Rules and Policy

[bjornredtail]

 Swareing-I think it wise to ban swareing on these forums. However, For purpaces of example, in-charcter action, quotation and paraquotation we should be alowed to blank out sware words to a cencored, but still recoginizable form. For example, Sware would become s****e, or s___e, etc.

[Abby The Rat]

 

Swareing-I think it wise to ban swareing on these forums. However, For purpaces of example, in-charcter action, quotation and paraquotation we should be alowed to blank out sware words to a cencored, but still recoginizable form. For example, Sware would become s****e, or s___e, etc.

A no no, if you allow some, then someone will push it and show a bit more. Then later in life someone will push it a bit more and get away with it. Even later the full word comes out and if and when we try to go back on it, we look the bad guys.

Words like that shouldn't even be allowed in any form.

Here's the thing: A substitute for [edit] "I am so stupid". Isn't that Ad flaming us? By twisting our words? Couldnt he change it to lovely?

Wasn't me, that was set before I became Admin. The ones that turn to "lovely" is the ones I set.


What about a guide to the rules and good conduct.

Something like,

"It is generally a good idea, to use the edit post and correct any mistakes you find. Correct Grammar and Spelling will make you better along the other users.

Double posting is a big no no if you have more to say and no post after your post edit the first post and add more to it."

[Riverpaw]

 

"It is generally a good idea, to use the edit post and correct any mistakes you find. Corret Grammar and Spelling will make you better along the other users.

Double posting is a big no no, if you have more to say and no post after your post, edit the first post and add more to it."

Normally, I refrain from publicly spagging, but since that's a spag error while discussing the subject of spag...

SPAG: "Corret" --> "Correct" | Lowercase : "Grammar" and "Spelling" | Remove comma after "I"

More spag, but not on the subject of spag, so never mind.

----- ----- -----

Anyways, I say a republic is great, but never remove the power of impeaching. I personally preferred the democracy, but then again, it has been known to be chaotic. However, my proposal for "secure voting" still stands. Oh, wait, I have no proposal... yet. I just want to say that whatever proposal is put up for vote, whether to the public or to a comittee, should be done securely. No plain forum polls. Make it either a "reply with your vote" or "PM me your vote with ... in the subject". Have at least two sources count the votes. Only active members (definition of "active" left to admins) can vote. Oh, and upon request, someone may ask that only digitally signed (PGP/gnuPG/Crypto Kong) votes from them, be accepted.

[bjornredtail]

 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.  

[Aqualis]

 Flaming: Flaming should be allowed, unless it's breaks rules concerning swearing or refers to someone other then the addressee, it should not be allowed. Insults directed to a person intelligence should be allowed simply because no other insult is so easily refuted. If someone does not wish to be flamed they should stay out of heated discussions, that's just common sense; but, if you don't mind being flamed while arguing or debating there is no problem. To people outside the argument that aren't being flamed shouldn't be concerned unless there is major rule breaking. It doesn't concern you.

Swearing: I also believe that this should be allowed, to a point. Swearing for the sake of swearing should not be allowed. Swearing for emphasis should be allowed because it is a common part of everyday speach. I suspect many people here do it.

Banning: Keeping in-game bannings seperate from in-forum bannings is a great idea. Because someone cheats in the game doesn't not automatically mean the should be banned from the forums. Of course, every case is different, but I believe this holds true for most.

Perma-bans should be used only in the case of porn and law breaking (not rule breaking). Or, if someone has been gagged multiple times, with little time between gaggings, it should be put to forums vote, whether or not that person should be perma-banned.

Gagging: Should be used in case of repeated rule breaking. Otherwise, warn them.

Leaving: I see nothing wrong with someone doing this.

Suggestions: I think a seperate board should be created for suggestions. People are more likely to post in a board than a pinned topic.

Advertising: Here also, I think a seperate board should be created and the no advertising rule should be altered to say no advertising outside the advertising forum.

Post Count: Let the people keep their post count, but remove the reward for reaching 1000 posts. I believe that it is the reward and not the number that drive people to SPAM (if not just because they feel like it). Custom titles should be awarded based on actions that deserve such a reward or other criteria that can be established later.

UltraMod Discussion: There should be a seperate, stricter set of rules for this board alone.

Constitution and Voting: The constitution commitee should be a set of 7 elected board members, the admins, and the mods. They will write and approve the constitution among themselves and then post it in a pinned topic in the General Discussion with a link to a locked poll. Discussion would be carried out in this topic. The entire committee and 75% of the active members should agree on the wording of and the constition itself. If the above requierments cannot be met, the constitution should go back for revision and the process repeated until and agreement is reached.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

I apologize now for any spelling or grammatical mistakes now, for I do not have time to check for them.

[Took out an overstatment]

[The Lady Shael]

 I like Aqualis' ideas for the Constitution and the post count. The advertising and suggestions idea aren't bad either, except that, if we carry those out, we'll have an awful lot of forums. Already I think we have too much. And some, like the Strategies and Help forums, are severely under-used. They're great ideas, don't get me wrong there. I'd like to see these two areas fixed up a bit. But too many forums can be overwhelming.

[bjornredtail]

 Too many forums- Simple, combind the Stragity, Help and Clans forums into a game general discussion forum. Also, put this, the turbo forums, and bug reporting forum into a seprate game discussion catagory. Then have the Spam room, General Discussion, Advertiseing, and Role Playing forums in a sepate General Discussion Catagory.

[Riverpaw]

 Advertising... I suppose we need someplace for that. Every other ROC site has one, and quite frankly, they're more or less essential for the advancement of new sites in the ROC. I should know. I tried to start a site a few months ago. Without TSR's advertising forum, I'd be nowhere. I'm still nowhere, but at least I had three members besides myself. I plan to start again, thanks to Beatles and his hosting. Well, somehow, I think that I'm not the only one. I just can't be. I bet that many people have such an idea. It would just be doing the ROC such a great favor. Also, there's also another thing. RWL itself can benefit from this. Again, I quote TSR. They have an "affiliate program". It's slightly messed up but nevertheless a great example. Simply put a "you advertise here and we advertise at your site" clause in. Although this seems to not benefit RWL much, remember that other sites get one ad, but RWL gets so many ads in all these places. If not for that, just do it as a favor to the ROC...

[Abby The Rat]

 

Flaming: Flaming should be allowed, unless it's breaks rules concerning swearing or refers to someone other then the addressee, it should not be allowed. Insults directed to a person intelligence should be allowed simply because no other insult is so easily refuted. If someone does not wish to be flamed they should stay out of heated discussions, that's just common sense; but, if you don't mind being flamed while arguing or debating there is no problem. To people outside the argument that aren't being flamed shouldn't be concerned unless there is major rule breaking. It doesn't concern you.

Can I say, are you kidding? Being flamed or flaming others, even in a debate is what cause bad feelings in each other. I can easily debate with Holby without even ever having to flame. We even had a good few laughs and still carred on debating. If flames happens, then you will not laugh or have fun.

Post Count: Let the people keep their post count, but remove the reward for reaching 1000 posts. I believe that it is the reward and not the number that drive people to SPAM (if not just because they feel like it). Custom titles should be awarded based on actions that deserve such a reward or other criteria that can be established later.

OK, I agree with you fully here, Post counts shouldn't mean so much. I but I like knowing how much I've posted for all the time I've been here.

Constitution and Voting: The constitution commitee should be a set of 7 elected board members, the admins, and the mods. They will write and approve the constitution among themselves and then post it in a pinned topic in the General Discussion with a link to a locked poll. Discussion would be carried out in this topic. The entire committee and 75% of the active members should agree on the wording of and the constition itself. If the above requierments cannot be met, the constitution should go back for revision and the process repeated until and agreement is reached.

mrf? I'm not sure what to say, just, currently and most likely always Admins have the final say, we just like to be kind to our members and this is why we are allowing you to change the rules and ways things are run. So maybe this is a rare semi-democracy forum. (I mean, I never even seen a democracy forum before or even remotely like this, not even Terrouge does this.) So.. maybe but it takes a lot of effort and it could fail before it ever got off the ground.

Advertising... I suppose we need someplace for that. Every other ROC site has one, and quite frankly, they're more or less essential for the advancement of new sites in the ROC. I should know. I tried to start a site a few months ago. Without TSR's advertising forum, I'd be nowhere. I'm still nowhere, but at least I had three members besides myself. I plan to start again, thanks to Beatles and his hosting. Well, somehow, I think that I'm not the only one. I just can't be. I bet that many people have such an idea. It would just be doing the ROC such a great favor. Also, there's also another thing. RWL itself can benefit from this. Again, I quote TSR. They have an "affiliate program". It's slightly messed up but nevertheless a great example. Simply put a "you advertise here and we advertise at your site" clause in. Although this seems to not benefit RWL much, remember that other sites get one ad, but RWL gets so many ads in all these places. If not for that, just do it as a favor to the ROC...

So maybe not a, forum but a webring or affiliate programs. Theses are not hard to make, but it does take up space and takes some designing to fit into the website. Maybe a different place, but I dunno yet.

(Oh, and Riverpaw I'm always bad at Grammar because of my deafness, but I guess I shouldn't of incorrectly spelt correct, goes back and edits.)

Suggestions- I second Killenne on this point. In addation you should still be able to suggest stuff directly to the Admins.

Everyone have been saying something about suggestion. It's great. So I wonder what we could do to make it directly to us Admins, don't forget, we don't always have time to act on the suggestion, good or bad.

Ok, now my 2 cent.
Spa Room 101- I say get rid of it. I created it, sort of, and now I'm saying get rid of it.

[Vengerak]

All valid points... but the fact of the matter is that if you give someone something, they are going to take a little more.
A good example would be me.... with tardies to homeroom. I thought "Bah, 7:30. It doesn't matter if I'm there at 7:31." "7:31... I can leave the house five minutes later, get in the extra sleep.... hit the lights just right... I'll be there by 7:32." Well, obviously, this simply continued until I almost got suspended. And then I realized that they do have to be strict in their enforcement. Otherwise, I'm going to take just a little bit more. Part of being a mature adult is realizing, accepting, and following the rules. So next time you ask "Can't we just say this demi-curse? It's not so bad!"... just think for a second.

Well, I have just thought for a second, & I've come to the conclusion that you're argument makes no sense.

I can see where you're coming from with regard to the "You give 'em an inch, they take a mile." thing, but, come on.  A "demi-curse" (HA!) isn't offensive to anyone with sense.  I find their ludicrous smothering of people & the erosion of free speech offensive, corny though it may sound.

& how far do you wind it back? If a "demi-curse" is just a short step towards inoffensive & socially acceptable curses, & inoffensive & socially-acceptable curses are just a short step towards proper curses, well, then words that rhyme with "demi-curses" & thus have the potential to call them to mind are a step further back, & must be banned.  Similarly, any sentence that, if looked at in a certain way could be said to be innuendo should be banned.  & so on & so forth, until we get into a situation where you actually have banned nouns.  Adjectives, verbs & God knows what else are likely down the crapper, as well.

For this reason, I feel that your logic is flawed.  & you've got to respect your forum-goers intelligence, up to a point.  Maybe some people would take a little more, but maybe they would have brains enough not to overstep the boundaries that common sense tells them must exist.

I would certainly hope so.

[RazorClaw]

 Well, we could go for a thing where we have the admins share the "presidential house". They are in control. But we have some of the more mature and respectable for a place on a council which decides things that won't really affect the forums, and helps the admins with important decisions. As well, these council members can answer the questions of the forum-members that the admins would normally have to trouble with. As for the Spa Room, it lets people like Blackeyes vent out their true natures and save normal stuff for the normal forums. Plus, half of the hilarious topics that are posted in there would immediately be labeled "spam" if they were in GD. Demi-curses should be allowed. Look them up on www.merriam-webster.com and if they aren't marked "VULGAR" they shouldn't be banned.

[bjornredtail]

 Polls, SPA room, and General discussion- I say keep the spam room, but merge the current polls forum into it. Then allow serious polls in the General discussion area again.

[Quamicauzilot]

My thoughts:

Swearing: Regulations, I think, should be kept as they are on this; not allowed.  It serves no real purpose other than to express anger/frustration that can be expressed without swearing.

Spa Room 101: I'm all for getting rid of it.  I imagine some people like it, but I feel that a forum for spam isn't something we need.

"Demi-Curses:" Meh.  Each way has its merits.  Might edit this later, but my brain doesn't want to process anything.

Flaming: I don't think it should be allowed in any form.  The only thing flaming accomplishes is bad feelings, erosion of general courtesy if generally allowed, and grudges.

Ultra-Moderated Discussion: I'd rather the admins just select more moderators (for this forum alone, if they don't feel like making that many global admins) that they consider responsible and up to the job than distributing mod powers to all in that forum.

Bannings/Gaggings: Neither, of course, should be done unless reasons are present, fairly serious ones for the former.

Advertising: Certainly not in the main body of forums.  If an advertising forum's set up, fine, but advertising should stay there.

Basically, I don't have a problem with the current setup, nor do I have a problem with the mods/admins, but thought I'd interject what cents (Hah.  Homonyms are fun.) I had.

[bjornredtail]

 Just bumping, with a part of an IM I had with Fenix... I qoute.

(11:42:46) bjornredtail: A bit of an odd question:
(11:43:03) bjornredtail: Do you have any suggestions for how the forum should be run?
(11:43:08) bjornredtail: on RWL.
(11:43:14) Fenix2080: ROFL
(11:43:22) bjornredtail: I know...
(11:43:27) Fenix2080: "yes, the word democracy, comes to mind"
(11:43:52) bjornredtail: How would you set up this democracy?
(11:44:14) Fenix2080: with referendums
(11:44:23) Fenix2080: see, firsto f all
(11:44:32) Fenix2080: there is a codeo f conduct, that an elected few write up
(11:44:48) Fenix2080: with limits for every person's actions, even teh administrators
(11:45:01) Fenix2080: and consequences relative to the crime
(11:45:54) Fenix2080: any major decision should be made with a community-wide referendum, no single-soul decision
(11:46:56) bjornredtail: Would a democraticly elected officer be added?
(11:47:07) bjornredtail: What powers would he/she get?
(11:47:21) Fenix2080: whatever the elected council decides
(11:48:21) bjornredtail: What powers then would this council get?
(11:48:25) bjornredtail: What limitations?
(11:48:58) Fenix2080: the council is allowed to write the code of conduct for the game, and forums
(11:49:27) bjornredtail: What role would the server's owners play in the council?
(11:49:37) Fenix2080: but at the same time, they are allowed to be removed from the council, should the majority of people (70% and above ) Decide it
(11:50:06) Fenix2080: the serve'rs owner would regulate the server and make sure everything is running smoothely.  he should have an unbiased outlook on how things are run
(11:50:28) bjornredtail: Basicly, enforceing what the council descides?
(11:51:02) Fenix2080: yes
(11:51:30) bjornredtail: How large would this council be? How long would their term in office be?
(11:52:15) Fenix2080: depending on the population of the community, let's say, 2% of the population should be council members
(11:52:31) Fenix2080: their term would be decided in a community-wide referendum, my opinion would't be good enough
(11:53:36) bjornredtail: Right. Though it is assumed that the forum charter would be commented by everyone.
(11:53:47) Fenix2080: of course
(11:54:06) bjornredtail: Who would be alowed to vote in the various elections?
(11:54:22) bjornredtail: Would activity be used as a factor in voteing elebability>
(11:54:23) bjornredtail: ?
(11:55:20) Fenix2080: let's  say, loggin into the forusm at least once a week would allow forum citizenship, and you have to be an active member for at least a month
(11:56:01) bjornredtail: How would voteing be handled to avoid multi-accounts from casting many votes?
(11:58:58) Fenix2080: we would hope the activity rule would rule out most mutli accounts. and we would have a no proxie rule, too
(11:59:34) bjornredtail: Should Forum and Game punishments and or governance be seprated?
(11:59:47) Fenix2080: no , it's the same community
(12:00:31) bjornredtail: Do you have suggestions outside of governance for the forums?
(12:04:21) Fenix2080: not really
(12:04:24) Fenix2080: why are you asking all these question
(12:04:35) bjornredtail: I was going to re-post them on the forums
(12:04:42) Fenix2080: oh
(12:04:44) Fenix2080: ok go ahead

[calria]

 Wow! When I saw this topic, I was just waiting to hit the mindless flamey argument I was sure was inside, but instead I'm pleasantly suprised to find intelligent discussion and polite disagreement. Yay!

My thoughts on the matter...

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.

Swearing: Swearing shouldn't be allowed. I include demi-curses in this. Why? It's not necessary to get your point across! You can express your displeasure at something without cursing/demi-cursing, and there might be someone on these forums who finds that word offensive. Yeah, I know that most of us don't, but what if some of us do? Most of you aren't offended by name-calling that includes homosexual references, but I very much am. Most of you aren't offended by references to rape when discussing attacking etc in the game, but I'm extremely bothered by it. The reasons are my own. All you all need to know is that I'm bothered by it. Others probably have similar things that they're bothered by. If it's not necessary, why risk offending someone who otherwise could have a perfectly fine time being a member of the forum community?

Banning:  Banning should only be used in cases where the member in question has repeatedly and intentionally flouted the rules of the forums, without any remorse, and, at the same time, has failed to give the forum any measurable benefit from his/her presence. Bans should be given lengths according to the severity of the rule-breaking. Permanent bans should only be given after time-limited bans have been shown to not be effective, or in the case of those who repeatedly try to get around their bans.

Gagging: Love it! Leave it like it is!

Post Count: I like the idea someone posted about removing a number of posts from the count as a result of spamming... Other than that, it's not a big deal, is it?

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.