Forum Rules Proposals

[Ezra Pound]

Not too many people are keen on adding extra ‘red-tape’ to anything, but bare with me on this one, I would like to propose some Forum Rules, There are the usual ones of politeness to other users, steering clear of touchy subjects e.g. religion, politics etc.
But in addition to these I would like to add a few others and would be interested in other peoples additions / views.

One problem with all forums is the ‘Delay effect’ where a user reads a post and decides to reply, in the meantime someone else also decides to do the same, the result is two or more posts that tend to repeat themselves, this is unavoidable as postings timed close together are usually not aware of each other, however if you are aware of a previous answer there little point in you also replying with nothing extra to add.

So :-

1) Don’t duplicate a reply if you have little extra to add
2) Keep to the subject, other reader’s attentions can soon be lost
3) Try to judge how useful your reply is, “Oh really “ doesn’t help much

There are a few for starters, maybe if users are interested and the list gets a bit bigger a vote could be taken on some of them

 

[Ezra Pound]

Reserved

 

[Black Hole]

Not too many people are keen on adding extra ‘red-tape’ to anything, but bare with me on this one, I would like to propose some Forum Rules, There are the usual ones of politeness to other users, steering clear of touchy subjects e.g. religion, politics etc.
But in addition to these I would like to add a few others and would be interested in other peoples additions / views.

One problem with all forums is the ‘Delay effect’ where a user reads a post and decides to reply, in the meantime someone else also decides to do the same, the result is two or more posts that tend to repeat themselves, this is unavoidable as postings timed close together are usually not aware of each other, however if you are aware of a previous answer there little point in you also replying with nothing extra to add.

So :-

1) Don’t duplicate a reply if you have little extra to add
2) Keep to the subject, other reader’s attentions can soon be lost
3) Try to judge how useful your reply is, “Oh really “ doesn’t help much

There are a few for starters, maybe if users are interested and the list gets a bit bigger a vote could be taken on some of them

1) You will notice that I take care to patch up when duplication occurs, and make sure there is something to add.
2) It's a forum. Diversions add to the richness.
3) Yes

You have opposed when I have proposed standardised terminology or conventions, so I don't see why you think you have a mandate to propose rules yourself. I keep to my standards, regardless of what others might think or say, and I suggest you do the same.

 

[fenlander]

I don't think there's anything so unusual about this forum that it needs a special set of rules. Many forums publish a pretty standard code in an attempt to cover their backs in case someone needs to be banned, gets litiginous or accuses the forum of propagating discriminatory opinions, willfully infringing copyright or corrupting minors. Hummy.tv is a highly specialised forum and the likelihood of any of those things happening seems remote. A few standard disclaimers would do no harm, but by and large I think the members and moderators have proved pretty capable of doing their own policing.

Who reads these things, anyway?

 

[Ezra Pound]

1) You will notice that I take care to patch up when duplication occurs, and make sure there is something to add.
2) It's a forum. Diversions add to the richness.
3) Yes

You have opposed when I have proposed standardised terminology or conventions, so I don't see why you think you have a mandate to propose rules yourself. I keep to my standards, regardless of what others might think or say, and I suggest you do the same.

It's quite surprising that you reply to my original post as if you feel you have to personally defend your own position, how interesting. Are you saying that if other users of this forum found something objectionable about your posts, that you would be unwilling to comply with their group decision?

I quite clearly stated that my post was a starting point, to which others could add their own ideas

 

[gomezz]

Already several breaches of standard netiquette noticed in this thread. Not a good start.

 

[Black Hole]

It's quite surprising that you reply to my original post as if you feel you have to personally defend your own position, how interesting. Are you saying that if other users of this forum found something objectionable about your posts, that you would be unwilling to comply with their group decision?

You might interpret it that way, others might see it differently.

 

[Ezra Pound]

Back Hole : You might interpret it that way, others might see it differently.

So you're not prepared to answer the question then

 

[Black Hole]

Respond to a "when did you stop beating your wife" trap? Go pick a fight with somebody else.

 

[Ezra Pound]

Respond to a "when did you stop beating your wife" trap?

With the "when did you stop beating your wife" question you look bad however you answer it, would it be that bad for you to say you will comply with a forum group decision? where is the trap

 

[fenlander]

There is no mechanism for making a 'forum group decision'. Generally reasonable people comply when there is a clear consensus against their position, failing which a mod steps in and locks the discussion. Seriously EP, this whole thread seems unnecessary.

 

[Ezra Pound]

It wasn't intended to be a row, it was an invite for comments about guide lines that is all, unfortunately it got hijacked, by all means let's get back to the original discussion
EDITED

 

[Trev]

There aught to be a rule about not quoting in full the immediately preceding post.

Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk HD

 

[4291]

There aught to be a rule about not quoting in full the immediately preceding post.

Especially if contains a spelling mistake.

 

[Brian]

To get back on topic, I think that we should have some rules, but probably Not as many as they have on AVForums.

 

[gomezz]

Only one rule needed for guidance: Reply unto others as you would have them reply unto you.

 

[Ezra Pound]

Only one rule needed for guidance: Reply unto others as you would have them reply unto you.

I would agree with that, I think this would fall under 'general rules' e.g. be tolerant to others rather than a 'specific rule' e.g. don't use bad language. The typos / bad grammar corrections could be seen as helping, (BTW 4291 this is not a knock at your post, most people can take a joke) but as long as the poster can be understood, I'm not sure it helps a great deal, it is either a genuine mistake or a lack of knowledge and I don't think the forum is the place to correct either. It's more important to make a relevant point than to correctly spell an irrelevant one

 

[Trev]

this is turnin into a farse of corse its the plase of the forum to kerekt lack off nolege, its what peepl want elce thay wudnt ask the kweschuns

 

[Luke]

Or to put it aonethr way:
Tihs is tinurng itno a fcrae. Of cursoe it’s the palcae of the furom to crocret lcak of kwendgole. It’s waht poplee wnat esle they wldoun’t ask the qseuitnos.

 

[Black Hole]

So mcuh eseiar to raed!