Suggestion for a minor rules change.
|
Suggestion for a minor rules change.
|
I'd like to recommend rule 13, no calling out, be slightly expanded to include following people from thread to thread with the express purpose of calling that person out for a wrong suffered (real or perceived) in another thread and any time a call-out post is made in order to dredge up past wrongs (real or perceived) from other threads.
Thief and assassin for hire. Member in good standing of the Rogues Guild.
If the transgression is admitted and atoned for in some semblance, then okay.
This is rare, so you're setting up a scenario where I have to forget the conversation in the kitchen once we reach the dining room. You also establish a situation where someone can contradict themselves across threads and not be challenged. 
Also, rules #2 amd #4 cover the spammy/trolly nature of what you're talking about.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
Yet, you cannot create a new thread for these same purposes. I do understand the potential issues but currently there is a loophole by which people can (and have) been called out for things that had no relevance whatsoever to the current topic. This is what I'd like to see closed.
Thief and assassin for hire. Member in good standing of the Rogues Guild.
Is that really a thing?
I'm guessing that would be considered trolling, anyway.
Even if the open windows of science at first make us shiver after the cozy indoor warmth of traditional humanizing myths, in the end the fresh air brings vigor, and the great spaces have a splendor of their own - Bertrand Russell
(July 4, 2015 at 1:16 am)Faith No More Wrote: Is that really a thing? I was told it was neither trolling or calling out. Don't get me wrong, you guys want to keep the rules as is, that's fine. I've just seen this loophole exploited.
Thief and assassin for hire. Member in good standing of the Rogues Guild.
Give us an example of this taking place.
I'm fine with expanding the rule in this way. Behind the scenes, we've been talking about rewriting a number of the rules to make them less ambiguous and expand their scope to cover more than they currently do.
 (July 4, 2015 at 11:34 am)KUSA Wrote: Give us an example of this taking place. Go read a significant proportion of Huggy74's posts. He makes regular use of this tactic in order undermine a thread. (July 4, 2015 at 1:16 am)SnakeOilWarrior Wrote: Yet, you cannot create a new thread for these same purposes. I do understand the potential issues but currently there is a loophole by which people can (and have) been called out for things that had no relevance whatsoever to the current topic. This is what I'd like to see closed. This, I agree with. The loophole exists when the rule is interpreted as only starting a thread in order to do so is a violation.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<--- |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Suggestion for a minor rules change.
