| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 44048 | 2004-04-05 05:51:00 | New Rule Please? | ~~~~~ s y ~~~~~ (2054) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 227319 | 2004-04-05 05:51:00 | This request from me comes after reading, yet more, [insert your own words] from [insert your own word to describe people you hate] Could we please have a new rule to ban the following discussions: Intel vs. AMD Micrsoft vs. Linux, etc. These discussion, no matter what for, ALWAYS turn into a flame thread. It is like discussing Christianity with Buddism or Muslim. Everytime I see this, I feel like swearing at the author. *You know who you are X-(* Do you think we should really keep it on? |
~~~~~ s y ~~~~~ (2054) | ||
| 227320 | 2004-04-05 06:50:00 | Hey ~~~sy~~~~, No one is forced to read said posts, likewise, no one is forced to reply to them Just my thoughts on the subject. DD. |
dumdum (4965) | ||
| 227321 | 2004-04-05 06:51:00 | > No one is forced to read said posts, likewise, no > o one is forced to reply to them > > Just my thoughts on the subject. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, but don't you think, if that is the case, why do we have rules? |
~~~~~ s y ~~~~~ (2054) | ||
| 227322 | 2004-04-05 06:55:00 | Hi Guys The Admins have made it quite clear they will lock any thread* deemed in this way - call it the 'unwritten rule'. Thus said rule already exists. Rev Species 116 * Meaning not this thread but any Vs. flame thread |
revspecies116 (3916) | ||
| 227323 | 2004-04-05 07:00:00 | Don't you think it's too late when things get outta hand? Do you try turn teens around after they've got in trouble? |
~~~~~ s y ~~~~~ (2054) | ||
| 227324 | 2004-04-05 07:49:00 | You have a good point sy but a miriad of new rules may actualy be counter productive to the primary reason of PF1 . If someone has a genuine query as to which OS, for eg, they should use then, I think that the question is valid even though you could just about put your shirt on it that someone will get lower the standards at some point (even within flavours of the same brand) . BB has a loose threashold that he gives in the latest anti-MS thread which, seems to cover the bases without being overly restrictive . Graham L gave good advice of what should be acceptable discussion types in the same thread . But, human nature being what it is . with differing opinions, personalities and expertise there is always going to be fur flying from time to time which is why it is necessary for the admin's to drop in occassionaly . I don't count myself from being above being involved in a bit of verbal diarrheoa every now and again so can't and don't wish to throw stones . Sometimes it's just too hard to resist ;) Cheers Murray P |
Murray P (44) | ||
| 227325 | 2004-04-05 16:50:00 | New Rule = No New Rules (freedom of speech etc...) Lotsa golden arguments get lost in time, so that new forum visitors don't get to see the different sides of opinions from earlier "discussions". | Greg S (201) | ||
| 227326 | 2004-04-05 22:03:00 | Always watch out for those who want to restrict your freedom of expression. Almost anything should be allowed, other than uninformed personal abuse or denigration. Maybe a bit too much of this gets thru in this forum, often to try to boost personal petty egos. |
rugila (214) | ||
| 227327 | 2004-04-05 22:18:00 | The thing is, SY, that I could have a rule that bans references to small furry animals but we can't prevent the posts, and who's going to take any notice of the rule anyway? That last one wasn't too bad, I kept an eye on it. Admittedly the opening post was pretty dodgy but it didn't escalate and the responses mitigated what it said. Nobody makes you read every post. A heading that is meaningful and appropriate helps stop wasting time for others. But we'd never be able to enforce a rule for that either. robo. |
robo (205) | ||
| 227328 | 2004-04-05 22:23:00 | I really don't want to go aroud creating more rules . I don't have a problem with debate over the merits of any product/OS/PC/widget versus another as long as the debate stays rational, and opinions are expressed without personal attacks or other breaches of our (small) set of rules, AND the debate is genuine not just a pointless beat up on a vendor . For example, most of the discussions that went on about the PC Company were genuine debates -- plenty of strong opinion but backed up with points that somebody could counter . I don't think we ended up locking many of those . Basically I'd just ask you all to use common sense . The problem with rules is that as soon as you make one, you have to define it more clearly to allow for special cases and next thing you know you've invented lawyers . Too many rules will just kill discussion . |
Biggles (121) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||