suggestion re: thread ratings
I'd suggest setting:
vBulletin Options > vBulletin Options > Poll and Thread Rating Options > Required Thread Rating Votes to Show Rating
to a value other than 1. (Possibly 5 or 10?)
That would impede the member(s) that you have that are presently lightly stuffing 90 percent of the ballot boxes in the Second Amendment subforum, reference: http://forums.outdoorsdirectory.com/...mendment-Forum
Funny thing is the stuffer(s) probably are not aware that at any time you can just go to your server's httpd access log file and with the mighty power of notepad.exe alone you can identify every individual thread rating voter individually merely by searching for the string "threadrate.php".
Sometimes here we laugh at dumb-criminals... while this is far from criminal, it is surely defacing (while the tagger essentially signs their name on each.... D'oh!) Since the defacing was done so publicly I assumed its OK to suggest a solution publicly. Plus, I would hope that is is common knowledge today that all web servers keep log files to file away who (individually) does what, precisely for the purpose of allowing the web site owner (only) to figure out what exactly is happening and by whom. If I'm wrong anywhere in this paragraph then sorry and please delete this thread.
I wasn't even aware that we could rate threads. What's the purpose for the ratings?
I suspect its a vBulletin feature that allows members to mark a particular thread with their vote as to its "rating" (whatever that means... Importance? Coolness? Humor? Trash?) that all other members can only see as the current average rating, and how many members rated it.
Originally Posted by Frostbitten
In the issue I mentioned, very many threads were only sent one rating of one star, and with no other ratings one also becomes the average and is instantly published for all to see. My suggestion was to increase the threshold number of ratings that must occur before any rating whatsoever is published onsite. Looking back, I could see how someone might miss that, which is my main point. Sorry, my writing is clearly not always.... well, clear... ;-)