Gerard

Including Chris. lol Witch one? Admin Chris don't count, he's Admin, not Moderator. Or does Chris count ? Inside joke - a couple of weeks ago Chris forgot Spaz wasn't still a moderator, because he gets treated as if he were staff all the time anyway.

Regedit = registry editor Start, Run, type "regedit", hit ok In case you didnt know, thats where Windows stores all its information about what stuff is and where to find it. Don't start changing things unless you know what you're doing (which you do because I just explained it).

The CtrlAltDel/Administrator login is probably your easiest bet. If you have XP Pro you can go Start/Run and type lusrmgr.msc - this brings up the dialog where you can add/remove/enable/disable/rename accounts, and you can change the password of the administrator account if you have access. But there is a (slightly harder) way to hide accounts from the welcome screen. You make it into a "special account" Go to regedit, and navigate to: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon\SpecialAccounts\UserList Right click, New, DWORD. Make the name of it the SAME as the name of the existing account you want to hide. For example if you have an account called "secret" call the key "secret". Make sure the hex value is 0 (which is the default if you choose dword). Test it by locking your PC, and the account will no longer show up in the logon screen.

And yet, not only am I there..... But I've got two votes? Maybe a few people never realized I wasn't a mod? Could've been an honest mistake, I guess. Including Chris. lol True Story.

Spaz wasn't a moderator at all in 2007.

That's a good point. I've only played MTA/SAMP once or twice ever or something, but do you have accounts you can keep? Like on most multiplayers, where your account keeps your weapons and stats after you leave, ready for the next time you log on. If that data is stored on the tgtap mta/samp server, then it could probably be edited by us fairly easily. Eg being able to buy things from the store. If that's possible it would tie the forums into the game really well.

If you don't play multiplayer (like me) or you don't have a 360/PS3 (like me) then you're just going to miss out, unless you change one of those things. This idea on its own isn't actually removing anything from the forum, it's just giving some/a-lot-of/most people something extra - not making any difference to the few/lot-of people that can't/don't participate. The issue comes with getting rid of the gang system - but to be honest, that's pretty much defunct. I wouldn't have said it was FUBAR, but all you can do is apply/getaccepted into gangs and chat in a private subforum - that could still go on after the changes if you have an official clan. AKA no difference, except instead of waiting for non-existent gang wars you can just play on multiplayer. I don't see any reason not to do this, but Chris is going to have to persuade me a bit harder to host it on my server.

You're thinking of it wrong - it won't mean you can't read any forums. That isn't it. It would stop you posting in some areas. But (if its better) there could be no post restrictions, just a difference in status and maybe not allowed to join gangs/clans. That way people just have to do a little bit to prove they're not a spammer, that's all. This isnt earning your place in the forum, and it isn't an honour given to a small number of people. They just have to talk about GTA for a little while to have the restrictions lifted. I'm not pushing the idea - just making sure people understand what I was referring to. Can someone run with that idea and think of a way we can encourage members to post about GTA without stopping them posting in other places?

I'm struggling to cope with that. This is a GTA site and a GTA forum about GTA. That was meant to be the one thing we have in common. I don't mean that we HAVE to talk about GTA all the time, but surely doing that once in a while is a minimum requirement? That suggestion wasn't meaning they couldn't read anything apart from GTA - that's silly. Just that they couldn't post in a small number of areas (eg Offtopic area, gangs, suggestions), or create topics until they'd proven they weren't a spammer. TM - you seem to think that the way we have everything now is good because people don't have to talk about GTA and they can just sit and be off-topic all the time. I agree with the community aspect, and that we have off-topic facilities, but the lack of GTA orientation is degrading this community. Do you think we should do nothing and just allow (or even encourage) our members just to be off topic all the time? If not, what would you like the changes to achieve?

Maybe I won't give these to the people everyone else is voting for, and I'm certainly not giving any votes to friends or sucking up. Half the people in this list I don't even like (personality). I'll let you figure out who that is Male: 1. Godfather 2. K9 Krew 3. Original GTA Master Female: 1. Rainbow Bear 2. Kokane 3. Little_Chestnut

The outcome of a postcount-based restriction is obvious: spam. How long does it take someone to make the connection between "I need 50 posts" to "I'm going to make 50 posts"? SPOILER: That is quite a negative option - restricting availability. Can we not turn that into a positive, and offer rewards to the elite few who contribute exceptionally? But that is only an incentive to a handful who aim for that, we need to entice the rest of them. One idea I had ages ago was that brand new members would go into a sub-member group that had access to most places but not access to all the features. Eg they can't post new topics (except in GTA areas) or they cant use PMs or upload images or whatever. To progress into "real members" (full access, like normal) they have to simply prove to any supermod that they're a real half-decent member. That doesn't mean they have to be perfect or worthy of elitehood or anything, just proving that they aren't spammers or anybody. So sub-members with 10 posts automatically go into a queue which supermods can look at and approve people for becoming full members, or ban them if they're spammers. JUST a suggestion, so feel free to rip it to shreds. Hopefully we'll end up with a good idea eventually.

Group name indicator? Usernames are different colours in the active users lists AND next to your post WITH an icon - all telling you which group someone's in. Surely you don't need more help than that? Unless you mean on the active userlist to show that red=admin, green=supermod, orange=section-moderator and bold=elite? That is hardly a suggestion for "change" - just a gimmiky mod used on tiny forums. We're talking about deep-rooted changes of the ethics and culture of the forum, changing the focus of posts and redirecting the attention and respect paid to various things. Not a legend for username colours. We know how to use IPB, and we know what mods we want installed, I'm pretty sure we don't need your admin suggestions all the time. I don't mean to sound rude, but it isn't nice having someone telling you how to do your job (like I do to Chris all the time).

Usually you'll get a USB cable with your phone, so you plug it into your PC and use the software provided to copy your photos and stuff across. If you didnt get one of those cables, or your phone is so old that you've lost it, you can get one from a phone shop or just send a picture message to someone else who can get the images off their phones. Or bluetooth it to them, or even bluetooth it to someone with a bluetooth-enabled laptop.

yay! Gawd you can't joke around here anymore Back on topic?

What a shame. Maybe you'll have to post about GTA instead? What, post about GTA on a GTA forum? Ridiculous. But yeah thats what the topic at the top of "Announcements" is for... </unnecessary condescending sarcasm>

REM was suggesting there's nothing we can do to inspire members to post less about FFAG and flaming, and more about GTA. TM, that's an interesting point that it isn't a problem that some people don't want to talk about GTA; and UO is suggesting that we have moved beyond being a GTA-only community into the ranks of a general community about lots of different things. I think perhaps we need to sit down and agree what TGTAP Forums are for, then we should be able to decide what should be on here and what shouldn't be on here. I have no doubt that the 'mission statement' of the forums will be totally different to what it was five years ago, but I'm still not sure what that is. To provide a place for..?

You have a point, we haven't seen any new GTA releases for a year (VCS), and no major ones since 2004/2005 (SA and SA PC). However we're just a couple of months away from the much-hyped release of GTA IV, which we know quite a bit about (although (almost) nobody here has played yet, obviously). And people still play GTA games. Maybe you don't mod games (which is fine) but there are a hell of a lot of people that do, myself included. Modding is one of the big things to do and talk about here, and its what a large portion of our members are here for. GTA IV is planned for Q2 of FY2008 (Feb-Apr), not Q2 CY2008 (Apr-Jun), which allows a considerably sooner window, although April is still probably the best bet. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm hyped up even though I won't even be able to get the game unless I buy a 360 in the next few months. I think the problem is more along the lines of there isn't much here for people to join in with. Probably only a small portion of our members start interesting topics that people join in with, and if that happened more (which it easily could) then it would inspire more discussion. I don't deny the need for off-topic chat, but things like most of the spammy FFAG topics are just a waste of space. So are you just suggesting we give up?

Geez you cynics. We aren't discussing how to improve the gameplay. We're asking what we'd like to see after GTA IV - there is a difference. Obviously we can only comment on what we know about IV, such as it's location, scale, characters, macro storyline etc (as well as a small amount of technical detail). For example some people (including me, and 3 other people in this topic) want to see Vice City again. We know it isn't going to be in GTA IV, because that's set in Liberty City. So here you can say you'd like to see another GTA IV (after this first one) set in Vice City. Or instead have it in a GTA 5 which is totally different from IV. What's pointless about that? After IV has been out a while there'll be a proper wishlist topic for what we want to see inside the next game. By the time we know what/where the next game is we can go into excruciating detail. But for now, just large-scale ideas.

Firstly, you've grasped our issues perfectly. We've made a couple of changes which will hopefully discourage the masses of off-topic postings, and encourage more GTA-related discussion (which is the point of this forum, no?). But these changes are mostly superficial (subforum organisation) and we need to really dig down to the core of why the members want to post more about their favourite TV shows than GTA. Secondly, your signature is far too big. Get rid of some userbars (I'll let you choose which). "Biggest userbar whore" award isn't for the person with the most (apparently).

We all know what's going to be in GTA IV, and that although some things are different (wanted levels, detail, no planes) most of it is the same as the GTA III stuff (but better). What would you like to see in the next GTA, after GTA IV? Would you want the same as GTA IV but with a new city and story, like they did with GTA III (by making Vice City etc)? Or do you fancy trying out something totally different to anything we've ever seen before? Bring back planes? Set in a different country, or the whole world, or in space? Play as multiple characters? Design your own character? See the GTA IV Wishlist, the old GTA San Andreas Wishlist and the Ultimate GTA4 Poll for some ideas. If you think you have any decent suggestions, post them here. We might even send the best ones off to Rockstar...

Glad to see these changes being made at last. Kudos on the positive attitude, but there are still a lot more changes we need to at least discuss.

It's 2008 already, and we've got the entire year in front of us. I just can't believe it's January already. I've been ringing it in with Jools Holland as usual - best way there is for anyone with taste. Anyone got any predictions for 2008? Next president? Global warming? Catastrophic events? Market crashes? New inventions?

They're for nothing until Chris agrees to do them. He is the only person with any decision-making power on this site (something that needs to change). He's also in London for a few days... I'd say we can do it this year. Just get the OK from him, create some nomination topics (and another topic to add suggestions for awards) and we should be able to start and end voting at the same time as the rest of the awards.

"Hobbas" and "X's" are the two types of moderators on habbo hotel (which I have been on once or twice). Hobbas have the power to kick people from rooms, and X's just help people, with no special powers. Obviously I'm not suggesting we follow that, but why not have members who aren't staff who officially help people? Big status, big respect, big rewards. Also, Misho suggested to me that in addition to the internal forum awards, we give TGTAP awards to the best things of 2007 (as voted by our members) such as Game Of The Year and Film, TV Show, Gadget, Car, Sport etc etc. You could also do individuals like best actor/actress and sexiest male/female (celebrities mixed with random people in photos and tgtap members). That'd be a nice twist, and could be a starting point for a lot of discussion, and it counts as off topic. I think that's a cool idea, cos everyone has an opinion, and most of them are pretty strong (as the forum awards show).

Solving problems over PM, not flaming, no one-word posts and being helpful about GTA exactly the point about these changes I've been asking for - but we need people to show the members how to do that. We can't just rename a subforum and expect people to suddenly change how they act in it. We can't just remove their one outlet for flaming without showing them the alternatives. Changing one sentence in the rules isn't going to get the message across, so I think we need a set of members to actively go around helping other members, showing them how to behave, if they do something wrong helping them understand why its wrong and what they should have done, and leading by example. That should be the job of the staff, but that's never been something that has been arranged. Perhaps the Elites should be the most helpful active members (eg Hobbas or X's lol) rather than just the people on Chris' MSN.