What are the exact rules of the forum?

[Nitro]

Didn'y they say like 6 months ago they would format and list the rules in a formal and proper way?

[MaGoo]

We have rules already.

[Sonyk]

It's more or less implied stuff. If it's wrong anywhere else, more often than not, it'll be wrong here.

[FQuist]

There's no list of rules. We're working on a revised set of rules.. which might change board policy on some aspects. And that requires a lot of discussion. We might want to post the current global rules sometime until we finalise the real rules page.

When you refrain from doing these things you're mostly in the clear (feel free to edit this to fix stuff, other admins):

- Don't post insults aimed at community members either obvious or implied
- Don't bypass the swear word filters or use inappropiate language, or post pictures with swear language.
- Don't talk about sex issues or posting any sexually explicit pictures
- Don't post things that show people ways of getting illegal software
- No racism, homophobia, etcetera.

Most these things are obvious.

[MaGoo]

No posting sex issues? I've seen a lot of those and nobody seems to condemn it.

[Newspaz]

You agreed to something when you registered.
The most important sentence in that agreement must be:

The owners of JazzJackrabbit Community Forums reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason.

[MaGoo]

Was that directed towards me?

[LittleFreak]

- Don't talk about sex issues or posting any sexually explicit pictures

Wasn't there a discussion about sex some time ago in misc?

[Tubz]

You agreed to something when you registered.
The most important sentence in that agreement must be:

This is what is said on every vB forum when you register.

[cooba]

Wasn't there a discussion about sex some time ago in misc?I suppose they added that rule *after* the discussion.

[White Rabbit]

(Nimrod's SEX!!! signature)
(Encyclopaedia Erotica)
(Are you a virgin???)

[LittleFreak]

I don't think putting 'SEX!!!' into the signature is prohibited as long as the link is not about sex at all.

[Fawriel]

I don't think putting 'SEX!!!' into the signature is prohibited as long as the link is not about sex at all.
Shouldn't that be vice-versa..?

[Newspaz]

Was that directed towards me?
Not really.

This is what is said on every vB forum when you register.
So?

[Nitro]

Yeah I also didn't understand about the "Don't talk about sex issues" rule..... why? it's natural and it's not like I'm putting perversed sick animal porn chat in or something. I would do it, I would reccoemnd it, it's natural, therei sn othing wrong with young people doing it, so is it ok?

Derby: Content removal. An unfiltered expression was removed, though it should technically be in the filter.

[JelZe GoldRabbit]

Yeah I also didn't understand about the "Don't talk about sex issues" rule..... why? it's natural and it's not like I'm putting perversed sick animal porn chat in or something. I would do it, I would reccoemnd it, it's natural, therei sn othing wrong with young people doing it, so is it ok?

You seem to be forgetting that some people are pretty traditional when it comes to morals and values, including stuff that has to do with sexuality, like those who are of orthodox religions. And that some people simply can't take the sight of it. I, for one, don't think it belongs on a board like this, but that's just me.

Most, if not all, of these rules are common sense and to force respect from and towards others, no matter their background. I hope the new rules get finished soon.

- JelZe GoldRabbit =:3

Derby: Previous quotation clearance.

[Tubz]

Not really.


So?
Meaning.....It's useless information!

[LittleFreak]

Shouldn't that be vice-versa..?

You mean providing links to porn sites in the signature and hiding them (e.g. "My clan site" as name)?

<s>That'd be cool!</s>

[Nimrod]

I don't think putting 'SEX!!!' into the signature is prohibited as long as the link is not about sex at all.

It was a link to the #jj2 web client.

and SEX!!! was to get most peoples attention, it appears to have worked ;-)

[Newspaz]

Meaning.....It's useless information!
That's what you turn it into.

[Stijn]

"Admins can edit all your info and posts" is not a rule, it's a warning you should think about when posting. It does not say anything about what the content of your post should be like and what guidelines apply to it. Therefor, it's useless indeed if you are asking for rules.

[Nitro]

Flash good point thanks.

[LittleFreak]

Flash good point thanks.

Now I'm completely surprised. :P

[FQuist]

Someone having "SEX!!etc" in his signature or a mention of something is a bit different from actual talk about sex. Talking about "sex issues" is not the same as mentioning the word "sex" or something like that. That seems to be obvious. I might have phrased it wrongly, the rule is a bit more nuanced probably, but mostly it's right. And no, it wasn't added after that conversation (what conversation?)

Tublear, that all contracts say something does not make it useless. It's still true and you are still bound to them. We have the right to edit, close and delete threads despite that that text is in more than one forum.

The basic rules are in the registration agreement, btw:
By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-orientated, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.

[Nitro]

And other than these basic rules, Quist? see this is the problem. All you got is a bunch of basic crap that doesn't help enough.

[LittleFreak]

And other than these basic rules, Quist? see this is the problem. All you got is a bunch of basic crap that doesn't help enough.

How comes you don't know about the normal law? That's something everybody know's normally.

I agree it'd be better if they were put somewhere here though.

Apart from that, I still don't get why nobody closed the discussion about "Did you have sex?"

I can post a link if you don't believe me it has been there. :P

[FQuist]

It doesn't help enough, no, which is why we're working on a rules draft. But it does help and it contains the rough rules. You know the rest yourself, or at least you should after so many years here.

(a small note, it was about 4 months since we started on the rules, not 6. :P)

[Nitro]

Apart from that, I still don't get why nobody closed the discussion about "Did you have sex?"

Let's channel the topic to that, I also don't see any reason why it should be closed unless people started talking about having gay sex. [:

[LittleFreak]

Let's channel the topic to that, I also don't see any reason why it should be closed [flame]

Me neither, I found the topic interesting. :P

The rules say though, that it is not allowed and Quist is ignoring my question it seems.

[FQuist]

I missed it actually. The topic doesn't sound like it was descriptive in any way, I guess that's why it was allowed to stand. That's the nuance to the rule, AFAIK.

[Tubz]

Someone having "SEX!!etc" in his signature or a mention of something is a bit different from actual talk about sex. Talking about "sex issues" is not the same as mentioning the word "sex" or something like that. That seems to be obvious. I might have phrased it wrongly, the rule is a bit more nuanced probably, but mostly it's right. And no, it wasn't added after that conversation (what conversation?)

Tublear, that all contracts say something does not make it useless. It's still true and you are still bound to them. We have the right to edit, close and delete threads despite that that text is in more than one forum.

The basic rules are in the registration agreement, btw:

The thing is it could sya that on my board if I made one. But I wouldn't care, I would allow sex discussion. It would still say that though if I made a vB board.

[LittleFreak]

I missed it actually. The topic doesn't sound like it was descriptive in any way, I guess that's why it was allowed to stand. That's the nuance to the rule, AFAIK.

So talking about sex is OK as long as there's no deeper "description" of how that is done and such?

[Nitro]

What is wrong about how it is done? everyone knows it by the time they can read or use the internet (i.e this), and even if they'd discover it here then it's natural and nothing wrong with it..... these rules are so dumb, makes ya wanna die.. |:

[LittleFreak]

Well, think about that some users here might be pretty young (around 11 or so) and don't know about those things yet, and their parents don't want that either.

Now if the eleven year old gets a "bad taste" through this forum and the parents find out, Quist and others might get problems. Why should they risk that?

[Stijn]

(a small note, it was about 4 months since we started on the rules, not 6. :P)

So what's the deadline? ;)