Jump to content

Cyan

Advanced Members
  • Posts

    207
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Cyan

  1. I am going to use my own discretion and close this. Ideally we want constructive and appropriate criticism on this forum base, something most of the replies have not been. And I am sure the OP wanted that rather than some of the harassment he has received both on the forum base and off. 

     

    I want this to be fair for everyone regardless of the circumstances. Sadly some people may not be able to see that.  

     

    With that said though, its disappointing the majority of replies here have been removed by our moderation team (vols included) even though they all have been correctly removed. No one has done anything wrong here - and worked within the tools/rules they have been instructed to do so. 

     

    The rules are not here to stifle conversations but to try and improve them, something that's not really worked in this case so we will have an internal discussion about moderation practices in the future, nothing may change though as we discuss it. 

     

    Threads like this are difficult to get the right balance, and with that said I think the moderation team have done overall a good job. 

     

    Any further questions, feel free to reach out to me. 

    • Thanks 1
    • Sad 2
  2. This appears to be an opportunity for people with concerns about that chat to vent their frustrations to the main owner. 

     

    Regardless whether people believe the main owner is suitable for the job or not - the discussion is open and it should be made use of. 

     

    :)

    • Award 1
    • Cool 1
  3. 4 hours ago, Brandon said:

    Ultimately, we should not be expected to change security protocols when they are industry standard. Facebook also has Code Generator, which is the same thing as the two-factor authentication method that xat uses. The method that xat uses is a standard and is used across the web, so it's the responsibility of the user to understand how it works if they wish to use it. Two-factor by using SMS is still secure, but less secure.

    The key thing here is though, nearly every other provider uses SMS as a backup, we do not. 

     

     

    Noticing the subject, I do not agree with a  replace of authenticator, just have sms as a backup 

  4. SMS backup is standard, and is something that although in our case would weaken security, its still more than good enough for this type of usage. And I have no concerns about it. 

     

    Only real concern would be cost, and some international users or messing up country codes, or spamming the system.

     

    For what it is, should not be too expensive, but until research is done and proper cost analysis for is it worth it is complete this type of feature.

     

    We used to use a PHONE verification system for paid users to remove reserve. It was quite a pain though understanding what types of phones is acceptable or not. At least with this type of solution it would be all SMS. 

     

  5. Agree with the concept, but a lower random number of xats with a new value generated randomly every day.

     

    Stops bots working out the limit and then just assigning the amount of xats to the account. 

     

    Also with the ability of increasing and decreasing until raids stop.... unfortunately people will be effected though with captcha measures. 

  6. Yeah, I'm going to disagree. 

     

    Im not for adding rules for the sake of adding rules, some people will post good luck just being polite and then have there post deleted or even warned about posting again, and then they will have a negative experience of our forum.

     

    Instead we want to be welcoming. 

    • Award 1
  7. Starting again, as no one counted there posts, and also, cameron diaz was mentioned 4 times, some other guy three times.... rules are:

     

    Okay, I really hate forum games, however we should really kick start this forum with something, and as you guys have demanded this ridiculousness for years, lets start with a game that has really annoyed me on other forums in the past. 

     

    The idea of the game is to name a celebrity, or famous person starting with the first letter of the second name. For example

     

    Post1: Isaac Newton

    Post2: Nelly Furtado

    Post3: Frank Turner 

     

    A famous person is defined as having, a Wikipedia page, or Twitter verified with over 25,000 real followers. 

    The same notable person cannot be used twice. 

     

    The first notable person is; Leonardo Dicaprio

     

    The thread will be locked: April 30th at 23:59 UTC. Thats a insane 2 months of posting. The winner is determined as suggesting the most notable undisputed names within that time frame. You should keep a counter on every post for my sanity, any cheating will result in disqualification. 

     

    You get 2 lives. A life is lost when you forget to count your post. AND if you name the same notable person a second time. 

     

    Winner gets 3000 xats, and anything else anyone wants to donate to the fund. 

     

    From my experience these games get very competitive and friends can become arch enemies, please have fun know your limits and remember the rules. 

     

    Let the living hell begin. 

  8. If you do get any to join, contact me directly so I can verify them and have them set up. 

     

    xat in the past has offered free stuff to them as well to get them started. 

     

    I should add, when it comes to politicians, being in power etc is not enough, they have to actually be a sort of celebrity, so Obama would count, but whoever the vice president is wouldn't..

     

    or your local MP for example wouldnt count...

     

    also, twitter verification alone is not enough.

     

    Each will be decided case by case basis basically by xat. 

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.