Can we make objectively true derogatory statements about well known people yet?
I’ve heard Jim Irsay is interested
Forum Etiquette
- Thread starter Zachary
- Start date
You can criticize and critique freely, but our prohibition against ad hominems specifically still protects any and every (real) person as we believe this tends to produce the best discussions.
If you think this is bad policy, that's fine—you can propose a change to any of your elected advisory panel members.
Wanted to reply to this but didn't want to derail the thread.
As a general rule, we don't proactively make threads for things just to have a thread for things anymore. If there's news, rumors, or just broadly any sort of discussion that someone wants to have and a thread to house that conversation doesn't yet exist, a thread should definitely be made—this isn't a post advocating against new threads broadly. Making a thread just to have one for possible, unknown, future conversation though—a thread where that conversation isn't expected to immediately exist—is discouraged though.
This is a change from our approach long ago so confusion is completely understandable. The goal is just to ensure that, when a thread shows up in the What's New feed, it is because there is a time-relevant justification for it being there and/or there's an active discussion of some sort taking place that readers may be interested in consuming/participating in.
As a general rule, we don't proactively make threads for things just to have a thread for things anymore. If there's news, rumors, or just broadly any sort of discussion that someone wants to have and a thread to house that conversation doesn't yet exist, a thread should definitely be made—this isn't a post advocating against new threads broadly. Making a thread just to have one for possible, unknown, future conversation though—a thread where that conversation isn't expected to immediately exist—is discouraged though.
This is a change from our approach long ago so confusion is completely understandable. The goal is just to ensure that, when a thread shows up in the What's New feed, it is because there is a time-relevant justification for it being there and/or there's an active discussion of some sort taking place that readers may be interested in consuming/participating in.
Last edited:
d'oh, I want to bring the awareness of parks that are rarely talked about to this site
No worries! When relevant/interesting/etc news or developments occur involving those parks, definitely share it and, if the topic of that discussion doesn't have a thread, definitely create it! We just generally don't want to make threads without immediate relevancy.
I love to see the Foghorn Leghorn advocate for the immediate demolition of X2, Backlot Stunt Coaster, Boo Blasters, or other relatively well-liked attractions on a daily basis comments since I felt these are kinda funny,
Is there a reason you resurfaced a conversation from months ago by copying and pasting part of a previous post I made?
Just feels a little weird.
Just feels a little weird.
well, I wanna see if someone had taken screenshots of the posts by that user because what he said was kinda funny
edit: the name in question is LakeCharlesGuy
Last edited:
No one did that, there's no reason anyone should have done that, and asking for that is weird and irrelevant.
im sorry, I just wanted to see the lore of LakeCharlesGuy