I want to repeat some points I made on deleted threads, because I'm not sure I ever got an answer to it. In my personal opinion... this sight has served me well and for free. I have never considered this place as a right (although, that is the problem with free things that last a long time...eventually people assume it is a right)... I'm not paying for it. I am willing to work with the new rules, but it comes down to understanding the new rules. And as long as Sculli is taking opinions...
If I understand things as they are, the new rules are designed to keep people from stating their disagreements with each other because these disagreements tended to boil down to name calling and rarely ever were resolved. However, because we are still human and will always disagreements, we have the neighborhood watch to list, it seems to me, people who have chronic problems with being...disagreeable?
I have read and reread the rules and standards, but it seems like there is a general.. obscurity.. as to what the ultimate intention is going to be here. "Offensive Material..." is very subjective unless enumerated because even the Supreme Court seems to have a hard time describing it, saying "I know it when I see it" (Jacobellis v. Ohio...not full quote I know). And the whole concept of "Flaming..." being difficult to feel out because, people will take "clearly insulting" differently.
Case in point, The Neighborhood Watch, in my opinion, is suffering from people not knowing what they can or cannot do. But the problem is how much proof is required before a thread will do any good, because honestly...how many people expect to be scammed, harrassed or what have you? "Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition." Unless you are running FRAPS or what have you, how will you have proof of your words, and if you have no proof, then it is a contest of who's argument is better or has a better reputation. And it is in that "argument" where the old flames used to grow. But without those debates over the facts, how valuable will simply stating the accusation become?
What I would like to see is something to the effect of "thread warnings," listing in clear words what the subject is lacking, needs adding, or what have you--somethign I notice E.leibfrid is starting to do. If a person is only on the edges of the new rules, a statement of "more proof" or "being an inexperienced player is not a valid argument" before the thread is locked or a user is penalized will help people finally get the hang of the new rules, and leastwise understand them. If nothing else it will demonstrate IF this is the new home of the "mod nazi" or not.
