Thank you to everyone who gave their feedback and opinions in the last thread. Rule #4 is now in place and can be found on the front page with a hyperlink to here.

4. Don't negatively reference specific users within the site when creating a [help] or [vent] thread.

Feel free to offer any suggestions, questions, or feedback down below.

4249382

4. Don't negatively reference specific users within the site when creating a [help] or [vent] thread

Yeah...That definitely works...

4249382
Ya can't stop me negatively referencing myself, amigo!
Ha!

4249382

The wording allows for people to talk shit about people on Deviantart, Fanfiction.net, etc. It's one thing if we're talking about a person in someone's life, like their father or best friend, but there's still the risk of stirring up the shit pot if someone were to talk about a specific user elsewhere on the Interweb.

4261020
The admin action policy for this group is based entirely on how sad or angry you make an admin.

Rules lawyering makes me super-angry.

4261037

It's only 'rules lawyering' if someone tries to plead a case for reopening a thread. The actual wording may preempt some misguided posts.

I've allowed myself to be trolled by someone skirting the rules in a VB board once. I'm not going to go through that circus again. It wouldn't apply here, but in most cases, I'd be in favor of a 'You're banned because I perceive you as a problem for the rest of the community , and that's just how it is' rule.

4261048
That's essentially how it is here. Is best rule. No permanent bans is not best rule, but we must make do with the whims of our brutal longing-Sunset overlord.

4261054

No permanent bans is not best rule

Thank god that I'm not the only one who feels that way.

What if someone were to just say "someone/some individuals, whose name/names I won't mention," would that possibly work without violating this rule?

6353808
That would risk starting drama, but doesn't violate any rules specifically.

6353950
Alright, thanks.