The user agreement has updated, in case you aren't logged in and didn't get harassed about it.
This revision has actually been sitting on the drawing board for about a year now, and I just found the text file again. Oops. Though this is normal for me.
Post here if you have any comments or questions about the agreement... and to head off the question, everything in the "do not" list is subjective, and I will not define absolutes. Trying to do so will lead down a path of pain and torment...
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I still think the part about "long-time posters" being given extensive leeway with the rules while newbies aren't is rather undemocratic and elitist. Not that I don't enjoy being able to take advantage of it or understand its perceived purpose, but on a philosphical level it just doesn't seem right.
I don't lend much credence to the notion that without such provisions this board would suddenly (or even gradually) turn into the vast expanse of chaos and entropy that is the TrekBBS. It seems to me that this board attracts a certain variety of poster, and for the most part people either fit in here or don't. And those that don't generally don't stay long anyway. It's sort of a self-regulating system. No real need for seniority clauses.
But what the hell, it's your board. C'est la vie. I'm certainly not going anywhere.
-MMoM Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
quote:Originally posted by Charles Capps: Trying to do so will lead down a path of pain and torment...
Obvious Movie quote: "Yours or mine?"
Chevy Chase in "Spies Like Us"
Posted by Charles Capps (Member # 9) on :
quote:I still think the part about "long-time posters" being given extensive leeway with the rules while newbies aren't is rather undemocratic and elitist.
You seem to be under the impression that the community isn't elitist, or perhaps that it is a democracy.
The reason I put those particular sections in the rules is due to a recent incident of spamming - a guy posted a basic ad for his site not once, but twice, and was even given a third chance not to screw up and do it again... and instead, he sent me a long-winded PM about preferential treatment and how we all suck and are horribly unfair.
Well, yes, we are. He's perfectly correct. So I figure that people might as well be warned ahead of time, eh?
Might be better to just replace the whole thing with "CAUTION: Jackasses Within" or somesuch. Posted by David Sands (Member # 132) on :
I like it. Concise. Good balance between democratic openness and appropriate elitism.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: I still think the part about "long-time posters" being given extensive leeway with the rules while newbies aren't is rather undemocratic and elitist.
I disagree. Sure, it's "undemocratic" and "elitist", but no message board is a democracy (unless it's an unmoderated Usenet group). An in a case like this -- having a well-established Internet community -- I think it's okay to be stricter with newcomers because they don't have a strong relationship with the rest of the community. The rest (myself included, admittedly) pretty much know where we stand with one another. Basically, a proven track record of behavior and interaction makes minor infractions much more excusable. If some random person comes into the community, and within a week starts causing trouble, how do we know that won't be a regular problem with them?
I think that, as long as such a policy is clearly spelled out in the user agreement (as it is now), I don't think it's unfair.
Posted by Vice-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
I still don't understand the part of "excessive posting" since I tend to post at least three times on one sitting here. Can you or will you elaborate Charles?
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Well I'm guessing posting more than Tim, and in that case - everyone here has nothing to worry about! Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
Mmmmm, can someone tell me what people that registered in 1999 can get away with, but really shouldn't? Out of pure academic interest Posted by Charles Capps (Member # 9) on :
quote:Originally posted by Vice-Admiral Michael T. Colorge: I still don't understand the part of "excessive posting" since I tend to post at least three times on one sitting here. Can you or will you elaborate Charles?
I am intentionally being vague here in order to allow the proper level of enforcement against those that really need it. This is meant to stop people that just post random fluff & useless comments, in addition to people that just plain post too much.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
Here's an example, Mucus. A longtime poster (not necessarily from 1999 but one who's been here and contributed long and often) can get away with starting a thread where the starting post consists of a link to some other site. For longtime members, it's presumed that it isn't spamming. If a new member were to do that, the thread would be locked down and the link disabled as spam. That's probably the easiest and most common example I can come up with. Longtime members can just use a link to start a discussion; new members have to supply a set-up and discussion start to prove that it isn't a case of spamming.
Posted by Nim' (Member # 205) on :
Besides, if a "longtime poster" tries to abuse his/her cred with the community to get at a newer person for petty prestige reasons, everyone sees it for what it is and will arguably call him/her on it and ask what is going on.
Posted by Doctor Jonas (Member # 481) on :
Actually, I stay around here because of the elitist atmosphere, even if I don't participate in it. That's the flavor of this place. If it wasn't for that, it would be like any other message board.
Posted by Charles Capps (Member # 9) on :
We're unique because we're jerks!
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
I prefer tin-plated dictator with delusions of godhood.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I think of Flare as a 1920's gentleman's club that's full of the top minds in sci-fi jackassery.
That's not to say that we dont love our female members- though they could be meaner- I'm just drawing an elitist comparison.
Or, we are the strange deep-sea fish of the internet- all glowy appendeges and long sharp teeth. Older members can take the presure while some new members are crushed to pulp and carried away by the currents....
Something. Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"Mmmmm, can someone tell me what people that registered in 1999 can get away with, but really shouldn't?"
They can post porn? B)
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Can somone post links to the new and old user agreement?
Several major demons have e-mailed me today claiming my soul now belongs to a "Charles capps" and their feelings are hurt.
One actually called me a tease.
Posted by FuturamaGuy (Member # 968) on :
Isn't Flare about to have it's 6th birthday, here in a few days?
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
Yep, the birthday is on the 12th. Six years of my life have gone into this place. I feel all the richer for having done so.
And by richer, I mean in the philosophical sense. I wish this place had given me monetary riches. I could be rolling around naked in a bed of $100 bills right now.
Posted by Nim' (Member # 205) on :
I think the bills prefer to keep having Paris Hilton roll on them.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:I could be rolling around naked in a bed of $100 bills right now.
My mind! You've soiled it with your foul visualization!
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
I used to roll around naked on a bed of nickels, but they wound up in the darnest of places.
Posted by Charles Capps (Member # 9) on :
Every time you derail an announcement topic, I have to click a lock button. Please, think of the lock buttons!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)