Real Rules?

[Penner]

I don't know if it has already been suggested but how about no threats of violence?

[SuburbanFarmer]

I don't know if it has already been suggested but how about no threats of violence?

Wouldn't really bother me, actually. These clowns would never get off the couch to do anything.

The one rule that we've all understood implicitly since the beginning was 'no doxxing'. That's the line that nobody will ever cross without being instantly punished by the board. And I stand by it.

[Fife]

Smitty said “no rules.”

That’ll be no rules then. (Here anyway, I still got to get famous.)

+1 Martin.

However, MUCH more important than "no rules," IMNSHO, is NO RULERS.

We can survive a rule or two; but we won't survive "moderation."

Other than you, sir, you own the place; it's your property to do with as you please. I'm just suggesting a strict NO RULERS ethos. It served Dan's forum pretty well until Dan decided to shutter the whole shop. Dan chose to close it all down rather than to impose "moderation." So be it. I trust you to make a reasoned decision as the owner of this place if something is too much for you to stomach being displayed on your property.

If you are going to have Kath, or anyone -- ANYONE -- in a position to impose some arbitrary correction for violation of some rule, this forum is going to suck the kind of donkey dick we've been subjected to lately.

Not fun; not productive; not worthwhile. It's either a Free Fire Zone or it's shit.

Again, this is not a personal attack on Kath, it's an attack on the office.

NO RULERS. The members of this forum are more than capable to police any mischief without threats and rumors of "moderation," or whatever. Fuck that noise. This is a barroom fight, as Smits would put it. We'll break some shit occasionally, we'll shit up each other occasionally, but overall we'll sort out the shitheads and move forward. Darwin didn't have any "moderators" or po-pos in his book, as far as I'm told.

[Speaker to Animals]

She tried to take away my naked Yoga, Fife.

[C-Mag]

@ Fife +1
No Rulers


@Penner +1
I was always good with Dans One Rule

I'm all for having some mutually agreed upon guidelines. Posted on a sticky as Kath suggested. I think the 100 post break in period was good and worked well, it was violated from time to time and a peer would just say, hey, it's a newb lay off for a bit.

[C-Mag]

She tried to take away my naked Yoga, Fife.

The Yoga wasn't a problem, the near porn that was posted and you couldn't really avoid was a problem.

[Speaker to Animals]

The 100 post rule helped kill the forum, quite honestly.

[Smitty-48]

Smitty said “no rules.”

That’ll be no rules then. (Here anyway, I still got to get famous.)

+1 Martin.

However, MUCH more important than "no rules," IMNSHO, is NO RULERS.

We can survive a rule or two; but we won't survive "moderation."

Other than you, sir, you own the place; it's your property to do with as you please. I'm just suggesting a strict NO RULERS ethos. It served Dan's forum pretty well until Dan decided to shutter the whole shop. Dan chose to close it all down rather than to impose "moderation." So be it. I trust you to make a reasoned decision as the owner of this place if something is too much for you to stomach being displayed on your property.

If you are going to have Kath, or anyone -- ANYONE -- in a position to impose some arbitrary correction for violation of some rule, this forum is going to suck the kind of donkey dick we've been subjected to lately.

Not fun; not productive; not worthwhile. It's either a Free Fire Zone or it's shit.

Again, this is not a personal attack on Kath, it's an attack on the office.

NO RULERS. The members of this forum are more than capable to police any mischief without threats and rumors of "moderation," or whatever. Fuck that noise. This is a barroom fight, as Smits would put it. We'll break some shit occasionally, we'll shit up each other occasionally, but overall we'll sort out the shitheads and move forward. Darwin didn't have any "moderators" or po-pos in his book, as far as I'm told.

I'll launch into a personal attack on Kath, she's a low down double dealing liar who cried wolf to get her way cause she was butt hurt about not having the juice to shut people up at a whim, it gives me no pleasure to say that, but that's the fact, Jack.

Delete my posts, will you? Oh yeah, there's gonna be some attacks for that, that's fighting dirty, you're gonna get the knife for that, and rightly so.

A decade on the DCF, I never saw much moderating to speak of, one time Scotty Dolan got kicked off by Dan for calling Dan a "punk", and of course I got kicked off by Dan one time for calling him "Hanoi Dan", but that was about it, and he didn't really ban us, he just asked us to leave.

He didn't have to use force, cause me and Scotty were Dan's bros, so we cut him some slack and just did as he asked.

Marty Hash is a bro, he don't need no chick assed moderator to stir up trouble by power tripping, all he has to do is ask.

[DBTrek]

Much ado about nothing in a venue that only a couple dozen folk read.

[Smitty-48]

Indeed, so there ain't no reason to be screeching wolf about "child porn!" just to delete posts, and nobody should have a beef with hockey talk neither, virtual pub, if you think you're saving the world here, or curing cancer, or whatever reason you think your threads are so fuckin' precious, get over it already, and leave well enough alone.