Forum Rules (Last Update: 02/13/2015)

Login or Register to Hide This Ad

b.mac

Wild Mouse Nerd
May 14, 2011
4,122
5,579
113
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
RE: Forum Rules (Last Update: 3/24/2014)

Ooooooooh PDF files, very cool. BTW I'm pretty sure no other forum community has a forum charter, or acknowledges that theydo at least and shares it with members.
 

Shane

ParkFans Founder
Silver Donor
Jun 2, 2011
2,908
5,006
113
Raleigh, NC
parkfans.net
RE: Forum Rules (Last Update: 3/24/2014)

Well we are a legal entity with a TaxID and everything so we were legally required to have a Chater. I guess as you put it "they don't share it with their members" was the case until yesterday. We've had a charter since 6/18/2012.
 

Nicole

Administrator
Jul 22, 2013
9,039
23,257
113
Arlington, VA
RE: Forum Rules (Last Update: 3/24/2014)

Yesterday evening, we published an update to the Site Rules, as part of a larger restructuring of the Forum. As Zachary has already stated, all of the changes were agreed upon in a face-to-face meeting among the Site Admins. As the person who initially requested and drafted the changes, however, I wanted to provide a brief explanation of what we did.

Based feedback I have received from the community, since I joined the Staff, as well as my own frustrations as a member and Moderator, I suggested that we take an exclusive, versus inclusive approach to our rules. In other words, I only wanted to restrict content that the three of us could identify as specifically detrimental to the Forum. It seemed to me that we need to keep the discussions professional and civilized, without gaging our members.

With that in mind, we eliminated all vague, ill-defined guidelines. "Useless Nonsense" may be the best (but not singular) example. I had no idea what was covered under that heading, so I had no idea how to enforce the rule. As a member, it honestly struck me as a catch-all to allow Staff to delete anything they felt wasn't strictly "on-topic," regardless of the impact on discussion.

As I'm sure everyone knows, we have recently had a new debate about the use of profanity on the Forum. The poll, once again, revealed a deeply divided membership. With no clear answer, we used the same logic: we chose not to restrict "colorful" language, because of the lack of consensus against cursing. Once again, we decided to err on the side of free speech, over censorship.

The other most obvious change is the replacement of the "Safe for Work" clause with "pornography." After much discussion, we concluded that the only thing we really should prohibit is pornography. If anyone has a specific example of content that is not safe for the office and is not already covered elsewhere, please PM us.

Other than those categories, most of the remaining changes were for brevity and clarity.

I would also like to highlight one category of restrictions that will still be vigorously enforced. We left in place the rules that are designed to prevent the vicious conflicts that have derailed discussion in the past. The Staff will address immediately all personal attacks, as well as "racial, religious, cultural, sexual, physical, or any other form of intolerance."

Our hope is that our members will show good judgment, and remember that we are still an on-line community, with a reputation to protect.
 

Zachary

𝓡oyal 𝓜ango 𝓒réme Frappuccino Survivor
Administrator
Sep 23, 2009
12,542
31,416
113
Newport News, VA
twitter.com
RE: Forum Rules (Last Update: 09/01/2014)

Minor update to the forum rules tonight:

Inappropriate content is prohibited, including but not limited to:

[...]

3. Personal insults or attacks targeting forum members, site staff, park employees;

[...]
Has become...

Inappropriate content is prohibited, including but not limited to:

[...]

3. Personal insults or attacks targeting any (real) person;

[...]
This really doesn't change much of anything- just a slight refinement to widen the umbrella a bit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zimmy and Nicole

Nicole

Administrator
Jul 22, 2013
9,039
23,257
113
Arlington, VA
RE: Forum Rules (Last Update: 09/01/2014)

There was a reported attack against a banned member, which highlighted that the categories seemed a bit arbitrary. The good news is that we have not had many violations recently, so the likelihood that this change will noticeably increase moderator actions is very slim.
 

Zachary

𝓡oyal 𝓜ango 𝓒réme Frappuccino Survivor
Administrator
Sep 23, 2009
12,542
31,416
113
Newport News, VA
twitter.com
RE: Forum Rules (Last Update: 09/19/2014)

It wasn't concluded whether or not it would have fallen under the rule regardless. This is sorta a non-issue.
 

Nicole

Administrator
Jul 22, 2013
9,039
23,257
113
Arlington, VA
RE: Forum Rules (Last Update: 09/19/2014)

I said it highlighted a problem in the old rule, not whether it would be deleted under the new rule.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe

Zimmy

Nessie wants you to look into yourself
Silver Donor
Sep 28, 2013
5,566
8,003
113
Virginia Beach
RE: Forum Rules (Last Update: 09/19/2014)

Fair enough. It is always best when problems are detected early.
 

b.mac

Wild Mouse Nerd
May 14, 2011
4,122
5,579
113
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
RE: Forum Rules (Last Update: 09/19/2014)

I assume Doctor Who is still the jack of all trades.

Either way, it's nice to see some English out of these rules. There's not as large of a gray area to abuse which makes things a lot easier to... tolerate, I guess?

Just a general blurb, referencing certain groups without directly naming their names is fine, right? I recall a certain Crew and a group of Donkey lovers that would make me a little loose with my wording on these forums. I'm not going to get into naming direct members of those groups, just it pains me that they call themselves "communities" when they treat their userbases like crap or gloat that they have excellent events when they just abuse a park's very loose media policy (As in they accept anyone who's name isn't YourParkSucks.com).
 
Login or Register to Hide This Ad