Site Comments & Suggestions

Locked: Commentary and Questions Regarding Inconsistent Application of Forum Rules

  • Last Updated:
  • Jun 17th, 2012 5:55 pm
Tags:
None
Deal Expert
User avatar
May 8, 2005
31842 posts
1326 upvotes
Jucius Maximus wrote:
Jun 17th, 2012 1:00 pm
Religious discussion is not permitted on RFD!

I don't encourage any kind of discussion or flaming that might result in getting this thread locked! (I have a feeling some people are looking for the opposite response.)

I hope other people don't get drawn into some kind of inappropriate discussion that will create more problems and let the original purpose of this thread be forgotten.
I'm not sure what you think is an " inappropriate discussion " exactly, cause you asked for an " intelligent commentary " on the inconsistent application of forum rules ....and for the most part, that's exactly what's taking place here ...at least IMO. :)
" The placebo effect is the most powerful supplement of all "
" The pain of discipline weighs ounces, the pain of neglect weighs tons "
" The best training in the world can't overcome a lousy diet "
TRAIN HARD !!!!
[OP]
Deal Expert
User avatar
Aug 18, 2005
18388 posts
3061 upvotes
GTA West
poedua wrote:
Jun 17th, 2012 1:13 pm
I'm not sure what you think is an " inappropriate discussion " exactly, cause you asked for an " intelligent commentary " on the inconsistent application of forum rules ....and for the most part, that's exactly what's taking place here ...at least IMO. :)
By now you should know...

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR YOU TO BAIT ME. Better luck trying other people.
What if there were no hypothetical questions?
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
May 25, 2011
8952 posts
14161 upvotes
wilsonlam97 wrote:
Jun 17th, 2012 11:41 am
Yeah but they aren't. I for one don't believe in anything except for Toonie Tuesday but that doesn't make me religious. In fact, non-religious people being called atheists is pretty offending to begin with. It's not exactly a nice name and it's been always been viewed as a negative aspect of a person to be non-religious. Please rid the term of atheist. :facepalm:
Terminology not discussion:
Agnostic: a person who believes that the existence of a g(G)od/spirit world is unknown or unknowable.
Atheist: a person who disbelieves in the existence of a g(G)od.


My guess is that a Human Rights violation could be queried if a person were denied membership based on religion, gender...not because of an avatar or signature.

Children have the right to attend school. But the school may not permit them to wear certain attire.
Banned
User avatar
Mar 2, 2011
5476 posts
252 upvotes
Toronto
Jucius Maximus wrote:
Jun 17th, 2012 1:19 pm
By now you should know...

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR YOU TO BAIT ME. Better luck trying other people.
+1. People must ignore any baiting or attempts to lock the thread
Agafaba: "Hitman doesnt troll, he just has very strong opinions about controversial topics"
stealth: "Classic Hitman response. ;) A God amongst trolls"
pablonutribar: "Hehehe - you are a god amongst trolls."
king_george: "Keep up the good fight you awesome freeedom fighter you"
Deal Expert
User avatar
May 8, 2005
31842 posts
1326 upvotes
Jucius Maximus wrote:
Jun 17th, 2012 1:19 pm
By now you should know...

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR YOU TO BAIT ME. Better luck trying other people.
Oh please. :rolleyes:

I simply said I thought we were having an intelligent commentary " on the inconsistent application of forum rules " in this thread...nothing more.
" The placebo effect is the most powerful supplement of all "
" The pain of discipline weighs ounces, the pain of neglect weighs tons "
" The best training in the world can't overcome a lousy diet "
TRAIN HARD !!!!
Member
May 14, 2008
438 posts
68 upvotes
aviador wrote:
Jun 16th, 2012 10:54 am
There are many RFD users whose signature links to external businesses. I once commented on a particular one whose signature linked to a blog shilling a cosmetic mail order subscription company --professional blogger using RFD signature to link to blog where she "reviews" (infomercials) products from only one particular mail order company called glossybox.


I agree. Alot of people have links to their personal blogs where they shill their personal business products, and it is tiresome. It is the equivalent of spam, and I hate spam. I wish RFD would create an official policy related to signatures that include links to external websites and blogs.

Request to moderators: Can RFD institute a ban on links to external websites and blogs that are included in RFD user signatures? They are just spam-in-disguise.






.
Deal Addict
Jan 12, 2012
2899 posts
75 upvotes
East York
I find it hilarious how some users in this thread are calling people trolls or saying that their not going to be "baited" - those people in this thread are instigating the situation and in all honesty flame-baiting the average thread viewer...

It's funny how people in this thread are saying they want a "intelligent" and "well thought-out" conversation to happen as if THEIR views and opinions are intelligent to begin with - it's very arrogant, and antagonizing.

IMO no one in this thread wants to have a discussion, they just want people to agree with them and when they don't they throw the troll or "baiting" arguement out there.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
May 25, 2011
8952 posts
14161 upvotes
poedua wrote:
Jun 17th, 2012 1:25 pm
I simply said I thought we were having an intelligent commentary " on the inconsistent application of forum rules " in this thread...nothing more.
Yes.

There can be disagreement without abuse. That is the skill that will permit touchy topics to be reinstated. The topic has never been the direct problem.

"Nah nah nah boo boo, you can't bait me" taunts are also best ignored.
Deal Expert
User avatar
May 8, 2005
31842 posts
1326 upvotes
ishfish wrote:
Jun 17th, 2012 1:30 pm
Yes.

There can be disagreement without abuse. That is the skill that will permit touchy topics to be reinstated.
Couldn't agree more.

But it seems the inability of a certain group of ' OT regulars ' to clue into that fact and acquire that skill - despite repeated warnings from the mods & oranr to do so - triggered the new stricter rules and the political / religious topic ban. A very small % of the membership brought this unto themselves IMO...and in the process, unfortunately ....ruined things for the vast majority of other ' rule abiding ' members..
ishfish wrote:
Jun 17th, 2012 1:30 pm
The topic has never been the direct problem.
Fair enough.

Perhaps with the benefit of 20 / 20 hindsight, another solution would of been to simply retain political / religious topics - and instead - issued ' perma bans' to the dozen or more habitual OT offenders. :rolleyes:
ishfish wrote:
Jun 17th, 2012 1:30 pm
"Nah nah nah boo boo, you can't bait me" taunts are also best ignored.
Agreed :D .
" The placebo effect is the most powerful supplement of all "
" The pain of discipline weighs ounces, the pain of neglect weighs tons "
" The best training in the world can't overcome a lousy diet "
TRAIN HARD !!!!
Newbie
Jan 30, 2012
8 posts
1 upvote
CHARLESBOURG
*
*
*
*

TL;DR
1. They removed my signature
2. Should post and tell them how to run their site
3. ??????????????
4. Bahwahwahwahwah

Haha - I dont think you are in no position to tell them how to run their site. I think you are just a bunch of sour grapes crying over having your little signature links taken down. This is a privately owned site, dictated by their terms and conditions and it appears they are trying to protect their brand. If you are not okay with it then perhaps its time to move on. Do you honestly believe if they lose a bunch of troublemakers it will make a different?

Na na na na - hey hey hey; good bye! Just dont let the door hit you. ;)



[IMG]http://i50.tinypic.com/200d7y8.png[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i47.tinypic.com/1e82ed.png[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i45.tinypic.com/1zd3o93.png[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i48.tinypic.com/35jdny8.png[/IMG]


Not so innocent now, are we? :lol:
[OP]
Deal Expert
User avatar
Aug 18, 2005
18388 posts
3061 upvotes
GTA West
Sourmouse wrote:
Jun 17th, 2012 2:32 pm

Not so innocent now, are we? :lol:
Excuse me... you have quoted 2 of my posts on another forum.

1. First one says "don't go start crap in that thread" on RFD. This is consistent with what I've been saying here.

2. Second one is from almost 4 months ago, WELL BEFORE any complaint from Oranr was made about my sig. (Notice how the dates in your screen shots are all jumping around - you are grabbing things out of context.)

I have specifically said in my original post in this thread that people who repeatedly break the rules on RFD should be banned. If you have problems with the conduct of other people, go and report it to Oranr. Maybe other people are "not so innocent" but I am not playing some two-faced game here as my message is consistent on whatever site you find me.

Add photo:
[IMG]http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/4341 ... chine1.png[/IMG]
What if there were no hypothetical questions?
Deal Expert
User avatar
May 8, 2005
31842 posts
1326 upvotes
Sourmouse wrote:
Jun 17th, 2012 2:32 pm
Haha - I dont think you are in no position to tell them how to run their site. I think you are just a bunch of sour grapes crying over having your little signature links taken down. This is a privately owned site, dictated by their terms and conditions and it appears they are trying to protect their brand. If you are not okay with it then perhaps its time to move on.

Do you honestly believe if they lose a bunch of troublemakers it will make a different?

Na na na na - hey hey hey; good bye! Just dont let the door hit you. ;)
Chances are, for every troublemaker the site loses, it'll pick up just as many ( if not many more ) newcomers. ! :)

They could easily ' perma-ban ' a dozen or more of the OT troublemakers first thing tomorrow....and it wouldn't adversely impact the site one little bit IMO.
" The placebo effect is the most powerful supplement of all "
" The pain of discipline weighs ounces, the pain of neglect weighs tons "
" The best training in the world can't overcome a lousy diet "
TRAIN HARD !!!!
Banned
User avatar
Mar 2, 2011
5476 posts
252 upvotes
Toronto
Sourmouse wrote:
Jun 17th, 2012 2:32 pm
*
*
*
*




1. They removed my signature
2. Should post and tell them how to run their site
3. ??????????????
4. Bahwahwahwahwah

Haha - I dont think you are in no position to tell them how to run their site. I think you are just a bunch of sour grapes crying over having your little signature links taken down. This is a privately owned site, dictated by their terms and conditions and it appears they are trying to protect their brand. If you are not okay with it then perhaps its time to move on. Do you honestly believe if they lose a bunch of troublemakers it will make a different?

Na na na na - hey hey hey; good bye! Just dont let the door hit you. ;)



[IMG]http://i50.tinypic.com/200d7y8.png[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i47.tinypic.com/1e82ed.png[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i45.tinypic.com/1zd3o93.png[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i48.tinypic.com/35jdny8.png[/IMG]


Not so innocent now, are we? :lol:

What forum is this?
Agafaba: "Hitman doesnt troll, he just has very strong opinions about controversial topics"
stealth: "Classic Hitman response. ;) A God amongst trolls"
pablonutribar: "Hehehe - you are a god amongst trolls."
king_george: "Keep up the good fight you awesome freeedom fighter you"
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
May 25, 2011
8952 posts
14161 upvotes
Sourmouse wrote:
Jun 17th, 2012 2:32 pm
*
*
*
*




1. They removed my signature
2. Should post and tell them how to run their site
3. ??????????????
4. Bahwahwahwahwah

Haha - I dont think you are in no position to tell them how to run their site. I think you are just a bunch of sour grapes crying over having your little signature links taken down. This is a privately owned site, dictated by their terms and conditions and it appears they are trying to protect their brand. If you are not okay with it then perhaps its time to move on. Do you honestly believe if they lose a bunch of troublemakers it will make a different?

Na na na na - hey hey hey; good bye! Just dont let the door hit you. ;)



[IMG]http://i50.tinypic.com/200d7y8.png[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i47.tinypic.com/1e82ed.png[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i45.tinypic.com/1zd3o93.png[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i48.tinypic.com/35jdny8.png[/IMG]


Not so innocent now, are we? :lol:
What is the purpose of this (the quoted interaction, not this post)? How do you measure when the goal has been achieved?
[OP]
Deal Expert
User avatar
Aug 18, 2005
18388 posts
3061 upvotes
GTA West
ishfish wrote:
Jun 17th, 2012 3:01 pm
What is the purpose of this (the quoted interaction, not this post)? How do you measure when the goal has been achieved?
I do not understand your post. What "goal" are you talking about?
What if there were no hypothetical questions?

Top