New rules for the Chatter forum

[artaddict]

I'm personally glad the discussion of politics and religion are going away.

 

Ditto! Thank you, IANAN & other mods.

[QM2]

hostile discussions?

bunny cat sez "no".

 

http://queenmargot.com/bunny_cat.jpg

[dandelion]

I'm (as always when it comes to these kinds of matters) split. I haven't engaged in the more political discussions in Chatter, but I've, like amongst others, Ethernautrix, found some of them interesting to read. On the other hand I well understand why these restrictions are made.

 

Sometimes I'd wish for an automatic delay function for all kinds of digitalized messaging (posts, texting, e-mail etc) done when one is angry or agitated and so on. It is too easy to send harsh messages and get a rapid escalation of conflict/misunderstanding. And still: almost everything that is of real importance and interest are prone to conflicts. It is a pity that the discussions have been so infected that they can't continue. It is so interesting to follow discussions on "real" issues with participants from all over the globe.

 

Bottom line (as a conflict avoiding Swede) is: I don't know.

 

[cmeisenzahl]

Got it, thanks.

[AndyH]

Jim and FPN Admin Team:

 

I quite understand the reasons for this, and applaud IANAN for his thankless task as "the enforcer" - I have told him so via PM. The effort needed to police each and every thread makes any discussion in the political arena demanding of time and attention, only more self-policing would help.

 

 

Still, I am sorry to see any forum for enlightened and civilized discussion on topics of the day fade away. I don't think a "politics and religion" section is the answer either - these tend to degenerate into slugwars and flamefests much too easily. My only suggestion is that perhaps these rules might be revisited after the passage of a few months?

 

[Fernan]

If discussions on economics are allowed, would discussions on the environment and climate change be allowed too? Both are scientific in nature...

 

Curious to see how the margins of what is acceptable will be determined!

 

 

Fernan

[AndyH]

Fernan, I think the "limits" will self-establish by how long the participants refrain from calling each other (or the politicians they support) idiots.

[Hugh200au]

Every thing needs rules, it's really just where the line is drawn and by who. When do rules become censorship etc..to what extent is "freedom of speach" allowed or disallowed and how is it defined. The list seems somewhat overdone when "polite and respectful" should be all that is required from civilized people and broad enough to cover any unsavory moments. Strangly the politics/religion rule is the one I find most unusual, over many years I've learnt more about various religions ( and political points of view to a lessor extent) with frank and open discussions with those from different races and religions to mine, but it is an area that can "overheat". My personal view is that the FPN is well run but does at times suffer from some overzealous censorship (this is not a critism as such, just a personal obsevation) that is not required. In truth, I doubt it will make much difference as most topics I've read don't go within a bulls roar of breaching the new guidelines and nearly all are conducted in a "polite and respectful" manner.

Regards

Hugh

[Possum Hill]

I'm (as always when it comes to these kinds of matters) split. I haven't engaged in the more political discussions in Chatter, but I've, like amongst others, Ethernautrix, found some of them interesting to read. On the other hand I well understand why these restrictions are made.

 

Sometimes I'd wish for an automatic delay function for all kinds of digitalized messaging (posts, texting, e-mail etc) done when one is angry or agitated and so on. It is too easy to send harsh messages and get a rapid escalation of conflict/misunderstanding. And still: almost everything that is of real importance and interest are prone to conflicts. It is a pity that the discussions have been so infected that they can't continue. It is so interesting to follow discussions on "real" issues with participants from all over the globe.

 

Bottom line (as a conflict avoiding Swede) is: I don't know.

Well said, and it's refreshing to see someone write "I don't know".

[playpen]

I would greatly appreciate a clarification here. Do these rules also apply to avatars that might be objectionable to children or adults searching through this network?

 

If the answer is no, I would like to know exactly where you draw the line on decency.

[Possum Hill]

I would greatly appreciate a clarification here. Do these rules also apply to avatars that might be objectionable to children or adults searching through this network?

 

If the answer is no, I would like to know exactly where you draw the line on decency.

It looks like the guidelines really apply to any activity on FPN.

[Hugh200au]

If one takes a broader look at the FPN, it's owned/run/controlled by the administrators and clearly not for profit-a very important point. I don't know how the network is run, how admins came to be, who appoints/invites? them and I'm not really interested in that. I joined, I didn't have to pay and I like the network, BUT somebody makes the rules and they run the show. So at the end of the day we will abide with their rules or go away. While we can agree or disagree with administrators/moderators , who clearly do this in their own time and without financial reward, their efforts in maintaining a cost free forum should be applauded.

Regards

Hugh

[Strang]

If one takes a broader look at the FPN, it's owned/run/controlled by the administrators and clearly not for profit-a very important point. I don't know how the network is run, how admins came to be, who appoints/invites? them and I'm not really interested in that. I joined, I didn't have to pay and I like the network, BUT somebody makes the rules and they run the show. So at the end of the day we will abide with their rules or go away. While we can agree or disagree with administrators/moderators , who clearly do this in their own time and without financial reward, their efforts in maintaining a cost free forum should be applauded.

Regards

Hugh

 

Well said and, when day is done, this is a nice place to come and learn and play. It doesn't matter what the rules are. If you can play within the guidelines, you play. If you can't, you go away.

[playpen]

Possum, that remains to be seen. I am interested to see what happens.

[OldGriz]

I would greatly appreciate a clarification here. Do these rules also apply to avatars that might be objectionable to children or adults searching through this network?

 

If the answer is no, I would like to know exactly where you draw the line on decency.

 

Avatars, threads and images objectionable to children and some adults have been removed fairly often...

All one needs to do it report it to the mods and Admins.....

Remember, the mods and admins have a life outside FPN and do not always catch what might be objectionable to others... especially an avatar

 

[playpen]

If you back channel I will explain.

[hardyb]

 

Legum servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus - We are slaves of the law so that we may be able to be free. (Cicero)

[playpen]

Gosh, what a cute little thing. Is he sleeping or allergic or what?

[hardyb]

Gosh, what a cute little thing. Is he sleeping or allergic or what?

 

No I think he is just rubbing his nose and ears.

Edited February 25, 2009 by hardyb

[MDI]

If any one man breaks the Law, Fluffy he shall meet:

 

http://easybmp.sourceforge.net/images/Steganography/FluffyStego_NoAlpha.png

 

That is all.