New Posting guidelines (Feb 09, 2003)

[Glaucus]

We will not however tolerate excessive posting promoting drug use or other illegal activities.

Of course posting about drug use is not illegal.  If it were then the High Times magazine would have been shut down by now.  Countless movies would have never been made.  Freedom of expression and freedom of speech guarantee this as a legal right.

Of course you have every right to ban any form of expression or speech on your forum, I'm just pointing out that if you are doing it for legal reasons then you need not worry about it.  Only if people were conspiring to commit an illegal act should you worry, ie: setting up drug deals or piracy transactions. Simply discussing or even advocating is perfectly legal in the US and most other countries.

Also, the No posting about illegal activities rule is very blanketing.  Technically I couldn't mention the fact I like to speed when I drive or that I placed a bet on the Super Bowl (I didn't, just an example) or that I paid for a lap dance at the super bowl party (illegal in my part of the world for some stupid reason).  If you simply want to stop 420Dude's advocating drugs then just make a rule that says "No Advocating Of Illegal Drug Use" and leave it at that.

And oh yeah, you should also remember that not all your users live in the US so what's illegal in the US might not be in other countries.  You might wanna post a link to all the laws in your country or state so people can be informed of what illegal activites thet can't talk about.  ;-)

I know people will think I'm being anal here but with rules you gotta be clear and not allow them to be open to ambiguity.  I've participated on forums with MUCH tighter posting rules and had no problem with it, I just think the wording should be clearer.  With statements like This includes image posting I wonder if pictures like this: :quickdraw:  :smack:  :whack:  :ak47:  and :destroy:  break any rules as they seem to advocate violance.  Obviously a bit of sarcasim there but I think I made my point.

  - Mike

[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

[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

[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

[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