4. Stay on a topic. The subject deviates naturally in conversation, but keep it on a topic of discussion. Bashing a person doesn't count as a topic of discussion, in much the same way 'lol' doesn't count as a post.
-----------------
Where topic is a subject that members can converse about, and not conversing about a member. If the topic deviates in a thread that is fine with me, I believe that if topics were to be static we would have thousands of very very short threads.

i don't see you doing anything here except shooting down suggestions based on entirely abstract and rather questionable grounds.

What is the least lacking on this forum is respect for other members as Regal mentioned. Realize that EVERYONE on these forums has something you could learn from about them, even Megaman. Treat others as you wish to be treated, so don't blow up on members.

RIGHT

Because I’m a total spastic who shouldn’t be granted the right to breathe, I’m forced to post this through a proxy. And f*ck YOU, STUPID DISABLE HTML. REALLY. And f*ck me too, for being such a f*cking idiot. again


^_^

You have no idea how perfect this was first time. This? Is a rough outline.

@Altoecko - my only concern is for the increasing complaints of the members of this forum. which i can only assume you haven't heard, since you honestly don't spend as much time around here talking to them, in for instance the Mag Chat, as i do (though admittedly i don't spend that much time in there myself). ><

But there are complaints, ok? People saying that they basically have ‘nothing to say’. people just not posting anymore. Etc etc etc.

Names? Well, people I’ve noticed saying it, people not posting anywhere near as much as they used to, include 1ce, Facts, Chrssy (ok, blame WoW, but she’s here practically EVERY DAY and barely says a word), Taizon, Genji, Duelpro and so on. I don’t know exactly what you plan on offering them to bring them ‘back into the fold‘, persuade them to post regularly again and bring some life back to the place. Respect won’t cut it. They need to feel like they have something to say, right?

And this isn’t about freedom. It just isn’t. your definition is noted and appreciated, but me and KK were talking about constraint, the exact opposite of freedom. So I don’t see really, how your definition is even relevant.

Now Alto, you have no earthly right to preach to me. None at all. First off, because you apparently have no idea that me and KK are actually pretty close. I value her ideas, I really do, and I’m not afraid to critically engage with them because I know she’ll be ok with that. Hell, she does the same to me. The last time I brought her an idea she didn’t like, she asked me what exactly I was smoking. I like KK an awful lot, and hope that she possesses for me only a fraction of the respect I have for her.

So you have no right to start chastising me. Full stop. I honestly don’t mind. Seriously, I understand your concern, and your claim to respect honestly touches me. It’s a far cry from the time when I was new on the forums when you decided to just, without cause, call me a ‘douche’. that actually hurt. So yeah… seriously, its not always wise to be so… iunno. Willing to teach me what I apparently need to learn.



As for Bo. This was never about him, he’s a total newcomer to the scene and to blame the kind of thing I’ve been talking about on him would be idiocy. Hell, I’m talking here about a more general problem, far more general. In addition, I don’t think I’ve ever been angry on a post on this forum since I got here. Depressed, yeah. Sarcastic, hell yeah. Critical, certainly at times I’ve been that. Angry, emphatically no. So yeah… Bo, this really isn’t and shouldn’t be about you, or even caused by you. Some of the quotes in the original post for this thread, they’ve got you in. doesn’t mean this isn’t a long-standing problem. I’ve personally already said that I’m willing to discuss any question you might want to ask, though not on the forums. I don’t want to monopolise the conversation.


And Sumisem, well…

Originally, the suggestion as proposed by NLY was that he get banned from the place.

And I’d much, MUCH rather see it closed.

Exclusion is NOT a solution.

Then of course Alto stepped onto the scene. He followed up on the idea you praised him for (how shall I put this? My original point; the lack of respect) and offered to help moderate the place.

Now, when this place was originally considered, as part of the chat splitting, right? Part of my idea for splitting the chat, which somewhere on these forums was outlined, I’m pretty certain I said that this particular forum would require moderation. Diligent moderation. Instead of which, after it all went ahead in the Fireside Chat, there was no moderation. And now you have a problem, so what’s the solution?

Omg. Moderation. How ironic.

Btw… Socratic Seminars (I’m aware of the definition, Socrates btw was known for being particularly combative, and the style of the seminars, while suited to round table irl discussion, will on a forum lead inevitably to exactly what we’ve already got; conversations turning into duels, all in the name of finding meaning) are not _exactly_ the best basis to moderate the place on. They’re really not, that won’t attract anyone back.

One thing I’m very, very tired of, is having good ideas fall apart because of alterations that weren’t needed. Do I have to mention the Duelpro Mentorship again? It’s just the most frustrating thing.

…

So. Basically, I’m done. I’ve already left the Mag, and I very strongly suspect I won’t actually be missed.

I like all of you, very much indeed. I respect you guys, believe it or not, and I’m really grateful for all the time I’ve been able to spend here. I’m glad you’ve tolerated me. You know how to reach me, I have an msn address, emails are always nice, etc.

If you guys want to talk to me about my staff positions, you can reach me the same way. I’m willing to keep them up, because I don’t like letting people down.

... but i'm getting this bad feeling about it all, now. iunno. like i'm a nuisance.

speak soon, folks.

-John Hearty

Hm, well the main thing I heard from members was that there wasn't a clear enough definition of what was bad spam and what was Amy-Appropriate and people didn't feel they understood where the guidelines were.

Point: Respect.
- Don't attack members.
- We are all individuals, and all different. Everyone has a right to an opinion.
- Stating your opinion in this thread opens it up for discussion.
- The fact that people don't agree with your opinion doesn't mean that they are attacking you. Neither does it mean that they don't like you. Neither does it mean that you arn't wanted in the discussion.

Point: Conversation.
- The subject deviates naturally in conversation, but keep it on a topic of discussion.
- Bashing a person doesn't count as a topic of discussion, in much the same way 'lol' doesn't count as a post.
- If the thread turns into flinging insults that's not a discussion. If you really want to flame each other - take it to PM.\
- If someone is constantly trying to flame you about something you said in here over PM and you don't want to participate, mention it because that's not part of the deal. It's kind of more like abuse.

The amended suggestion for putting in the first post of topics that could become serious.

Opinions Please? do you think putting this at the front of a topic that you want to be serious, and maybe flagging it in the subject description would work? do you think these are ok guidelines to follow in a serious discussion?

note: not all topics in this forum need be serious, so if you don't want debate this could be left out - or subject description flagged as 'no debates'. thus being i changed it from talking about forum to talking about thread.