|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 8:48 pm
Okay, I'm trying to put together a Rules sticky.
Here are my ideas; I'd like your input as well.
1. No bumping.
2. All threads should be philosophy related.
3. No ad hominem attacks.
4. No idiotic behavior -- this is very subjective, so if someone is reported for idiotic behavior, there must be unanimous agreement among the moderators and myself for said idiot to be banned.
5. Likewise, moderatorships may be revoked for any reason if there is unanimous agreement among the other mods and myself.
That's all I can really think of right now. Do we need anything else?
As soon as we all agree on rules and membership fee, I will make you all moderators.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 9:19 pm
Maybe there should just be one thread to talk about whatever, so we can talk to other crew members and get to know each other a little. Personally, I regret it every time I visit the chatterbox. xp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 05, 2005 9:30 pm
Whozit Maybe there should just be one thread to talk about whatever, so we can talk to other members and get to know each other a little. Personally, I regret it every time I visit the chatterbox. xp Okay, that's a good suggestion. Let's make a sticky thread that's just for off-topic discussions. Or can we make subforums in a guild? Hmmm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 06, 2005 5:36 pm
That all sounds good to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2005 12:57 pm
I'd would just like to say that as moderators we need to remember to accept people on the principle that they are good at debating and have important views. Not just because they happen to agree with our own view point.
Most people here, I'm guessing, already realise this but I thought I'd say it just in case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2005 4:28 pm
We could have a 'Three strikes--You're out' rule. If someone violates any of smoovegeek's rules three times, they are banned from the guild. Of course, there would be warnings given before action is taken, and unanimous agreements would be required for the more subjective offenses, as smoovegeek said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2005 7:14 pm
Perhaps a suggestions thread, in which acceptable topics can be posted. This way, should out numbers grow large and old threads be forgotten, a new thread can be made in it's place.
Just a thought...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 8:39 pm
Raven, I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Could you please clarify?
I mean, anyone can post a new topic without prior approval, but I don't think that's what you meant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 8:52 pm
I suppose it's a given, but for the sake of dotting our i's and crossing our t's you might want to point out that proper spelling and grammatical structure are a necessity. Even in the ED forum I sometimes find it difficult to follow some of the discussions due to poor editing.
I think it's also a given that 'flaming' shouldn't be tolerated. I think the 'three-strike rule' that John Blackthorne suggested was a good one, but I think we should come up with some kind of ruling as to just how bad violations are. I don't think flaming should be tolerated. I don't really think it will be a problem in here as everyone seems to be mature enough to refute properly, but I think it might be wise to at least address the issue.
Another issue that shouldn't be a major problem but warrants some kind of attention is language. We're all intelligent people and I think we can avoid profanity in our discussions. That said, I don't think it will ever be a major problem but just as above, I think it might be wise to simply address the matter to head off any problems that might arise.
That's all I have for the moment. If I can think of anything else I'll be sure to suggest it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 8:59 pm
I think spelling and grammatical structure are very, very good to have. However, I don't like to be too much of a stickler. I don't care if someone misspells a few words or uses improper syntax as long as their point comes across relatively clearly.
It's tough to set standards for these things. I don't want to make everyone conform to Chicago style and OED spelling and have to look at posts with a mental red pen. Even people with poor spelling and grammar skills can have something important to say.
I don't anticipate many people coming in here with such horrible English that a reasonable person can't understand what they're saying. If that does occur, a little gentle prodding to preformat their posts in Word with spelling & grammar checking on might be in order, but I'd hate to ban someone just because they didn't pay attention in Language Arts class.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:58 pm
I don't think this is really relavant to the guild, but I had to ask anyway: Should we tolerate swearing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:21 pm
Whozit I don't think this is really relavant to the guild, but I had to ask anyway: Should we tolerate swearing? It doesn't make you look very intelligent. Beyond that, if it isn't directed at a person in the form of a flame, or isn't dissing someone's beliefs, etc... I don't usually have much of a problem with it. It certainly shouldn't be *encouraged* (chuckles)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 9:36 am
Starlock Whozit I don't think this is really relavant to the guild, but I had to ask anyway: Should we tolerate swearing? It doesn't make you look very intelligent. Beyond that, if it isn't directed at a person in the form of a flame, or isn't dissing someone's beliefs, etc... I don't usually have much of a problem with it. It certainly shouldn't be *encouraged* (chuckles) Agreed. 3nodding -Alezunde
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
