow/unfollow users, change their profile info, forcing posting shouts on other user's page, the list goes on. This list was made public in October 2010, most of the exploits were still present in *June 2011* (!!) when they were actively exploited.
Eevee also theorized there was XSS vulnerabilities present in the trouble ticket system, which later was a cause of the site being hacked.

Your "tech team" has a very bad history of not taking anything seriously (even things they were told months in advance) until it becomes a problem. I'll even go as far as to guess if Yak was told about this directly he would have replied with one of his classic "I don't care"s. Based on past events, the only way to guarantee this would be noticed and fixed was to make it public.

Even now, this exploit still exists, and no one cares enough to disable the avatar upload form. Obviously, no one is _that_ concerned about it. The only priorities around here seemed to be deleting the journal and banning people, as if that will solve the problem.

It won't.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Apr 10, 2012)

Accountability said:


> Even now, this exploit still exists, and no one cares enough to disable the avatar upload form. Obviously, no one is _that_ concerned about it. The only priorities around here seemed to be deleting the journal and banning people, as if that will solve the problem.
> 
> It won't.



The exploit should be fixed, but Ben was  "Chinatown" if you recall correctly. "Going, leaving byeeeeeeeee oh wait I'm coming back" He cited the handling of the site as a reason for leaving. Then you come back to complain about the site more. I dunno man, it kinda gives a really weak case to take you seriously. It's not the fact there is criticism and actually justified at that, but if you're gonna play musical/chairs and act that indecisively it points to some other problems, FA staff and regular users for that matter can't help you with. 

Yes, I believe the exploit should be fixed but I do agree if you're not going to make an attempt to file a ticket and have a good conversation with people in charge first, you are doing it in bad faith. I don't believe any site should put up with it, and I've seen other sites not put up with it. You'd have a point if someone at least bothered to make contact - and the "well FA admins don't listen in the past" is NOT an excuse to do it now. 

As far as FayV being on Weasyl, uhh big deal? It's not like other staff members haven't devoted themselves to other sites - myself included. Anyone trying to argue this as a big deal, I'm sorry but get your heads examined.


----------



## Dragoneer (Apr 10, 2012)

sandfox said:


> FA has 13 admins and they cannot keep up with the trouble tickets


I'm sorry, but no. Yes, we have had a bad habit of not being pro-active on tickets, but we have stepped up our game. We're removed several idle admins and added more to replace them. In the past 90 days, we've handled over 4,500 tickets - that's only tickets. This doesn't include all the other daily issues we have to address, taking care of problems as we find them, notes and more.

FA has improved our response time, and dramatically so. And I'll stand by that. We've been quietly trying to refocus, improve consistency and more.

Seriously, I don't care if people go to Weasyl, Nabyn, SoFurry, Furocity, Inkbunny, FurNation, Furry4Life or any of the other multiples of furry art galleries out there. I don't. I care about FA, and only FA. People can go wherever they want. My goal is to improve FA, and get our asses in line and slowly work our way to correcting the mistakes of the past. I take the blame for that, but I'm working to fix that. If people don't like the direction we go... that's alright. There's a variety of sites out there for a reason. One site does not fit all.

And if you don't like FA you're free to leave. Nobody's holding you here.


----------



## Kirune (Apr 10, 2012)

Dragoneer said:


> In the past 90 days, we've handled over 4,500 tickets - that's only tickets.



that's only ~3 tickets per day per admin
wowsers


----------



## Dragoneer (Apr 10, 2012)

Kirune said:


> that's only ~3 tickets per day per admin
> wowsers


I'm trying to improve those numbers, and they're going up - albeit slowly. Things aren't perfect, but improving. Some admins have been on hiatus, vacation, etc. We're still reviewing the admin team in general, and trying to prioritize people. we've had some idle admins, and not every admin is working on the same thing. My goal is by May to have zero backlog, and all admins gearing up to handle things more efficiently

I'll be honest. It's not where I want it to be, but it's also far, FAR better than it was a mere three months ago. And we're working to improve it every day.


----------



## Bluflare (Apr 10, 2012)

Dragoneer said:


> And if you don't like FA you're free to leave. Nobody's holding you here.


Damn like the 30th time I've heard this, and sadly I've been tallying them in my little notepad. : )


----------



## kayfox (Apr 10, 2012)

Dragoneer said:


> My goal is to improve FA, and get our asses in line and slowly work our way to correcting the mistakes of the past.



So, how about my offers to help on the technical side?


----------



## CannonFodder (Apr 10, 2012)

sandfox said:


> He might possibly be _drifting_ towards a temp ban? Welp we gotta ban him from FA and the forums forever and wipe his gallery, meanwhile we'll temp-ban some of the other people and not ban others at all
> consistency!
> there is none here
> dude dragoneer uses this exploit, when he is at convention room parties he sometimes gives someone a giant avatar as a joke. this isn't a big issue like you're making it out to be


I was talking about ben's behavior specifically, not the staff's.
I'll go into further detail though, Ben's heart is in the right place... it's just... he's more interested in "fixing" and "bettering" member bases.  Translation- he's a lose cannon that when he becomes a weasyl admin god help them, because he's going to enforce the rules absurdly harshly to the point he's going to kill what chance the site has at becoming widely popular.
Weasyl thinks they are doing something smart by recruiting ex-fa admins and such, but Ben is basically a firecracker that you shouldn't be holding.

Tl:dr; nobody is going to want to use Weasyl if Ben becomes a admin, because nobody is going to want to use a website where the rules are enforced harshly.

Tl:dr; of Tl:dr; I give Weasyl a month if Ben becomes a admin there.


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Apr 10, 2012)

How I feel fa is run sometimes 


If someone were to point out that I had a unlocked front door or some other compromised part of my house rather than arrest them for their foresight I would thank them and get it fixed asap.


----------



## Accountability (Apr 10, 2012)

Dragoneer said:


> I'm sorry, but no. Yes, we have had a bad habit  of not being pro-active on tickets, but we have stepped up our game.  We're removed several idle admins and added more to replace them. In the  past 90 days, we've handled over 4,500 tickets - that's only tickets.  This doesn't include all the other daily issues we have to address,  taking care of problems as we find them, notes and more.
> 
> FA has improved our response time, and dramatically so. And I'll stand  by that. We've been quietly trying to refocus, improve consistency and  more.
> 
> ...



This might be effective if it wasn't the hundreth time you said it.

Every  time these things happen it ends up with you saying "I want to improve  FA" and everyone else saying "Well you can start by finding new coders".  These exploits? The real problems? They don't go away when admins are  handling five thousand trouble tickets and they don't go away with a new  navbar. They'll go away when you finally realize that "improving FA" is  going to require major action in the coding department.

I don't  expect you to answer this here, I don't expect you to answer it publicly  at all, but I want you to really sit down and really think about this:  Is the present tech team/development team _helping_ or _hurting_ FA? I've had to ask myself similar questions in regards to communities I run. 

Just  look at just the past week! On the first we were told about all these  great features that would be coming out "this week". That didn't happen,  did it? Who's fault was that? I know what you're going to say, you'll  say that "we dropped the ball" or "I take the blame for that". No. Stop.  We all know coding new features is not your responsibility. If you want  to claim responsibility for anything, be honest and say you take  responsibility for not hiring a development team that actually gets  things done on time. There are 13 year old kids out there that could get  these things implemented in a day.



Dragoneer said:


> I'm trying to improve those numbers, and they're going up - albeit slowly. Things aren't perfect, but improving. Some admins have been on hiatus, vacation, etc. We're still reviewing the admin team in general, and trying to prioritize people. we've had some idle admins, and not every admin is working on the same thing. My goal is by May to have zero backlog, and all admins gearing up to handle things more efficiently
> 
> I'll be honest. It's not where I want it to be, but it's also far, FAR better than it was a mere three months ago. And we're working to improve it every day.



Why not just implement the oft-requested "Report Submission" button? 90% of the trouble tickets would disappear instantly. Stop trying to fix the broken trouble ticket system by shuffling people around.


----------



## Fay V (Apr 10, 2012)

About this "Jumping Ship" for Weasyl thing. I feel I ought to make it very clear.
Yes I am an Admin for FA and I am also one of the creation staff for the upcoming site Weasyl. I am following through on my responsibilities with the site exactly as I promised. It isn't a big deal so far as I am concerned. I joined both teams for different reason, and while similar they are two different sites. It's like saying you can't have an Italian restaurant in town because there's a Mexican place already built. 

As for Ben as mod, you bring up good points CF but you're being extreme about it. Yes Ben had a bad history as a mod here, hell we butted heads on everything, however it's extremely harsh to attack his character like that and assume he will be so heavy handed with the rules. I said before that FA and Weasyl are two different things. They're designed to run differently. 
Honestly I have faith that Ben won't be dealing a heavy hand with the rules and if you want proof of that then check out the info we've published, the staff CoC and upcoming AUP. One of the most consistent things Ben has been pushing is to be as open to the community as possible. But besides that, frankly he doesn't have the option. We've set up our staff to be checked and balanced. There's no way for him to start handing out bans and such unfairly without getting his ass kicked out. 

I realize you have a history with Ben, but I'm taking personal insult to this, because that kind of harsh site killing heavy handed authoritarian attitude is not one that I would abide, much less put my name behind. So just chill out and go take a look at the way the site is actually set up before you start claiming it'll die in a month.


----------



## CerbrusNL (Apr 10, 2012)

dinosaurdammit said:


> How I feel fa is run sometimes
> 
> 
> If someone were to point out that I had a unlocked front door or some other compromised part of my house rather than arrest them for their foresight I would thank them and get it fixed asap.



There's a difference between saying "Hey, that's broken" and abusing the crap out of it.


----------



## dinosaurdammit (Apr 10, 2012)

CerbrusNL said:


> There's a difference between saying "Hey, that's broken" and abusing the crap out of it.




I really dont see how it hurt the site, it was not something that compromised the integrity of the system. If the coders only act when someone exploits it but it has been a known issue for a while then who should you really be mad at?


----------



## Kirune (Apr 10, 2012)

CerbrusNL said:


> There's a difference between saying "Hey, that's broken" and abusing the crap out of it.



There's also a difference between being told something is broken and waiting for it to be abused before you fix it.


----------



## Accountability (Apr 10, 2012)

Two different people now remember this first coming to light in 2008.

So this whole "We didn't know! You should have reported it!" thing might as well be thrown out.


----------



## Mxpklx (Apr 10, 2012)

I think you guys are overreacting over this whole issue. 

I've been on forums that are literally Hell. And that is not an understatement. A good example of this Facepunch Forums. Here are some reason why you can get banned on Facepunch:

1. Not capitalizing the first letter of a sentence.
3. Bad grammar in general.
2. Image macro.
3. replying to a dead thread. Or dead as in nobody posted in it for a week.
4. Replying to troll threads. You'd get banned for not even realizing it's a troll thread too.
5. Asking a user why they were banned.
6. Internet memes they don't like.
7. Not meeting their desired ban quota. *That's right, they have a ban quota.
*
As for the over-sized image exploit, the participants should have just been given a 48 hour ban for partaking in this exploit. No perma bans over something small  like that. But who am I to judge the all knowing admins of FA? And so what if they abused it like a gang bang? It's their own loss. The issue should have been easily fixable seeing as how it works. (This is the first I have heard of this so I may be wrong)

And a quick thank you to the Furaffinity mods/admins for not being complete and utter assholes like most other forums. I just think the level of over reaction in certain cases is too high. 

You regular users really take this forum for granted.


----------



## Kirune (Apr 10, 2012)

Mxpklx said:


> i am the forum master look at me talk



did you read the thread before you posted, bro
because it sounds like you're way off base.
also facepunch is dumb and you make it sound awful.


----------



## Draconas (Apr 10, 2012)

A little off topic probably, but people bitching about tickets? I had my last 3-4 tickets answered within a day, albeit it's by sciggles, she's doing pretty good in my book. As for the exploit, I sent an admin here on FAF and sciggles a copy of the how-to journal before they deleted it, details and images on how to do it that were in great details, why this is relevant I guess is because of how bad that they wanted it.

Harmless exploit or not, if the users knew that they would risk their accounts over something this stupid (I even told them they would suspended/banned), then they know and now show others what happens when you do this kind of thing.


----------



## CannonFodder (Apr 10, 2012)

Draconas said:


> A little off topic probably, but people bitching about tickets? I had my last 3-4 tickets answered within a day, albeit it's by sciggles, she's doing pretty good in my book. As for the exploit, I sent an admin here on FAF and sciggles a copy of the how-to journal before they deleted it, details and images on how to do it that were in great details, why this is relevant I guess is because of how bad that they wanted it.
> 
> Harmless exploit or not, if the users knew that they would risk their accounts over something this stupid (I even told them they would suspended/banned), then they know and now show others what happens when you do this kind of thing.


Yeah, that's what I've wondered about people talking about the trouble tickets as well.  The only TT I've ever filed that took longer than a day was during a holiday and that's understandable.  How long do they on AVERAGE take to be resolved anyhow?


----------



## Mxpklx (Apr 10, 2012)

Kirune said:


> did you read the thread before you posted, bro
> because it sounds like you're way off base.
> also facepunch is dumb and you make it sound awful.


I'm just pointing out the over reaction some people are having about this topic. 
And did you even read over your post?


----------



## Fay V (Apr 10, 2012)

CannonFodder said:


> Yeah, that's what I've wondered about people talking about the trouble tickets as well.  The only TT I've ever filed that took longer than a day was during a holiday and that's understandable.  How long do they on AVERAGE take to be resolved anyhow?



Depends on the ticket, day, and so on. 
We still have a backlog, so those will take time. Users that post "this person is stealing" and that's it take a long time to answer. Ones with a loooooooot of links take a while, but most lately have been done in under a week. The average being a day maybe?


----------



## CannonFodder (Apr 10, 2012)

Fay V said:


> Depends on the ticket, day, and so on.
> We still have a backlog, so those will take time. Users that post "this person is stealing" and that's it take a long time to answer. Ones with a loooooooot of links take a while, but most lately have been done in under a week. The average being a day maybe?


Maybe there should be a "how to properly file a trouble ticket" with a bunch of tips and general advice for users?


----------



## CerbrusNL (Apr 10, 2012)

Mxpklx said:


> As for the over-sized image exploit, the participants should have just been given a 48 hour ban for partaking in this exploit. No perma bans over something small  like that. But who am I to judge the all knowing admins of FA? And so what if they abused it like a gang bang? It's their own loss. The issue should have been easily fixable seeing as how it works. (This is the first I have heard of this so I may be wrong)
> 
> And a quick thank you to the Furaffinity mods/admins for not being complete and utter assholes like most other forums. I just think the level of over reaction in certain cases is too high.
> 
> You regular users really take this forum for granted.



The bans have been changed from 3 days or so, to 1 day, for the regular users. 

Your thanks are appreciated, though ^_^


----------



## Fay V (Apr 10, 2012)

CannonFodder said:


> Maybe there should be a "how to properly file a trouble ticket" with a bunch of tips and general advice for users?



We've made threads like that before, two in fact. they're floating around somewhere. 
But yes I want to make a very clear cut how to for the site. especially since I get too many Notes "Help I have a problem" "I can't help with that right now, please file a trouble ticket" "how"


----------



## Arshes Nei (Apr 10, 2012)

Fay V said:


> I realize you have a history with Ben, but I'm taking personal insult to this, because that kind of harsh site killing heavy handed authoritarian attitude is not one that I would abide, much less put my name behind. So just chill out and go take a look at the way the site is actually set up before you start claiming it'll die in a month.



Although CF's points are overdramatized, she isn't the only person I know of from this site that has a personal history with Ben or problem with his behavior from user to mod standpoint. I think that may be a tough road to earn that trust back from other users who felt abused by him. So I wish you the best though. I seriously don't see why you being on another site is a problem.


----------



## Fay V (Apr 10, 2012)

Arshes Nei said:


> Although CF's points are overdramatized, she isn't the only person I know of from this site that has a personal history with Ben or problem with his behavior from user to mod standpoint. I think that may be a tough road to earn that trust back from other users who felt abused by him. So I wish you the best though. I seriously don't see why you being on another site is a problem.



I understand that, I was the same way with Ben. It took me meeting him in person and actually sitting down and talking to him about a site where he could start ground up versus trying to change everything. Honestly I think Ben has grown since being an FA mod. 
Hopefully Ben won't even be an issue. We're striving to make the site policies transparent and all our actions consistent. So it shouldn't be "Ben is doing this" it should be "staff is doing this" 
That's something that will come with time as users learn to trust Weasyl. 

As for the site. It really doesn't matter. I suppose everyone assumes that the sites will have an instant vendetta against one another, but as I said, they are totally different creatures which will offer totally different experiences. 
I'm not even doing the same work between the sites, but oh well. Members of both staff are fully aware of what I'm doing and that I'm doing my best to help both sites.


----------



## CannonFodder (Apr 10, 2012)

Fay V said:


> I understand that, I was the same way with Ben. It took me meeting him in person and actually sitting down and talking to him about a site where he could start ground up versus trying to change everything. Honestly I think Ben has grown since being an FA mod.
> Hopefully Ben won't even be an issue. We're striving to make the site policies transparent and all our actions consistent. So it shouldn't be "Ben is doing this" it should be "staff is doing this"
> That's something that will come with time as users learn to trust Weasyl.
> 
> ...


I don't have a issue with ben as a person.  The thing I do have a problem is that Weasyl adding him as a admin.  It's probably not going to go well, but considering that Weasyl is going to have other ex-admins as well hopefully things won't get off to a rocky start and as far as ex-admins Ben is by far not one of the worst choices.  Some of the ex-admins who shall remain nameless, but you are probably thinking the same person I am, I'd lose faith in humanity if people actually considered them for another admin spot.


I don't get that either, even though FA is pretty much the powerhouse when it comes to furry sites people act as if you can ONLY use one furry site in total.

The one thing I have a problem with Weasyl though is that from the looks of it that it's trying to be like Fa.  Weasyl should do it's own thing and sure taking things here and there from other popular websites is okay, but only if the parts they are modeling after are for the benefit of the website NOT the whole site.

Tl:dr; my problem with Weasyl is that they seem to be trying to hard to be like Fa.


----------



## Fay V (Apr 10, 2012)

CannonFodder said:


> I don't have a issue with ben as a person.  The thing I do have a problem is that Weasyl adding him as a admin.  It's probably not going to go well, but considering that Weasyl is going to have other ex-admins as well hopefully things won't get off to a rocky start and as far as ex-admins Ben is by far not one of the worst choices.  Some of the ex-admins who shall remain nameless, but you are probably thinking the same person I am, I'd lose faith in humanity if people actually considered them for another admin spot.
> 
> 
> I don't get that either, even though FA is pretty much the powerhouse when it comes to furry sites people act as if you can ONLY use one furry site in total.
> ...



Just to be clear. None of the admins were selected because they were ex-admins, current admins, or whatever to FA. Ben has actually been one of the founders for Weasyl, so his involvement has absolutely nothing to do with FA at all. He's been instrumental in getting the business license, setting up our payment providers, legitimate donations drive, etc. His work as an FAF moderator means nothing. He is an admin because he has been monumental to the foundation of this new site. 

As for trying too hard to be like FA. I dunno what you mean and we ought to take this somewhere else. Go to my ask thread and I'll gladly go into the project more in depth. 
Just again, the admins, ex staff from FA is a coincidence. Not chosen because they worked for FA but because they have other qualities that Kihari (the owner) felt was exactly what the new site needed.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Apr 10, 2012)

Fay V said:


> As for trying too hard to be like FA. I dunno what you mean and we ought to take this somewhere else. Go to my ask thread and I'll gladly go into the project more in depth.
> Just again, the admins, ex staff from FA is a coincidence. Not chosen because they worked for FA but because they have other qualities that Kihari (the owner) felt was exactly what the new site needed.



True, but I kinda scratch my head at the "Acceptable Upload Policy" that term has been more specific to FA, when most other sites use other terminology.


----------



## Verin Asper (Apr 10, 2012)

Arshes Nei said:


> True, but I kinda scratch my head at the "Acceptable Upload Policy" that term has been more specific to FA, when most other sites use other terminology.


its just a reworded of other sites Acceptable use Policy


----------



## Fay V (Apr 10, 2012)

Arshes Nei said:


> True, but I kinda scratch my head at the "Acceptable Upload Policy" that term has been more specific to FA, when most other sites use other terminology.


Not gonna lie. I had no idea that particular phrase was FA specific. Glancing around I realize how I've just glanced past such names. The phrase itself is fairly straight forward so it just always struck as "this is what this thing is called." 
I'll keep myself from going into a long explanation about out upload policy ideas. I'm happy to explain anything else in detail in my questions thread. 

I honestly wanted to clear the ben thing up since he can't defend himself anymore, and I'm partially involved and would rather not have my name connected in such a way.


----------



## Devious Bane (Apr 10, 2012)

Arshes Nei said:


> True, but I kinda scratch my head at the "Acceptable Upload Policy" that term has been more specific to FA, when most other sites use other terminology.


Well, FA had to use a term inwhich the most uneducated, dull minded person could understand that this specifically covers what is/isn't acceptable. The buck stops there however, the contents of the AUP can still leave a person confused after reading it 4-5 times because of how it is written.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Apr 10, 2012)

Crysix Fousen said:


> its just a reworded of other sites Acceptable use Policy



Yep or Submission policy etc. But since FA kinda hits the forefront of using it, I'd see more reason not to. It just looks like it was poorly thought out to gingerbread template the thing than doing actual research on various policies you can easily look at from other art related sites. 



Devious Bane said:


> Well, FA had to use a term inwhich the most uneducated, dull minded person could understand that this specifically covers what is/isn't acceptable. The buck stops there however, the contents of the AUP can still leave a person confused after reading it 4-5 times because of how it is written.



Yet another reason not to. If the site wants to make itself distinguishable and more clear and open to the users, why use the same kind of phrasing with a policy that is considered confusing.


----------



## Fay V (Apr 10, 2012)

That is a very good point Arshes, and we're actually taking it to heart and thinking of a better way to express ourselves without appearing to copy FA.


----------



## Verin Asper (Apr 10, 2012)

Arshes Nei said:


> Yep or Submission policy etc. But since FA kinda hits the forefront of using it, I'd see more reason not to. It just looks like it was poorly thought out to gingerbread template the thing than doing actual research on various policies you can easily look at from other art related sites.


sadly people are morons, even on SoFurry where they actually had to break it down for their idiot user base
http://wiki.sofurry.com/wiki/Acceptable_Use_Policy#Copyright

yet I still find folks uploading art not theirs, have it wiped from their gallery and told to not do it....to then continue doing it several times till they are banned (which currently theres a glitch were even if you are banned from SoFurry you can continue to upload images)


----------



## Xenke (Apr 10, 2012)

Crysix Fousen said:


> http://wiki.sofurry.com/wiki/Acceptable_Use_Policy#Copyright



"[...]the right to redistribute said work on our website *(duh...)*"

I actually lol'd.


----------



## Dragoneer (Apr 10, 2012)

Xenke said:


> "[...]the right to redistribute said work on our website *(duh...)*"
> 
> I actually lol'd.


I actually was tempted to write "The AUP in Plain English", and break it down on a line-by-line basis, complete with flow charts. "Did you make this? No? Was it made for you? No? Then you can't post it."

I never did. It'd still be ignored.


----------



## Dragoneer (Apr 10, 2012)

Fay V said:


> As for the site. It really doesn't matter. I suppose everyone assumes that the sites will have an instant vendetta against one another, but as I said, they are totally different creatures which will offer totally different experiences.  I'm not even doing the same work between the sites, but oh well. Members of both staff are fully aware of what I'm doing and that I'm doing my best to help both sites.


The way I see it both sites have different missions and different end goals, and will appeal to different (but similar) user bases. Not a problem.

People tend to think I have some death-grudge against other sites, but I'm long time friends with staffers from pretty much every other site. A lot of us go way back. We all have our different means to accomplish what we do, and different viewpoints, but we're all about the same thing: serving our community.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Apr 10, 2012)

Fay V said:


> That is a very good point Arshes, and we're actually taking it to heart and thinking of a better way to express ourselves without appearing to copy FA.



Glad to hear, I just don't want the site thought of "FA's gingers/sloppy seconds" and want you guys to definitely branch out on your own, especially if you have unique material going for you. 



Crysix Fousen said:


> sadly people are morons, even on SoFurry where they actually had to break it down for their idiot user base
> http://wiki.sofurry.com/wiki/Acceptable_Use_Policy#Copyright
> 
> yet I still find folks uploading art not theirs, have it wiped from their gallery and told to not do it....to then continue doing it several times till they are banned (which currently theres a glitch were even if you are banned from SoFurry you can continue to upload images)



Yes, and sadly this is the way of internet. Even if we gave people picture menus like Idiocracy people would still f' up and not follow policy. 

I'm not surprised by Ben's ban to be honest, and hope it doesn't reflect too poorly on the other site. Especially since as I stated before he made a big deal about leaving this site and not too long after he's back on it doing that. I really hope for change but I'll be honest, that thing just from an observational standpoint isn't too promising or welcoming for another site. To actively change you have to ...well do it, not come back and cause more headaches when not necessary. It really wasn't the mature or welcoming representation imo.

As far as the exploit goes, it just needs to be fixed. Users are going to just be frustrated over the whole ordeal if it continues on and all you can do is threaten or ban. While banning may be justified since you're asking users not to do it in the interim, that interim should be very short, because if it's a bannable offense it means it's a priority fix.


----------



## Dragoneer (Apr 10, 2012)

Arshes Nei said:


> As far as the exploit goes, it just needs to be fixed. Users are going to just be frustrated over the whole ordeal if it continues on and all you can do is threaten or ban. While banning may be justified since you're asking users not to do it in the interim, that interim should be very short, because if it's a bannable offense it means it's a priority fix.


The coding team is looking into a fix right now. We proposed a few ideas earlier, and we're looking into getting them resolved ASAP.


----------



## CannonFodder (Apr 10, 2012)

Probably the biggest reason why how some people think fa and other sites have a grudge or something is really stupid is that if that were true and fa was actively discouraging other sites growth and such then if fa ever went down be it from hardware failure/funding going to shit/whatever then there'd go the furry fandom along with it.
I'm pretty sure that Dragoneer wouldn't want the furry fandom to go extinct with fa if that ever happened.


----------



## Dragoneer (Apr 10, 2012)

CannonFodder said:


> Probably the biggest reason why how some people think fa and other sites have a grudge or something is really stupid is that if that were true and fa was actively discouraging other sites growth and such then if fa ever went down be it from hardware failure/funding going to shit/whatever then there'd go the furry fandom along with it. I'm pretty sure that Dragoneer wouldn't want the furry fandom to go extinct with fa if that ever happened.


The fandom would move on. =P Happened with previous sites time and time again. I just... wouldn't want to be the guy to take that blame. I sometimes wonder where they'd settle though.


----------



## Xenke (Apr 10, 2012)

Dragoneer said:


> I actually was tempted to write "The AUP in Plain English"



Such a document would become so lengthy that it would become unreadable.


----------



## Dragoneer (Apr 10, 2012)

Xenke said:


> Such a document would become so lengthy that it would become unreadable.


Let alone maintaining it.

Shouldn't be a problem into the future. =3


----------



## CannonFodder (Apr 10, 2012)

Dragoneer said:


> The fandom would move on. =P Happened with previous sites time and time again. I just... wouldn't want to be the guy to take that blame. I sometimes wonder where they'd settle though.


I know.  I was just pointing out how ridiculous the notion that you have a grudge against other websites is.  They act as though you want Fa to be the ONLY furry website anyone can use anywhere on the internet.

Earlier in the thread there was a conspiracy theory that the so called "real" reason why Ben was banned was because of his involvement with Weasyl.  If the people arguing that you want Fa to be the ONLY furry website were correct then their logic would stipulate that ANYBODY involved with Weasyl at any point would be banned as well.


----------



## Fay V (Apr 10, 2012)

CannonFodder said:


> I know.  I was just pointing out how ridiculous the notion that you have a grudge against other websites is.  They act as though you want Fa to be the ONLY furry website anyone can use anywhere on the internet.
> 
> Earlier in the thread there was a conspiracy theory that the so called "real" reason why Ben was banned was because of his involvement with Weasyl.  *If the people arguing that you want Fa to be the ONLY furry website were correct then their logic would stipulate that ANYBODY involved with Weasyl at any point would be banned as well*.



>.> 

<.< 

shhh


----------



## Verin Asper (Apr 10, 2012)

CannonFodder said:


> Probably the biggest reason why how some people think fa and other sites have a grudge or something is really stupid is that if that were true and fa was actively discouraging other sites growth and such then if fa ever went down be it from hardware failure/funding going to shit/whatever then there'd go the furry fandom along with it.
> I'm pretty sure that Dragoneer wouldn't want the furry fandom to go extinct with fa if that ever happened.


not to mention some folks on SoFurry moved to So Furry cause of how FA is, it is funny when I mention to them, "you know that secondlife rule I worked with a admin on FA...yea I got the idea from SoFurry's, brb wiping your gallery :V"


----------



## CannonFodder (Apr 10, 2012)

Fay V said:


> >.>
> 
> <.<
> 
> shhh


The conspiracy theory gets even worse when you seriously take a look at it.  The conspiracy theory would basically say that Dragoneer is out to ban anybody that works on any other furry site.  The fact that the site owners/admins/mods from sofurry/inkbunny/etc AREN'T banned from fa proves the conspiracy theory flat wrong.


Sometimes I wonder if the people coming up with these theories are high or drunk.


----------



## Verin Asper (Apr 10, 2012)

CannonFodder said:


> The conspiracy theory gets even worse when you seriously take a look at it.  The conspiracy theory would basically say that Dragoneer is out to ban anybody that works on any other furry site.  The fact that the site owners/admins/mods from sofurry/inkbunny/etc AREN'T banned from fa proves the conspiracy theory flat wrong.
> 
> 
> Sometimes I wonder if the people coming up with these theories are high or drunk.


They are furries, so its actually C; "gawd damn butthurt over something FA did"


----------



## LizardKing (Apr 10, 2012)

Dragoneer said:


> The coding team is looking into a fix right now. We proposed a few ideas earlier, and we're looking into getting them resolved ASAP.



Ideas such as "fix the problem", and, uh...


----------



## Accountability (Apr 11, 2012)

CannonFodder said:


> The conspiracy theory gets even worse when you seriously take a look at it.  The conspiracy theory would basically say that Dragoneer is out to ban anybody that works on any other furry site.  The fact that the site owners/admins/mods from sofurry/inkbunny/etc AREN'T banned from fa proves the conspiracy theory flat wrong.
> 
> 
> Sometimes I wonder if the people coming up with these theories are high or drunk.



The best FA conspiracy theories are the ones that FA is really making thousands of dollars in donations a month and Dragoneer is buying cars/whatever with them.

By comparison the banning ones sound _believable_. He can't just be banning people he doesn't like, either, because I'm still here.


----------



## gunnersquad (Apr 11, 2012)

.


----------



## Verin Asper (Apr 11, 2012)

gunnersquad said:


> I can't believe people actually thought there wouldn't be consequences for breaking the rules and that they should just be let off the hook because it was "harmless"


*has been let off the hook once found to be harmless in a different event*
I'm not saying they should be out right suspended, thats what I thought Ben should get at least, but those that went "lol gonna try this out" should of gotten a warning for being an idiot


----------



## Devious Bane (Apr 11, 2012)

Crysix Fousen said:


> ...those that went "lol gonna try this out" should of gotten a warning for being an idiot



I agree, I don't think displaying the exploit and encouraging the use of it should be considered one in the same. However, both things are addressed by the same line of text in the ToS which states


> [Do not] discuss, *take part* or abuse [...] known bugs.


.


----------



## kayfox (Apr 11, 2012)

So, its okay to abuse unknown bugs?


----------



## LizardKing (Apr 11, 2012)

kayfox said:


> So, its okay to abuse unknown bugs?



Only if they're also unknown _by the person using them_. It's an interesting exercise in meditation and doublethink.


----------



## kayfox (Apr 11, 2012)

LizardKing said:


> Only if they're also unknown _by the person using them_. It's an interesting exercise in meditation and doublethink.



Well, once you think there is a bug then you will need to repro the problem, but thats abusing a known bug.  You cant really report bugs without knowing what leads to them, hence the repro.  Therefore dont report bugs.

Solved.


----------



## Traediras (Apr 13, 2012)

Wouldn't it be easier to set/limit a file's dimensions in the actual code? That way even if the file's dimensions are larger, the image would still only appear at 100px?







That is probably the most primitive way to do it, but for reference the icon's physical dimensions are 250x250px. Even if you guys were able to implement an avatar class in the CSS (unsure if you guys do that or not), at the most basic level that would virtually prevent any further icon exploits. And yes, I did use the .gif exploit, only to verify the bug above all else. Was kinda funny but there is also the potential for that sort of thing to be used much more creatively.


----------



## Kihari (Apr 14, 2012)

Traediras said:


> Wouldn't it be easier to set/limit a file's dimensions in the actual code? That way even if the file's dimensions are larger, the image would still only appear at 100px? ... the icon's physical dimensions are 250x250px. Even if you guys were able to implement an avatar class in the CSS (unsure if you guys do that or not), at the most basic level that would virtually prevent any further icon exploits.



Speaking strictly on _resizing_, this could be done in two ways: via CSS as you suggest, or by actually resizing the image stored on the server. The first option has some hurdles when dealing with different browsers (IE's hilarious tendencies to get things wrong, for example), but beyond that, the worst thing that can happen is having to sit around all day editing a million template files where these things appear. You're also soaking up more bandwidth serving up a larger file, but y'know.

The real problem is that this is (or was, as the case may be) yet another example of the application _trusting information supplied by the user_, which is a fault that has _very_ worrying implications. Out of curiosity, any details from those in the know on how this particular exploit has been addressed?


----------



## Traediras (Apr 14, 2012)

Kihari said:


> Speaking strictly on _resizing_, this could be done in two ways: via CSS as you suggest, or by actually resizing the image stored on the server. The first option has some hurdles when dealing with different browsers (IE's hilarious tendencies to get things wrong, for example), but beyond that, the worst thing that can happen is having to sit around all day editing a million template files where these things appear. You're also soaking up more bandwidth serving up a larger file, but y'know.
> 
> The real problem is that this is (or was, as the case may be) yet another example of the application _trusting information supplied by the user_, which is a fault that has _very_ worrying implications. Out of curiosity, any details from those in the know on how this particular exploit has been addressed?



If the failsafe was referenced directly from a CSS file then the impact would be very small, not even 40 bytes worth of data. Physically resizing the file on the server would probably be less efficient in the long run, but I guess the only other viable alternative is to convert to a different format (of which the only other known file that can allow animations is aPNG files - still .png format but able to run animations). Even if the server dealt with resizing, we don't know if it would pick up the .gif exploit or not.


----------



## Kihari (Apr 14, 2012)

Traediras said:


> If the failsafe was referenced directly from a CSS file then the impact would be very small, not even 40 bytes worth of data. Physically resizing the file on the server would probably be less efficient in the long run



I'd rather do more processing once than read more data many times. But that's me.



> Even if the server dealt with resizing, we don't know if it would pick up the .gif exploit or not.



Well really, there need not _be_ an exploit (and apparently this was fixed, it seems? so good show).


----------

