Printable View
I'm good with these rules assuming they are enforced reasonably, which I am confident they will be.
Sure, a good chunk of comments on this site could be found in violation if one were inclined to enforce every one of these rules to the letter.
But they've never operated that way here, and I seriously doubt they're go to start operating that way.
I'll give a general thumbs up and address the free speech argument. There is no constitutionally protected free speech right recognized here (or in any place like it). There is no right to free speech on a forum that you don't personally own. I appreciate your advocacy of it, John, and I would do the same. However, this isn't a "free place" in any sense of the term. It's a private website.
I only say this because I've seen, on other forums, people jump all over this to criticize and make wild claims about a right to free speech on someone else's website. They're wrong. Just like if you walk into my house and start saying things I don't want you to say, I can stop you from saying it by warning you, and eventually throwing you out if you don't stop. Same rules apply to a private website on the internets.
It's you guys' website, you can obviously do as you wish.
But, since you asked for input...I don't have a real problem with any of this, but were I you, I'd be careful about becoming so straight-laced, so PC, so vanilla, that you start driving away as many fans as you attract.
This is a website about a sports team. Passions run deep, as they should. Be careful you don't damp out the reason people come here in the first place.
And, BTW, thanks again to all five of you for all the work you put into this.
To follow up on what Chief said, just remember:
Independent. In-depth. Irreverent. Individuals.
Thanks for providing the site.
The guidelines are solid, but you guys shouldn't try to rule with an iron fist. Handing out bans/deleting posts isn't the best way to moderate a solid forum.
Anyone who steps over the line should be banned, but anything borderline should prob be taken with a grain of salt until it becomes a huge distraction/issue.
Honestly I think 99.9% of the posts and posters thus far have been fine, and there is only one or two worthless posters who eventually will be banned/grow tired anyways.
And that's how we feel about it, Dave. The community has been great and barring a few exceptions, hasn't done anything close to ban-worthy. Personally, I don't expect even that to continue... As people adjust, I expect to see bans drop to almost zero. Most people aren't interested in trolling and once we sort out a few bad seeds, things should hum along just fine. If the forum is going strong and we're not getting complaints, we certainly won't go out of our way to ban people for minor infractions (none of us like banning people in the first place).
Yea there are some that seem to believe that their constitutional rights have been violated which of course incorrect. However others are really just saying: this is America! Stop being a wimp! And on that latter point, I have seen moderators enjoy using their power instead of letting people debate.Quote:
Originally Posted by deanlambrecht
I think the rules posted are fine in theory, we will see how they play out in real life. I give you credit for posting and asking for feedback and believe that a posting of the rules is appropriate if you are going to be deleting posts; hopefully in practice a free exchange of opinions will be encouraged and the powers that be will err on the side of free speech and not censorship.
It's weird because I should like these rules more than I do. We have all seen posts that are just attacks or dismiss the worthiness of debating a topic. The negativity can feed on itself and be a disincentive to post of even visit the site. So I get it: rules are needed.
Jeff
you **** stupid ***** ****faceQuote:
Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp
I will bounce you out of here faster than a Frogtown "lady" at church on Easter if you keep it up, mister.Quote:
Originally Posted by ofx1
Your quote, I'm still trying to figure out what it means... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Brock BeauchampI will bounce you out of here faster than a Frogtown "lady" at church on Easter if you keep it up, mister.Quote:
Originally Posted by ofx1
Drink more. That always helps me think.Quote:
Originally Posted by ofx1
No drinks, but I'm on moderation now. What did I say that violated the new 725 posting rules? I admit to not reading them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brock BeauchampDrink more. That always helps me think.Quote:
Originally Posted by ofx1
If we ever moderate you for anything, just consider it a pre-emptive strike.Quote:
Originally Posted by ofx1
You already did, I was just trying to figure out why. That said, I've already spent too much of my weekend wondering why - it is what it is, I guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brock BeauchampIf we ever moderate you for anything, just consider it a pre-emptive strike.Quote:
Originally Posted by ofx1
I'm on board with these rules, esp. #2.
You might want to consider a rule about not allowing discussing what goes on at other forums on Twins Daily Forums. Example: "Did you see the flamewar between Mike and Dave over at MajorLeagueTwits?" and then there may or may not be a link to that material. I assume you don't want Twins Daily to be a source for more eyeballs to see a flame war or other futile discussions at other sites.
Big fan of what Chief said here, its why I'm not a fan of rule #1. This is part of the site is a forum not a blog and not every post needs to be meaningful and constructive imo. Everything else seems pretty reasonable.Quote:
Originally Posted by USAFChief
"PLAGERISM, if you use someone else's work, quote them. If you are found to be plagerizing, you will sent to the principal and your reply will be thrown away" (Ryan, 74).
Insufficient citation. You need a footnote, endnote or works cited to accurately reference and attribute your quote. Parenthetical in-text citations won't do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Twins Twerp
Is this proposal near adoption, or do you anticipate a round (or so) of revision?
Thanks.
I can try to cut down on the swear words but it won't be easy.