Full Version: New Forum Rules (Sticky)
From: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#1]
18 Oct 2006
To: ALL
While we have held that there would be virtually no moderating, it seems to be giving problems. These new rules may help that problem.
While David and I both loathe the deletion of posts, it may be necessary to do some of that by the new rules put in by request of the membership. We will follow them.
Here are the changes:
This is a business related forum. As a rule of thumb, it is suggested that nothing be said here that would not be said directly to the person's face. (unchanged)
Opinions are openly encouraged and appreciated, although in the event of a dispute toward a person or company, only factual first hand accounts will be allowed. (Unchanged)
As a business-related forum, business ethics are taken very seriously. Anyone showing disregard for generally-accepted business ethics may be subject to expulsion. It will be at the discretion of the moderators, after due consideration as to whether this infraction has occurred. (Reworded)
We reserve the right, at our sole discretion, to remove any posts deemed to be mean-spirited, intentionally malicious, argumentative for arguments sake, or otherwise detrimental to the smooth operation of the forum.This includes hijacking (going off in a new direction) a thread even with good intentions. (New)
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#2]
18 Oct 2006
To: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#1] 18 Oct 2006
Harvey,
I should point out that, especially, regarding the last paragraph of your post, I'm holding myself to the same standards as a "civilian" and have asked you (if necessary) to delete any posts of mine that may cross the line we've drawn.
EDITED: 18 Oct 2006 by DGL
From: Engravin' Dave (DATAKES) [#3]
19 Oct 2006
To: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#1] 19 Oct 2006
From: Mike (MIKEN) [#4]
19 Oct 2006
To: ALL
From: Dave (MT_DAVE) [#5]
19 Oct 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#2] 19 Oct 2006
I like the new rules also!! Although I'm not a punster, I have certainly hijacked my far share of threads bringing them off topic in a flash.
Dave
From: PenMan [#6]
19 Oct 2006
To: Mike (MIKEN) [#4] 19 Oct 2006
From: Engravin' Dave (DATAKES) [#7]
19 Oct 2006
To: Dave (MT_DAVE) [#5] 19 Oct 2006
Dave,
I'm as guilty as anyone here taking a thread off topic. It's funny how one discussion will lead to an unrelated question that needs to be asked then and there.
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#8]
19 Oct 2006
To: Engravin' Dave (DATAKES) [#7] 19 Oct 2006
We're not proposing a zero-tolerance policy, but we do want to establish a low-tolerance policy, for the situations we addressed.
We're not looking to drastically change the successful format that's gotten us this far.
From: Laser Image (LASER_IMAGE) [#9]
19 Oct 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#8] 19 Oct 2006
I really like the hijacking rule. There is nothing more frustrating than trying to follow a thread and reading a bunch of stuff in the middle that has nothing to do with the thread.
Speaking of that, I have a question about.... Oh wait, never mind. :P
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#10]
19 Oct 2006
To: Laser Image (LASER_IMAGE) [#9] 19 Oct 2006
That's one of the primary reasons for the changes.
We're not attempting to take the fun out of things and we're not opposed to spirted-debate.
It's when the humor grossly overtakes the stated discussion title and when spirited debate turns to personal attacks, that we'll intervene.
Essentially, there won't be any noticeable changes, except those for the greater good.
EDITED: 19 Oct 2006 by DGL
From: Button (LASERCHICK) [#11]
19 Oct 2006
To: ALL
From: Becky (KIAIJANE) [#12]
19 Oct 2006
To: ALL
Good job guys!! Nicely done.
I'm glad I got all of the punning out of my system on that dedicated thread!!
Hope it wasn't me you made that rule for <gasp> LOL
From: jeanettebrewer (JEANETTEBREWER2) [#13]
19 Oct 2006
To: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#10] 19 Oct 2006
I noticed that Chuck already "broke the rules" on another thread (reference ARA Membership)! I think y'all may end up spending more time keeping us on track than on your "real jobs"! :O
From: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#14]
21 Oct 2006
To: ALL
I just did something very difficult.
I moved a few posts and deleted one to stay with the new policy.
TO ALL
Please do not do something that makes me do it again.
From: Carl (CSEWELL) [#15]
21 Oct 2006
To: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#14] 21 Oct 2006
Can you post the post that you deleted so we can see an explicit example of what is NOT acceptable?
Thanks.
From: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#16]
21 Oct 2006
To: Carl (CSEWELL) [#15] 21 Oct 2006
It was someone baiting someone else to a word duel. It has become quite obvious lately what will lead to that.
I cannot put back a deleted post, it is gone forever. A deleted thread, we have set up a trick to be able to undelete the thread. It was not originally intended for that use, but it works anyway.
From: BratDawg [#17]
22 Oct 2006
To: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#16] 22 Oct 2006
As one of the incorrigible punsters, I have admittedly posted where I should not have, like many of us (it's ok, I now attend PA meetings and feel much better...I don't bite my typing fingers as much!). I certainly understand the need to keep semblance of order for those seeking answers in the technical threads and I'll be happy to repect that and refrain from the temptation!
As my involvement with engraving is slight, I tend to visit as much for the comeraderie as the opportunity to learn and do have many fine friends among this group! I guess my confusion over the new rules, and reason for playing Devil's advocate is where those last "violations" took place, the "Topic of your choice" folder.
I remember the old days of DSSI, when off-topic posts often ran rampant
and created a lot of work for the moderators. Hence the "Waaaaaay off topic" folder was created so that posts like that would not interfere with the technical portions and get in the way of those seeking answers. I assumed that the 'your choice folder' was something similar.
Perhaps there needs to be a non-moderated (or a lite version) folder that could serve the same purpose. After all, for many folks this place, and others like it, are the equivalent of the "Office Water Cooler". Sometimes you need help or advice, sometimes you just need a break and to have a laugh to help get through the day.
I'm certainly not telling you or David how to run this, and I'll be good and respect all of the rules ( I don't post much anyway), but I hate to see there not be a place where you can let your hair down a little. A simple warning on the door for those who enter should suffice and those who want strictly the technical aspect can avoid it at all costs.
Not trying to start trouble, just a little food for thought on behalf of those who like a good chuckle as a side to the technical main dish! So, I guess my question is.... are you forum or agin em? (OK, sorry...guess I haven't attended enough meetings!) ;-)
From: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#18]
22 Oct 2006
To: BratDawg [#17] 22 Oct 2006
It gave me a lot of thought if I should have moved those posts from the topic of your choice folder. I am still uncertain.
The folder says free threads, but it was a specific thread title wanting to be a topic. I am still unsure. I might have been overzealous because the rules were so new.
Thanks for bringing it up, I think this is a good topic for the members to indicate their preferences.
I will put up something to get the member's opinions.
From: Stunt Engraver (DGL) [#19]
22 Oct 2006
To: Harvey only (HARVEY-ONLY) [#18] 22 Oct 2006
I think we also need to consider, what became the primary reason for the changes in our posting policy, which was the invoking of the "S" word.
Not the four-letter one, but the name of a person who couldn't be mentioned, even in passing, without a very predictable response, from a very few forum members.
We dealt with that, not by disallowing comment on the subject, but by insisting that any further comment on the issue, take place in previous threads, where the issue was aired out at length.
The majority of forum members seem to be fine with that.
It's not that there was anything inherently wrong with our original rules and now we have wording in place, in the event of having to enforce unusually disruptive behavior.