Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
New Forum Rules
I understand what you're trying to say, and I agree with you on some parts.
However, if the rules are set very strict, then especially the newcomers will behave better.
After they gather experience on the forum, they know "how much" you can disregard the rules.

The new rules are pretty cool, also I like that you show the warning levels now.

Phil, you're such a fresh ninja!
Thanks given by: Divisor
I'm not saying you should prolong the rules, just make them more specific in the parts I mentioned. And I'm definitely not saying they are bad, quite the opposite, they are much better than the old ones.
And thanks about the IRC tip, didn't know that.
Thanks given by:
maybe you can do me the favor and put our points to words so we can really just add them to the descriptions.
[sig placeholder until my new sig is finished]
should totally allow people to be all trolley on their birthday :D
Thanks given by:
Here, the suggestions are in italic:
Basically everything that Marshall said.

Also, what does "Bans will be allotted upon disregard." mean?
Thanks given by: YinYin
I strongly advise you to change "corrections" to "suggestions", as you are in no position to correct anyone.
Thanks given by: Wiro
i find rule .1 very useful. probably you could add ¤ use google translator if your english is too basic [ preferealy use basic cause bad might hurt their feelings ]. sorry for spelling mistakes cause i am using mobile
Thanks given by:
At the topic concerning the clarity of the rules, my personal experience is that leaders that state what they want very clearly are much better than leaders that assume you know what they want, especially if you are new to them.

EDIT: So what you in my opinion should do is remove unclarities, such as the example Divisor brought up, and replace them with a specific span of time/more specific wording.

The unclarities:
gravedigs (posting in threads that have been inactive for several weeks)

Bans will be allotted upon disregard.

The last sentence feels like it is missing something. Perhaps a complete rewording would help.

Other than these small changes, I am very happy with the new rules. Rule #7 use my little nephew lol.

TITLE: a idea
make cave for bear?
Thanks given by: YinYin , Divisor , LutiChris
i do have an IRC link at the top
only weird thing is that i always get a warning i have to answer with no for it to work
so who is having what problems with the web irc we have here? it should be accessible for everyone

how about we keep the basic rule as short and precise as possible
but also hide more info/examples on questionable things such as gravedigging etc in a "more..."/"details..."/"examples..." spoiler box
because many newcomers may just not be familiar with these things/terms at all (not that anyone will read it right from the beginning, no need to)
but it would help for everyone who wants to read up on it
and obviously our 'COMMON sense' did include quite a lot of explaining so far
  • (01-15-2011, 01:33 PM)Divisor Wrote:  2. Everybody has his own definiton of "several". If you don't clear it up, people will complain. If you warn me for gravedigging, I can argue back saying several for me means something else than several for you.
    its the same as double posting
    if you post something valid for the thread to actually get back up and recent it will not be gravedigging, no matter how old the thread is (if its all too old you might include that fact in your "digging" post and state why the hell you are bringing things back up so noone gets confused - not all that hard to do)
    if you post something that doesnt contribute to the thread enough to give others a reason to reread it (and give everyone a *wherethefuckdoesthisoldthingcomefrom*feeling) you might only be bumping it for your own sake
    and thats the part that is unwanted
    (01-15-2011, 01:33 PM)Divisor Wrote:  3. I can make 4 posts in a row saying relevant and sensible things. Is that alright then?
    they will be automerged
    also you can always edit your last post
    and you can also delete your last post and post a new one including the last posts content and your new post/edit
    depending on how important you may think your new post to be (should it bump the thread or not?)
    and if your new thoughts are really all new and different to your last post and some time has passed a double post is totally ok to clearly seperate your new text from the old one - no problem there, but tripple or more are hard to imagine (then you are really just talking to yourself and noone cares)
    (01-15-2011, 01:33 PM)Divisor Wrote:  Spelling part: Then it's no problem if you scratch it, right? It only causes confusion.
    only thing i agree with you
    a different phrasing of what it means might be good
    even i could pile up some warning with this that could in the end ban me :D
    wouldnt have a problem with a week off tho

  • (01-15-2011, 01:57 PM)Marshall Wrote:  All this is solved if you have COMMON sense.
    apparently not - otherwise we wouldnt need any rules
    really if you want to penalize others you better do it fair and on a basis they can understand and not argue about
    otherwise it will more often feel unfair
    (01-15-2011, 01:57 PM)Marshall Wrote:  Certain degree of offtopicness is hard to avoid. Everyone knows that. A couple of posts in exchange is fine, but when it exceeds that and you would love to discuss it at greater detail and length, open a new topic in the relevant section. Not rocket science...
    one could settle for: you are not allowed to carry off topic discussion over to a new page in default settings(?)
    as in - if someone started talking off topic somewhere on the first page
    every post on the first page is still allowed to somehow comment on that off topic
    but on the second page its not anymore (so if you see your off topic comment on the second page you know that you have to open a new topic about it/pm/irc that stuff and delete the post to not get warned)
    hm a bit complicated eh ...

  • (01-15-2011, 02:11 PM)Phil Wrote:  which would make the rules insanely long and nobody would read them anymore.
    that's our problem isn't it?
    true true
    but even short rules can be refined and made more precise
Thanks given by: The Lost Global Mod , Divisor
Also, this should be added in the rules (even though it's more a guideline):

Making a thread (Click to View)

Disclaimer: These two images belong to Silva, check the HEX section. I do not have any ownership over these two images.

The Lost Global Mod edited this post 01-17-2011 07:08 AM because:
i actually suggested that, but it got pretty much ignored. so don't bother. ;D
Thanks given by: Taniaetc , Alblaka , Jernemies , betitngoan , LutiChris
Alright, as there was some dispute about what is considered gravedigging, off-topic, etc, we updated the forum rules with some examples. Please note that this is not a bargaining-place, so any additional changes will be less than unlikely.
Also, regarding the maps that Silva once posted: it is practically written there already. If people are too lazy to read, it's their fault as a violation will be sued to its full extent.
Silverthorn / Blue Phoenix
~ Breaking LFE since 2008 ~

"Freeze, you're under vrest!" - Mark, probably.

» Gallery | » Sprites | » DeviantArt
Thanks given by: Alblaka , snorsorbet

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)