X Freaks Forum

News:

  • Welcome to X-Freaks new forum !!!
    Please read the rules :)
  • We have T-Shirt design contest going on. Please visit this topic :)
  • New Theme! Discussion goes here
  • x-freaks.com - online for more than 12 years!

New rules

Sander · 27095

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Sander

  • Administrator
  • Die-hard fan
  • *****
    • Posts: 3856
    • View Profile
    • X-Freaks
on: June 09, 2008, 10:41:03 PM
The new rules have been implemented. They are now on a test period. Tell us what you think.

This is my administrator color.


Offline SarahAlex

  • Big fan
  • ****
    • Posts: 600
    • View Profile
    • MySpace
Reply #1 on: June 09, 2008, 10:48:48 PM
Quote
4. Administrators and moderators are required to use different color font when talking as an admin/mod to avoid confusion between personal opinions and official statements. That color should be noted in the signature of the admin/mod.


This is a good idea.

However, I would like to know if there are some sanctions for admins/mods in the case they'd abuse their rights.


SarahAlex - the devil's advocate


Offline Sander

  • Administrator
  • Die-hard fan
  • *****
    • Posts: 3856
    • View Profile
    • X-Freaks
Reply #2 on: June 09, 2008, 10:58:02 PM
There will be sanctions depending on the level of abuse, his/her previous actions etc. And it will be decided by me and other admins/mods.

This is my administrator color.


Offline Sirimono

  • Big fan
  • ****
    • Posts: 998
    • View Profile
Reply #3 on: June 09, 2008, 10:58:51 PM
Quote
12. Pictures that are under copyright are allowed to be posted on the forum, as long as they add this to their post: „This/these images are posted under the fair rights agreement. Copyright belongs to the respective owners.“ This includes scans of magazines and photo books not available from official stores any more (they are only available from second-hand stores/auction sites/etc).


I don't quite get that one. I mean, I have no idea if pictures are copyrighted, but I guess every picture is copyrighted that I didn't take by myself.
Do I have to add that little sentence now to EVERY of my posts in which I post an image that is not taken by me?



„All images are posted under the fair rights agreement. Copyright belongs to the respective owners.“


Offline MiscastDice

  • Fan
  • ***
    • Posts: 489
    • View Profile
Reply #4 on: June 09, 2008, 10:59:48 PM
JRR 2.0.  :evil:



Offline SarahAlex

  • Big fan
  • ****
    • Posts: 600
    • View Profile
    • MySpace
Reply #5 on: June 09, 2008, 11:03:50 PM
To Hypno: Thank you. :)

Quote from: "Sirimono"
I don't quite get that one. I mean, I have no idea if pictures are copyrighted, but I guess every picture is copyrighted that I didn't take by myself.
Do I have to add that little sentence now to EVERY of my posts in which I post an image that is not taken by me?


Now I'm happy that the eye I'm using as the avatar is really mine. (Ok, the photo was taken by a friend but since it's part of my body I also have the copyright. :D)


SarahAlex - the devil's advocate


Offline Sander

  • Administrator
  • Die-hard fan
  • *****
    • Posts: 3856
    • View Profile
    • X-Freaks
Reply #6 on: June 09, 2008, 11:06:16 PM
Quote from: "Sirimono"
Quote
12th rule


I don't quite get that one. I mean, I have no idea if pictures are copyrighted, but I guess every picture is copyrighted that I didn't take by myself.
Do I have to add that little sentence now to EVERY of my posts in which I post an image that is not taken by me?
Be cleaver. Think of a way ;)


Quote from: "MiscastDice"
JRR 2.0.  :evil:
JRR doesn't allow much that we do. If you want a spamfest-norules-everythinggoes forum, go to 4chan or something.

Quote from: "SarahAlex"
Now I'm happy that the eye I'm using as the avatar is really mine. (Ok, the photo was taken by a friend but since it's part of my body I also have the copyright. :D)
Naturally, you can't add text to your avatars or signatures (I mean you can, but it would be... stupid and such), so I don't mind those :)

This is my administrator color.


Offline Sirimono

  • Big fan
  • ****
    • Posts: 998
    • View Profile
Reply #7 on: June 09, 2008, 11:06:27 PM
Quote from: "SarahAlex"

Now I'm happy that the eye I'm using as the avatar is really mine. (Ok, the photo was taken by a friend but since it's part of my body I also have the copyright. :D)


right! If this aplies to posted pictures it should apply to avatars and signatures as well!
I think the rule is unnecessary, i wonder if you could just handle it with a disclaimer saying that "every picture on this whole forum are posted under the fair rights agreement. Copyright belongs to the respective owners." ?



„All images are posted under the fair rights agreement. Copyright belongs to the respective owners.“


Offline SarahAlex

  • Big fan
  • ****
    • Posts: 600
    • View Profile
    • MySpace
Reply #8 on: June 09, 2008, 11:08:48 PM
Yeah, some "group disclaimer" would be great.


SarahAlex - the devil's advocate


Offline MiscastDice

  • Fan
  • ***
    • Posts: 489
    • View Profile
Reply #9 on: June 09, 2008, 11:10:05 PM
Quote from: "SarahAlex"
Yeah, some "group disclaimer" would be great.


I agree on the issue of a group disclaimer.



Offline Sander

  • Administrator
  • Die-hard fan
  • *****
    • Posts: 3856
    • View Profile
    • X-Freaks
Reply #10 on: June 09, 2008, 11:11:01 PM
I disagree. Next question.

This is my administrator color.


Offline SarahAlex

  • Big fan
  • ****
    • Posts: 600
    • View Profile
    • MySpace
Reply #11 on: June 09, 2008, 11:19:02 PM
Thanks for modification of the rule 12, I'm happy that I don't have to disfigure my Masaya signature by disclaimer that his face belongs to him and not to me. :lol: Posting copyright stuff everywhere else is annoying but yeah, laws are laws, I get it.


SarahAlex - the devil's advocate


Offline Madjhatter

  • Sunday Listener
  • **
    • Posts: 95
    • View Profile
Reply #12 on: June 09, 2008, 11:48:33 PM
Quote
12. Pictures that are under copyright are allowed to be posted on the forum, as long as they add this to their post: This/these images are posted under the fair rights agreement. Copyright belongs to the respective owners. This includes scans of magazines and photo books not available from official stores any more (they are only available from second-hand stores/auction sites/etc). This rule doesn't apply to signatures and avatars.


I can work with that, just as long as I can post the scans without them getting deleted.

~Live boldly. Take risks. Make somebody say, "what the hell was that all about?"~


Offline Hollywood

  • Die-hard fan
  • *****
    • Posts: 1492
    • View Profile
    • http://www.myspace.com/363181252
Reply #13 on: June 10, 2008, 05:32:05 AM
Quote
2. Please make constructive posts. A certain amount of good natured off topic is ok, but negative and bantering comments without facts to back them up and direct offenses are not allowed. Constructive criticism is welcomed. This rule is not enforced as harshly in the Offtopic section of the board.

Ha, are you serious?  Everyone has to make happy-happy posts about how great everything is?  And you get to decide that someone is breaking the rules if you simply don't find their tone to be "good natured" enough?  This, combined with the lack of rules about what will be done to bad mods/admins, presents an absolutely fantastic loophole for capricious staff members to do as they will.  Until this loophole is closed (and I'm not holding my breath here), nothing whatsoever has been done to correct the PN situation.

Quote
3. Please try to watch your language. There are minors on this board, so avoid the use of profanity as much as possible, specially against other members of the board.

Who will be in charge of covering the minors' eyes so they don't read X lyrics like "stand up, fuck up!", "fuck the blood!", etc.?  How about-- given that we have a DTR subforum-- the DTR lyrics "kiss my motherfuckin' ass"?  I know we had a profanity rule before and I'm glad no one bothered to enforce it so far, given the utter ridiculousness of banning profanity on a board dedicated to a band that themselves used profanity and explored some of the most "obscene" and "vulgar" themes possible in their music.  Anyone who can't tolerate a discussion of X shouldn't be listening to them.

Quote
10. No news from sources that are subscription only, that require the subscribers to sign a nondisclosure agreement. In less legal terms, they agree not to repost anything they learned from the subscribed to source. This includes YoshikiMobile.

11. No download links or torrents for any albums/singles/videos etc. are allowed outside the sharing forum. YouTube and other streaming site links, also downloads from official sources are allowed. The sharing forum rules are found here.

Once more I become intensely curious as to how posting Yoshiki Mobile messages is somehow far worse legally than sharing pirated copies of entire albums/singles/videos in the sharing forum.  When you purchase a CD you also in essence "sign a nondisclosure agreement" with regard to the CD's contents.  I quote from the back of my Vanishing Vision CD: "Unauthorized copying, reproduction, hiring, public performance and broadcasting prohibited".  Rules #10 and #11 present an incredibly strange double-standard.

Quote
12. Pictures that are under copyright are allowed to be posted on the forum, as long as they add this to their post: „This/these images are posted under the fair rights agreement. Copyright belongs to the respective owners.“ This includes scans of magazines and photo books not available from official stores any more (they are only available from second-hand stores/auction sites/etc). This rule doesn't apply to signatures and avatars.

Unnecessarily "official" and time-consuming for members.  As others have said, the same effect can be achieved by posting this message somewhere on the forum itself so that it applies to all pictures.  Why do you disagree with his idea and why are you against the notion of posting such a statement?

And here's the main thing: none of these rules address, whatsoever, the PN problem that 31 users here have spoken out about.  If anything, these rules-- particularly #2-- give PN and other admins even more of a carte blanche to do as they will with no real concerns of repercussions.  No one asked for more rules about photos or about how to quote people when posting.  No one.  In fact, many have said that they don't want any further restrictions on behavior for users.  What you've done here, unfortunately, has no bearing whatsoever on the issues people have discussed here at length.

It's like people telling you they're hungry and you giving them hats and parking tickets.  The supposed "solutions" here have no relevance to the problem.

color=darkred]STAND UP!  FUCK UP![/color]


Offline Sander

  • Administrator
  • Die-hard fan
  • *****
    • Posts: 3856
    • View Profile
    • X-Freaks
Reply #14 on: June 10, 2008, 05:59:16 AM
Quote from: "Hollywood"
Quote
2. Please make constructive posts. A certain amount of good natured off topic is ok, but negative and bantering comments without facts to back them up and direct offenses are not allowed. Constructive criticism is welcomed. This rule is not enforced as harshly in the Offtopic section of the board.

Ha, are you serious?  Everyone has to make happy-happy posts about how great everything is?  And you get to decide that someone is breaking the rules if you simply don't find their tone to be "good natured" enough?  This, combined with the lack of rules about what will be done to bad mods/admins, presents an absolutely fantastic loophole for capricious staff members to do as they will.  Until this loophole is closed (and I'm not holding my breath here), nothing whatsoever has been done to correct the PN situation.
Constructive posts =/= happy-happy posts. And what loophole? Rulebreakers will be dealt with, as the admins/mods see it. This goes for all rulebreakers.

Quote from: "Hollywood"
Quote
3. Please try to watch your language. There are minors on this board, so avoid the use of profanity as much as possible, specially against other members of the board.

Who will be in charge of covering the minors' eyes so they don't read X lyrics like "stand up, fuck up!", "fuck the blood!", etc.?  How about-- given that we have a DTR subforum-- the DTR lyrics "kiss my motherfuckin' ass"?  I know we had a profanity rule before and I'm glad no one bothered to enforce it so far, given the utter ridiculousness of banning profanity on a board dedicated to a band that themselves used profanity and explored some of the most "obscene" and "vulgar" themes possible in their music.  Anyone who can't tolerate a discussion of X shouldn't be listening to them.
Don't be stupid, you know what I mean. The anti-profanity rule goes for needless using of foul language (etc. "Ooh this song is so motherfuc*ing good./Bleh I don't like that shitty fuc*ed up song."), in sentences where you could easily use normal words instead of swearing. Swearing doesn't make you look cool.

Quote from: "Hollywood"
Quote
10. No news from sources that are subscription only, that require the subscribers to sign a nondisclosure agreement. In less legal terms, they agree not to repost anything they learned from the subscribed to source. This includes YoshikiMobile.

11. No download links or torrents for any albums/singles/videos etc. are allowed outside the sharing forum. YouTube and other streaming site links, also downloads from official sources are allowed. The sharing forum rules are found here.

Once more I become intensely curious as to how posting Yoshiki Mobile messages is somehow far worse legally than sharing pirated copies of entire albums/singles/videos in the sharing forum.  When you purchase a CD you also in essence "sign a nondisclosure agreement" with regard to the CD's contents.  I quote from the back of my Vanishing Vision CD: "Unauthorized copying, reproduction, hiring, public performance and broadcasting prohibited".  Rules #10 and #11 present an incredibly strange double-standard.
Umm yeah, combine rule #12 and you have a triple standard? The download links are not allowed the private sharing forum. In the future, it might be possible that YM messages will be allowed there, but this is yet uncertain.


Quote from: "Hollywood"
Quote
12. Pictures that are under copyright are allowed to be posted on the forum, as long as they add this to their post: „This/these images are posted under the fair rights agreement. Copyright belongs to the respective owners.“ This includes scans of magazines and photo books not available from official stores any more (they are only available from second-hand stores/auction sites/etc). This rule doesn't apply to signatures and avatars.

Unnecessarily "official" and time-consuming for members.  As others have said, the same effect can be achieved by posting this message somewhere on the forum itself so that it applies to all pictures.  Why do you disagree with his idea and why are you against the notion of posting such a statement?
Because you should not be too lazy. Post the disclosure to your signature, if you think you can't remember to post it every time. Small font is ok.

Quote from: "Hollywood"
And here's the main thing: none of these rules address, whatsoever, the PN problem that 31 users here have spoken out about.  If anything, these rules-- particularly #2-- give PN and other admins even more of a carte blanche to do as they will with no real concerns of repercussions.  No one asked for more rules about photos or about how to quote people when posting.  No one.  In fact, many have said that they don't want any further restrictions on behavior for users.  What you've done here, unfortunately, has no bearing whatsoever on the issues people have discussed here at length.

It's like people telling you they're hungry and you giving them hats and parking tickets.  The supposed "solutions" here have no relevance to the problem.
What problem? I saw problems in that the rules were unclear and mostly unwritten, so people got confused and posts edited/deleted for reasons they didn't know were wrong. Secondly, as I saw it, you were uncomfortable with admins/mods editing your posts without notification beforehand. That's fixed also. As I said, this is not a spamfest-norules-everythinggoes forum.

This is my administrator color.


Offline Uncontrol

  • Filesharers
  • Sunday Listener
  • **
    • Posts: 173
    • View Profile
Reply #15 on: June 10, 2008, 06:15:22 AM
I agree with Hollywood again.

The rules mainly addressed other issues that were never really issues to begin with. I notice a lot of the rules have to do with Hypno worried about being sued. Why would you be sued? Why do we need to add copyright material at the end of all our posts? That's ridiculous. I've never, ever heard of a website shut down over a copyright issue with an image. And rules like #12 is totally not needed at all. The law doesn't only apply when you say it does. The law will apply whether or not you add a little sentence at the end of each post.

Furthermore, why even worry about images at all? When have you ever heard of anyone being busted for X Japan images? If you were to be busted for anything, it would be mp3s. I promise you. And even those you have nothing to worry about.

I'm also against all of this happy happy stuff too. I don't think we ever even had a problem with users excessively cussing. I mean, if they're listening to X, I think they can handle a fuck every now and again. I mean this IS an X Japan forum, you guys are acting like it's some homework help forum on Yahoo for children or something. The only problem I can recall us ever having here was Panthere. Not with mp3s, not with cussing, not with image copyrights, and not with people being mean to each other.



Offline Uncontrol

  • Filesharers
  • Sunday Listener
  • **
    • Posts: 173
    • View Profile
Reply #16 on: June 10, 2008, 06:18:10 AM
Quote
I saw problems in that the rules were unclear and mostly unwritten, so people got confused and posts edited/deleted for reasons they didn't know were wrong. Secondly, as I saw it, you were uncomfortable with admins/mods editing your posts without notification beforehand. That's fixed also.


No. Our problem was that we were uncomfortable with an admin editing our posts for ridiculous reasons, period.



Offline Lucs

  • Die-hard fan
  • *****
    • Posts: 1478
    • View Profile
    • Xploson
Reply #17 on: June 10, 2008, 06:20:11 AM
Come on... could you stop complaining all the time ? Just wait a little... see how it goes with the new rules... then in one or two months maybe you could start complaining again if things didn't change...

I totally agree with the rule number 2. Some people just like making negative posts all the time, but what for ? It's totally useless if it's not well argued, which isn't most of the time.

I think the new rules are really good and we should give it a try. Stop complaining for some time, see how it goes !


Offline Hollywood

  • Die-hard fan
  • *****
    • Posts: 1492
    • View Profile
    • http://www.myspace.com/363181252
Reply #18 on: June 10, 2008, 06:56:07 AM
Quote from: "Hypno"
Constructive posts =/= happy-happy posts. And what loophole? Rulebreakers will be dealt with, as the admins/mods see it. This goes for all rulebreakers.

There is a loophole because definition of "constructive" is entirely subjective and is not defined within the rule itself.  I.e., if you don't like someone's tone, you get to decide that they're breaking rule #2.  I've got to hand it to you, that one's pretty brilliant really. ;)

Quote from: "Hypno"
Don't be stupid, you know what I mean. The anti-profanity rule goes for needless using of foul language (etc. "Ooh this song is so motherfuc*ing good./Bleh I don't like that shitty fuc*ed up song."), in sentences where you could easily use normal words instead of swearing. Swearing doesn't make you look cool.

When you ask me to not be stupid, shall I interpet that as "good natured off topic" or as "contructive criticism"? ;)  I mean, I wouldn't want to think that I'm being personally insulted by the same admin who just posted all these rules about respecting other users and not making personal offenses.  Nah, couldn't be that. :)
And frankly, I see no difference between saying "this song is so motherfucking good" and discussing the DTR song lyrics "kiss my motherfucking ass".  I would understand it if this were a Backstreet Boys forum, but why should users not be allowed to repeat the same language that the bands we are discussing use themselves?  Honestly, anyone who's offended by that kind of language should not be listening to X, hide, DTR, etc.

Quote from: "Hypno"
Umm yeah, combine rule #12 and you have a triple standard? The download links are not allowed the private sharing forum. In the future, it might be possible that YM messages will be allowed there, but this is yet uncertain.

Why does this double/triple standard exist?  What's the purpose of it or reasoning behind it?  I'd honestly like to know, as I find it confusing and don't understand the purpose behind it.

Quote from: "Hypno"
Because you should not be too lazy. Post the disclosure to your signature, if you think you can't remember to post it every time. Small font is ok.

What I meant was: what is the legal rationale behind it?  You really want everyone to include legal disclaimer in their signatures just because you don't want to make such a disclaimer yourself for the forum?  I've never seen that on a forum before (and I've been on many of them), frankly it makes no sense to me why you would want to require your users to go through all of that.  It seems very arbitrary.

Quote from: "Hypno"
What problem? I saw problems in that the rules were unclear and mostly unwritten, so people got confused and posts edited/deleted for reasons they didn't know were wrong. Secondly, as I saw it, you were uncomfortable with admins/mods editing your posts without notification beforehand. That's fixed also. As I said, this is not a spamfest-norules-everythinggoes forum.

Given the two very lengthy threads about the problem at hand, I'm sure you know what problem we're talking about.  You're avoiding the issue.  While I am not you and cannot know what you're thinking or what you mean by all of this (until you tell us, of course), this whole thing gives the impression of someone who is taking advantage of forum unrest to force completely unrelated rules upon his forum.  Please don't assume that your users are too stupid to realize when they've been "baited and switched" into irrelevant rules they didn't ask for.

When we all complained about PN's abuse of her admin power, we were told that solutions were in the works.  We waited.  These rules are the "solution"?  They do nothing whatsoever to address the fact that PN has continually abused her admin power by editing and deleting posts for entirely frivolous reasons.  It has absolutely nothing to do with "notification beforehand" as you would know if you read the two lengthy threads about the PN subject.  I was "notified beforehand" that I was supposed to not call Yoshiki's drumming "multiorgasmic death-sex", which does not make her request that I modify my post any less silly.

Quote from: "Uncontrol"
Our problem was that we were uncomfortable with an admin editing our posts for ridiculous reasons, period.

Precisely.

There is nothing at all in these new rules that addresses the PN problem or will forbid PN from making further frivolous deletions.

EDITED TO ADD:
In case anyone missed this, here's an illustration of what I mean when I use the phrase "double-standard":
http://www.x-freaks.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=38719
Quote from: "Hypno"
Quote from: "Hollywood"
Quote from: "Kyubi"
Really, stop speaking about PN and "JRR2 coming" everywhere like a fucking childish kid, get serious.

A mod calling a user "a fucking childish kid"?  Isn't that nice. :P
And me allowing it, in this case? Even nicer.

I'm seriously thinking that calling us JRR2 or something = ban. I'm pretty sick and tired of this.

Hypno, why "in this case" is it acceptable to break user rules #1, #2, and #3, along with administrator/moderator rule #1?

I'm asking this as a serious question, because I'd like to know in which cases admins and mods are exempt from the rule that says they're not exempt from the rules.

color=darkred]STAND UP!  FUCK UP![/color]


Offline ferret

  • Die-hard fan
  • *****
    • Posts: 3557
    • View Profile
Reply #19 on: June 10, 2008, 07:10:24 AM
Quote from: "Uncontrol"

I'm also against all of this happy happy stuff too. I don't think we ever even had a problem with users excessively cussing.


You people REALLY like to twist it so it fits what you believe, huh?

Please make constructive posts.

Nothing wrong with that.

A certain amount of good natured off topic is ok, but negative and bantering comments without facts to back them up and direct offenses are not allowed.

OT is ok as you can see all over the board. (when it gets too much someone usually says back to topic)
Negative bantering without facts = "JRR 2.0. :evil: " "this forum/band/person sucks" (sorry, I don't care if you don't write WHY you think they suck, then we can talk) "this thread sucks/I hate it" (then why write in the thread?)
Direct offenses: everything you direct at a user (in all seriousness; you can still call a friend bitch/idiot/what the hell ever - except c*nt, n****r, f*g and all the stuff that is racist/sexist  - in good manner if he/she's not offended)

Please try to watch your language. There are minors on this board, so avoid the use of profanity as much as possible, specially against other members of the board.

Is it too much to ask to be civilised in a forum? Usually that goes without saying but some users seem to "forget" it.

RIP


Offline Hollywood

  • Die-hard fan
  • *****
    • Posts: 1492
    • View Profile
    • http://www.myspace.com/363181252
Reply #20 on: June 10, 2008, 07:25:24 AM
Quote from: "ferret"
Direct offenses: everything you direct at a user (in all seriousness; you can still call a friend bitch/idiot/what the hell ever - except c*nt, n****r, f*g and all the stuff that is racist/sexist  - in good manner if he/she's not offended)

This part I do agree with, quite a bit in fact.  I think the use of profanity against other users-- I mean of the "part 1 of name fucking part 2 of name" variety especially-- has really gotten a bit much lately.  That kind of thing isn't cool.

Just wanted to clarify, in case it wasn't clear in my previous post, that I'm not supporting the use of profanity against other users.  I just don't see why using "fuck" or whatever in a non-insult context, like "that band is fucking great!", should be banned on a forum about bands who themselves use those words.

color=darkred]STAND UP!  FUCK UP![/color]


Offline ferret

  • Die-hard fan
  • *****
    • Posts: 3557
    • View Profile
Reply #21 on: June 10, 2008, 07:29:43 AM
Quote from: "Hollywood"
I just don't see why using "fuck" or whatever in a non-insult context, like "that band is fucking great!", should be banned on a forum about bands who themselves use those words.


Where in the rules does it say that?

Please try to watch your language.

in not the same as

shut your goddamn mouth with your filthy words or I'll ban you

RIP


Offline Hollywood

  • Die-hard fan
  • *****
    • Posts: 1492
    • View Profile
    • http://www.myspace.com/363181252
Reply #22 on: June 10, 2008, 07:37:43 AM
Quote from: "ferret"
Quote from: "Hollywood"
I just don't see why using "fuck" or whatever in a non-insult context, like "that band is fucking great!", should be banned on a forum about bands who themselves use those words.


Where in the rules does it say that?

Please try to watch your language.

in not the same as

shut your goddamn mouth with your filthy words or I'll ban you

True.  And personally I think the level of language that was used up until very recently (prior to the last couple weeks or so) was just fine, I felt like I could speak naturally and didn't notice anyone being offended by anyone else's language.  What I said in the part you quoted was more in reaction to what Hypno said above:
Quote from: "Hypno"
The anti-profanity rule goes for needless using of foul language (etc. "Ooh this song is so motherfuc*ing good./Bleh I don't like that shitty fuc*ed up song."), in sentences where you could easily use normal words instead of swearing.

...Which, if I'm not mistaken, would restrict language further than the standard used here before (and here too, by "before" I mean "a couple weeks ago before the profanity became more insult-oriented").  But I'd be happy to be wrong about that if I got the wrong impression from his words.

color=darkred]STAND UP!  FUCK UP![/color]


Offline SarahAlex

  • Big fan
  • ****
    • Posts: 600
    • View Profile
    • MySpace
Reply #23 on: June 10, 2008, 07:56:20 AM
Personally, I don't feel offended by vulgarisms (thanks to my almost ghetto-like primary school where it was quite normal that "students" used the words like "b**ch", "f*ck" and so on, every day, even when speaking with a teacher, and we also had some pupil x teacher fights) but there's no need to write them everywhere as some younger users do lately. I mean "younger" by age.
And I guess that if you write something like "Fuck, today I got fired, my dog is ill and we broke up with my boyfriend/girlfriend", nobody will mind the initial vulgarism anyway.


SarahAlex - the devil's advocate


Offline Anna

  • Die-hard fan
  • *****
    • Posts: 1221
    • View Profile
    • Tsurezuregusa
Reply #24 on: June 10, 2008, 08:04:33 AM
To be completely honest, I must say that I also don't like the rule n.2. I certainly agree that some comments are really useless ("I don't like this thread."). However, I feel uneasy about "negative and bantering comments", because I fear this will be interpreted very loosely. Also, what is a "fact"? We may also argue endlessly about this, as I think we have already seen that what is a "fact" for many members here is nonsense for others.

I certainly think we should first see how these new rules work out, but I agree with Hollywood that this one really might cause troubles in the future.

Pony rocks!


Offline SarahAlex

  • Big fan
  • ****
    • Posts: 600
    • View Profile
    • MySpace
Reply #25 on: June 10, 2008, 08:09:04 AM
Quote from: "Anna"
To be completely honest, I must say that I also don't like the rule n.2. I certainly agree that some comments are really useless ("I don't like this thread."). However, I feel uneasy about "negative and bantering comments", because I fear this will be interpreted very loosely. Also, what is a "fact"? We may also argue endlessly about this, as I think we have already seen that what is a "fact" for many members here is nonsense for others.


This doesn't depend on the rule but on people. If they're going to force us to speak as if we all used antidepresive pills, I will protest too. :wink:


SarahAlex - the devil's advocate


Offline Anna

  • Die-hard fan
  • *****
    • Posts: 1221
    • View Profile
    • Tsurezuregusa
Reply #26 on: June 10, 2008, 08:14:36 AM
Well, I think that's what I basically said - that it too much depends on people's interpretation. And that's something we had problems with.

Pony rocks!


Offline Matthias

  • Die-hard fan
  • *****
    • Posts: 1650
    • View Profile
Reply #27 on: June 10, 2008, 08:18:23 AM
Quote from: "Anna"
...I certainly think we should first see how these new rules work out,...


Yes, that's what I think, too.



Offline Skooter

  • Fan
  • ***
    • Posts: 353
    • View Profile
    • Livejournal
Reply #28 on: June 10, 2008, 10:07:04 AM
Quote from: "Matthias"
Quote from: "Anna"
...I certainly think we should first see how these new rules work out,...


Yes, that's what I think, too.

Same here. While it's not impossible that problems might arise from these rules, I think we should wait to see if they actually do.

(I agree with most of them myself, providing some of them aren't enforced TOO strictly (as the profanity rule) but I doubt it will be)



Offline Sander

  • Administrator
  • Die-hard fan
  • *****
    • Posts: 3856
    • View Profile
    • X-Freaks
Reply #29 on: June 10, 2008, 10:29:24 AM
Quote from: "Hollywood"
Quote from: "Uncontrol"
Our problem was that we were uncomfortable with an admin editing our posts for ridiculous reasons, period.

Precisely.

There is nothing at all in these new rules that addresses the PN problem or will forbid PN from making further frivolous deletions.

EDITED TO ADD:
In case anyone missed this, here's an illustration of what I mean when I use the phrase "double-standard":
http://www.x-freaks.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=38719
Quote from: "Hypno"
Quote from: "Hollywood"
Quote from: "Kyubi"
Really, stop speaking about PN and "JRR2 coming" everywhere like a fucking childish kid, get serious.

A mod calling a user "a fucking childish kid"?  Isn't that nice. :P
And me allowing it, in this case? Even nicer.

I'm seriously thinking that calling us JRR2 or something = ban. I'm pretty sick and tired of this.

Hypno, why "in this case" is it acceptable to break user rules #1, #2, and #3, along with administrator/moderator rule #1?

I'm asking this as a serious question, because I'd like to know in which cases admins and mods are exempt from the rule that says they're not exempt from the rules.
And now, she can't edit your posts for "ridiculous reasons", as you already know the reasons she can edit them, and act accordingly, righ?

And the Kyubi issue has already been brought up in the mods subforum.



And I can't write more atm, because then I'll miss my lunch and be late for work...

This is my administrator color.