Official Everybody Edits Forums

Twipply

Guest

I think the rules need revising.

Here's a link to the rules for the forum: Link

I don't think they're particularly well written, precise or logical.   While maybe not of critical importance, having them scrapped and replaced with ones that make sense would probably be a good thing.

Any comments or suggestions?

jakery

Guest

Re: I think the rules need revising.

It depends. What, specifically, is wrong with the rules that are in place?

Last edited by jakery (Apr 20 2011 2:04:03 pm)

Twipply

Guest

Re: I think the rules need revising.

Some of the rules are actually alright, and I don't have the time to go through all the ones that aren't.   But to pick one in particular, the first will suffice.   I don't think to "Be nice" is a reasonable requirement for posting.   Some people are going to think you're being mean just for a difference of opinion, while others are going to have no real opinion about whether what you said was nice or not.   It's basically just a vague rule that I don't think is necessary regardless.

NikK

Guest

Re: I think the rules need revising.

I don't have the time to go through all the ones that aren't.

Not like it's a 10 thousands word thing. Lol.

But to pick one in particular, the first will suffice.   I don't think to "Be nice" is a reasonable requirement for posting.   Some people are going to think you're being mean just for a difference of opinion, while others are going to have no real opinion about whether what you said was nice or not.   It's basically just a vague rule that I don't think is necessary regardless.

Well, you don't want everyone coming and saying "Get out, idiot, HAHA!!", do you?
Post your version of the rule, then.

Last edited by NikK (Apr 20 2011 2:36:00 pm)

Twipply

Guest

Re: I think the rules need revising.

Not like it's a 10 thousands word thing. Lol.

The way I write things like that, it would've been.   I also don't need to find flaw in all of them to say that they need revising, one is sufficient.

Well, you don't want everyone coming and saying "Get out, idiot, HAHA!!", do you?
Post your version of the rule, then.

No, I don't really want people going around calling each other idiots all the time.   That's not to say I don't think it should be allowed though.   There's also definitely a difference between calling someone an idiot sometimes and making an every day habit of it.
As for my own versions of the rules, I haven't created any because I haven't thought about it deeply.   Perhaps someone else would have some suggestions.

jakery

Guest

Re: I think the rules need revising.

I don't think to "Be nice" is a reasonable requirement for posting.   Some people are going to think you're being mean just for a difference of opinion, while others are going to have no real opinion about whether what you said was nice or not.   It's basically just a vague rule that I don't think is necessary regardless.

Security Chief: "Gentlemen... It seems we aren't all in agreement."
Mike Nelson: "I disagree!"

There's a big difference between disagreement and being a mean jerk. People disagree on the forum all the time. I'm even disagreeing with you right now. When I see, "Be Nice," I think, "Don't go out of your way to make others upset. Don't do name calling or personal insults. Show respect. Be polite. Follow the Golden Rule. etc."

When I see, "Be Nice," I don't think, "Settle your differences with rainbows, unicorns, chocolates, fairy dust, and prancing woodsmen."

Edit:
Any other specific rules that you want to talk about? I'm also interested in hearing about rules that should exist--but don't.

Last edited by jakery (Apr 20 2011 2:53:33 pm)

Twipply

Guest

Re: I think the rules need revising.

When I see, "Be Nice," I don't think, "Settle your differences with rainbows, unicorns, chocolates, fairy dust, and prancing woodsmen."

Haha, nice.

When I see, "Be Nice," I think, "Don't go out of your way to make others upset. Don't do name calling or personal insults. Show respect. Be polite. Follow the Golden Rule. etc."

This is more or less how I interpret the rule, except you don't have to "go out of your way" to make others upset, it excludes all of it.   There is no, "That argument was stupid, because ..." allowed, as that may be taken as a nasty thing.   You don't get to show/state your disrespect for someone you think deserves it, simply because it may be upsetting.   Nothing that can be taken to heart negatively is allowed.

An element of conflict and friction is required for some conversation, especially so when arguing/debating.   That's basically why I dislike the rule.   Although, I also have a thing about people not being overly cuddled and protected, which is why I don't enjoy the parental control on EE either!

Of course, this isn't to say I'd prefer a forum of insults and slander, because I wouldn't.   I'd much rather it followed the first part of your interpretation, in that you shouldn't go out of your way to make others upset.   Some is fine, too much is not.   There's a difference between being a little confrontational and being a spiteful person.

As for other specific rules, I guess 6 is a little ambiguous.   Nowhere does it state what's actually worthy of a warning or how many warnings it's worth.   Is one mod that particularly dislikes spam going to dish out 2 extra warnings than another?   It doesn't sound very fair to me.
-- Edit 1 --
Scrap that underlining, I can't read.   Although, having each broken rule as 1 default warning doesn't sound very fair either.   If someone goes and posts in the birthday thread, is them posting person information (Rule 1.C) and getting 1 warning really comparable to the 1/2/3+ warnings for spamming the forum? (Rule 3)   Or are they going to start giving out 0 warnings for trivial rule breaking?   If so, why have the rule to start with?

I guess 1.C can be my new example of a rule I disagree with.   Posting your birthday clearly isn't likely to do any sort of harm, and yet there's a rule about that exact thing.

Rule 5 just makes my head hurt.

-- Edit 2 --
"I've decided to lift his ban." - I just lost interest in this thread, do with it as you wish.

Last edited by Twipply (Apr 20 2011 5:21:12 pm)