[adelardsyah]

It would be greatly appreciated if BF can implement "if user is banned, then remove hidden post" function.
Whom are we giving these credits to if the user is already gone, anyway?

[Fry]

hmm seems like a interesting update but sometimes people will disable their accounts so you would loose that stuff

This forum account is currently banned. Ban Length: (Permanent)
Ban Reason: Multi-Accounting | https://breachforums.hn/Forum-Ban-Appeals if you feel this is incorrect.

[adelardsyah]

hmm seems like a interesting update but sometimes people will disable their accounts so you would loose that stuff

That's true. So maybe like if-except self-ban function, i guess

[Tanaka]

Obviousely self-ban can't be interested about this proposal

[OneSh0tTw0sh0t]

It would be greatly appreciated if BF can implement "if user is banned, then remove hidden post" function.
Whom are we giving these credits to if the user is already gone, anyway?

I think this would also make spammers work easy - many threads will be auto-unlocked which means bots will be less spotable - so why don't we just delete threads with credit paywalls giving the chance for them to be reposed by another user so they can get credit?  As for "reply to see", I agree that they could be unlocked when the user is banned.

[adelardsyah]

Obviousely self-ban can't be interested about this proposal

Well, obviously

It would be greatly appreciated if BF can implement "if user is banned, then remove hidden post" function.
Whom are we giving these credits to if the user is already gone, anyway?

I think this would also make spammers work easy - many threads will be auto-unlocked which means bots will be less spotable - so why don't we just delete threads with credit paywalls giving the chance for them to be reposed by another user so they can get credit?  As for "reply to see", I agree that they could be unlocked when the user is banned.

"Reply to view" was introduced to supress bot from existing, i believe.
The way i see it is that credits are meant as a "thank you" for contributing to the forum.
Like that guy who sat for 20-something-hours to clean data from LinkedIn (i think, i could be mistaken), i unlocked it just because he deserved it. Even if he split the link to 3 and asked to be unlocked 3 times, i would have unlocked them all just because he's earned it. I don't even need the data as i have already scrapped all the email address that i need myself.

However, i definitely don't want to spend 1 credit, much less 8 credits, to unlock a link from someone who has been banned for scamming, for example. If BF thinks that person doesn't belong here, then that person also does not deserve to be "thanked".

[Dev]

so why don't we just delete threads with credit paywalls giving the chance for them to be reposed by another user so they can get credit?  As for "reply to see", I agree that they could be unlocked when the user is banned.

I would have to disagree with this wholeheartedly.

Resources that only a handful of people were interested in would now be deleted-- possibly getting wiped off the face of the net if nobody noticed the absence of the thread, thus not reuploading. Then the sad individual that noticed it was deleted but doesn't have the resource, doesn't have the ability to reupload.

The point of self-ban's is another worthwhile thing to consider, a self banned account shouldn't have their threads modified in any way I'd say

I kinda have to disagree with this thread's suggestion overall, I get it, but I don't agree.

[adelardsyah]

so why don't we just delete threads with credit paywalls giving the chance for them to be reposed by another user so they can get credit?  As for "reply to see", I agree that they could be unlocked when the user is banned.

I would have to disagree with this wholeheartedly.

Resources that only a handful of people were interested in would now be deleted-- possibly getting wiped off the face of the net if nobody noticed the absence of the thread, thus not reuploading. Then the sad individual that noticed it was deleted but doesn't have the resource, doesn't have the ability to reupload.

The point of self-ban's is another worthwhile thing to consider, a self banned account shouldn't have their threads modified in any way I'd say

I kinda have to disagree with this thread's suggestion overall, I get it, but I don't agree.

I see your point. However, you are getting it wrong, i believe. (correct me if i'm also getting you wrong)

The only suggestion i make is to remove credits required to unlock post from banned users with the exception of self-ban users, obviously. That's it. It's the only suggestion i made here.

[Hollow]

It seems complicated to implement if we have to exclude certain types of bans; I can already see the bloat that could result from this..

[ReverseForce]

It seems complicated to implement if we have to exclude certain types of bans; I can already see the bloat that could result from this..

Why the reply option is missing from posts of banned accounts?

I reported this to adda already

---

It seems complicated to implement if we have to exclude certain types of bans; I can already see the bloat that could result from this..

Why the reply option is missing from posts of banned accounts?

I reported this to adda already

*Addka724... whatever

This forum account is currently banned. Ban Length: (Permanent)
Ban Reason: Self-Ban (health issues) | http://breached26tezcofqla4adzyn22notfqw...an-Appeals if you wish to be unbanned in the future.