Author Topic: Response to new rules  (Read 6832 times)

Kinema

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
    • View Profile
    • Email
Response to new rules
« on: April 23, 2008, 11:04:55 pm »
In many ways i can agree with some rules, mostly because hopefully it would put a stop to alot of problems including, imo, Iccy using his own feelings in deciding what he wants on the forum and what he doesn't want.

After reviewing them, however, i thought I'd raise some issues.

Firstly i am assuming that, while these rules could broadly cover every forum, Chat is the only one with a perceived problem. Any trolling, falimg or otherwise unfavourable threads in the other boards should be locked, or moved to chat, since those boards are specifically in place for discussion relevent to their title. Chat, however, is an open board for discussion of anything. As such i am, in general, against over-regulation of this board, since it would seem to impact negatively on the communities growth.

As follows, the rules that Iccy has put in place, and reasons i may disagree with them.
Things that will probably get you banned:




    * Sassing/ Annoying Moderators/Admins (Mod's or Admins should not be given higher status as users than anyone else on the board. By introducing this rule you are giving mod's and admins the right, at their discretion, to warn others for almost anything. If i made a post that in anyway annoyed a mod, or dissented, i could be warned! Obviously in practice this may not abused by certain mods, but in the past we have seen moderators abusing their powers on this forum. This idea that mods and admins are higher status users is wrong, they should be viewed as normal users, but with the added responsibility of removing posts that do offend others, or cause significant problems for other users use of the forum (ie flooding or whatever).
   



    * Severly content lacking posts. Remember your RCP kids (Read. Comprehend. Post) - (Unnecessary and will only lead to abuse, if a post has no content of interest, it will not get posted in and fall of the front page, if a post stays on the front page because others are posting in it, clearly it does have content and therefore should not be locked.

    * IRC based threads/discussions/talks. Keep that for IRC, it's a seperate place from here. It's offical and all, but it's completely seperate from here (The IRC and forum are inexplicitly linked, and crossover is definitly going to occur, this doesn't immediately imply that it is bad, and the overlap is something you're just gonna have to get used to.)
 
    * Discussion of either politics or religion. These subjects often degenerate into flamewars more quickly than almost any other topic, and therefore it is recommended that you not make topics about them. Some discussion is fine, but keep your fanaticism in check. (Just no, this is a CHAT forum, you cant just deny people the right to discuss religion or politics because you think it leads to flamewwars. These topics are obviously very polarising but you MUST NOT deny peopel the right to have enjoyable discussions about it. If a thread does degenerate into an off-topic flamewar then thats probly justification for locking or deletion of posts, but you MUST NOT censor our enjoyment of free discussion of ANYTHING WE WANT. In doing so you will kill the form.


Rynex

  • Wisdom.
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 558
    • View Profile
Re: Response to new rules
« Reply #1 on: April 24, 2008, 02:08:41 am »
I'm glad that someone is going to say something. I'm not an ass who doesn't listen and would prefer refinement over absolute autocratic leadership on this. Anyway... reflection time.

    * Sassing/ Annoying Moderators/Admins (Mod's or Admins should not be given higher status as users than anyone else on the board. By introducing this rule you are giving mod's and admins the right, at their discretion, to warn others for almost anything. If i made a post that in anyway annoyed a mod, or dissented, i could be warned! Obviously in practice this may not abused by certain mods, but in the past we have seen moderators abusing their powers on this forum. This idea that mods and admins are higher status users is wrong, they should be viewed as normal users, but with the added responsibility of removing posts that do offend others, or cause significant problems for other users use of the forum (ie flooding or whatever).
I agree with what you are saying, but there's a fine line between annoying a moderator with something simple like a comment, and actually calling them names and just generally being an ass to that moderator. I think the line is a little clear also. Don't go berating a moderator for something he deleted, send him a PM.

    * Severly content lacking posts. Remember your RCP kids (Read. Comprehend. Post) - (Unnecessary and will only lead to abuse, if a post has no content of interest, it will not get posted in and fall of the front page, if a post stays on the front page because others are posting in it, clearly it does have content and therefore should not be locked.
Going off-topic is alright to a certain degree in my opinion, but when it carries on for 4 pages, then you've completely changed the original subject. Say if someone wanted to discuss Art and then the thread ends up as something completely unrelated, the thread has offically lost it's meaning. You should be trying to take the thread in the right direction, which is the direction of where the thread was planned.

    * IRC based threads/discussions/talks. Keep that for IRC, it's a seperate place from here. It's offical and all, but it's completely seperate from here (The IRC and forum are inexplicitly linked, and crossover is definitly going to occur, this doesn't immediately imply that it is bad, and the overlap is something you're just gonna have to get used to.)

No they aren't linked. In your opinion it might be, but none of the moderators have control over what is posted there and here. What goes on in IRC, should stay in IRC. If you really REALLY want a thread where you can talk about stuff that is happening in IRC, then use the one in the Discussion forums.

 
    * Discussion of either politics or religion. These subjects often degenerate into flamewars more quickly than almost any other topic, and therefore it is recommended that you not make topics about them. Some discussion is fine, but keep your fanaticism in check. (Just no, this is a CHAT forum, you cant just deny people the right to discuss religion or politics because you think it leads to flamewwars. These topics are obviously very polarising but you MUST NOT deny peopel the right to have enjoyable discussions about it. If a thread does degenerate into an off-topic flamewar then thats probly justification for locking or deletion of posts, but you MUST NOT censor our enjoyment of free discussion of ANYTHING WE WANT. In doing so you will kill the forum.
"The following is discouraged:"
If you really want a thread that discusses politics or religion, then you can make one... but just expect the moderators to watch it with a Keen eye. The waters for a religious or political debate are usually filled with crap as far as the eye can see, and whether this forum can handle such a topic is unsure... but the Cannabis topic has been going well so far, even after calls to delete it.

If you really can't handle what has been put in place, post somewhere else. I personally think the rules that I've put down are very reasonable. It will put an end to moderator abuse at least.

Chat is the only one with a perceived problem.
Pretty much. At least we can keep things on track a lot better with rules in a forum which covers everything, rather than a specific subject (Audiosurf).
« Last Edit: April 24, 2008, 02:16:03 am by iccy »

Melodia

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 732
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Response to new rules
« Reply #2 on: April 24, 2008, 04:34:00 am »
A message board isn't a free county. It's a dictatorship...theoretically the owner of the message board can put down any rules, and you need to agree TO them, even if you don't agree WITH them (note the difference).

I don't understand why people want to post about religion/politics on a message board dedicated to a rhythm/puzzle video game. There's hundreds of forums dedicated to such things...it's kinda silly to even bitch about a rule that actually allows it.

But, I can't comprehend the bit about signing posts -- I've been on the net for a good 12 years now, and have NEVER seen a forum where it was discouraged as such. Yes, sigs are fine, and I'll grant not too many people do it, but I've always signed my posts and outside of the occasionally mocking on Gamefaqs (that I've also gotten here from one or two people similarly), I've never seen anyone say it was a bad thing. So...what's up with that?

-Lala-

Saint Louis EX

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 748
  • DESU
    • MSN Messenger - kuanjiaqing@hotmail.com
    • View Profile
Re: Response to new rules
« Reply #3 on: April 24, 2008, 04:44:35 am »
I say ban those who promote pirating of Audiosurf!

Rynex

  • Wisdom.
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 558
    • View Profile
Re: Response to new rules
« Reply #4 on: April 24, 2008, 05:39:10 am »
-Lala-

I honestly find it kind of redundant, but if you honestly want rid of it... Just for you Melodia.

I say ban those who promote pirating of Audiosurf!

I would love to, but I'm not an internet detective. Plus I can't ban people :D

VDZ

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 404
  • Nooooooooeees
    • MSN Messenger - supervdz@dolfijn.nl
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Response to new rules
« Reply #5 on: April 24, 2008, 06:56:17 am »
I say ban those who promote pirating of Audiosurf!
No. However much you may disagree with someone's opinion, it remains an opinion, and you can't just ban someone for having a different opinion.
I think it's a good thing that people illegally download Audiosurf; I found Audiosurf this way. If it hadn't been for me downloading that pirated copy of Audiosurf, I wouldn't have paid $10 to legally buy it afterwards.
You will probably disagree with me, but just because you disagree does not mean I should be banned.

Also, iccy reminds me of this guy at the moment:

Cody900

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 953
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Response to new rules
« Reply #6 on: April 24, 2008, 07:50:07 am »
RESPONSE TO LOCKED TOPIC.

Fucking lock this thread now.

Rynex

  • Wisdom.
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 558
    • View Profile
Re: Response to new rules
« Reply #7 on: April 24, 2008, 08:46:15 am »
I say ban those who promote pirating of Audiosurf!
No. However much you may disagree with someone's opinion, it remains an opinion, and you can't just ban someone for having a different opinion.
I think it's a good thing that people illegally download Audiosurf; I found Audiosurf this way. If it hadn't been for me downloading that pirated copy of Audiosurf, I wouldn't have paid $10 to legally buy it afterwards.
You will probably disagree with me, but just because you disagree does not mean I should be banned.

Also, iccy reminds me of this guy at the moment:


To each his own. I think it's a bit dumb to declare that you pirate Audiosurf or whatever, because at the end of the day it doesn't really matter. If you enjoy the game, you should talk about it and not the means on how you got it.

Cody900

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 953
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Response to new rules
« Reply #8 on: April 24, 2008, 08:48:21 am »
Add "Promotes illegal Audiosurf" to iccy's repertoire.

BigYeti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 757
    • View Profile
Re: Response to new rules
« Reply #9 on: April 24, 2008, 11:04:13 am »

Also, iccy reminds me of this guy at the moment:


Hahah those knights were all tough until Maho shows up.  Then again, can't stop Maho.

Iccy:  Religion/Politics I completely understand as being sensative issues (to say the least).  I would actually really appreciate a keen mod eye on topics like that, as people do tend to post with emotions that block all possibility of learning or discussing.  When something goes from discussion to argument I wouldn't see a reason why it shouldn't be either pruned back to discussion or closed altogether. 

As for the first one...I'll sass you all I want!  SAAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS



Edit:

Quote
Things that will probably get you a PM from a moderator as a warning:
Sassing/ Annoying Moderators/Admins
Light Trolling.
Light Spamming.
Quote Pyramids. (Anything above 5 quotes is just a pain to read)
Linking to NSFW images.
Back seat moderating - If you think something is breaking the rules. REPORT IT

Okay...wait a second...

Quote
Quote Pyramids. (Anything above 5 quotes is just a pain to read)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOo



Quote
Back seat moderating - If you think something is breaking the rules. REPORT IT

Really, should that get you a warning?  It's generally people trying to keep things in line for the good of all.  I understand if someone is trying to act superior or mod-ley....but telling people they are out of line, or that they are gonna get in trouble if they continue on a course of action is perfectly justified in my eyes.  What's wrong with people helping people?  It was the deferral of regulation to Government that started us on the road to hell.  Do we need that on the internet too?
« Last Edit: April 24, 2008, 11:12:31 am by BigYeti »
Quote from: Dick Masterson
The Apollo 11 mission was mankind walking to the edge of the Earth and telling the universe to go fuck itself. We go where we please, when we please.

Rynex

  • Wisdom.
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 558
    • View Profile
Re: Response to new rules
« Reply #10 on: April 24, 2008, 11:31:21 am »
Ok, the reason why I put backseat moderating down is because it prevents something like elitism occuring. The members have already been called elitists by newcomers on numerous occasions. I'd rather you guys just report and relax knowing that it'll get dealt with. I know that you guys love to help and things, but sometimes it's for the best.

As for quote pyramids. Stick to the thread you've got, but seriously... more than 5 becomes a bit of a pain to read :D



BigYeti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 757
    • View Profile
Re: Response to new rules
« Reply #11 on: April 24, 2008, 12:29:09 pm »
Ok, the reason why I put backseat moderating down is because it prevents something like elitism occuring. The members have already been called elitists by newcomers on numerous occasions. I'd rather you guys just report and relax knowing that it'll get dealt with. I know that you guys love to help and things, but sometimes it's for the best.

As for quote pyramids. Stick to the thread you've got, but seriously... more than 5 becomes a bit of a pain to read :D




Alright, makes sense.  Fuck it, then.  I'm gonna sit back in the armchair and leave the modding to the mods.  (poor bastards)   ;)

Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
More than 5?
5 what?
5 quotes?
or like...5 fingers?
Maybe five thumbs?
Quote from: Dick Masterson
The Apollo 11 mission was mankind walking to the edge of the Earth and telling the universe to go fuck itself. We go where we please, when we please.

Cody900

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 953
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Response to new rules
« Reply #12 on: April 24, 2008, 01:06:18 pm »
Lock.

Cody900

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 953
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Response to new rules
« Reply #13 on: April 24, 2008, 01:06:27 pm »
Lock.

Cody900

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 953
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Response to new rules
« Reply #14 on: April 24, 2008, 01:06:35 pm »
Lock.