The new rules

[Nuck]

Originally Posted by Vapor Wizard

Your right Nuck!..We have both been around long enough to know "who's who"and "who's gone",but the more we argue amongst ourselves,members and moderators(who most of are past members like ourselves)alike,the less chance we have of those who have left returning. Ridicule as you see it passes as fustration through my eyes. I say we just let bygones be bygones for the sake of somthing that we once believed was a good thing! I think the effort(as you just mentioned) is being made,lets just monitor now and see what direction it takes!The Wiz!

I think the rules discussions have been very constructive without a hint of drama. Rather than monitor, I think the more people we have that give honest input, the better the chance of finally putting all this nonsense behind us.

[dumwaldo]

Originally Posted by Elendil

One of the first rules that should be enacted is an immediate ban for discussing the circumstances of a ban or an infraction or discussion of a banned member or why they were banned.

Virtually every forum I have been a part of (except those most loosely moderated) have this type of rule.

This is what burns me up about the situation. Reflecting back to when MiniCig was banned I recall expressing the same sentiment but it was a mod that told me I was wrong and that is not how things are done at ECF and that ECF was a community where the concerns of the community need to be discussed.

I unfortunately bought into that line of thinking and when a decision was made to completely reverse that policy I was the first one to have the hammer brought down upon them.

The thing that burns me up even more is that prior to being banned, I had 3 instances of being contacted by moderators regarding forum situations and in every instance I cooperated 100% even though I was not breaking any forum rules or unknowingly breaking rules.

When I first started posting here I mistakenly violated forum rules regarding drug references and when it was brought to my attention in private I immediately rectified the situation with no argument.

During my time on this forum I, there was one particular member I have not been able to get along with nor was he able to get along with me. It started becoming a problem for the moderators and one of them contacted me and asked me to refrain from engaging in discussions with that party. Again I provided the fullest cooperation i could with no argument.

Finally, just prior to me being banned I was asked in private by a moderator to not participate in threads about the Screwdriver. I did point out to that individual that there was nothing polite about the wording used but I would absolutely comply and refrain from participating in threads about the SD and I did not give any argument over the matter.

Despite a demonstrated history of willingness to work with the mods and do what I can when asked I found myself in a situation where I was being personally insulted and baited into making inflammatory comments and it seemed as if the mods were unwilling to help me.

I would not have been banned if a mod would have just removed a blatantly offensive and obviously inflammatory post the first time it was reported.

The whole situation seemed like a double standard to me and after I was banned I felt like I had been set up and the history of cooperation I thought I had demonstrated was disregarded.

Contrary to what SJ said earlier, no reason has ever been provided to me of exactly why I was banned for a week. The PM that comes along with a ban did not even include the text of my last post and instead quoted a completely unrelated post. The ban message only told me to come back with a different attitude and no matter how many times I read the rules during my week long ban I was never able to find the rule that says one can be banned for strongly voicing an opinion that happened to be contrary to the popular opinion.

DW

[Nuck]

As interesting as your particular situation is, it's probably more constructive to look at the overall picture and not specific instances (other than as reference).

[lordmage]

Nuck for once i agree with you maybe when this is done we will all know what not to say or do.

[Surf Monkey]

These are the rules we use at dvdinmypants.com/forum/. They work like a charm:

1) Post anything you'd like. However, if it's deemed overly homophobic, racist, sexist or threatening don't be surprised if your post is edited and/or the rest of the membership heap abuse on you for being a racist, sexist, threatening and/or homophobic bigot.

2) No Commercial Spam. If you have a legit ad you'd like us to post, contact a moderator. Feel free to use your signature to link to your non-commercial page.

3) If you post illegal content it will be removed immediately.

4) Please work out problems/disagreements/misunderstandings between yourselves. We're not your mother. If you put us in that position, we ain't gonna be like Florence Henderson. We're going to be more like Patty Duke in the ABC After School Special "Please Don't Hit Me, Mom." And that special was so hardcore they had to air it on a Sunday night!

5) Label all NSFW (Not Safe For Work) threads as such. Rule of thumb: Can you open it and read it in a conventional place of business? If not, please put NSFW in the title of the thread.

6) Animated avatars are forbidden. Nobody wants to see some ****ing tiger balancing on a ball.

a) No nudity in your avatar.

b) Pictures in signatures are forbidden. Also, try and keep them under three lines.

7) We reserve the right to moderate/administer the site and forum as we please. HOWEVER, if you feel that a mod in particular has a vendetta with you, feel free to contact another moderator and explain the problem. But if that mod disagrees with you, you're gonna look like a bitch, so make sure your gripe is legit and you're not just being pissy because we took your instructions for making a pipe bomb off of your signature (for example).

8) Above all, have fun.

[taukimada]

Originally Posted by mamu

At least you got that part right.

Still perpetuating myths with your so-called "insult" word. You know for a fact it was more than that you directed at Terra.

DW: the great manipulator of truths!! Maybe we should give you a medal, or better yet a name tag...

hmmm... can that be counted as a personal attack... it was QUITE directed.. it was no different than calling DW a "conman" in my understanding of the english language