Give the people what they want (pole) - Page 13 - Politics version 7.0 -- Two Plus Two Poker Forums

Could I get a clarification on who's next proposed rule from someone other than well named (who is great but apparently has to basically guess at what chez and who next mean just like the rest of us)? I know those two don't like answering direct questions but I really don't think it's too much to ask...

Is something like; "Jesus Christ you're a drooling moron" allowed under the proposed rules?

Bump

06-28-2017 , 11:00 AM

#302

Beta Chuck

stranger

Join Date: Jan 2017 Posts: 6

Quote:

Originally Posted by SenorKeeed

HELLO CITIZEN, THIS IS NOT WELL NAMED.

SINCE JESUS CHRIST IS NOT AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF THIS FORUM, WE BELIEVE HE SHOULD BE OFF LIMITS AS A TARGET FOR PERSONAL ATTACKS. I BELIEVE THEY ALLOW THAT SORT OF THING IN RGT.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

CHUCK

06-28-2017 , 11:16 AM

#303

Shame Trolly !!!1!

Neo-Gorean

Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 4,839

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beta Chuck

... SINCE JESUS CHRIST IS NOT AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF THIS FORUM, WE BELIEVE HE SHOULD BE OFF LIMITS AS A TARGET FOR PERSONAL ATTACKS...

06-28-2017 , 12:10 PM

#304

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,848

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beta Chuck

Public figures are not off limits when it comes to personal attacks.

SOMETHING IN CAPS

06-28-2017 , 12:47 PM

#305

TiltedDonkey

veteran

Join Date: Sep 2013 Posts: 2,975

Quote:

Originally Posted by chezlaw

In my view, its bad for 2+2 to have forums criticising the moderation of other forums.

If posters have an issue and don't feel they can keep it to the mod's own forum then ATF is the right place.

This is fair enough.

06-28-2017 , 01:02 PM

#306

Trolly McTrollson

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 36,733

Quote:

Originally Posted by SenorKeeed

Bump

06-28-2017 , 01:16 PM

#307

formula72

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 4,315

He doesn't seem interested in answering because I believe he knows that Keed is just trying to get the forum shut down.

06-28-2017 , 01:27 PM

#308

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,848

Quote:

Originally Posted by chezlaw

It's the sort of post that strictly speaking is against the rules but we wouldn't do anything as it's falls comfortably within the 'light touch' approach. If it was repeated excessively or was part of a long series of similar type posts then some green ink could appear. At worst, if it continued excessively then a short timeout might result.

That approach I'll be taking for insults that don't have content and don't breach the other rules

06-28-2017 , 02:05 PM

#309

SenorKeeed

mew mew mew

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 37,478

So calling someone a moron is against the rules, but not really, except unless you feel like it?

Of course. You wouldn't want to have a simple, well articulated, easy to understand set of rules. Because that would involve actually having to engage with the forum you're moderating. Answer their questions directly. Interact whith them. Obviously chez and what's his name aren't into that, and apparently those two tell well named about as much as the rest of us.

06-28-2017 , 02:07 PM

#310

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,848

I'm not sure which part of 'light touch' is too difficult for you.

06-28-2017 , 02:13 PM

#311

SenorKeeed

mew mew mew

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 37,478

Just pointing out that you don't want to actually have rules that are well articulated and simple and well defined. You want something as basic as calling someone a moron to be against the rules, but you won't actually enforce it unless you want to, but you reserve the right to do so. Because it's against the rules after all. Not that you'll actually define the rules.

And of course you ignore a simple direct question for days. And you don't actually answer it, you say well technically it's against the rules but we probably won't enforce it, but maybe we will. A completely useless answer (a purposefully useless answer)