Forum guidelines
-
@ChrisH said in Forum guidelines:
@asdf said in Forum guidelines:
- Don't post anything illegal.
Illegal where?
Is libel illegal?
Who decides what libel is?We're right back at Fox flagging posts for violating the forum guidelines.
@Lorne-Kates once tried to coerce me into downloading copyrighted material illegally!
-
@cvi said in Forum guidelines:
@asdf Could call it "code of misconduct".
Filed under: I aim to misbehave
I'd rather call it "Shit you need to know" or "Important shit".
Definitely with the word "shit" somewhere in the title.
-
@boomzilla said in Forum guidelines:
@Sumireko said in Forum guidelines:
Should probably also remove the ability to flag a moderator or administrator's post. Or at least have a message box that chides you for doing so.
Nah. We're only people. Built from the same crooked timber as the rest of you.
I thought you were made of steel.
-
@cheong said in Forum guidelines:
@asdf said in Forum guidelines:
Most of you have seen the recent discussion in the Lounge. Apparently, we need to clarify how and when we want to sanction a user. Since we're a forum that tolerates a lot of behavior, these were my suggested guidelines:
- Don't post anything illegal.
- Don't post spam.
- Don't doxx any member of the forum.
- Respect the rules and tone of the various categories, as specified in the respective category.
- On the rare occasion that the overwhelming majority of the forum disagrees with a behavior (examples: use of obnoxious bots for an extended period of time, deleting hundreds of threads, actively scaring away users) and the majority of the mods decides to give you an official warning, listen to the mods. Pro tip: Our mods have to be really pissed off to do any work.
Should we adopt something like that as the official rules/guidelines for this forum?
I'm thinking about suggesting not to post anything (especially images) that may cause discomfort to others. But it'd be better if @mods can bring back the "spoiler" tag and require forum users to hide those "content that may cause discomfort to others" in those tags.
TRIGGER WARNING!
I don't think there a good idea. Who decides what's ok and what's not? And mods would have to actually do some work. Nah, spoiler tag is ok, if you want, wrap your shit in a tag, but don't require others to do this.
Filed under: unless you're posting pictures of penises
-
@kt_ said in Forum guidelines:
Filed under: unless you're posting pictures of penises
That's sexist!
-
@asdf said in Forum guidelines:
@kt_ said in Forum guidelines:
Filed under: unless you're posting pictures of penises
That's sexist!
Is it? I mean, vaginas would fine, sure.
So maybe it is?
ETA
is fun!
-
-
-
flag posts that have no flags are just posts
-
@cheong said in Forum guidelines:
I'm thinking about suggesting not to post anything (especially images) that may cause discomfort to others.
Oh God, please no.
THIS IS NOT A SAFE SPACE.
-
@kt_ said in Forum guidelines:
TRIGGER WARNING!
I don't think there a good idea.I need a trigger warning for you're bad spelling
-
@asdf said in Forum guidelines:
@cheong said in Forum guidelines:
But it'd be better if @mods can bring back the "spoiler" tag and require forum users to hide those "content that may cause discomfort to others" in those tags.
-1.
I feel like that would already be way too strict for this forum; trolling someone with horrifying images should be allowed, even if I still hate @tufty for that. Even requiring [NSFW] tags would be too much, IMO.
In really bad cases, the mods can still intervene and delete a post as soon as they notice it.
What about us that access the forum from work? It doesn't happen often but it's still annoying when it happens.
I can't believe we actually need guidelines. When did the golden rule of don't be a complete asshat become invalid?
-
@DogsB said in Forum guidelines:
When did the golden rule of don't be a complete asshat become invalid?
YMBNH. The
thread is 
.
-
@Jaloopa said in Forum guidelines:
@kt_ said in Forum guidelines:
TRIGGER WARNING!
I don't think there a good idea.I need a trigger warning for you're bad spelling
What do you say that?
Seriously though, I think this would be the most important type of trigger warning for this forum. I mean, this literally hurts the majority of users!
-
@kt_ I need my grammar spoon back
-
@Sumireko said in Forum guidelines:
Should probably also remove the ability to flag a moderator or administrator's post. Or at least have a message box that chides you for doing so.
Are you seriously suggesting that they should be officially regarded as "above the law"? They're fallible people like anyone else.
-
@masonwheeler said in Forum guidelines:
They're infallible people like anyone else.
FTFTDWTF. Or did you ever see anyone admitting that (s)he was wrong around here?
-
-
@Sumireko said in Forum guidelines:
Should probably also remove the ability to flag a moderator or administrator's post. Or at least have a message box that chides you for doing so.
Disagree. Checks-and-balances / who watches the watchers.
If anything, a mod shouldn't be allowed to clear a flag on their own post.
-
-
@cheong said in Forum guidelines:
I'm thinking about suggesting not to post anything (especially images) that may cause discomfort to others. But it'd be better if @mods can bring back the "spoiler" tag and require forum users to hide those "content that may cause discomfort to others" in those tags.
Off-topic, probably needs it's own thread, but I agree. If only because previous forums we used supported
spoilertags, so there is legacy content that's broken.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Forum guidelines:
If only because previous forums we used supported spoiler tags, so there is legacy content that's broken.
OTOH, that content was, arguably, already broken; the spoiler tags didn't actually hide the content until after it was fully loaded and already visible. Spoiler tags that actually work properly, yeah, I'm 100% in favor. Although that's probably a problem with the way the browser handles them, rather than the forum, unless it was because forum authors stupidly tried to reimplement the browser in JS.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Forum guidelines:
If anything, a mod shouldn't be allowed to clear a flag on their own post.
There're no technical measures in place to stop us, but I definitely avoid doing so.
-
@kt_ said in Forum guidelines:
@asdf said in Forum guidelines:
@kt_ said in Forum guidelines:
Filed under: unless you're posting pictures of penises
That's sexist!
Is it? I mean, vaginas would fine, sure.
So maybe it is?
ETA
is fun!Like this:
https://what.thedailywtf.com/topic/20452/the-official-pokèmon-go-thread/495
INB4
I know not a vagina
-
@Karla said in Forum guidelines:
@kt_ said in Forum guidelines:
@asdf said in Forum guidelines:
@kt_ said in Forum guidelines:
Filed under: unless you're posting pictures of penises
That's sexist!
Is it? I mean, vaginas would fine, sure.
So maybe it is?
ETA
is fun!Like this:
https://what.thedailywtf.com/topic/20452/the-official-pokèmon-go-thread/495
INB4
I know not a vaginaClose enough, so +1 from me!
-
@DogsB said in Forum guidelines:
What about us that access the forum from work? It doesn't happen often but it's still annoying when it happens.
You shouldn't be relying on the inherent goodness of people to save your job. A spoiler tag will only save you from people shoulder-surfing, it won't stop your browsing history being picked up by your employer's web watcher. So if people use words like "recipe", "mother", "of", and "satan" in their posts, you might find yourself being flagged up as a potential terrorist by an over-zealous administrator.
Or someone might post this highly NSFW image
… and you'd get flagged as some sort of ultra fetishist, even if you didn't open the details tag.
@DogsB said in Forum guidelines:
I still hate @tufty for that
That image (which is here for your enjoyment) is a piece of art. It's not a real thing, it's a photoshop job; it works on a very visceral level and creates a definite reaction. Art.
This is a horrifying image, but for some reason it doesn't need NSFW tags :
@Karla Sorry, but if you think the words "mons pubis" could be considered NSFW …
-
@tufty It was the image that appeared that I was referring to.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Forum guidelines:
@Sumireko said in Forum guidelines:
Should probably also remove the ability to flag a moderator or administrator's post. Or at least have a message box that chides you for doing so.
Disagree. Checks-and-balances / who watches the watchers.
If anything, a mod shouldn't be allowed to clear a flag on their own post.
Since I've been a mod, only one person has actually flagged a staff member. I'll leave you to guess who that was.
-
@abarker You sure? I'm sure that some jeffing flags targetted moderator posts.
-
@aliceif I'd say 90% of the jeffing requests I see aren't flags, but mod mentions. I've seen those target mod posts.
-
@Karla No image appeared for me, but, as I pointed out earlier, <details> doesn't stop the content being loaded, merely stops it being displayed. So this particular snatch shot doesn't flash up on your screen, but it got you flagged for browsing porn at work anyway.
-
@tufty I am really not sure
your point is?If you go to the post in the Pokemon thread you can see that I was asked to put it in a details tag.
-
@Karla If you want to post such image in the status thread or other threads that such content is not expected, I'd rather to see it not loaded even in page source.
-
@abarker said in Forum guidelines:
Since I've been a mod, only one person has actually flagged a staff member
To be fair: It's two people now. And none of you @mods have done anything about it.
-
@cheong Can you and @tufty reach a consensus?
Either I am completely misunderstanding you both or you are saying opposite things. That means, regardless of what I do, I will disappoint one of you.
-
@cheong said in Forum guidelines:
@Karla If you want to post such image in the status thread or other threads that such content is not expected, I'd rather to see it not loaded even in page source.
What sort of page source are you looking at that displays NSFW images?
Either you're looking at some ascii pron-- or you don't even see the HTML anymore, you just see blond, brunette, redhead...
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Forum guidelines:
@cheong said in Forum guidelines:
@Karla If you want to post such image in the status thread or other threads that such content is not expected, I'd rather to see it not loaded even in page source.
What sort of page source are you looking at that displays NSFW images?
Either you're looking at some ascii pron-- or you don't even see the HTML anymore, you just see blond, brunette, redhead...
It was anatomically correct image from Wikipedia. It displayed on my original post on the Pokemon thread and I was asked to wrap it in a details tag and I did.
I really do not know
the issue is?
-
@Karla said in Forum guidelines:
@cheong Can you and @tufty reach a consensus?
Either I am completely misunderstanding you both or you are saying opposite things. That means, regardless of what I do, I will disappoint one of you.
I mean, IMO putting in detail tag in pokemon thread could be enough because you can view that thread is not for work by defination. But for the more general threads like "Status" thread, if someone want to post NSFW contents, I'd rather they have it posted in way that's not rendered to browser page until the user click on it.
Details tag just hide it from display, but the content it hides is still on page source and will trip warning if someone's company set content filter/monitoring on their network.
-
@cheong said in Forum guidelines:
@Karla said in Forum guidelines:
@cheong Can you and @tufty reach a consensus?
Either I am completely misunderstanding you both or you are saying opposite things. That means, regardless of what I do, I will disappoint one of you.
I mean, IMO putting in detail tag in pokemon thread could be enough because you can view that thread is not for work by defination. But for the more general threads like "Status" thread, if someone want to post NSFW contents, I'd rather they have it posted in way that's not rendered to browser page until the user click on it.
Details tag just hide it from display, but the content it hides is still on page source and will trip warning if someone's company set content filter/monitoring on their network.
I understand that.
I think that @tufty 's point was something different than that. I cannot be sure as he has not responded to my request for clarification.
At least I got a like from @kt_ I was just trying to be freakin funny. Clearly I failed except to him.
-
@Karla said in Forum guidelines:
I am really not sure
your point is?That if you're posting something that's not safe for work, it remains not safe for work, and thus liable to get people in trouble, regardless of whether you put it in a
<details>tag or not. The<details>tag stops special snowflakes like @asdf from seeing things straight off, and gives you a weasel out ofbut I put it in a
<details>tag, it's your fault for clicking it.I should probably add that I don't personally care. Go ahead, post full on porn, it ain't gonna get me sacked.
-
@tufty said in Forum guidelines:
@Karla said in Forum guidelines:
I am really not sure
your point is?That if you're posting something that's not safe for work, it remains not safe for work, and thus liable to get people in trouble, regardless of whether you put it in a
<details>tag or not. The<details>tag stops special snowflakes like @asdf from seeing things straight off, and gives you a weasel out ofbut I put it in a
<details>tag, it's your fault for clicking it.I should probably add that I don't personally care. Go ahead, post full on porn, it ain't gonna get me sacked.
Your first reply to me was this:
@Karla Sorry, but if you think the words "mons pubis" could be considered NSFW …
My original interpretation of that was that you thought I was silly (or more likely worse) for considering the quoted words as NSFW.
Is your and @cheong 's point that I should not have posted the link at all?
-
@Karla said in Forum guidelines:
@Lorne-Kates said in Forum guidelines:
@cheong said in Forum guidelines:
@Karla If you want to post such image in the status thread or other threads that such content is not expected, I'd rather to see it not loaded even in page source.
What sort of page source are you looking at that displays NSFW images?
Either you're looking at some ascii pron-- or you don't even see the HTML anymore, you just see blond, brunette, redhead...
It was anatomically correct image from Wikipedia. It displayed on my original post on the Pokemon thread and I was asked to wrap it in a details tag and I did.
I really do not know
the issue is?It was a very nice, anatomically sorta correct, enjoyable image frok Wikipedia. I liked it!
-
@Karla said in Forum guidelines:
My original interpretation of that was that you thought I was silly (or more likely worse) for considering the quoted words as NSFW.
My original comment was exactly that. I clicked the linked thread, saw the details tag, clicked it, saw the words "mons pubis" and a wikipedo link, and did me a great big ole
No image, presumable because the stuff in a details tag fails to onebox or some other knobBB disconsistency. However, this does indicate that the <details>tag, at least for the moment, appears to defang oneboxed porn.Is your and @cheong 's point that I should not have posted the link at all?
I've got no problem with posting links. Even links to wikipedo. But there's a big difference between typing the following two link formats into a post :
(warning - the image title explains exactly what this is an image of. It's almost certainly not safe for work, or humans. Frankly, given nobBB's penchant for removing formatting, I'd be bloody careful about even quoting the stuff below.)
[A not safe for work link to wiki](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Inflated_scrotum_right.jpg)https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Inflated_scrotum_right.jpgOne gives a reasonable explanation of what it is, and requires a click to get it, and the other - well - *blammo*, it's in your face. Well, in your balls, in this case. You could wrap the second in a details tag, but that is less explicative than the formatted link.
That's links. Then there's pasting stuff in directly. Again, don't quote this and I'd be very careful about visiting the link. It's the same image.
Wrapping that in a details tag isn't going to hide it, or stop it showing up in your employer's logs / flashing up on your network administrator's screen.
I think the gist of what I'm trying to say is
If you think it's not safe for work, do your best to make sure it doesn't get people in trouble, and a
<details>tag isn't the best you can do.And meanwhile someone downvoted my previous post. Hahahahahahaha I know who you are
-
@Karla said in Forum guidelines:
My original interpretation of that was that you thought I was silly (or more likely worse) for considering the quoted words as NSFW.
Is your and @cheong 's point that I should not have posted the link at all?
IMO, there is NSFW thread you can post NSFW materials at, or you can create a new one. As long as the thread topic contains words that suggest no sane person should look at it while you're on monitored network, I'm okay for that.
It's much like asking for non-smoking area at somewhere people normally not expecting people smoking. Is that too much to ask for?
-
-
@aliceif And why did you do that, pray tell?
-
@cheong said in Forum guidelines:
@Karla said in Forum guidelines:
My original interpretation of that was that you thought I was silly (or more likely worse) for considering the quoted words as NSFW.
Is your and @cheong 's point that I should not have posted the link at all?
IMO, there is NSFW thread you can post NSFW materials at, or you can create a new one. As long as the thread topic contains words that suggest no sane person should look at it while you're on monitored network, I'm okay for that.
It's much like asking for non-smoking area at somewhere people normally not expecting people smoking. Is that too much to ask for?
My intent was not to be NSFW I was simply explaining what I think when people refer to pokemons as mons.
The non-smoking area has nothing to do with pokemon so it would not have made any fucking sense.
Jesus fucking christ...I am a horrible person and promise to be more careful with my links.
Are you and @tufty fucking happy now?
-
@tufty said in Forum guidelines:
@DogsB said in Forum guidelines:
What about us that access the forum from work? It doesn't happen often but it's still annoying when it happens.
You shouldn't be relying on the inherent goodness of people to save your job. A spoiler tag will only save you from people shoulder-surfing, it won't stop your browsing history being picked up by your employer's web watcher. So if people use words like "recipe", "mother", "of", and "satan" in their posts, you might find yourself being flagged up as a potential terrorist by an over-zealous administrator.
Good point. I regularly get blocked pages on this site because of the swear filter.
-
-
@Karla said in Forum guidelines:
Jesus fucking christ...I am a horrible person and promise to be more careful with my links.
If you're a horrible person, it's not because of that one link you posted though.
