Rules/Guidelines proposals

[Carthage]

Selkit,

Nothing is sacred beyond the skull of its believer

By that logic we shouldn't even be trying to determine what is acceptable behaviour, which is the entire purpose here.

Sacred, and respectful are not the same thing. No one is asking you or anyone to like the beliefs or opinions of others, only that you accept that they have a different position and don't be abusive about the fact that you don't necessarily agree with it.

That line of respect and acceptable behaviour is what needs to be drawn. We all want to see discussion and civil debate continue. But attacks need to stop.

[Selkit]

(Edit: Methinks I should read Rat's postings more thoroughly before I jam a foot in my mouth; If you are planning to moderate against directed ad-hominem nonsense, you'll hear no objection from me whatsoever. It's the sole cardinal rule in the scientific forums I frequent. Attack the point, not the person, if you really must attack something outright, essentially. Mea culpa.)

Perhaps I should clarify why I would object in this particular case. It is their business to state their belief, none of my business to rebuke or pre-emptively challenge an indirect statement that does not involve me or imply involvement, and none of their business to offer blessings in its name on me, assume I partake, or otherwise attempt to involve me in theistic pursuits on an unrelated neutral forum. The same goes for any crass assumption about political affiliation, or any other topic which frankly has no neutral business operating outside of its native venue. I would like to be assured the ability to say "No, I disagree, and do not approve". I do not suffer evangelists or political emissaries lightly, after having witnessed the slow decay wrought on friends and family by both, the repeated attacks on lifestyle I and others have to fend off from those avenues, and many other issues that for similar reasons should not be brought up in public.

TL;DR?

It's a hot-button with me, I have a long running history of extremely unpleasant encounters with these subjects, and I would like to remain able to speak negatively when confronted directly on the issue in a secular or apolitical topic.

[Carthage]

Speaking negatively should certainly be allowed, but within reason. Under your particular circumstances you have examples to cite, and justifications for your frustrations with religion. Using those in a discussion about religion to explain your opinion would be better than just saying "Take your silly dogma and GTFO".

Again, the difference between being respectful and civil, and attacking people.

[Selkit]

Unquestionably, Carthage. Part of being a humanist is respect for fellow human beings themselves, regardless of nationality, creed, ethnicity or education. An overt attack on the person behind the message is rather crude at best.

[Univaded_Fox]

I motion that if an account is created and the creator makes zero (0) posts after a period of six months, that the account should be terminated.  There are accounts that were setup two years ago and the creator has not left a single post since that time (nor even signed in).  It creates an inaccurate representation of the true membership of BC Furries.

[RainRat]

I know that in the Events Board it can be kind of difficult to find some important piece of information about an event when the thread is like 10 pages long and the event is about to start. I am setting out some guidelines:

1. If your reply is only that you will or will not make it to an event, use the Registration button that the calendar provides. But if you have information to share as well, by all means, post both.

2. Event organizers, edit the first post in the thread to include all the information that someone coming to the event would need to know.

3. Event organizers, consider whether using a poll to collect information would suit your needs.

4. Do not remove the description of the event from the subject line when replying. It makes it more difficult to keep up with multiple events when monitoring using Recent Posts.

These are guidelines only; use your judgement, these are intended to make planning events smoother. Noone will get a warning or ban for good faith attempts to help plan an event. Use the "Report to moderator" if you see a particularly obvious example, a mod will send them a Private Message reminder(does not count as a warning or lead to a ban).

[RainRat]

1. PG rating. There's no age verification so nothing that would cause problems if a minor were to read.
b. Drugs: You may discuss, say, legalization. But how-to and planning are not ok.

This is currently the rule that the mods are going by when deciding the moderate threads. If you disagree with a mod action or want to refine the rules, this is the place to do so, not the moderated thread.

This is where I'm coming from:
Marijuana is still illegal here (ok, so maybe some people have medical marijuana, but say if you got your doctor to prescribe you morphine, if you posted "Hey if you like morphine meet me at blablabla", then we're still going to think something is up.)
We know we have members as young as 12, so we can't put out those "Only enter if you're above 18 pages"
If we let people discuss their marijuana deals here, then next thing you know, they'll be discussing deals for stronger stuff. Where do we draw the line? We let people deal according to our personal opinion on what's ok rather than following any laws?

[RainRat]

New Proposal:

Size of inline images:

I've been calling these out when they go way overboard, but I feel like I should make a guideline so people know what's reasonable.

How about:

-No more than 900 pixels in width.
-No more than 250KB of inline images posted within a short period of time.

[Nibi]

New Proposal:

Size of inline images:

I've been calling these out when they go way overboard, but I feel like I should make a guideline so people know what's reasonable.

How about:

-No more than 900 pixels in width.
-No more than 250KB of inline images posted within a short period of time.

Is there a possibly way where the code or whatever for the site could be changed to automatically resize images to be smaller if they go over a size limit? That would be kind of cool. :3

[RainRat]

I could have the forum reject images wider than a certain width, but I don't see an option to resize. That still leaves the open issues:
-Is 900 pixels a reasonable limit?
-The limit should still be public so poster know even if they find a loophole, it's not acceptable to exceed it.
-There's no way to set programmatic limit on the number of KB posted in a short period of time.

[RainRat]

Recent posts have brought to my attention that maybe I need to clarify the personal attacks policy. It includes stuff like "Person X is a liar", "Person X is a slut". Even if it's someone that everyone likes to gang up on, the personal attack policy applies to everyone.

One reason is that most of the time, it's hard or impossible to prove that an accusation is not true.

I don't want to take away any rights from the people running furmeets. You are of course allowed to say "I will not allow Person X at my furmeet." If you want to discuss reasons with Person X, you should take it to private messages.

On the other hand, I don't want to give a safe haven to thieves or dangerous people, so perhaps there should be an exception for when it's in the public interest and the facts are not in dispute.

Thoughts on where the line should be drawn?

[Sevrin]

People should not be able to be accused of being thieves if you feel

One reason is that most of the time, it's hard or impossible to prove that an accusation is not true.

however if it's proven that they indeed steal, warnings about the person should be allowed to be posted. Avoiding drama is a delicate thing, you might just want to have no exceptions to the rule and leave it to word of mouth.

[kohl]

EVERYONE SHOULD BE A MOD

[Samurai Kai]

EVERYONE SHOULD BE A MOD

I don't know about THAT, but I mean... that could get crazy.

[professor whovianart]

if i were a MOD., i would modify everyone else thinking, so that they would post mundane things..... oh, and have everybody call me "BROTHER, BIG".


(orwell was onto something).