Your comments

Although I can see why this might be suggested, it is an idea that I do not fundamentally agree with. A couple of the reasons have been mentioned already - some users might come back, and so on. But here's some additional food for thought.

  • By deleting someone's account, you are directly affecting their own personal data, which is something that individuals should have control over. I know people have mentioned adding a clause to terms and conditions, but considering that there are times when people might not have control over being able to get back online (personal circumstances) this would not always be a fair move.
  • Even though yes, there are a bunch of inactive accounts just sitting there, they are not harming anyone, they just exist, so I'm confused as to why they annoy people. I am not versed in server capacity, but given there are plenty of sites out there on the internet that don't delete people's accounts, I'm guessing there are probably things you can do to mitigate the issue. (Is it an issue? Are the servers being affected currently? I have no idea what it takes for these things to become a problem.)

I can see how this could potentially be annoying!

Thanks for your response! Yes, thankfully I haven't seen it flood the site chats too much either, which is positive.

I can see the reasoning behind the 100 forum post being to reduce spam; my main query on this is that it creates inconsistency across users, thereby making the feature a lot less functional. The need to reduce/prevent spam may also be a good reason to modify the feature so that it's changed through settings instead. (This helps especially if you do get users who come and go a lot.) Or alternatively, create a way for an account to automatically switch to idol if you don't interact for a certain length of time.

To add to my original post, here is a way in which it might be done:

  • All feedback is centralised to this feedback forum. When creating a feedback post, there is a dropdown list saying "This feedback is for..." with options to choose "General WoX / WoL / WoP / (insert whichever site here)."
  • Site specific feedback topics are accessible by the the leaders of the relevant site (the big green & blue), and they are able to respond to the feedback, mark it as complete/declined/under review and so on. They are also responsible for implementing changes to their site.
  • This means that users no longer have to differentiate when to post in the feedback forum, and when to contact the MoM of a specific site.
  • General site feedback (pertaining to changes affecting all sites) is dealt with as usual by the higher ups.

Thanks for the info - I think I remember there being a word limit but didn't realise it was that long already so good to know.

I think I just question whether adding such a test is only going to create yet one more barrier for people who would really just like to get on with things and enjoy the site. There are lots of people who grade well right from the start. Another possible issue is the fact of there being enough graders per each piece of homework. With a barrier in place, there is no doubt that some may get put off or never get as far as actual grading; in which case there may be fewer graders overall, meaning grades are slower to get back to the users. Which possibly means more AT work. I guess the question would then be, is there enough improvement in the quality of grading to justify that being the case?

It’s an interesting idea but comes with faults. There are certain things that can be very subjective. Eg I’ve had assignments in the past where it was very hard to tell from the answers if a requirement was met or not, and had to make a judgement. Likewise, when using information from outside sources, people’s opinion may differ on how much info used counts as plagiarism. These things could be very hard to judge and scoring people on them seems unfair. Furthermore, if someone took such a quiz and failed, would this mean they are locked out of grading forever? What if they wanted to improve and try again?

I agree people shouldn’t take the mick with grading but feel that this could end up excluding competent users.

If people really want to prevent one-liners, maybe try one if these instead:

1) Create a minimum character limit on the grading box that prevents submission if the comment is too short.

2) Make it a hard rule that all comments are to be a certain length and that a user has the right to complain if this is not the case. Also punish graders who are culprits of this.

I disagree with this for one reason: Keeping a pet involves feeding them, which can be very costly for a user. To involuntarily receive a pet as a gift might be detrimental to users who don't have a lot of money to begin with. This forces on them the choice of either ruining their bank account by keeping the pet, or making the emotional decision to release them. Pets should be able to be acquired by the user only, as a decision they have made themselves, and not from being gifted by others.

I would love for this matter to be raised again on the basis that interest rates have now changed. Grad staff, who are not allowed to do homework or grade, cannot make even close to as much money as anyone with a student account as their only means are the weekly salary, riddles, anagrams and interest. Meaning if they don't have much money to start with, they will be surviving on very little, which restricts access to more expensive parts of the site - potions brewing, for example. Think about it: To even get one potion, you have to go through potentially loads of Whispering Wizard wheel spins (50G each) and that's just to get one recipe, never mind the ingredients. Once you have that, and have purchased the ingredients, you have to wait a long time for the potion to be ready, and even if you do everything perfectly, there's no guarantee that the potion will succeed. In the event that it fails, that's more money you have to spend buying fresh ingredients. It simply isn't covered by the current salary, especially if you also need to buy food/drink to survive outside of the free food meal times, or even just generally buy stuff as the purpose of the site is to be able to enjoy it. Please do reconsider this.

I would like to offer a suggestion that combines this with the suggestion of teachers being able to see all homework done with their subject. Obviously, creativity is very subjective, and one person's idea of creativity might greatly differ from another. Therefore, I think the creativity award idea is great, but should be kept to the teacher's discretion. If teachers were able to see all of their class homework, perhaps they could have the option of clicking a button to reward creativity if they think the homework was particularly good. If that's potentially a problem with the site storing huge amounts of work, then maybe the teachers could have a 1 week window in which to do so before it disappears.

If I zoom in on my browser, the text does not wrap to fit the screen, meaning I would constantly have to scroll left and right to read the text. A zoom feature would simplify things by increasing the text size while still wrapping it so that it fits on the screen. Copy/paste could work, but again, some topics are quite long.