Accepted [Suggestion] Fix Contracts

When I moderated contracts... It would be very annoying for myself and the other parties involved to have to cause yet another re-sign after already correcting big mistakes in the contract simply due to a tag missing.

They've just fixed up some terms, some payment dates, etc. Then I have to delay it further "Oh sorry could you please tag the 7th username of "whoever" before we can approve this contract". Honestly... tagging can cause delays of hours, because if tagging is poorly done the first time, we have to wait for everyone involved to sign the contract again.

To fix, a server admin (as nicit said) just clicks edit on the sticky and changes the clause to require 1 tag of each user and that's it. More tagging is more than welcome if you so wish.

 

True, they do need to be read fully but the name tagging helps make it easier to read imo and tell who's responsibilities are what. Instead of trying to hunt for names in the same color as all the text around it.

Not really sure what you meant by this.

 

You DONT NEED TAGS. You can literally see who posted as per that image ^^^

 

This is irrelevant. There are responsibilities of both users in the contract. You can't determine that from who posted it. And sure tags aren't necessary but no-one is going to take the time to change the name colors otherwise unless they are required to do so, which lets face it that's never going to happen. A username has to be listed for each individual responsibility to clarify who's it is. Tagging just makes it easier for those names to stand out for each one.

 

Ahh, I see where you're coming from now. However, I don't see how it's really necessary - Contracts seem fine and clear already. They already state the specific users and their roles and I don't see how it's that hard seeing the specific users listed and what they do.

 

I agree that it is better... but the question posed by Nicit's proposal is whether it is best to relax the rules a bit. But look, if you're a moderator, you're going to read the entire contract. I don't think it would be too much more work to read a little more white instead of blue. Things work better, in my opinion, if they have the user's needs at the forefront. Loosening the tag requirements will help users at little cost to staff.

 

Ctrl-F --> Enter Name --> Look for highlighted names.

There we go, you have just found all the names in the contract. Guess what!? There's not an @ sign in front of them but that doesn't matter because of the world of technology.

 

Just a reminder to keep this thread to only your opinions on the topic, and then move on. There's no reason to argue over other people's opinions as they are just that, opinions. Posts that were attacking other posts or generally flamebaiting have been removed. Let's not continue to do this.

 

I really see no need in being forced to tag players. All this just leads to is extra work for both staff and players - Staff will have to keep pointlessly reminding users to tag others and players will have to keep editing their contract, further stalling the approval - All this does is discourage players from doing contracts. Contracts are supposed to be a more simple and cleaner way of making and enforcing contracts - And being required to pointlessly tag users goes directly against that.

There are critics of this suggestion who claim this would have players make spelling mistakes and claim they didn't agree to the contract, that it makes it harder to spot users in contracts or people who even argue that we shouldn't fix something that isn't broken. I disagree.

Those who claim that players would somehow "claim they didn't agree to the contract due to spelling errors in their name" forget the fact that they clearly agreed to it with their forum account. If they truly didn't agree to it, they wouldn't have signed via their forum account in the first place. Not to mention, doing things like this is both not using your common sense and bending the rules - Things that are strictly not allowed.

Those who cry that it'd make it harder to spot users in contracts forget one simple thing - You may use CTRL-F to spot usernames too. Just perform that on your browser and search for the usernames - It isn't that hard.

Finally, those who say we shouldn't "fix something that isn't broken" have two flaws in their argument. Firstly, why not though? It literally just takes a couple minutes to fix, and imagine all the hassle it'd save both moderators and users. Secondly, contracts kinda are broken for this reason - This discourages users from making contracts and adds unnecessary complications to contracts - Contracts are supposed to be simple, clean and easy to enforce - Not full of unnecessary complications.

I see literally no effects from this suggestion as than positive ones if this is implemented.

+1

*bump*

 

BUMP - As a staff member I don't see the point in delaying accepting a users contract for the whole sake of making sure they've put @ at the beginning of their name, as long as they do it once in the post to make sure that the appropriate user has been notified that they have been mentioned I see no need in making them do it every single time.

+1

 

@Nicit6