[split] Peanut Gallery Commentary-and the drama over the nudity thread continues

[Losty]

Wrong. There is a negativity clause and no one has been subject to it not even once since it was created. If you think the staff are going around shutting people up that don't agree with us, you're simply wrong. We don't even agree with each other half the time and that's the way we like it.

I didn't say that's what you're doing.

I said that's the nature of that particular clause.  It says, "We won't define the line, but it's there, so don't cross it."  No rule which is so poorly defined should exist, since the point of RULES is to reduce ambiguity, not to increase it.  It's a poorly-written rule, and should be removed or improved.

But since you keep saying I'm wrong, then why don't you say what I'm wrong about?  Is the term "excessive" not a totally arbitrary term, and are the mods not the arbitrators of this forum?

Please understand, I'm not arguing against the mods.  I'm arguing against a weak and poorly-thought-out rule, which in fact isn't even a RULE, since rules are meant to reduce ambiguity, not to increase it.

I was responding to this mostly

If there was a "negativity clause," the membership role on these forums would include only those who exclusively post cat memes and respond to all threating ideas with smiley-face icons.