How do you all feel about the new posting rules?

I haven't been posting very regularly, so it all seems very abrupt, but I personally don't like the new rule. I think it's a bit restrictive.I can defenetly see the rational, but certainly there can be another way of doing this?Perhapse users can vote threads off the board if they don't like them, or they are repetative. My personal fear is that new posters will not be atracted to the site when they see just a bunch of old threads, it may seem as if the forum is dead.Also, they may also be confused by the posting rule which is usually not a part of other sites.I personaly don't like the new system, but it won't drive me away.Anyone elses opinion?

I dont like it either.. but I dont like change. Im with Yaro, perhaps if enough people bitch about a stupid topic admin would pull it. Moose does not seem to mind doing that anyways LOL...

---

"One is punished most for ones virtues" Fredrick Neitzche

I also think at least one forum should be open to unrestricted threads such as the Free for All.And posters who have proven themselves as good members, should be allowed to post unrestricted. Perhapse the post count, or title can be taken into acount. That is a "member" will have more privalege than a "junior member". get it?restrictions can be imposed on those with eratic behavior. Like rocket or Brad.

I like it.I haven't seen it being a problem with getting topics going. And a good start makes for a better topic.I'd rather have it slowed down but right.

I have never read the rules, and I can't imagine myself ever will read the rules.With that said, I have a set of my own rules that I believe any forum mod in his right mind would have for a forum like this. One of them is don't call another person something like b****.So, what are the new rules anyway?

I dunno. It seems needlessly complicated to me. Someone posts a new topic in the new topic forum. An adsministrator notices it. She closes the original topic and then copies the post into the correct forum. So, when I log in and list the latest posts I see a bunch of closed topics in the new topics forum, and a repeated post for the topics that are finally open for discussion. But I guess I'm not the one spending the time doing the closing and copying.

The new rules don't bother me, but as I said in another topic I wish there were a way to request a new thread from within an existing one.In the other thread I proposed a relaxation of the rule about wandering off-topic. I think that in light of the new restrictions it would be fair to allow a spin-off discussion within an existing thread to continue under a subtitle beginning with something like "OFF-TOPIC:" or "OT:", followed by a proposed new topic title. The spin-off discussion would be allowed to continue until an admin decision is made on whether to allow the "OT:" to have its own thread.Before I proposed this, Abby had pointed out that under the old system if a discussion veered off-topic, posters were encouraged to create a new thread. That isn't so easy to do now, and the delay could cause a hot topic to die.

I think the new topics should be in Free-For-All. If they grow legs then admin can move them to an appropriate forum. This would also allow anyone to comment on the new topic to suggest changes or point to topics that already cover the topic.I would also like to have a reply-branch facility that would automatically start a new thread for an off-topic discussion with a link back to the post that setup the OT digression.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

I feel strongly that the only way you can be sure to have a quality message 1 and topic title, is to be able to contol such, before the topic is opened to the masses for debate.For what it's worth, berberry brought up the "Need a new topic for an off-topic" situation here. I've been thinking about the situation since then. I have a reluctance to propose exceptions to the rules, for fear that they be abused.One idea I had, would be to permit QUALITY EMERGENCY topics to be started in the "Short Subjects" forum. This would be (only?) for situations where existing topics are going off topic.If such an emergency topic were started, the staff could review it, and decide what to do. If the topic met standards, it would be moved to the appropriate forum. If it didn't meet standards, it would be closed, and the originator could be punished (suspended?). So you better be sure of yourself, if you're going to start an emergency topic.This IS NOT new policy - It's just an idea. What does the membership think about "emergency topics" going into the "Short Subject" forums?Adminnemooseus

---

WHERE TO GO TO START A NEW TOPIC (For other than "Welcome, Visitors!", "Suggestions and Questions", "Practice Makes Perfect", and "Short Subjects")Comments on moderation procedures? - Go to
Change in Moderation?
or
too fast closure of threads

Adminnemooseus writes:

quote:

---

One idea I had, would be to permit QUALITY EMERGENCY topics to be started in the "Short Subjects" forum. This would be (only?) for situations where existing topics are going off topic.

---

I've been thinking about this, too. How about doing exactly what you're saying but requiring that any spin-off topic, when opened in 'Short Subjects', carry a thread title beginning with the "OT:" prefix? That should make it easier for an admin to spot it and deal with it quickly.

I don't like the new rule too.It complicates new discussions and reduced the board's activity.

Then I imagine Adminnemooseus considers it a complete success...

I came on board the day it took effect, and had I not been very familiar with forums in general, it very well might have driven me off. I have been successful with starting a couple of new threads, but it was (as a new member) very complicated... It is only by chance that I found the new posting rules, and muddled my way through it. The new system is not friendly to the new user, in my opinion.I manage a number of non-related forums, and assume the traffic of "bad" topics, or just plain abuse led to this new policy. Am I correct?

In a way, I am confident that we will get more positive results than negative.Before this new rule, too often did we see hit and run posts, and the hit and runner were usually the thread starter. We saw several a day that would post something like "creationism has been proven to be true again and again and again... evolution has been proven to be false again and again and again..." 5 or six times and then disappear without giving any explanation. In fact, I remember having trouble keeping up with new threads when I first signed on, which wasn't that long ago.Although it may be too soon to tell, but I can already notice the decrease or lack of hit and run posters.

---

The Laminator

​

These boards are quiet enough that we can all do our own navigating around worthwhile threads and junk.I had not posted for a few days and just tried starting a topic and thought I must have been banned for some reason.Message boards don't have an immediacy to them to begin with - this new system makes it seem even more so in some respects.I like coming here but I have to say that I probably wont be around as much.It's just a poor solution to something that didn't seem broke to begin with.Sorry guys.