Questions about Forum Rule Changes, February 2012

[worktroll]

This thread is for any questions about the changes made to forum rules in February 2012, as announced in this post

[JPArbiter]

Question;

if I quote an official battletech source that happens to include something that is generally considered a swear word, would that be considered a warnable/banable offense?

I am still very upset that Moderator God and Davion slapped me with a one month ban for quoting the book "Grave Covenant" in a thread about "favorite battletech quotes."  I am also still upset that the ruling was upheld, and no consideration was given to the fact that I could point to page number, paragraph ans sentence of what I was quoting.

[Peter Smith]

Considering the response I got in the "No Swearing!" thread in Off-Topic (page 5), some members of the staff here feel that the double-standard is legitimate. If that's the case, I would expect to see disclipinary action in the case you described.

[JPArbiter]

if that is the case then there needs to be a clear cut list of what words are and are not acceptable.  I as a forum goer find it hard to tollerate not being aware of the standards we are to be held to.

I hate to say it but we need a Carlin List in the rules.

[worktroll]

As a general note: partial self-censoring remains an offence. If you wish to use a swearword, then either use it in full - in which case the censertron will allow it, or not - or use only symbols eg. ******.

The vast majority of Warnings for self-censoring do, depressingly, happen for words that themselves would be accepted on the forums when typed in full. If in doubt, either use the full word - particularly if it is a quote from BT source material - or symbols only.

There will never be a "Carlin list". Given the multinational membership of the board, it would be impractical to attempt to compile and maintain such a list. If in doubt, remember the advice: "Don't be a dick."

The changes to warning & ban expiry means that honest mistakes and accidents can disappear over time. No-one's going to be Banned because they goofed on a word.

W.

W.

[JPArbiter]

I have to say I disagree with that policy, it is akin to someone who never played chess having to go up against a grand master. 

the FCC has such a list, as does European equivilents.  If the language the censor bot allows can not be made public, what is the point?  the current policy penalizes to many people who act in the absence of malice.

at that point I can only recommend as a user that the moderators do NOT come down hard when a user self censors if the post is made in proper context.

[worktroll]

No, the rules remain as stated- do not partially self-censor. Use the whole word, or none of it.

Regards,

Worktroll, Administrator.

[roosterboy]

if that is the case then there needs to be a clear cut list of what words are and are not acceptable.

No, there doesn't.

Say what you want to say. If that includes words TPTB find objectionable, either the censortron will filter them out or—in the rare event you manage a word that it is truly something the Mods/Admins have never heard of before but they decide they don't want on these forums—they'll add it to the list that the censortron filters out. Either way, you're covered and don't need to worry about what's on the list and what isn't.

the current policy penalizes to many people who act in the absence of malice.

It does no such thing.

[roosterboy]

the double-standard

There is no double standard. There are different standards for the forums versus the print books.

[Peter Smith]

No-one's going to be Banned because they goofed on a word.

Unless, by my reading of the new rules, it's the sixth warning. JPArbiter got a month's ban because that's what the level of punishment that came up. If it happened to be his sixth warning, would it still be enforced as-is?

There is no double standard. There are different standards for the forums versus the print books.

If you want to split that hair, that's on you. To me, it failed the sniff test the first time you said that, and it failed it again.

[Maelwys]

I was told to direct this here...

Do not post links to online businesses without first gaining permission from a site Admin. It is acceptable to post links to online stores, local game stores or other resources in response to a request from a fellow poster as long as the other rules are followed.

So..we're not allowed to post links to online businesses without first gaining permission from a site Admin (Are Site Admins different from forum admins?). However, if someone asks, we're allowed to post links to online businesses?

[Gracus]

Where can we find out what level of penalty we are currently at?

[worktroll]

Short form: you can post a link to a known, existing online business such as a FLGS, or name of an established business such as Ral Partha Europe, that you're not associated with, to help out another player. Eg. "You can buy minis from Ral Partha Europe or BV Traders".

What we won't accept is people advertising their business, or blatantly attempting to drum up business with which they are associated with, unless they ask permission of the site Admins first. The site Admins (same as forum admins) are myself (Worktroll), and Chunga. The reason for this should be clear - we cannot accept any responsibility for commercial transactions made on the basis of information on this site, so we need to be able to approve or disapprove any posts soliciting such commerce.

Does that help?

And folks, remember - if you're not sure if something you'd like to post nudges up against a rule, you can always PM a moderator for advice.

Worktroll, Administrator.

[worktroll]

Where can we find out what level of penalty we are currently at?

You should be able to tell from your Private Messages, as all Warnings are sent via PM. Note, only Warnings issued on this iteration of the forum apply - any Warnings from before the crash (with the exception of Permabans) are not counted.

PM a moderator or admin if you're concerned.

W.

[roosterboy]

If you want to split that hair, that's on you.

If you want to use a different definition of "splitting a hair" than the rest of the English-speaking world, that's on you. Acknowledging the distinction between two completely different things is about as far from hair-splitting as one can get.

[E. Icaza]

As a general note: partial self-censoring remains an offence. If you wish to use a swearword, then either use it in full - in which case the censertron will allow it, or not - or use only symbols eg. ******.

The vast majority of Warnings for self-censoring do, depressingly, happen for words that themselves would be accepted on the forums when typed in full. If in doubt, either use the full word - particularly if it is a quote from BT source material - or symbols only.

There will never be a "Carlin list". Given the multinational membership of the board, it would be impractical to attempt to compile and maintain such a list. If in doubt, remember the advice: "Don't be a dick."

The changes to warning & ban expiry means that honest mistakes and accidents can disappear over time. No-one's going to be Banned because they goofed on a word.

W.

W.

I received a warning last year for using symbols for a swear word and was told that symbols were unacceptable and that I had to type the word and let the censortron do its thing.  Is that no longer the case?

[Gracus]

Yes.  I have been dinged for using the letter+asterisk chain before.   :'(

[roosterboy]

Yes.  I have been dinged for using the letter+asterisk chain before.   :'(

Because that's clearly against the rules. If you had left off the letter part and just used asterisks (or symbols), you would have been fine.

[worktroll]

I received a warning last year for using symbols for a swear word and was told that symbols were unacceptable and that I had to type the word and let the censortron do its thing.  Is that no longer the case?

Using symbols that replace letters directly - eg. "@" for a, "$" for s, etc - will still earn a Warning. Using mixtures of letters and symbols - eg. "a$$" - will still earn a warning.

Typing "ass" will not earn a warning. Nor will it be censored.

Using "*****" or "(*&*^&" will not earn a Warning.

If for some reason the phrase "batcakes" becomes an obscenity over time, either type the words entire, or type "*****". Do not type "b** c****". We will add new unacceptable obscentities to the censertron as required. Please feel free to type "batcakes" instead of obscenities.

People who deliberately post obscure or excessive obscenities in an effort to test the rule can be Warned under Rule 3. We aim to keep these forums PG13+.

People who post using derogatory racial, political, religious insults or similar, can also be Warned.

Does that help make the rule clear?

W.

[E. Icaza]

Using symbols that replace letters directly - eg. "@" for a, "$" for s, etc - will still earn a Warning. Using mixtures of letters and symbols - eg. "a$$" - will still earn a warning.

Typing "ass" will not earn a warning. Nor will it be censored.

Using "*****" or "(*&*^&" will not earn a Warning.

If for some reason the phrase "batcakes" becomes an obscenity over time, either type the words entire, or type "*****". Do not type "b** c****". We will add new unacceptable obscentities to the censertron as required. Please feel free to type "batcakes" instead of obscenities.

People who deliberately post obscure or excessive obscenities in an effort to test the rule can be Warned under Rule 3. We aim to keep these forums PG13+.

People who post using derogatory racial, political, religious insults or similar, can also be Warned.

Does that help make the rule clear?

W.

Aff.

[ColBosch]

You should be able to tell from your Private Messages, as all Warnings are sent via PM. Note, only Warnings issued on this iteration of the forum apply - any Warnings from before the crash (with the exception of Permabans) are not counted.

This is untrue.

[worktroll]

Please PM me with the reasoning behind your statement, thanks.

Worktroll, Administrator.

[HikageMaru]

Truth be told, I never noticed the "report to moderator" link until now because... well, I guess I never had an occasion where I felt I would want to notify a moderator.  I also just checked and PMs and they have a "report to admin" link.  Out of curiosity, what is the difference?

A related question, the rules refer to "Postings."  I presume that means posting something on the boards.  Say my buddy PMs me a link to a website or video laced with profanities or something and I'm in a bad mood because my son ate all my waffles, so decide to "report to admin" the PM---would that get my buddy in trouble?

Finally, can you please clarify Rule 12.  Is this rule talking about using the boards to run a pirating ring or helping someone find a website that distributes pirated materials?  I'm seeking clarification as to whether making a banner with, let's say a copyrighted Battletech logo on it, will earn the banhammer.

[Col.Hengist]

Using symbols that replace letters directly - eg. "@" for a, "$" for s, etc - will still earn a Warning. Using mixtures of letters and symbols - eg. "a$$" - will still earn a warning.

Typing "ass" will not earn a warning. Nor will it be censored.

Using "*****" or "(*&*^&" will not earn a Warning.

If for some reason the phrase "batcakes" becomes an obscenity over time, either type the words entire, or type "*****". Do not type "b** c****". We will add new unacceptable obscentities to the censertron as required. Please feel free to type "batcakes" instead of obscenities.

People who deliberately post obscure or excessive obscenities in an effort to test the rule can be Warned under Rule 3. We aim to keep these forums PG13+.

People who post using derogatory racial, political, religious insults or similar, can also be Warned.

Does that help make the rule clear?

W.

 What is excessive for obscenities? Is it more than 1 allowed word in a sentence ormore than 2 words that are allowed in one sentence and its excessive? Or is it just arbitrary and at the mods discretion?

[roosterboy]

"report to moderator" ... "report to admin" ... Out of curiosity, what is the difference?

I should think that'd be self-evident. ;)

Finally, can you please clarify Rule 12.  Is this rule talking about using the boards to run a pirating ring or helping someone find a website that distributes pirated materials?  I'm seeking clarification as to whether making a banner with, let's say a copyrighted Battletech logo on it, will earn the banhammer.

Of course not.

[worktroll]

What is excessive for obscenities? Is it more than 1 allowed word in a sentence ormore than 2 words that are allowed in one sentence and its excessive? Or is it just arbitrary and at the mods discretion?

TO be brutally honest - the answer to this, and many other hypothetical questions, is "Don't be a dick."

If one were to post an obscenity-laced diatribe, then odds are very high that the poster would in fact be seeking to be confrontational, making an attack on someone, or trying to irritate people into acting. Such behaviour is in fact dick-like.

Note: I'm not singling anyone out here, least of all Col.Hengist - but I strongly believe most people know when they behave badly. Unfortunately, some don't realise until after they post. Those people have more chances to learn in the long run now. People who can't learn, or who choose deliberately to behave badly, are going to be acted on.

I also want to say, I can't recall the last time we actually issued a Warning on obscenity. On the other hand, we issue far too many Warnings for partial-self-censoring. Either use the full word, or don't.

W.

[Moonsword]

Truth be told, I never noticed the "report to moderator" link until now because... well, I guess I never had an occasion where I felt I would want to notify a moderator.  I also just checked and PMs and they have a "report to admin" link.  Out of curiosity, what is the difference?

Reporting it to the moderators will notify all the mods and admins via email that we need to come check something.  Mods don't actually get notifications on PM reports - those go straight to the admins with no moderator visibility at all.

[Col.Hengist]

TO be brutally honest - the answer to this, and many other hypothetical questions, is "Don't be a dick."

If one were to post an obscenity-laced diatribe, then odds are very high that the poster would in fact be seeking to be confrontational, making an attack on someone, or trying to irritate people into acting. Such behaviour is in fact dick-like.

Note: I'm not singling anyone out here, least of all Col.Hengist - but I strongly believe most people know when they behave badly. Unfortunately, some don't realise until after they post. Those people have more chances to learn in the long run now. People who can't learn, or who choose deliberately to behave badly, are going to be acted on.

I also want to say, I can't recall the last time we actually issued a Warning on obscenity. On the other hand, we issue far too many Warnings for partial-self-censoring. Either use the full word, or don't.

W.

 Thank you for the clarification.

[StCptMara]

I find it interesting that the Official Distilling Down to Basics of the rules, and mine are slightly different...
Especially since the official version really should be getting hit by the censortron(seriously? dick is allowed,
but ****** isn't? Aren't both equally offensive? Though the second can be used legitimately and not as profanity/insult).

My distilling is "Be Excellent to each other." So..y'all can think like that! (Then again, I believe that that is a supremely
profound statement, and has far more depth to it then just some California rocker talk...)

[Charlie Tango]

I find it interesting that the Official Distilling Down to Basics of the rules, and mine are slightly different...
Especially since the official version really should be getting hit by the censortron(seriously? dick is allowed,
but ****** isn't? Aren't both equally offensive? Though the second can be used legitimately and not as profanity/insult).

My distilling is "Be Excellent to each other." So..y'all can think like that! (Then again, I believe that that is a supremely
profound statement, and has far more depth to it then just some California rocker talk...)

Yes, but if dick wasn't allowed, you couldn't use it as a short form of Richard.

If you have someone you know named *****, then I feel sorry for them...

(I'm really curious what word you typed.. the first one I tried ended up being allowed by the censortron...)