Leave moderating to the moderators rule is ridiculous and lame and stupid

[Kardan]

Seems strange then that because of:

however if you find a thread which has already been posted then you MAY reply with a link to that thread however your post must also contain something which is relevant and on topic to the threads subject.

Then it means this post is fine: "Hey, this is already posted here: *link* - Yes, I also love tacos" is fine.
But this post: "Hey, you've avoided the filter - Yes I also love tacos" is not fine.

And yes, @Mr-Trainor; - I didn't realise that the abuse of mod features was in the same rule - clearly that is needed. I think everyone is luckily talking about the 1st part

[lemons]

Why does everybody make threads about the most pointless things?!

oh please you replied 58 times to the "Get rid of post your... junk threads"

now that is SAD

[Nick]

Seems strange then that because of:


Then it means this post is fine: "Hey, this is already posted here: *link* - Yes, I also love tacos" is fine.
But this post: "Hey, you've avoided the filter - Yes I also love tacos" is not fine.

And yes, @Mr-Trainor; - I didn't realise that the abuse of mod features was in the same rule - clearly that is needed. I think everyone is luckily talking about the 1st part

Posting a thread in the wrong section isn't breaking the rules. There isn't a rule in the rules section where it says 'Don't post in the wrong section otherwise you will receive a usernote' which is why you are allowed to say that. Where as avoiding the filter is breaking the rules.

[Kardan]

Posting a thread in the wrong section isn't breaking the rules. There isn't a rule in the rules section where it says 'Don't post in the wrong section otherwise you will receive a usernote' which is why you are allowed to say that. Where as avoiding the filter is breaking the rules.

I'm not talking about posting in the wrong section, I'm talking about someone creating a thread that has already been created.

[Nick]

I'm not talking about posting in the wrong section, I'm talking about someone creating a thread that has already been created.

Thats not breaking a rule either?

[Kardan]

So people can create duplicate threads and not get into trouble? News to me.

Then why does that part have to be specified in the rules? If posting a duplicate thread isn't breaking a rule, why is it included in the section about 'Telling people not to break the rules' - surely that's a void example? I mean, surely everyone would be free to post 'This has already been posted here:' - since that's not telling someone they've broke a rule?

[Nick]

I hate it when people refer to breaking a rule to getting in trouble. I hate it when people take it the wrong way from a friendly PM and get defensive. I'd say it would fall under the roof of posting threads in the wrong section.. you don't get a usernote for it so i really don't consider it as breaking the rules.

[Drewar]

So basically, all staff and management are always right, and there's no need for feedback ever?

I agree to an extent, but constructive feedback is actually extremely valuable and you'd be wrong to dismiss it imo. You shouldn't have to become staff in order to give feedback.
- - - Updated - - -
I doubt that everyone will suddenly start telling everyone else off every time they break a rule . If they do so without contributing to the thread, it's a pointless/off topic post. If they take things further they could be impersonating staff. I actually can't see the purpose of the rule .

Of course not (to answer @Kardan). I have no problem with people bringing up topics for serious, constructive discussion about a topic.

However, constructive criticism or feedback is extremely rare around here. It is the same people who are constantly creating threads moaning about every little detail that bothers me. You’ll see an entire thread made for something like: “OMG MY ONE WORD POST WAS MARKED AS POINTLESS OMG I DEMAND CLARIFICATION RIGHT NOW THE RULES SHOULD BE CHANGED OMG @MATTG THIS IS REDICULOUS”… Really? Your spam post being marked as spam is ridiculous? You don’t get any sort of negative consequence for pointless posting (no infractions or warnings or anything) as long as you don’t excessively do it over and over again, so why does it even matter to you? Yeah, one could argue that the rule is pointless. But it is there for a reason. It is there for the person who takes rule breaking to the extreme or continuously posts pointlessly. If you complain about "always" getting your posts marked as spam... then here's an idea... try creating a post that isn't spam and actually has some thought in it and promotes discussion.

That's the same reason the "Leave the moderating to the moderators" rule is in place. Sure, a lot of times the rule probably doesn't need to be strictly enforced, but it is there for the people who take it to the extreme.

Some people are too quick to want to change the rules around here simply because they constantly break them and are too lazy and stubborn/argumentative to change their habits. They think the rules should change and be tailored for them.

When you go for a hike on a mountain and the terrain doesn't suit your needs (it is too hard for you to hike), you don't go home and write a letter to the committee in charge of taking care of the mountain asking them to change the shape of the mountain for you, do you? Actually I shouldn't even ask that question, because some members on here probably would do that because they are so self-absorbed and stubborn.

[Kardan]

However, constructive criticism or feedback is extremely rare around here.

I'd like to disagree, I think the majority of feedback threads these day have constructive criticism/feedback, rarely do you see a thread say: 'CHANGE THIS BECAUSE IT SUCKS'.

[The Don]

oh please you replied 58 times to the "Get rid of post your... junk threads"

now that is SAD

Replied telling them to leave it as it is, I wasn't trying to get ridiculously trivial things changed :S

And if you want to talk about posts, you've got over half my post count when you've had your account 2 years and i've have mine for 9 :rolleyes: