New Posting guidelines (Feb 09, 2003)

redrumloa wrote:

So you can't promote speeding, gambling, or lap dancing either....

Ah darn, I really love 2 of those 3 you mentioned ;-)

In the spirit of Glaucus' "be specific" reply, I just gotta ask....So you "really love" giving lap dances?

I digress before I get moderated  :-D

[redrumloa]

Wayne wrote:
In the spirit of Glaucus' "be specific" reply, I just gotta ask....So you "really love" giving lap dances?

I digress before I get moderated  :-D

/me blushes

ROFLOL now that would be an ugly sight!! :roflmao:

[Glaucus]

I just find it's overkill to invoke such a blanketing rule because one single user made repeated posts about pot.  Why not just directly address that issue and not ban discussion on all things illegal.  I believe that if all off topic threads and posts are contained in the OT forum then there should be no problem at all.

Remember this web site is not just an Amiga discussion forum, but an outlet for the Amiga user community.  This is how Wayne has described it to me.  I believe OT discussion is an important part of this community and sometimes things are said that others will not agree with or even find offensive.  Obviously rules will be needed to keep the place civil but we must be careful that the rules don't get in the way of the community.

I would like to see what Dude420's view on this is.  Dude, would you consider refraining from posting about pot if Wayne deferred this rule?  Just an idea.

  - Mike

[downix]

I know many people are hoping for an end to 'trolling'...and I am hoping for something related to that....and end to the relentless 'counter trolling'.

I'll admit, I've been guilty of the latter one more than a few times.  I realized something the other day, however, that it's an endless circle that only breeds criticism, and gives an excuse for more trolling.

So, I'm avoiding the agressive stance against these trolls, and letting them show how rediculous they are.  Best to have debate between rational people.

[Glaucus]

uhmmm let me play devil's advocate and say 'good'. Those are all bad things, and this is an amiga website....(and I am playing devil's advocate...but its fun!)

I'm usually the Devil's advocate as well, sometimes I even advocate the Devil!  ;-)

Perhaps my examples weren't that great, but the more I read about this rule the more I realize that what it's really all about is that some individuals have been annoying by posting OT comments repeatedly.  They'd be equally annoying if smoking pot was legal or if they were advocating something that is legal.  For example if Dude posted about how he's drunk instead of high, or that we should all get plastered instead of stoned in every post, it would be just as annoying wouldn't?  However it would pass this little rule as being drunk isn't illegal!

Anyway, my point is that it's not what Dude420 said but how he said it.  Perhaps the rule makers are looking at it all wrong.

  - Mike

[DaveP]

Being drunk in charge of a computer should be
illegal.

So should being angry, but then Neko wouldn't get
any work done ;-)

( sorry personal, ban me )

[MarkTime]

@Darrin,

Wow, I had a similar experience visiting my wife's family in Ukraine.  If I remember correctly it is about an 18 hour flight.  Oh well, the laptop I brought was kind of important after I arrived, but I barely looked at it on the plane over....

The way over, went very quickly for me...somehow my mind was filled with thoughts of the trip.  The plane back, well...I don't have good news for you there...that was the most freakin !@#$@ boring trip ever.....I wanted to climb out of my skin by the time it landed....

Well, I should be more comforting, but then I'd have to lie :-)

[redrumloa]

I just find it's overkill to invoke such a blanketing rule

Did you read the rules before commenting? It's not a blanket rule per say. It's at the moderator's disgression. As I said a comment here and there within the context of a topic in question won't likely be touched. Over doing it and/or constantly putting it in OT threads will.

[color=FF0000]If you get drunk, that's fine. If you use drugs, that's fine. The moderators of this site aren't here to be your mother. We will not however tolerate excessive posting promoting drug use or other illegal activities. It's not funny, it's annoying, and it's unacceptable. Moderators are free to use their discretion up to and including banning the account of the person responsible.[/color][/b][/i]

[MarkTime]

@Glaucus

They'd be equally annoying if smoking pot was legal or if they were advocating something that is legal.

WHOLLY COW SON!!!!

Now that point, at least to me, is dead on the mark.

I'm impressed.

[MarkTime]

hmmm I told everyone this subject is interesting to me...I am fighting with myself here, to shut up!   I don't want to be guilty of doing the same thing, that I'm about to criticize....

but....

it is interesting, the other post about the V.I.C. and Tim Rue would come up at this time.

The most controversial figures I ever knew when I was still on c.s.a.m was Tim Rue and George Noel....

and they were far more controversial than Dude420 will ever be.....

and interesting thing about them, is they almost never spoke about anything illegal.....indeed, they were almost never off topic either.

One talked about the V.I.C. for almost a decade now, which is an Amiga program and addresses computing concepts...and the other was more of a custom chips advocate....

They rarely ever strayed off topic.  They could insult you in ways that are not personal attacks.  

People are very passionate about these characters, even now...

[Glaucus]

Did you read the rules before commenting? It's not a blanket rule per say. It's at the moderator's disgression. As I said a comment here and there within the context of a topic in question won't likely be touched. Over doing it and/or constantly putting it in OT threads will.

I believe I understand the spirit in which this rule was created in which is why I am questioning the wording.  :-)  I understand that if someone were to create a pot advocating thread in the OT forum it would mostly go un-noticed by most. I don't believe that this rule was created to prevent such discussions, yet the way it's worded one might think that is so.  I've been around long enough to know where Wayne is comming from, others might not be.

However, I think what Wayne was trying to address; the repeated OT postings of particular users in Amiga related threads, has not been properly addressed by this rule.  The fact that all the repeated OT postings were of an illegal subject is secondary, wouldn't you say?  This rule can't be used to stop all annoying OT posts which tells me it's of little use as people who want to be annoying will simply find ways around it quite easily.

  - Mike

Mike,

You're getting waaaay too stuck on this.  It doesn't matter.  

Illegal activities.
- drugs
- prostitution
- credit card fraud
- illegal ROM hacking.

Just a few examples of what Illegal means here.  Should I write out a different rule for each and every incidence?  Could explode the list.  

Please understand that just because speeding is against the law, doesn't mean you instantly go to jail for it.  Likewise, I think it's fairly safe to say that most people here get away with "murder" where posts are concerned.  These rules allow us the flexibility to make the necessary decisions to keep Amiga.org running correctly.  Nothing more.

1) If it's not written in the guidelines, I cannot take action when needed without someone bitching about it.

2) If it IS written in the guidelines, and you're given fair warning, then you have no reason to bitch when you reap the consequences of your actions.

You know as well as I that I'm not about to throw someone off this site for saying "I'm stoned" right now, but if, in 420's case, you had 181 posts on this site where you were either stoned, or talking about getting stoned, or showing people images of getting stoned, ad nauseum, you would feel the same way I do.

If you have alternate verbage which makes you feel more comfortable (or eliminates whatever reason you are uncomfortable), then feel free to suggest it.

[MarkTime]

ahhhh I'm hopless...

if I may suggest alternative verbage,  'No posting about illegal activities'...to 'no posts that promote illegal activities'

Presumably, you can talk about speeding...and be against it, and that would not be offensive.

The great thing about Mike, is he is only complaining about the rules on the front end...accurately understanding what a quagmire this whole business is.....after a while, the Mike's of this community will go quiet, and its another group that becomes the problem.

people who wanted the change in the first place...they will be the ones complaining like school children about every perceived violation over and over until one would want to throw their hands in the air....

or not...maybe that never happens....he,he,he

 ;-)

ok now I will force myself to go quiet...if I post here again, then I'm a big liar <---committing in public to shut up on this topic.

Good luck anyhow.

[Argo]

Can we talk about Amigas now? This is starting to get creepy...

[Glaucus]

Hey Wayne,

Well, I'm pretty sure this rule won't affect me much as I don't advocate illegal things anyway, but I am a tad bit worried about a slippery slope that might follow.  Some people have been annoyed by repeated postings advocating pot, I also know that many people have been annoyed by much of the OT discussions in general, especially some of the recent political debates.  I'm thinking it's only a matter of time before a new rule pops up banning political discussions or anything else others might find annoying.

If you have alternate verbage which makes you feel more comfortable (or eliminates whatever reason you are uncomfortable), then feel free to suggest it.

Well, for starters I think MarkTime's suggestion is far better and more realistic.  I also think catagorizing it as a cardinal rule is overkill as you stated yourself that it's a rule that won't be enforced 100% of the time but only when someone get's out of hand.  That to me is not a cardinal rule but more of a guideline.  :-)

However I think something the following would work nicely:
Repeated Off Topic Posts or Advocacy Will Not Be Tolerated - Except perhaps in the OT forums.  This would basically mean that people who like to advocate anything not related to the forum OR the thread itself my have their posts moderated.  Threads that are off-topic may also be moderated or moved to the OT forum (as I am sure they already are).  Repeat offenses of the above could get you a warning and eventually a ban.

The above would cover 420Dude's repeated off-topic posts in all Amiga related forums (or more clearly stated, all forums except the OT forum).  However, if Dude decides to start advocating pot in an OT thread (in the OT forum) about politics and the middle east for exampe, then he would stand a chance of getting moderated as it would again be off topic to the thread itself.

So this way you give him a small outlet for his advocacy and keep the rest happy by keeping the OT pot references to an absolute minimum.  Obviously you might want to re-word it a bit more clearly then I have, starting with a clear definition of what an off-topic post really is, but I think this approach stands a much better chance of addressing the problem at it's core.

  - Mike

[artman]

@MarkTime

Congrats on your aniversary coming up, it only gets better.  Been married 33 years this coming July, and it still"ROCKS!!!!" :-D  :-D  :-D