-De-adminning PN- not going to happen unless she breaks the current rules or steps down herself. And that is final, there is no reason to talk about this one any more.
As I said to you, both in public and via PM: if, as you said, you are seriously willing to de-admin PN if her bad behavior resurfaces, that's fine with me. I've already agreed to this, don't attempt to imply that I haven't. I honestly don't know why you're now trying to re-open this topic with me, other than to join Lucs in the strawman fiesta.
-Demolishing the current rules, bringing back the old ones- We are considering some changes in the rules. About your 'old rules worked fine', do you even remember the old rules? I deleted them, they have been thrown to the trashcan of history. If you want them back, you have to remind me of each of them (not that I'm actually putting them back, I just want to know if you know the old rules yourself)
Credit to you-- you're really trying every possible way to permanently force the new rules down everyone's throat, aren't you? No, I didn't save a copy of the old rules. I (naively) didn't anticipate that the new rules would be so bizarre and oppressive as to necessitate that.
because all I remember from there are 'No spamming' and guidelines for your avatar size... Also something about not posting (unchecked) translations without notes that they may have mistakes.
The fact that these are the only rules you remember really says something: those are the only rules that are actually of any importance. Well, those and "don't insult or harass other users". And yes, there was already something to that effect in the old rules.
So, for normal users:
1. Don't insult or harass other users, and don't post other users' PMs without their permission.
2. No spamming.
3. When posting translations or rumors, please include a disclaimer to remind others that there may be mistakes or other inaccuracies.
4. Maximum avatar size is (whatever).
5. Don't share audio or video files outside of the sharing subforum.
Why are any rules necessary beyond that?
By the way, the admin/mod rules are actually fine, the only problem there is that they aren't consistently upheld or enforced and that the admins (note plural) bend them at will.
Of course, first there should be a time period long enough to see if the rule under question works. Don't you agree?
No. Why do you need to "test" a new rule to see if it "works"? Uncontrol said it best:
Also, the new rules aren't something that you need to try to figure out if you like, it's not a new brand of Doritos or anything. You can read the rules and decide if you like them from that, there isn't really anything to try. You either like them, or you don't.
Speaking of that:
And I know people who have been posting a lot less because of your 'crusade' and the atmosphere it's generating.
Here we go again with these attempts to assert that I'm the only one who has any problem with anything around here. In that case, may I direct you to the current state of the rules poll?
Poll
Question: What do you think about the current rules? (Voting closes: July 25, 2008, 12:11:27 AM)
The rules are good as they are! - 14 (40%)
Some minor changes, and they'd be great! - 7 (20%)
The rules need some drastic changes! - 14 (40%)
We don't need ANY rules! - 0 (0%)
Total Voters: 34
60% of voters have a problem with at least SOME part of the current rules. I'm not alone, and have never been.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Lucs's sentence about your statement that if X swears, drinks, smokes, etc, then we should be allowed to act just as bad? I read the posts, but I guess it's just a misunderstanding?
Yes, that's what Lucs was talking about. My point in quoting that was to show that he was clearly addressing ME in the posts that he now claims were addressed to MiscastDice. But as I said, who he was addressing doesn't actually matter, since it was an obvious strawman argument either way.
And Hollywood, about your 'I or anyone has never suggested to get rid of all the rules', your statement of 'no one wanted the new rules, the old ones were good enough' almost is asking of getting rid of all the rules, because as I said above, the old rules really weren't anything.
Now you're contradicting yourself. First you supposedly can't remember the old rules, and now you remember them vividly enough to claim that they "weren't anything"? Don't forget, this forum's most active period-- the three-day reunion concerts and the lead-up to and cool-down from it-- occured under the old rules.
And everything went just fine.
