Rules and Policy

[bjornredtail]

 

Flaming: Flaming, in my mind, is defined as insulting comments during an argument that are meant to be hurtful or otherwise of a personal nature. This should not be allowed-- it's uncalled for, and it also often spawns more flaming if a little is allowed. There's no reason why we can't have our arguments and fights and discussions without namecalling or insults.

By that defenation, accuseing someone of being a hypracrate would be flameing. Are you sure you want that!?!?

Constitution and Voting: There should be elected from the general forum population a group of members who represent all of the different types of members... a few should be very game-intensive, a few should be among the Spa Room crowd, a few should be from the more mature, rule-abiding crowd, etc. All of the elected members, though, should be those who are mature enough to be able to discuss something intelligently and with reasons behind their statements/feelings, and without getting angry or upset because someone has a different viewpoint. Then, they, with the forum admins/mods, should set up a private board (as was done for BAX) and straighten out all of the rule changes. Then, these should be presented to the forum at large as the new rules. Any issues that come up afterwards can then be settled by this committee.
I think that trying to have a forum-wide vote on the finished new rules wouldn't settle much-- those who weren't on the committee would feel as though their ideas weren't represented, and in general it could cause ill-will among the sides of the arguments that are sure to rise up. Also, many of us have more than one forum account, so the voting wouldn't be a one-for-one vote necessarily.

You already know what is going to happen. People are going to put their friends on the commity, as will the admins. This will lead to no changes whatsoever, a rubberstamp to everything, from abuse of powers to software piracy (all of which the RWL admins have been accused of, with verying degrees of truth).

[calria]

 Nev, that's what I think on the issues. That's all I can say.

[Vengerak]

 I dosen't MATTER if something's absolutely necesarry to get a point across or not.

You want what, we should cut out everything that could be considered extraneous & adopt Newspeak? You shouldn't ban things simply on the grounds of their being unnecesarry.

[caedo caelestis]

 The forums should be run like any other, admins have power, and thats the end of it.

If people can't act mature, its their own problem, they can go ahed and make themselves look like idiots. If they cause problems for other people and hinder the original purpose of the message board system then the forum admins will deal with them accordingly.

[bob3]

 Ah Newspeak...
Caedo, the immortal defender of the status quo, eh?

[calria]

 There's nothing particularly wrong with the status quo, really...
People are always going to find something to rattle on about and whine at...

[Aqualis]

 There will never be peace on earth, or this foruml; as I am sure many of you realize. So we might as well try to make as many people here happy as we can. This does not mean banning the word |)arn, or any other words.

On flaming, if you can't take it, stop arguing.

[bjornredtail]

Nev, that's what I think on the issues. That's all I can say.

Perhaps, you could defend your opinions? That's the only way this is going anywhere, if some form of consencess is made. The only way to that is through a forum wide discussion and debate.

Also, I'm still waiting for Ad to respond to this remark:

Swareing- You can enforce that. Just as you can enforce the no swareing rule in the first place. You can simply punish those who try to 'push' it, in the same way you would punish someone who brakes the rules. Also, note the very stict cirmstances that it is allowed under. Only where there is no other way to get your point acorss lidigmentally, such as in quotes where altering the quote could vastly change its meaning.

[calria]

Perhaps, you could defend your opinions? That's the only way this is going anywhere, if some form of consencess is made. The only way to that is through a forum wide discussion and debate.

I feel like I've established what I think...
Anyway, I know myself, and I know that I get into arguments easily, so, having just said that I was pleasantly suprised by the lack of argument in this thread, I don't want to start one. I can hurl insults with the best of them, and I've been under stress in r/l lately, so I'm less likely to hold my temper...

[bjornredtail]

 I'm sorry, but I belive an argument is just what this fourm needs. Not an insulting match, not a flame war, a well thourght out argument. That is the only way attention will be brought to these issues, it is the only way our diffrances will be resolved, it is the only way badly needed reform will happen.

[caedo caelestis]

Ah Newspeak...
Caedo, the immortal defender of the status quo, eh?

Simplest solution usually works, might as well stick to it.

[Burninate]

 Question: Is this still in the works, or is it dead (user input on the change of rules)?

[calria]

 Probably a bit of both... we did get new mods and a new admin, so perhaps they should be given a nice jolly chance before more things go wonky, eh wot?