Poll: New Forum Rules: Yay or Nay?

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

The following sentence is also a little unhelpfully vague: "Discussion of ad blockers, pedophilia, illegal acts, and pornography is never allowed." Does this mean that discussing a crime in the news would technically be against the CoC, since we would be discussing an illegal act? Probably not in practice but it could be interpreted that way.

The sentences previous to that are worse, I think -
Illegal Drugs in the United States
Illegal Acts in the United States

Speaking as a Brit I don't like the idea that I could be discussing something which is perfectly legal in my country but then get rapped by the mods because it's illegal in the US (eg getting drunk on my twentieth birthday). Chances are that the mods would take nationality into account, but still...

They don't take nationality in account in the slightest. Case in point, both piracy and pot are tolerated in my country (the Netherlands) but I still get warnings for discussing them or even alluding to them

Well, that's pretty crappy. Seems a little unfair that a global community is being expected to hold to the laws of one country - even if it is the country that the parent company is registered in. Hmm. Not sure how long this 'US law applies to everyone regardless of nationality' rule has existed (I've only read the forum rules once before, back when I signed up) but now that I know about it I must say I'm not a fan.

 

[Theminimanx]

This goes for auto-playing videos as well. Just don't do it, please. (Not directed at you, just in general)

Is it an auto-playing video if you have to click the spoiler button to view it? It seems rather annoying if you have to click the spoiler button, then have to click the play button for what turns out to be 2 seconds of:

Spoiler

In that case, having spoilered videos auto-play or not would depend on how much else in contained in the spoiler (to prevent an auto-play buried in a wall of text) and be a matter of etiquette.

 

[Colour Scientist]

I have a question, I have seen people get hounded for not using the search bar to find similar threads, but what's the point? What constitutes a "necro" how long does it have to be before the thread is considered dead? If I post in a thread that hasn't been posting in for a week, am I necro-ing the thread?

It says in the CoC that it's 30 days after the last post in the thread, so a month after the thread has become inactive.

The "use the search bar" thing is largely thrown around by older members.
When I first joined, it was said a lot because we were encouraged to necro threads rather than make new ones.
Presumably because the forums are much larger now, it makes more sense to just make a new one.

This could be totally wrong but that's my guess anyway.

 

[lacktheknack]

It's not the words I worry about. It's the people. I got an argument from the staff over the word 'silly' in a post once. Fortunately, I overturned that one, but I don't think it should have ever been considered offensive to begin with.

This. I used the term "idort" in a thread (obviously referring to someone who owns every console, it's been common in gaming discussions for years now) and got a warning because the mod didn't want to do any research and assumed it was a typo of "idiot" (at least, I assume they assumed that; they don't actually discuss anything, they just lay down the hammer regardless of how ignorant they are of the topic at hand).

I've literally never heard of that.

So I Google'd it. First result:

Noun. An intentional, humorous misspelling of idiot.

Followed by other stuff about /v/ coining it for all-console owners. Pro-tip: If /v/ coined it, it probably has offensive connotations. "Idort" is indeed a misspelling of "idiot", and all that means is that /v/ is calling omni-console owners idiots. That's pretty consistent with what /v/ does.

At any rate, if you honestly meant nothing by it, appeal would have been easy.

The majority of the site's profits come from ads. Very intrusive, incredibly annoying, often content-disrupting ads. Even the mention of you blocking them is basically saying you're "stealing" their goods - you're enjoying the content they produce without paying to access it (by seeing ads).

Furthermore, if the site doesn't actively protect their ads, then the value of the ad space plunges. Why would you advertise on a space that allows people to block the ads, after all?

As far as I'm concerned, if you spend half an hour or more on this site per week, there's no adequate reason to not try a year of Pub Club and never fuss about the ads again. Seriously, guys, it's worth it. I wouldn't be in my third year of it if it wasn't. Plus, the site probably gets more value from you if you pay for pub club than they did collecting your ad views, which could result in less relentless ads for people who genuinely can't afford it.

 

[Zombie_Fish]

I have a question, I have seen people get hounded for not using the search bar to find similar threads, but what's the point? What constitutes a "necro" how long does it have to be before the thread is considered dead? If I post in a thread that hasn't been posting in for a week, am I necro-ing the thread?

Limit is 30 days from the last post made in the thread. If you post in it after that point, it is considered a necro.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Since it's a PG-13 forum, having a lengthy discussion about your favourite porn isn't going to be met with open arms. However, it's not illegal to watch porn, so people are entitled to mention that they have done so.
I hope that clears it up slightly?

Fair enough. I do have one question about that (since we're doing some Q&A here).

Recently, I did a review (in the reviews section) on Saya no Uta, which is a visual novel with several graphic sex scenes. My review touched briefly on those scenes (although entirely without descriptions or links or anything) and there was some discussion in the thread that followed about how they were handled. Finally, my review included several warnings to anyone interested in playing the game about the H content.

Since I posted it before the new rules went into effect, obviously my review is Grandfathered in. However, would I be allowed to post that review today if I'd written it a week+ later than I did? Or would a review of a video game with porn in it be counted as "discussion of pornography"?

Just seeking clarification. I don't currently have any plans for more visual novel reviews.

 

[Aramis Night]

When evaluating the CoC, you should take the rules into account as well as the obvious desire behind them. What i get from this is that the mods are adding more tools to the banning tool box because there are a lot of people that mods have been wanting to ban for a while, that they couldn't reasonably ban under the old rules. The new rules that are worded vaguely were not done so by accident.

The further clarification of old rules, is helpful and would be seen as a step to not have to ban people unnecessarily. The new less specific rules however serve no other purpose than to give the mods more freedom to throw people off the forum that they have likely have already been wanting to kick off. It will also have the nasty side effect of stifling a lot of unpopular opinion which may lead to much more stale discussions here. I'm hopeful this forum doesn't turn into yet another echo chamber full of rote conventional ideas without controversy. But the intent behind such broad rule definitions tell me to expect dark days ahead, Especially since there is no limit to the things people find offensive.

 

[Thaluikhain]

When evaluating the CoC, you should take the rules into account as well as the obvious desire behind them. What i get from this is that the mods are adding more tools to the banning tool box because there are a lot of people that mods have been wanting to ban for a while, that they couldn't reasonably ban under the old rules. The new rules that are worded vaguely were not done so by accident.

The further clarification of old rules, is helpful and would be seen as a step to not have to ban people unnecessarily. The new less specific rules however serve no other purpose than to give the mods more freedom to throw people off the forum that they have likely have already been wanting to kick off. It will also have the nasty side effect of stifling a lot of unpopular opinion which may lead to much more stale discussions here. I'm hopeful this forum doesn't turn into yet another echo chamber full of rote conventional ideas without controversy. But the intent behind such broad rule definitions tell me to expect dark days ahead, Especially since there is no limit to the things people find offensive.

Hey? You think this was intentionally done to allow mods to mod people without giving clear justifications?

 

[JoJo]

I remember a time where this was considered an adult forum and we were allowed to use whatever language we wanted as long as it wasn't excessive or directed at specific users.

The forum has sure gone downhill since then.

If this forum was ever an adult forum, then it certainly wasn't by the time I joined almost four years ago, it's been PG-13 from then until now. As far as I'm aware, and correct me if I'm wrong here, there isn't anything specifically in the new rules against cursing unless it's ridiculously excessive, or directed at other users.

 

[cerebus23]

With the kind of content and sheer amount of red meat used in that content, jim and zp especially, how can you not expect people to react to stuff?

why do we have to bite our tongue now? granted i like their stuff i dont have a problem with the stuff heck some of the more controvercial stuff i found hilarious, but if someone feels offended by a gag or something they should have every right to vent their disagreement.

Sometimes content creators do go too far, they are not always 100% in the right, they are only human after all.

Bumping older threads really needs some qualifiers, if a threat is relevant, or has new relevance, why can it not be bumped or necroed? Is it better to make a new thread even if it is number 20 on the exact same topic? what sense does that make exactly?

how about all the bi monthly flame debates that cover the same topics but just different thread titles, where they could probably find the old threads and read every opinion under the sun and loads of flames, instead we just rehash it. and i would be willing to bet as time goes on the constructive debate diminishes and trolling and flame baiting increases, maybe someone should do a study on that, as topics get rehashed.

 

[Aramis Night]

When evaluating the CoC, you should take the rules into account as well as the obvious desire behind them. What i get from this is that the mods are adding more tools to the banning tool box because there are a lot of people that mods have been wanting to ban for a while, that they couldn't reasonably ban under the old rules. The new rules that are worded vaguely were not done so by accident.

The further clarification of old rules, is helpful and would be seen as a step to not have to ban people unnecessarily. The new less specific rules however serve no other purpose than to give the mods more freedom to throw people off the forum that they have likely have already been wanting to kick off. It will also have the nasty side effect of stifling a lot of unpopular opinion which may lead to much more stale discussions here. I'm hopeful this forum doesn't turn into yet another echo chamber full of rote conventional ideas without controversy. But the intent behind such broad rule definitions tell me to expect dark days ahead, Especially since there is no limit to the things people find offensive.

Hey? You think this was intentionally done to allow mods to mod people without giving clear justifications?

I refuse to answer that question. My answer may be deemed offensive and i will be banned. Please don't be offended by my lack of answer.

 

[lacktheknack]

I remember a time where this was considered an adult forum and we were allowed to use whatever language we wanted as long as it wasn't excessive or directed at specific users.

The forum has sure gone downhill since then.

Jesus Christ, man, you've been here less than a year. The forums are improving from their state last year.

snip

I'm going to bet 40 cookies on this being inaccurate, what with new rules ALWAYS being vague and this forum being a bit of a low-controversy echo-chamber already.

 

[Sassafrass]

Nice to finally see the necro rule put in after a year of it being a non-listed rule.
In short, yays and stuff, I guess.

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

Does this mean posts laden with profanity would be banned? If we're trying to take "PG-13" then, as per the MPAA's guidelines:

A motion picture?s single use of one of the harsher sexually-derived words, though only as an expletive, initially requires at least a PG-13 rating. More than one such expletive requires an R rating, as must even one of those words used in a sexual context.

How are we to interpret this?

I feel so tempted right now to post that one video where Brian Blessed brings on a barrage of expletives.

I think that out of all the new forum rules, the PG-13 one seems the most unnecessary, people here tend to keep it civil anyway from what I have seen, and I don't see what the point in regulating swearing is anyway.

There are few enough words that can appropiately express anger, expletives have the right phonetics to do it succinctly and quickly without being bogged down with words such as "enraged" "overcome with anger and disdain".

Other than that, the rules seem okay, but I still miss DvsBstrd's quips and witticisms.

 

[Callate]

I'm a tiny bit worried about the "perverted remarks" line; it seems excessively vague. If it's just used to keep someone from trying to gross out another forum member as a sort of sideways aggression, that's one thing, but some people find homosexuality, transexuality, BDSM, vore, and "furries" perverse... And I'm not about to say off hand that discussion of any of the above is without merit; I think there have been interesting messages about any and all of the above, and I'd hate to see them go for fear of censure.

 

[Legion]

With the kind of content and sheer amount of red meat used in that content, jim and zp especially, how can you not expect people to react to stuff?

why do we have to bite our tongue now? granted i like their stuff i dont have a problem with the stuff heck some of the more controvercial stuff i found hilarious, but if someone feels offended by a gag or something they should have every right to vent their disagreement.

Sometimes content creators do go too far, they are not always 100% in the right, they are only human after all.

As per the rules, you are perfectly allowed to vent your disagreement. What you are not allowed to do is:

A) Create a thread to vent about it, without any discussion value.
B) Vent at them as individuals.

If you want to say how and why you find it offensive, that is fine. But if you start attacking them personally for it then you would be breaking the code of conduct. "I find this offensive because X. I feel that saying Y was out of order." would be fine. If you make it personal against them by saying things such as "You are an idiot/racist/sexist/troll/whatever" then that is crossing the line.

The rules have not changed in that regard, it was there before.

Or to put it more simply: Criticise the work, not the worker.

 

[lacktheknack]

And PG-13 clearly implies no cursing.

A mod in this very thread said that you can easily get away with "a few fucks".

Also, for someone who's been lurking here forever, you've missed the dozens of times that a staff member have said "This is a PG-13 site", and they've been saying it for years.

 

[JoJo]

Jesus Christ, man, you've been here less than a year.

Judge not a book by its cover.

If this forum was ever an adult forum, then it certainly wasn't by the time I joined almost four years ago, it's been PG-13 from then until now. As far as I'm aware, and correct me if I'm wrong here, there isn't anything specifically in the new rules against cursing unless it's ridiculously excessive, or directed at other users.

I can clearly remember that rule. It was before the "don't insult content creators" one. The first time I read the rules was shortly after Yahtzee came to the site.

And PG-13 clearly implies no cursing.

Implies, but the rules also imply from a straight reading that any discussion of an illegal act is prohibited and I can't see that being enforced. Unless we see examples of people being moderated for cursing, I wouldn't consider it a major problem.

On your other point, you joined the site in 2013, so I can't see how you would know so much about what happened years ago unless you have an older account? Is that the case?

 

[FoolKiller]

Now they can give warnings for necroing threads without me getting angry. About time it was put in.

Actually, this is why I voted nay. Its a load of shit. I've accidentally done it to a thread because the stupid site sees you read something and gives you a set of related articles only to show that the article is three years old. If you don't want the thread revisited then you shouldn't shove it in my face to begin with.

Also, this would be easier on the site's end to manage. All you have to do is create a nice little bit of code that locks the thread automatically when 30 days has expired from the time of last post.

Punishing someone for this seems lazy as it could be handled easily and proactively on the forum's end.

 

[IceForce]

We could really use an auto-lock feature so that threads that haven't had a post in 30 days are impossible to reply to. That would stop people coming in from google & performing their foul necromancy.

Also, this would be easier on the site's end to manage. All you have to do is create a nice little bit of code that locks the thread automatically when 30 days has expired from the time of last post.

Punishing someone for this seems lazy as it could be handled easily and proactively on the forum's end.

I've been saying this for months, but the mods don't seem to be interested in taking this suggestion on board.

Seriously, it wouldn't be that hard to implement. Just auto-lock all threads after 30 days of no replies.

It's simple, it saves people from getting warnings, and saves the mods from the extra work of having to deal with necro threads.