New Forum Rule for GC Threads?

[Tekki]

It's been noted in a few GC threads lately that "Forum users not involved in the war are not welcomed to post here except for wishing luck to one side or another."

When did this become an official rule of the forum or is it up to the discretion of the involved parties to request that this rule be applied?

It never used to be applied and was indeed the cause of some argument in some threads over who should be posting though it appears to be creeping into the status of a 'rule' now when I do not recall seeing it added as an official rule.

However it does seem to me to be moderately inconsistent to allow forum users to post everywhere else as they'd like but not in the GC, especially if they have an opinion or a view on the war thread they are posting in. This seems especially true as the 'relaxed' rules are now gone so the normal forum rules apply to the GC so anyone being rude or otherwise breaking the rules regardless of their involvement in the war, can be punished according to the rules of the forum.

So in short, is it an official rule now?

[Ashu]

My alliance got massed for this certain rule but...i doubt its official...and i am against it(not really the point or in any way important).

[Zeratul]

it is not a rule for all threads... it is only applied occasionally, and then it is stated in thread... we're not sure on the criteria for that, since we prefer not to mod the colosseum...

[Zeratul]

tetris, just because we dont mod it doesnt make it so that others dont...

[Mordack]

As far as I can see, this rule is about context.

The General Mods aren't about to warn people outside a war for wishing the participants good luck, or for making on-topic observations about the conflict. This rule is in place to prevent people not involved from mindlessly spamming, or from hijacking someone else's war thread in order to discuss a war of their own (as has commonly been the case with FUALL/TFF lately).

[ramen07]

Well now.

Dont want to mod the collusium?

Ill do it...

Been saying that for a year!


As for the rule, I do find it to be a bit harsh on the forum users. Preventing them from posting there opinion in certain threads. Granted, alot of people have been abusing the relaxed rules, thus they are now gone, and alot of people dont like having there war threads locked because of others. So I can see the side of the mods, as they have given the users MANY chances to clean up there act.

I think the mods should impliment this rule, at least for some time, to get the users to understand that a mod shouldnt have to close a war thread because people spam and insult each other to death, instead of actually talking about the war. Besides, half the people that post in war thread are not even involved, they just like to "express" there opinions, when they really arnt needed.

Just my thoughts.

Sorry, but I find you a bit too rash in your judgments and posts to mod wars....

[Tekki]

The only problem with this rule is that it means that anyone who does not want to spam but has a legitimate comment or argument to make in the thread is forbidden to do so.

Spam yes should be removed, as should stuff becoming the server war (but with the normal rules this should be able to be dealt with now) but something as restrictive as this also hinders legitimate posting.

For example, some of the race war threads or wars related to race. Other non involved parties such as the Tollan may like to post but IF this rule was applied to those threads are then forbidden to, unless they wish to risk a ban.

I know it's only been applied on a case by case basis that still doesn't answer the question about when it became a definite RULE and not just advice.

[Clarkey]

Do you people realise that Jason reinstated the old rules after all this happened?

The old rules have been reinstated and that is the new rules for the GC.

End of discussion???

[Tekki]

Yes, we realise the old rules are reinstated Clarkey, however this never used to be a rule hence when did it come in and where is it announced as a new rule?

[Clarkey]

I did what I felt was right at the time as I could see from the very first few posts of the TA_M vs NS thread that it was going to go down hill with spam, insults and abuse extremely quickly.

Rather than warning many people for the spam, insults and abuse and having many people banned (if their warnings warranted it) I decided a slightly different course of action to try and help prevent the thread going off the rails at a very early start.

That was my judgement, and my judgement alone. I still think what I was trying to do was right because I believe from the moment the replies to the thread started that it was clearly obvious (probably to most people) what state that thread would become.

It's history now, Jason has reinstated the original Forum rules for the GC now, so don't you think it's time to let this die now?

What was done was in the best interests of the Forum, and to try and prevent unnecessary warnings and bannings.

[Tekki]

Clarkey, despite how it may seem I was not referring to any particular thread. Infact this rule has been applied to 2-3 threads recently and thus I was curious as to if it was a rule officially and thus has been annouced or is an ad hoc rule applied when deemed appropriate.

As it seems to be the second option, are there guidelines as to when the rule will be applied?

And IF someone does have something legitimate that is not spammy or flammy or otherwise insulting or rule breaking in a thread that does have this ad hoc rule applied, would they be punished for it as technically they'd be breaking this rule.

[Clarkey]

Ok, Jason has reinstated the Forum rules for the GC.
These are the only rules (adhoc or not) that will be used for the GC.

So any future instances of "adhoc" rules should not take place.