|
|
Post by Krall on Jan 5, 2016 7:29:06 GMT
I've been discussing a formal rules system with my fellow mods (AnachronistRocketeer and shamiboy) and we've come up with a proposed ruleset. For the moment these will be the effective rules of the forum, but they aren't necessarily final - indeed part of the reason for this thread is to consult you all on this and see if there's anything we've missed! Anyway, here's what we've got at the moment: Please do let me know what you think of these rules, and point out any errors, flaws, or inconsistencies you find. We do plan on having a system of punishments corresponding to the different rules (so each rule has a punishment or small range of punishments associated with it), as well as formal system of appeals against moderator actions, and systems for changing the rules (should we need to do so in future) and for removing moderators who act outside the lines, but we don't have any of that worked out in detail yet. If you'd like to offer comments on those proposals as well, please feel free to post them!  |
|
|
|
Post by ToixStory on Jan 5, 2016 10:26:29 GMT
I like the rules. One thing I was wondering, does copyright apply to news stories as well? People in forums like this tend to post news stories whole, which is wildly against copyright and not legal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Krall on Jan 5, 2016 11:39:10 GMT
I like the rules. One thing I was wondering, does copyright apply to news stories as well? People in forums like this tend to post news stories whole, which is wildly against copyright and not legal. Ah, I wasn't aware copyright applied to news articles like that. For the moment I think that copying news articles that are generally available online is okay provided a link to the article is provided. |
|
|
|
Post by ToixStory on Jan 5, 2016 11:41:58 GMT
I like the rules. One thing I was wondering, does copyright apply to news stories as well? People in forums like this tend to post news stories whole, which is wildly against copyright and not legal. Ah, I wasn't aware copyright applied to news articles like that. For the moment I think that copying news articles that are generally available online is okay provided a link to the article is provided. I believe the rule of thumb is 1-2 paragraphs and then a link to the rest. You're supposed to do it for all online articles, but especially for those behind paywalls. Just wanted to point it out, how you handle it is up to you. |
|
|
|
Post by Krall on Jan 5, 2016 13:19:07 GMT
I believe the rule of thumb is 1-2 paragraphs and then a link to the rest. You're supposed to do it for all online articles, but especially for those behind paywalls. Just wanted to point it out, how you handle it is up to you. Ah, that would work. I'll discuss it with my fellow mods when they're next online. |
|
|
|
Post by orvillethird on Jan 5, 2016 14:58:37 GMT
These are good ideas. I do have one minor problem with one. I have been known to post material from a specific source that only allows those in the USA to distribute material they have approved, and other use is considered violation of the law. (I am, of course, referring to Radio Free Europe.)
|
|
|
|
Post by fluttersky on Jan 5, 2016 15:01:17 GMT
Firstly, you misspelt "genitalia" in Rule 3.2.
Secondly, Rule 1.2a is unnecessary, for all content affected by Rule 1.2a is already banned by Rule 3.2.
Other than that, it's a decent set of rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by Krall on Jan 5, 2016 20:17:12 GMT
These are good ideas. I do have one minor problem with one. I have been known to post material from a specific source that only allows those in the USA to distribute material they have approved, and other use is considered violation of the law. (I am, of course, referring to Radio Free Europe.) Ah, hmm. We may have to remove that part of the rule - it was put in mainly as a "cover our collective asses" measure moreso than a rule that's likely to be strictly enforced, as I know some countries have ridiculous immoral laws. Firstly, you misspelt "genitalia" in Rule 3.2. Secondly, Rule 1.2a is unnecessary, for all content affected by Rule 1.2a is already banned by Rule 3.2. Other than that, it's a decent set of rules. Nice catch on the misspelling! And I have two reasons for keeping Rule 1.2a and Rule 3.2 separate: -First, Rule 1.2a prohibits "images of any sort sexually depicting people under the age of 18", meaning any images of people under the age of 18 intended to be sexually arousing, regardless of whether they're nude or engaged in sexual intercourse themselves, whereas Rule 3.2 prohibits "Images which display people engaged in sexual activity", which is intended to mean sex itself (vaginal, anal, intercrural, oral, etc. etc.) rather than just any sexual depiction of adults (non-nude or censored images intended for sexual arousal would be okay - think of AH.com's "Pics of Gorgeous Women" and "Pics of Gorgeous Men" threads). The wording may have to be clarified to ensure this is obvious, though. -Second, the plan is for each individual rule to correspond with a range of punishments, and by keeping these rules separate we can classify sexual images of minors as an instant permanent bans infraction whilst having the posting of pornographic content of adults be a more middle tier infraction which can be "upgraded" to a permanent ban or "downgraded" to a warning if necessary (so, for example, someone spamming hardcore porn could be permanently banned whilst someone accidentally posting an image of a women where her nipples are visible would be warned and cautioned to be more careful in future - there would be no such variability for the sexual images of children rule, which would always be a permanent ban). |
|
|
|
Post by Southpaw on Jan 6, 2016 17:34:21 GMT
I approve of these rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by lordroel on Jan 7, 2016 15:09:13 GMT
Do not if it help but these are my rules on my forum, might be some you can use here:
Rule I: All new members must read the forum rules.
Rule II: Provide a civil environment for talking about what is written by the administrator (Lordroel) or alternate history in general, so be civil, that does not mean you have to be "nice" or "polite" which is different from being civil, otherwise do not insult other members, flame them, treat them with contempt, or treat them in any other offensive way as that is total not civil and you might get a responds from the administrator ore a moderator.
Rule III: In the Chat forum, you're allowed to talk about anything except for a list of subjects that are described in the immediate banning list who are banned to prevent the board from being overrun by notorious arguments.
Rule IV: Respect somebody view on religion and politics but do it in a respectful manner, that means not accusing somebody of being a liar, a racist, an antisemite, and so on simply because he has a different view on life, politics or religion.
Rule VI: All warnings, temporary banning and permanent banning are posted on the forum.
Rule VII: Do not pass off the work of others as your own (plagiarism). If you include the work of others in your posts, say so and include a link to the original, or if that's not possible mention the source.
Rule VIII: It is okay to respond to posts old threads (several months or more) but only if you have substantial new contribution to make, such as to extend a timeline, otherwise make a new thread under the same name but add a "II" or next available Roman Numeral to the thread title.
Rule IX: This is an English language forum. You may post in a any language, however provide an English translation for your post and any links posted.
Content of Posts
- Posting any images, videos, or links containing nudity or sex are prohibited. First time offenders are given a warning, then a 7 day temporary ban, and it's a ban the third time.
- Posting grotesque material, or links to such(shock sites) is strictly prohibited. You will get an immediate ban, a warning or kick the first few times if it was an accident.
- Posting anything containing viruses, malware, or anything to harm a person's computer, device, or network results in an immediate ban.
Immediate Banning Offence
People can be banned for various reasons, some are a lot more common than others, some are things which are decided on a case by case basis, violating the below immediate banning list always result in immediate banning.
- Support of Nazism.
- Holocaust denial.
- Advocating genocide or other mass murder.
- Threats to inflict "real life" harm, including lawsuits, on other members.
- Getting around being kicked or banned by posting from another account (a "sockpuppet").
- Spam" trolling (posting many deliberate trolls all over the place).
- Trolling immediately after signing up.
Standard Punishments
The Administrator ore a moderator (Inspector general) can respond to problems in three ways - warnings, temporary banning and permanent banning.
Warnings may be a casual "don't do this" message in a thread. The administrator ore a moderator usually will not threaten that you will be temporary banned/permanent banned if you ignore the warning. Don't ignore the warning.
Temporary banning, the first temporary banning is for 7 days, the second time you get a temporary ban it is for 14 days, for the third time it will be your last as you probably will not learn at all. Having received a temporary ban you will see the message, "You have been banned" when trying to access this forum which will last only for the duration of your temporary banning.
Permanent banning are permanent, and your account is totally deactivated.
Forum rules discussion
THE PIT OF INFAMY
The PIT OF INFAMY (sticky thread in the Forum Rules and Announcements forum) is used for general discussions for those who are temporary banned or permanent banned.
|
|
|
|
Post by orvillethird on Jan 7, 2016 16:02:05 GMT
Good rules, but with two problems. Permanent bans should not be used except in rare circumstances. People can repent for things they have done. However, permanent ban reversal should only be for people who do repent or for people banned by mistake or accident, or people falsely accused.
Second, the malware and viruses. I can see people accidentally spreading those. While they are stupid, it should not be a permaban if done accidentally.
|
|
|
|
Post by lordroel on Jan 7, 2016 16:34:58 GMT
Good rules, but with two problems. Permanent bans should not be used except in rare circumstances. People can repent for things they have done. However, permanent ban reversal should only be for people who do repent or for people banned by mistake or accident, or people falsely accused. Second, the malware and viruses. I can see people accidentally spreading those. While they are stupid, it should not be a permaban if done accidentally. Immediate Banning Offence are Permanent bans, other violations will be looked at case by case, and the malware and viruses question, thanks will change it to warning if it was not on purpose. |
|
|
|
Post by orvillethird on Jan 7, 2016 20:50:11 GMT
Good rules, but with two problems. Permanent bans should not be used except in rare circumstances. People can repent for things they have done. However, permanent ban reversal should only be for people who do repent or for people banned by mistake or accident, or people falsely accused. Second, the malware and viruses. I can see people accidentally spreading those. While they are stupid, it should not be a permaban if done accidentally. Immediate Banning Offence are Permanent bans, other violations will be looked at case by case, and the malware and viruses question, thanks will change it to warning if it was not on purpose. And that does sound better. (I would give options for people to repent, but it would likely not only take genuineness, but also time, with several months before your asking to come back could even be answered.) |
|
|
|
Post by lordroel on Jan 7, 2016 21:04:01 GMT
Immediate Banning Offence are Permanent bans, other violations will be looked at case by case, and the malware and viruses question, thanks will change it to warning if it was not on purpose. And that does sound better. (I would give options for people to repent, but it would likely not only take genuineness, but also time, with several months before your asking to come back could even be answered.) If a person who has done something not a Immediate Banning Offence then it will be looked after as a case, if that person can explain to me why he said it and explain it to me then he will get a warning, the Standard Punishments will remains a option but if a warning or 2 helps me keep a member i am happy. |
|
|
|
Post by orvillethird on Jan 7, 2016 23:32:53 GMT
And that does sound better. (I would give options for people to repent, but it would likely not only take genuineness, but also time, with several months before your asking to come back could even be answered.) If a person who has done something not a Immediate Banning Offence then it will be looked after as a case, if that person can explain to me why he said it and explain it to me then he will get a warning, the Standard Punishments will remains a option but if a warning or 2 helps me keep a member i am happy. Thanks for the explanation! |
|
|
|
Post by lordroel on Jan 8, 2016 8:11:37 GMT
If a person who has done something not a Immediate Banning Offence then it will be looked after as a case, if that person can explain to me why he said it and explain it to me then he will get a warning, the Standard Punishments will remains a option but if a warning or 2 helps me keep a member i am happy. Thanks for the explanation! No problem, i have seen how IAN n the AH.com is, as long as my member behave and learn from getting warnings i will never ever become like him (i think that). |
|
|
|
Post by espion80 (pending) on Jan 13, 2016 23:31:32 GMT
Hi,
I want to avoid spamming, but in my ongoing quest for constructive feedback, I was wondering if it would be all right to share a timeline and some maps I already posted on DeviantArt.
Many thanks,
HFP
|
|
|
|
Post by Krall on Jan 13, 2016 23:41:25 GMT
Hi, I want to avoid spamming, but in my ongoing quest for constructive feedback, I was wondering if it would be all right to share a timeline and some maps I already posted on DeviantArt. Many thanks, HFP This is really the wrong place to ask that, but yes, of course it'd be okay to share your timelines and maps in the appropriate forums! |
|
westvirginiarebel
Junior Member
I have been banned from alternate-timelines.com?
Posts: 50 
|
Post by westvirginiarebel on Jan 17, 2016 7:18:01 GMT
Thanks for the malware rule; that is really annoying on some sites.
|
|
|
|
Post by Krall on Jan 17, 2016 7:45:04 GMT
Thanks for the malware rule; that is really annoying on some sites. No problem!  I'm planning to implement this system of rules with only a couple of changes - specifically removing section 1.1, as that's incredibly vague and covers a lot of actions I don't want to prohibit, and a rule against trolling/argument-baiting which would either come under the "No Spamming" or "No Hateful Speech or Prejudice" section. Thoughts? I appreciate any and all feedback. |
|
