Can moderating just stay as it is

[GommeInc]

Warning people for mentioning ban reasons under the privacy rule is a bit weird It should be taken as speculation. I could say Lee was banned in 2010 for posting sexually explicit images of himself with farm animals. It isn't true, but does that mean I'll get a warning? There's a flaw in the rule. Rule A4 could be modified to include breaches of forum rules as well as illegal activity, because surely accusations are bad whatever way you look at it?

So A4 could become:

A4. Do not post accusations about breaking the rules, hacking or scamming, or illegal activities by other members ~ making baseless accusations only leads to arguments and often members are targeted wrongly or unfairly. We do not allow you to accuse anyone of breaking the forum rules, hacking, scamming or illegal activities with or without evidence so as to maintain a positive atmosphere about the forum.

You could probably word it better, but the bit that makes me think this is the right sort of rule is the description "making baseless accusations only leads to arguments and often members are targeted wrongly or unfairly." It is unfair to tell other members why someone is banned, and possibly unfair for the moderator who may get attacked for it, even though banned members seem to reappear anyway and all is well again

[mrwoooooooo]

jesus gomme you arent half going on about nothing lately

[Chris]

Rule A4 is fine. There is nothing wrong with A5 or A9 either, parts just needed swapping around.

[sex]

im pretty sure people have been allowed mention why people were banned for years...... well since before lee and chris anyways :rolleyes: lol

[GommeInc]

jesus gomme you arent half going on about nothing lately

At least this time I am being helpful

[Chris]

im pretty sure people have been allowed mention why people were banned for years...... well since before lee and chris anyways :rolleyes: lol

It's always been in the rules.

[sex]

It's always been in the rules.

well its never been enforced then because people have always openly discussed why other users are banned. do you mind posting the old rule because i cannot remember it mentioning bans one bit, i might be wrong though.

[Chippiewill]

So A4 could become:

The rules aren't a legal document, as long as people get the gist it's fine.

[GommeInc]

well its never been enforced then because people have always openly discussed why other users are banned. do you mind posting the old rule because i cannot remember it mentioning bans one bit, i might be wrong though.

He might not remember, despite apparently always being in the loop even though the rule change about abbreviations made it obvious he isn't

The rules aren't a legal document, as long as people get the gist it's fine.

No one seems to know the gist Looking at the constant rule changes lately, it's the exact opposite.

[xxMATTGxx]

Constant rule changes because a specific someone keeps asking them to be changed?

Show Hide

Don't hit me