As smart as Min is, he is going to leave because he realized they wouldn't listen.

[Whateverist]

I thought "Fucking Cops" was a porn thread before I opened it.

But then why would you open it??

---

Quitting the forum over it without fanfare, which we're all assuming Min has done, is at least honorable. Making a huge production number about it like a spoiled diva, that's something else.

I don't think he has quit the forums.  He just told me he was taking time to figure some things out.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I thought "Fucking Cops" was a porn thread before I opened it.

But then why would you open it??

---

Quitting the forum over it without fanfare, which we're all assuming Min has done, is at least honorable. Making a huge production number about it like a spoiled diva, that's something else.

I don't think he has quit the forums.  He just told me he was taking time to figure some things out.

Why wouldn't I open it. I know some hot lady cops.

[Whateverist]

Guess I chose the wrong emoticon. Needs more tongue in cheek.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Guess I chose the wrong emoticon.  Needs more tongue in cheek.

Mixed messages can be as confusing as an eleven-person orgy. 

[Whateverist]

I just hope they don't outlaw click-baity responses. Then I really would be in trouble.

[Angrboda]

I think the clickbait rule is needless nannying. If people are misled into clicking on a few threads they otherwise wouldn't click on, so what? There's such a thing as being too "hands on" and I think the clickbait rule is it. Good titles should happen because people complain in thread about the title, not because some mod decides the matter for everybody. It's a legalistic solution to what is a social problem. And while I'm not tempted to leave on account of the rule, I can understand someone being upset about it. IMO you shouldn't make rules designed to shape content unless that content is disruptive to the forum. And while unclear titles may be annoying, they're not disruptive.

[Whateverist]

Well said, Jormungy. I agree. So the only question is, does the rule allow the mod/admin to handle actual problems in a more expedient manner that would make their job easier. I tend to be on the side of honoring their contribution by giving them the leeway they request even though it does feel like nannying.

[abaris]

I tend to be on the side of honoring their contribution by giving them the leeway they request even though it does feel like nannying.

Well, how about titles like that.

Thread #247 (your own, I know)

Or: Can I just say, and I'm just being honest...

Should we report them or just let them be? I can't imagine anyone being as trivial as that. But that's just me. In my mind the bureaucracy can reach levels where it's overregulating the regulations.

[Whateverist]

I tend to be on the side of honoring their contribution by giving them the leeway they request even though it does feel like nannying.

Well, how about titles like that.

Thread #247 (your own, I know)

Or: Can I just say, and I'm just being honest...

Should we report them or just let them be? I can't imagine anyone being as trivial as that. But that's just me. In my mind the bureaucracy can reach levels where it's overregulating the regulations.

I get that staff want the rules because they don't want to be making decisions on their guts alone and wish to safe guard against abuse, intended or not.  And that is a worthy consideration. But the longer the specific list of offenses becomes it seems that it must also complexify their jogs too.  At least I'd feel it did in their shoes.  Perhaps something like this is better left in the same category as the "no sex with dead threads" 'rule'?  Everyone tut tuts, but in the end .. meh.

[Cyberman]

All perceived rule breaches should be reported. It then becomes our job to sort it all out.