Rules discussion

See room for improvement? Tell us about it! And if you encounter a problem with the board, please let us know.
User avatar
Valerion
Alpha Wolf
Posts: 2803
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:50 pm
Gender: Male
Sexual preference: Gay
Species: Werewolf
Region: Gauteng
Location: ::1
Contact:

Rules discussion

#1

Post by Valerion »

I've put up a set of forum rules here. Please let us know what you think. This list is still under construction, and your feedback would be invaluable.
User avatar
Rakuen Growlithe
Fire Puppy
Posts: 6718
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:24 pm
Gender: Male
Sexual preference: Bi
Species: Growlithe (pokemon)
Region: Other
Location: Pretoria
Contact:

Re: Rules discussion

#2

Post by Rakuen Growlithe »

On the subject of images.
I'd strongly encourage attaching them to the forum, both for permanence and because then they are given a thumbnail and can be seen at full view if desired.
I think if they are not attached to the forum then they must not exceed the width of the forum, and perhaps a size limit is needed, though I think that might already be set.
I'd also suggest that images are used sparingly when not in image threads. There have been some people posting images all over, admittedly not big enough to slow anything down or disrupt anything, but I'm not sure it's a good habit, especially if others copy it.
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~

“Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.”
~John Milton~
User avatar
Valerion
Alpha Wolf
Posts: 2803
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:50 pm
Gender: Male
Sexual preference: Gay
Species: Werewolf
Region: Gauteng
Location: ::1
Contact:

Re: Rules discussion

#3

Post by Valerion »

I added some stuff about banning and multiple accounts to the rules.
User avatar
Valerion
Alpha Wolf
Posts: 2803
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:50 pm
Gender: Male
Sexual preference: Gay
Species: Werewolf
Region: Gauteng
Location: ::1
Contact:

Re: Rules discussion

#4

Post by Valerion »

I fixed up the broken links in the page, and added LiveLeak to the videos section.
User avatar
Dragonwolf
Posts: 239
Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 10:53 pm
Gender: Male
Sexual preference: Straight
Species: Dragon Wolf Hybrid
Region: Gauteng
Location: Sandton, Johannesburg

Re: Rules discussion

#5

Post by Dragonwolf »

Once again Valerion thank you for your help.

I feel that the rules of the site need to be discussed further. Explaining in more detail of what should or should not be said in the forums. What you said in http://forum.zafur.co.za/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2563 made lots of sense in order to keep peace, but if the community doesn't know what they can or can't say, eg illicit use of narcotics, then they won't know that they can't say it and then get even more angry, if say, it was deleted.

I think a lovely solution would be a better defined 'Terms and Conditions' for the site for I feel and hear that people are leaving and if that happens in great number, I fear it will be a dark day for lots of us.
"We should stop being envious of others and start being more accepting of ourselves."

Did I get that right?... The mic was off? What do you mean it was OFF!
User avatar
Valerion
Alpha Wolf
Posts: 2803
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:50 pm
Gender: Male
Sexual preference: Gay
Species: Werewolf
Region: Gauteng
Location: ::1
Contact:

Re: Rules discussion

#6

Post by Valerion »

Dragonwolf Lord wrote:Once again Valerion thank you for your help.

I feel that the rules of the site need to be discussed further. Explaining in more detail of what should or should not be said in the forums. What you said in http://forum.zafur.co.za/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2563 made lots of sense in order to keep peace, but if the community doesn't know what they can or can't say, eg illicit use of narcotics, then they won't know that they can't say it and then get even more angry, if say, it was deleted.

I think a lovely solution would be a better defined 'Terms and Conditions' for the site for I feel and hear that people are leaving and if that happens in great number, I fear it will be a dark day for lots of us.
This will be hard, as I am bound to miss things. Here's a rule of thumb: Are you able to say it in front of a police officer? If so, it's a safe topic. If not - think again. If you are willing to make me a list of things that are illegal to discuss, I will add it to the list. But it can never be exhaustive, as laws change all the time. And I don't know each one myself.
Leeward
Recalcitrant Ruminant
Posts: 7036
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 10:23 pm

Re: Rules discussion

#7

Post by Leeward »

Sorry to necro, but I think a revision might be due. I have comments and suggestions on pretty much everything, so I'll go section-by-section.
User names
  • We do not allow users to change their own user name. If you would like to change your user name you must ask an administrator.
This section should probably clarify whether multiple accounts falls under this. More on that below. Also this should probably mention the annual Halloween event.
Signatures
  • No embedded videos allowed
  • Images are limited to 100 pixels high by 200 pixels wide
  • Images must be static, and not animated
Why not animated? Our avatars can be. I've seen one or two "transgressors" and it's really not that bothersome if it is discreet. Nobody uses those obnoxiously sparkly 1990's gifs any more.
Personal contact details
Please do not post your email address or phone number in a forum that are publicly accessible. This is intended to cut down on spam harvesting.
Forums that are accessible only by members may contain contact details. This includes:
  • Regionals
  • The yiffy forum
V&S also falls under members-only.
Embedded videos
  • YouTube videos may be embedded, using the provided tags
  • LiveLeak videos may be embedded, using the provided tags
  • No embedded video may autostart, even just to buffer itself. User interaction is required to start it
Mentioning this is redundant as it is enforced by the available BBCode. Also LiveLeak embedding has since been removed because nobody uses it.
Embedded images
  • Please ensure your image is available to all forum users, whether they are logging into the image hosting site or not
  • Please do not remove images from the image hosting service one you embedded it in your post, and ensure it does not auto-expire
  • You may also upload images directly into the forum
I suggest an additional rule to disallow images that break the forum width. Alternatively, some code that automatically resizes such images (or converts them to attachments) would be a much less restricting option.
Age appropriateness
  • In most of the forum the age restriction is PG-13.
  • The yiffy forum is NC-17, although porn is allowed there.
  • In order to be allowed access to the yiffy forum you need to have your age listed in your profile, and need to request this from an admin.
The MPAA links are broken.
Legality
Please do not make posts discussing subjects that are illegal in either SA or Switzerland (where the server is hosted. This includes, but is not limited to:
  • Bestiality
  • Copyright infringement
Although it is generally a good idea to discourage discussion on such topics to avoid possible incrimination and/or association, I see no reason why a blanket ban that also covers academic debate is necessary. Case in point: everybody agrees that murder is wrong, yet discussing murder cases or the concept itself (this does not include death threats obviously) is neither taboo nor forbidden.
Multiple accounts and Banning
  • You are not allowed to have more than one account on the server, unless you have discussed this with the Admins and received permission for this. Strict rules will apply to such cases, as discussed with the Admins.
  • Having multiple accounts will most likely get all of them banned.
  • If you are banned (temporarily or permanently), you are not allowed to create a subsequent account unless you have permission from the Admins. Ban evasion will not be tolerated.
This should be right up at the top. However, although I agree with this on principle, it seems a bit overkill. I know this rule was created because of a handful of isolated cases, but multiple accounts are generally pretty easy to spot, and not much of a threat anyway. I can't come up with a less strict alternative though, so consider this just a comment.
Venting and support section
Due to the nature of this sub forum, trolling posts will not be tolerated. This area is for people to discuss their problems and receive support from the forum. Those that abuse access to this part of the forum will be temporarily, or permanently, denied access to it depending on the severity of the infraction.
I couldn't agree more, and this definitely does need mentioning.
User avatar
Rakuen Growlithe
Fire Puppy
Posts: 6718
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:24 pm
Gender: Male
Sexual preference: Bi
Species: Growlithe (pokemon)
Region: Other
Location: Pretoria
Contact:

Re: Rules discussion

#8

Post by Rakuen Growlithe »

Leeward wrote:This section should probably clarify whether multiple accounts falls under this. More on that below. Also this should probably mention the annual Halloween event.
Halloween is a special event and the change of rules is announced each year. In any case, I only make it possible to change your own name during that period so there's no need to talk about exceptions.
Leeward wrote:Why not animated? Our avatars can be. I've seen one or two "transgressors" and it's really not that bothersome if it is discreet. Nobody uses those obnoxiously sparkly 1990's gifs any more.
We can probably do that. It's both a question of keeping things appropriate and space limitations. But I think the forum has plenty of spare space and most people are probably on high speed connections now.
Leeward wrote:I suggest an additional rule to disallow images that break the forum width. Alternatively, some code that automatically resizes such images (or converts them to attachments) would be a much less restricting option.
:O People wanting stricter rules! I'm in favour of keeping things to forum width but I don't know if anyone has the time or skill to fix that here. At the moment I remove images that are too wide if they are in threads where it would be too annoying, like WAYDN. And I make exceptions for photo threads like Adagio has.
Leeward wrote:Although it is generally a good idea to discourage discussion on such topics to avoid possible incrimination and/or association, I see no reason why a blanket ban that also covers academic debate is necessary. Case in point: everybody agrees that murder is wrong, yet discussing murder cases or the concept itself (this does not include death threats obviously) is neither taboo nor forbidden.
The reasoning there was two-fold. Firstly, and experience seems to bear it out, people are not capable of discussing issues without admitting their own involvement, which puts the forum in a bad place. Second, people get so worked up that discussion becomes impossible. I would like more discussion available but then it might be necessary to be stricter, so temp-bans with thread locks might come into play then.
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~

“Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.”
~John Milton~
Leeward
Recalcitrant Ruminant
Posts: 7036
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 10:23 pm

Re: Rules discussion

#9

Post by Leeward »

Rakuen Growlithe wrote::O People wanting stricter rules! I'm in favour of keeping things to forum width but I don't know if anyone has the time or skill to fix that here. At the moment I remove images that are too wide if they are in threads where it would be too annoying, like WAYDN. And I make exceptions for photo threads like Adagio has.
Fair enough, that's more of a structural issue than an administrative one. Still, a guideline would spare you the trouble.
Rakuen Growlithe wrote:Firstly, and experience seems to bear it out, people are not capable of discussing issues without admitting their own involvement, which puts the forum in a bad place.
Discussing illegal activity is not in itself illegal. People make assumptions regardless of what we say because it is a well-known "fact" that all furries are perverts; no amount of irreproachability on our part will change that image in the short term, and maintaining a good reputation on such a small scale will not make a difference in the long term.
Rakuen Growlithe wrote:Second, people get so worked up that discussion becomes impossible. I would like more discussion available but then it might be necessary to be stricter, so temp-bans with thread locks might come into play then.
Perhaps temp-bans should be a bit more commonplace then, as opposed to letting things get out of hand and locking a thread once the damage is done, which also end the debate on a sour note and inhibits further discussion.
Leeward
Recalcitrant Ruminant
Posts: 7036
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 10:23 pm

Re: Rules discussion

#10

Post by Leeward »

Leeward wrote:Perhaps temp-bans should be a bit more commonplace then, as opposed to letting things get out of hand and locking a thread once the damage is done, which also end the debate on a sour note and inhibits further discussion.
To implement this approach, I think we are going to need more than 2 active global moderators, so that the forum is monitored frequently enough to catch such a situation before it snowballs.

Oh yes, another suggestion I forgot about. I propose a clause on tolerance towards all (regardless of age, ethnicity, gender, sexual identity, sexuality, belief system, etc.), with specific mention of hate speech and propaganda.
User avatar
Rakuen Growlithe
Fire Puppy
Posts: 6718
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:24 pm
Gender: Male
Sexual preference: Bi
Species: Growlithe (pokemon)
Region: Other
Location: Pretoria
Contact:

Re: Rules discussion

#11

Post by Rakuen Growlithe »

Leeward wrote:Discussing illegal activity is not in itself illegal. People make assumptions regardless of what we say because it is a well-known "fact" that all furries are perverts; no amount of irreproachability on our part will change that image in the short term, and maintaining a good reputation on such a small scale will not make a difference in the long term.
I think you might have misunderstood me there. This has nothing to do with reputation or the image of the fandom. Discussions about illegal activity are not illegal but if a fur is discussing an illegal activity and then says that they do that activity then the forum is in a difficult legal situation because we should report that. This is the same issue that causes trouble on furry art sites; regardless of our views on certain topics we still have legal obligations.
Leeward wrote:To implement this approach, I think we are going to need more than 2 active global moderators, so that the forum is monitored frequently enough to catch such a situation before it snowballs.

Oh yes, another suggestion I forgot about. I propose a clause on tolerance towards all (regardless of age, ethnicity, gender, sexual identity, sexuality, belief system, etc.), with specific mention of hate speech and propaganda.
I would wait and see how necessary that is. The times that moderator intervention are needed are usually spaced quite far apart.

For the second part, it doesn't match with your previous suggestions to expand free speech. Hate speech and propaganda very much depend on someone's perspective. I have no interest in forbidding people from expressing their opinions on subjects just because they disagree with them or in promoting their own causes in appropriate places.
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~

“Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.”
~John Milton~
Leeward
Recalcitrant Ruminant
Posts: 7036
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 10:23 pm

Re: Rules discussion

#12

Post by Leeward »

Rakuen Growlithe wrote:if a fur is discussing an illegal activity and then says that they do that activity then the forum is in a difficult legal situation because we should report that.
Actually, no. The only crime you are legally obliged to report is child pornography. That is, assuming knowledge but not complicity to said crime.
Rakuen Growlithe wrote:For the second part, it doesn't match with your previous suggestions to expand free speech. Hate speech and propaganda very much depend on someone's perspective. I have no interest in forbidding people from expressing their opinions on subjects just because they disagree with them or in promoting their own causes in appropriate places.
Hate speech and propaganda both have very clear, objective definitions. I don't want to reduce freedom of expression any more than you do, but this is on a level far beyond a mere difference in opinion.
User avatar
Rakuen Growlithe
Fire Puppy
Posts: 6718
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:24 pm
Gender: Male
Sexual preference: Bi
Species: Growlithe (pokemon)
Region: Other
Location: Pretoria
Contact:

Re: Rules discussion

#13

Post by Rakuen Growlithe »

Leeward wrote:Actually, no. The only crime you are legally obliged to report is child pornography. That is, assuming knowledge but not complicity to said crime.

Hate speech and propaganda both have very clear, objective definitions. I don't want to reduce freedom of expression any more than you do, but this is on a level far beyond a mere difference in opinion.
I'd need a proper source for such a claim. However even if the forum is safe then we also need to think of our users. Even if we don't have to report a crime, other forum users could report such a crime, particularly if they already disagree with the activity or have an animus against the other person.

Which definitions are those? If we did have such a rule then it would need to be very carefully written.
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~

“Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.”
~John Milton~
User avatar
Helios_phi
The depraved
Posts: 2247
Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 9:00 pm
Gender: Male

Re: Rules discussion

#14

Post by Helios_phi »

While not reporting a crime in itself is not a crime. It does make anyone aware of the crime an accessory to the crime after the fact. Something you could be charged with. Like defeating the ends of justice.
Honest opinion. Leave that rule strictly in place. No one here is interested in beastiality, and I'm really not interested in seeing other people talk about it. There are other places on the internet for that.
[REDACTED]
Leeward
Recalcitrant Ruminant
Posts: 7036
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 10:23 pm

Re: Rules discussion

#15

Post by Leeward »

Rakuen Growlithe wrote:I'd need a proper source for such a claim.
I'll ask my bf, he'll know where to find official documentation. I can already amend my statement with regard to the exceptions: sexual abuse of children and the mentally disabled (top of page 2 of this Act), as well as corruption, theft, fraud, extortion, forgery, and uttering of a forged document (SAPS summary of Section 34 of the PCCAA).
Rakuen Growlithe wrote:other forum users could report such a crime, particularly if they already disagree with the activity or have an animus against the other person.
That would not be the forum's fault. That is voluntary self-incrimination, which is a really stupid thing to do in public and/or in the presence of someone who doesn't like you and/or would report it.

However, good luck to whatever overly conscientious individual decides to report (and prove) any wrongdoings. ("This guy on the Internet says he torrents movies! I don't know who he is or whether it's true though." :roll:) Unless you know or know someone who knows how to dox (which beyond a certain point is in itself illegal, which means any evidence obtained in such a manner is inadmissible in court), there's no way that's going to be taken seriously.
Rakuen Growlithe wrote:Which definitions are those? If we did have such a rule then it would need to be very carefully written.
The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 - Chapter 2: Bill of Rights - Section 16: Freedom of Expression - Subsection 2
User avatar
Valerion
Alpha Wolf
Posts: 2803
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:50 pm
Gender: Male
Sexual preference: Gay
Species: Werewolf
Region: Gauteng
Location: ::1
Contact:

Re: Rules discussion

#16

Post by Valerion »

No law is absolute, not even the Constitution. Freedom of speech traditionally are very limited. The government may not restrict my speech, but if I tell people how bad a company I work for, I get fired. Also, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences.

I will not change the rules on illegal content, unless you can give me a legal opinion that I am being wrong, in which case I will seriously consider shutting the forum down. The reason for that is to shield the forum members, to shield the forum admins and to shield the existence of the forum and to shield the fandom.

The fandom does NOT need another bestiality discussion to enter the mainstream media. They already believe we are sexual deviants, no need to give them ammunition to use out of context.
User avatar
Franky
The Bad Guy
Posts: 1748
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 12:32 am
Gender: Male
Sexual preference: Straight
Species: Mortally Challenged Fox
Region: Gauteng
Location: Where bad things happen.
Contact:

Re: Rules discussion

#17

Post by Franky »

You can't be an accessory to crime unless a significant amount of evidence is blantantly clear to the observer that the crime is happening.

Consider a discussion about narcotics. Your defence in any situation like that is based on word of mouth/keyboard. It will never hold in court neither will anything unless the so called participans had proof that it's actually happening.
User avatar
Valerion
Alpha Wolf
Posts: 2803
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:50 pm
Gender: Male
Sexual preference: Gay
Species: Werewolf
Region: Gauteng
Location: ::1
Contact:

Re: Rules discussion

#18

Post by Valerion »

There was an occasion where a serious criminal act was brought onto the forum. At the time I got legal advice and that was "rather keep it off the forum. It's WAY safer for you and everyone else."
Leeward
Recalcitrant Ruminant
Posts: 7036
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 10:23 pm

Re: Rules discussion

#19

Post by Leeward »

Valerion wrote:No law is absolute, not even the Constitution. Freedom of speech traditionally are very limited. The government may not restrict my speech, but if I tell people how bad a company I work for, I get fired. Also, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences.
I never said the law was absolute, nor that freedom of expression implies no consequences. I merely pointed out that our Constitution (one of the most recent and progressive in the world, I might add) is more strict with regard to freedom of expression than the forum rules.
Valerion wrote:I will not change the rules on illegal content, unless you can give me a legal opinion that I am being wrong, in which case I will seriously consider shutting the forum down. The reason for that is to shield the forum members, to shield the forum admins and to shield the existence of the forum and to shield the fandom.
I am a bit confused here. I'm not talking about illegal content, I'm talking about discussions concerning illegal activities. Indication of personal involvement is entirely optional, and at one's own risk (obviously). This puts nobody in danger of prosecution, because a mere confession to a crime without further proof is not evidence enough, and nobody has a legal obligation to report a crime (with the exceptions mentioned above). And as Inpw said, it will never hold up in court.
Valerion wrote:The fandom does NOT need another bestiality discussion to enter the mainstream media. They already believe we are sexual deviants, no need to give them ammunition to use out of context.
And who exactly is going to bother digging up dirt on an obscure fandom, which already has a bad reputation, in a country where it is virtually unheard of? Someone with a vendetta that bad is probably batshit enough to not be a credible source anyway.
Valerion wrote:There was an occasion where a serious criminal act was brought onto the forum. At the time I got legal advice and that was "rather keep it off the forum. It's WAY safer for you and everyone else."
I suspect that would probably fall under the exceptions, in which case they must be excluded in the rule as well. If it doesn't, then I reiterate that nobody, not even the admins, are either accessories or obliged to report it (nor will they be at fault for neglecting to do so).
User avatar
Ryall
Spotted Scallywag
Posts: 2760
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 6:25 pm
Gender: Male
Species: Hyena
Region: Gauteng

Re: Rules discussion

#20

Post by Ryall »

It's nice to see constructive discussion around the forum rules. Thanks Leeward for reviving this thread with some thoughtful commentary, and thanks admin for engaging with the community openly on this topic.

I generally support Leeward's suggestions, with two exceptions; one of which I wanted to comment on.
Leeward wrote:Oh yes, another suggestion I forgot about. I propose a clause on tolerance towards all (regardless of age, ethnicity, gender, sexual identity, sexuality, belief system, etc.), with specific mention of hate speech and propaganda.
I for one actually enjoy being able to openly criticize other people's belief systems on this forum, and I would prefer it if other people are free to voice their criticisms on say, sexuality. We're forced to bite our tongues enough as is in our work places.

The reason being, is that a lot of prejudice is born out of ignorance, and as soon as I see someone being, for example, homophobic, then that's an invitation to challenge and discuss their opinions, and 'educate' somebody.

In many instances, this results in fruitless arguments, but in a few cases, people actually start to question their own opinions - for the better.

This is how many changes in society start.

At the same time, I don't think certain beliefs should be sacred and free from criticism, just because a person is emotionally invested in them, and includes them in their identity.

If somebody starts promoting crystal healing, for example, I would like to see that challenged, not because I want to see that person recant that belief, but because I would hate to see someone else adopt that belief, because they were never challenged to think critically about it, as a result of everyone being forced to treat that belief with undeserving "respect."

Not all beliefs and belief systems are equal or deserving of respect.

Take Animew's crappy belief that he is able to magically generate large amounts of copper in his blood stream, for example...
Sorry, I couldn't resist. :P
Hahaha! :lol:
Leeward
Recalcitrant Ruminant
Posts: 7036
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 10:23 pm

Re: Rules discussion

#21

Post by Leeward »

That is actually a really good point Ryall, I didn't think of it that way. In hindsight I actually agree with you. Open criticism is something I realise I value being able to give and receive here.

The main reason I suggested that is to avoid a situation where the hypothetical crystal healing believer starts ranting and raving about how crystals are the best and only way to heal because medicine is evil, and that everyone who doesn't think shoving a diamond up their arse will cure AIDS is going to hell. I'm sure you can extrapolate the metaphor.

I'm open to critique regarding my suggestions, so feel free to comment on the other point on which you disagree with me.
User avatar
Ryall
Spotted Scallywag
Posts: 2760
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 6:25 pm
Gender: Male
Species: Hyena
Region: Gauteng

Re: Rules discussion

#22

Post by Ryall »

The other issue I disagree with is on the topic of bestiality, but I don't feel I have any value to add to that conversation. *shrugs*
Hahaha! :lol:
User avatar
Ivic_Wulfe
Viridis Spes Vulupe
Posts: 3012
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 10:58 am
Gender: Male
Sexual preference: Other
Species: Green Folf
Region: Gauteng
Location: Pretoria East (I prefer Valhalla)
Contact:

Re: Rules discussion

#23

Post by Ivic_Wulfe »

Valerion wrote:There was an occasion where a serious criminal act was brought onto the forum. At the time I got legal advice and that was "rather keep it off the forum. It's WAY safer for you and everyone else."
This is a valid point that is being made. The issue I guess that stands is, where does one draw the line. On the podcast we spoke to Green Reaper on a similar case. We can't or shouldn't be held liable for someone else's wrongdoing but opinions do matter.

It may be a good idea to look at the rules again, remove redundancies, have caveats for specific conversation points and maybe keep some of them in appropriate "adult" zones. (Which still disconnects furs that are seen as underage from the conversation even though I'm sure they sometimes know more than we ever did at their age.)

But that still doesn't necessarily answer all the questions. Open debate is useful but metering people's opinions doesn't help any either. Muzzling a perspective only divides us further as I've had to find out on the whatsapp groups.

It gets complicated very quickly and the want to blanket ban topics does make it easier to police, but in essence it doesn't look at some core concepts like freedom of speech.

Honestly, due to these complications legally correct as they stand, morally anyone who whiffs the forum as a parent and has a look through it and those discussions are around, it doesn't bode well. They DON'T think legally, morally or sensibly under these perspectives.

It isn't about how right you are to people from outside the fandom, we're still considered deviant. We can fight and probably win on legal grounds...but what does that achieve other than bad media and a scrutiny many would not like into our groups.

I agree with Leeward that it's a good practice but within a South African perspective, conservatism still rules and THAT is something that needs to be discussed.

Lastly, we seem to drift to get angry about things very quickly, pressing others to react on topics and it has been seen on various occasions that a well-metered debate turns into a flamewar and becomes acidic in nature. That makes it difficult as well.
AND THEN THE CAGE COMES DOWN! The cage with the Japanese fighting spiders inside, your mother strikes a match off her forearm and tells you to dance in the front room for money... - Dylan Moran
User avatar
Tocs
The glowing blue panda
Posts: 1640
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:57 pm
Gender: Male
Sexual preference: Gay
Species: Husky
Region: Gauteng
Contact:

Re: Rules discussion

#24

Post by Tocs »

I'm just throwing suggestions out there, I do not even know if they are viable themselves, but who knows, may be good, may not be.

1. When regards towards banning, be it a thread or person, temporarily or permanently, I believe in some cases that the moderators should maybe speak out towards all of us for the exact reasonings of the ban, the situation and the people involved. Or perhaps have a discussion with other furs, not only moderators, on how these people should be judged, in the most objective and civilized way possible. I know that sometimes it is for the better but honestly in the time I've been in the community I just feel that there is so much that is hidden from a lot of people, and for me (being the pest I am in wanting to know what is going on) it doesn't bode well for me, and by revealing some of these things, people will be able to get more involved in the community and have a clear understanding of how to handle certain situations. I know that this does not apply for all topics and incidences of course because some things must remain confidential, so perhaps gain permission from the people involved.

2. Remove the "Add friend/foe" option. Honestly I just feel that the need for this, although may be for a bit of fun in some cases, is pretty much useless... It doesn't add any practicality to the website, and just seems like something thrown in there that should not be in there... (again that is just personal taste and I know that it is not really a relevant thing at this point in time, again throwing out suggestions.)

3. With regards to confidential topics such as bestiality honestly although it will be interesting to debate about it in some cases, I do think that the rules in place currently is needed. I'm not sure what else I can add on that.

Again, I doubt if any of these changes or suggestions will be made, I'm just throwing in some thoughts there
For the most part, it is pointless to be sad in life.
Because sad spelt backwards is das
And das not good
Love every stranger, the stranger the better
The darker the night, the brighter I glow!
User avatar
Rakuen Growlithe
Fire Puppy
Posts: 6718
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:24 pm
Gender: Male
Sexual preference: Bi
Species: Growlithe (pokemon)
Region: Other
Location: Pretoria
Contact:

Re: Rules discussion

#25

Post by Rakuen Growlithe »

Tocs wrote:I'm just throwing suggestions out there, I do not even know if they are viable themselves, but who knows, may be good, may not be.
1.
I've got mixed feelings about that. However I will note that only five accounts have been permantently banned from the forum. Two are duplicates of current users and two (or maybe all the other three?) were the same guy who was trolling the forum.

When it comes to thread locks, I think nearly always a reason is given as to why the thread was locked.

2.
It's a part of the forum software and even if it can be disabled I would not do so. The foe function is what allows users to block others. If someone is on your foe list then you will not see anything they post. Block features are basically your own personal bans. So if someone harasses you or you just hate them you can make it so you don't have to see anything they post. (Although harassment should rather be reported.)

3.
As Valerion stated above, those rules are not changing any time soon.
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~

“Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.”
~John Milton~
User avatar
Sev
Superbike Snow Leopard
Posts: 6596
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 9:27 pm
Gender: Male
Sexual preference: Gay
Species: Snow Leopard
Region: Western Cape
Location: A Twisty Road

Re: Rules discussion

#26

Post by Sev »

Didn't Greyhound have his access to the forum blocked?
User avatar
Rakuen Growlithe
Fire Puppy
Posts: 6718
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:24 pm
Gender: Male
Sexual preference: Bi
Species: Growlithe (pokemon)
Region: Other
Location: Pretoria
Contact:

Re: Rules discussion

#27

Post by Rakuen Growlithe »

Some users have requested to leave the forum completely. In those cases they will not show on any lists.
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~

“Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.”
~John Milton~
Leeward
Recalcitrant Ruminant
Posts: 7036
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 10:23 pm

Re: Rules discussion

#28

Post by Leeward »

Let me explain why I suggested the change in the first place. Say we wanted to discuss the Pistorius case, or the effects and legalisation of cannabis, or even the realism of lock picking in video games, we can't do that because that rule doesn't allow it. That's why I think the blanket ban is illogical and excessive.
User avatar
Helios_phi
The depraved
Posts: 2247
Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 9:00 pm
Gender: Male

Re: Rules discussion

#29

Post by Helios_phi »

Not really. Mods usually allow those kinds of conversations.
Edit: the one conversation on drugs was halted cause it became incriminating.... other than that, the mods usually tolerate most of what we do. :)
[REDACTED]
Leeward
Recalcitrant Ruminant
Posts: 7036
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 10:23 pm

Re: Rules discussion

#30

Post by Leeward »

Helios_phi wrote:was halted cause it became incriminating
That is precisely my point. If the mods tolerate hypothetical, non-incriminating discussions about illegal activities, why not simply forbid self-incrimination for any crime, or more specifically a crime that could land one in jail? Making a rule that is inconsistently applied is just as bad as (if not worse than) having no rule at all.

I'm not suggesting the rule be removed, only that it be more specific.
Post Reply