Time to update the JC rules ?

Discussion in 'Communications' started by malkieD2, Aug 20, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Moderators: JoinTheSchwarz, LAJ_FETT, Ramza
  1. malkieD2 Ex-Manager and RSA

    Member Since:
    Jun 7, 2002
    star 7
    It's been some time since the JCC rules were thoroughly reviewed and updated, and I'm asking if its worth putting some effort in now to update the published rules to reflect the position of the current JCC mod team.

    Personally, I'm someone who likes to have a set of rules to adhere to, however I'm also extremely open to updating and adjusting rules to create the best possible posting environment. What I don't like are a set of rules which people don't follow - you either need to follow the rules, or change the rules where there is reason to do so. What you can't do, is have a set of rules, and then ignore or not follow them.

    It does bother me when what appear to be clear-cut, well defined rules are ignored by the people specifically put there to uphold them. So I feel its worth perhaps going through the published set of rules and policies and deciding if they still have bearing on the current posting environment.

    Just a couple of specific recent examples I'm referring to, so you get an idea:-

    WUL threads. It clearly states in II.D. of the JCC rules that "Add me to your Watched User List" threads are not allowed., yet when someone started such a thread it was left unlocked by the JCC mods (worse still, a number of mods posted in it), and when pointed out it was against the published rules the JCC mods claimed it was more of a "guideline" than a rule. Do we need a policy update here?

    Profanity on the boards. It's use of profanity that really spurred me to write this thread. Personally I'm against the use of any profanity - I simply think it isn't needed to express an opinion. The JCC rules (and infact boardwide rules) indicate that no profanity is allowed here. However, some profanity is being left unedited by JCC mods, even after it has been pointed out to them (but interestingly was subsequently removed by a non-JCC mod). So, do the rules need updating here?

    Profanity off the boards. It's a grey area when linking to offsite sources which contain profanity - what is the current policy as I struggle to see one in the published rules. I ask because recently a link was left unedited after being reviewed by a JCC mod which contained extreme profanity (the S and F words). The post was actually edited for another reason, but the link left without indication of the content of the link - ie I could understand a mod edited in "this link has some profanity", but I don't really think it is ok to leave the link with no warning what so ever. Do we need a policy update here?

    I've only brought up a couple of examples, and I'm not looking for you to focus specifically on the ones I've raised, I'm more asking the overall rules and policies of the JCC need updating so the people new to the forum know exactly what is acceptable posting.
  2. harpua Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 12, 2005
    star 9
    This is a message board. It's where people come in their free time to goof off. This is not the UN. It isn't a life or death matter. I remember the wul thread you're talking about, because you had a mild hissy fit in it. Somebody jokingly made a thread asking Sapient to add him to his wul. Sapient saw the humor in it, and even posted in the thread. Where is the harm in that?

    You seem to want this place run in a rigid and strict fashion... but why? I'm not seeing why this is so urgent.

    I understand wanting rules to be clearly defined... I really do, because I'll admit, sometimes they're not crystal clear, and yes, maybe the "grey area" explanation does get overused a little bit. Perhaps making some rules clearer is a better option than completely rewriting the rules.

    Also, why does this focus on JCC rules specifically?
  3. Boba_Fett_2001 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Dec 11, 2000
    star 8
    [image=http://homerize.com/_framegrabs/5F11/fg_092.jpg]

    Order, order! Do you kids wanna be like the real UN or do you just wanna squabble and waste time?
  4. malkieD2 Ex-Manager and RSA

    Member Since:
    Jun 7, 2002
    star 7
    Then why have any rules at all?

    The rules we have are in place to maintain some sort of balance between anarchy and prison discipline. It's where the rules are drawn which are important, not their severity. I'm more than happy with rules which are slanted towards a more easy going environment but they need to be agreed on and put in place by the administration.

    That is exactly my point.

    You are incorrect, this is not what I am looking for. Merely that either the rules we do have are adhered to, or that they are updated to reflect how the community would like to see the place run. Whether the rules are more or less strict is up to the community.

    At no point did I suggest a rewrite - merely an update to reflect current opinion.

  5. rhonderoo Former Head Admin

    Member Since:
    Aug 7, 2002
    star 9
    I agree. We're a more laissez faire moderating team than when those rules were posted, and it seems to fit with the current base of users. We'll look into updating that first post with our style so it's clear. If we miss something like profanity, however (agreed upon profanity on the Official List used in the context that makes it disallowed) then we need to get it, or someone does if we're not on.
  6. justicejedi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2006
    star 3
    Malkie has a point. If there's going to be rules, they should be followed. If people would rather a more relaxed environment, then adjust the rules to reflect that.

    However, that thread was made in fun. It wasn't hurting or annoying anyone (this being the exception :) ), which is why the "No WUL threads" rule was made.
  7. AaylaSecurOWNED Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 19, 2005
    star 6
    Retract claws, harps. It is just a message board, but he's not freaking out or even, I don't think, really that upset. He came in to the Communications forum to discuss an inconsistency in rule enforcement. That's what happens in Communications, I don't know if you've ever noticed.


    Malkie, I think, was suggesting exactly that.

    I'm guessing because it's the only place he sees this problem?
  8. rhonderoo Former Head Admin

    Member Since:
    Aug 7, 2002
    star 9
    Ladies, please.

    I don't think he's pointing out a consistency in rule enforcement, at all, the forum runs pretty well these days. Just that the rules need to reflect our current more open, easy going and laid back atmosphere in there compared to busier and earlier (and stricter) times - some of the stuff in the index and rules is left over from the early 2000 years.
  9. malkieD2 Ex-Manager and RSA

    Member Since:
    Jun 7, 2002
    star 7
    Inconsistency wouldn't be the right word. Just a disconnect between what is written in the rules, and whats actually enforced (or rather, needs to be enforced these days).

    Some of the rules/policies currently in there might seem daft to some folk, but we put them in there for pretty solid reasons at the time. A number of them are now probably redundant, or at least need reworking/rewriting to suit current requirements.

    However, I would like to see the current team tighten up on catching/editing profanity (if you do all agree it needs to be removed at all times).
    (I'm referring to on board profanity, the offboard links is a separate issue).
  10. AaylaSecurOWNED Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 19, 2005
    star 6
    Sorry, by inconsistency, that's what I meant. Differences between what's written and what's practiced.
  11. malkieD2 Ex-Manager and RSA

    Member Since:
    Jun 7, 2002
    star 7
    gotcha :) just when people usually talk about inconsistency it is in regards to a mod sometimes doing something, and other times not.
  12. deltron_zero Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 1, 2002
    star 6
    the jcc is ever-changing as it moves so fast and goes through intense peaks and lulls in activity, both daily and over the longer time-frame. also we seem to get new mods pretty frequently, so it's probably a good idea to update the rules once a year or something. makes perfect sense to me.
  13. Kavic_Toth Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Aug 9, 2002
    star 5
    That, and JCC is one of the more fluidly changing forums. Consider the changes that have sort of naturally occured in JCC with creation of Amph and the Arena. While there are threads there that were agreed would remain in JCC, many threads that might have been opened there are now redirected to the other forums. That constant evolution of how the other forums affect what is happening in JCC, along with the constantly changing user base and the changing moderators creates a possible need to also evolve the rules.

    I can see what Malkie is saying. There are posts and threads in the forum that I know either he or I or one of the other mods to the forum a year and a half ago might have edited or locked. You could say that speaks to the anal retentive nature with which it was run then or whatever, either way it is still a change in the forum that probably necessitates a revision of the rules.
  14. harpua Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 12, 2005
    star 9
    First off... there are no claws. :p

    Secondly, I have a question... there was recently an instance when a user was edited for using the word "ho" when the term "attention whore" is used quite frequently. It's a part of the JCC language, pretty much. So my question is, why is "ho" not allowed while "whore" is?
  15. DarthSapient Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Jun 26, 2001
    star 10
    Malkie, I get what you're saying and I agree. A lot of those rules were developed during the most active times of the site. During those times, things were more stringent simlpy due to the sheer volume of users, threads, and posts. I know with all the rules both public and private, it's hard to remember them all and then to enforce them as such. If the place has become more lax and we no longer mod certain things we used to, then the rules need to be updated to reflect that. And if we've added stuff, then that needs to be captured as well. You just want to make sure users know the rules and what to expect and that mods follow it and enforce those rules.
  16. ApolloSmileGirl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jun 18, 2004
    star 8
    Was the original TOS decided, and made by staff, or is the TOS as it currently reads decided upon by Wise? I know that he has final say, but not really sure whether he actually puts any input into the actual policy.
  17. dp4m Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Nov 8, 2001
    star 9
    The TOS isn't really supposed to be used any longer, but we can't really change it (board function breakdown; not that we're bound to it or anything). So we use the Rules of the Jedi Council Forum, which were written by us, passed to you guys for comment and then enacted.
  18. ophelia Cards Against Humanity Host. Ex-Mod

    Game Host
    Member Since:
    Jun 25, 2002
    star 6
    Supposedly, "whore" is okay so long as it's not directed at a person. Where that leaves us with "attention whore" I have no idea. Santa's naughty-list roll-call is still on the disallowed words list, however. I actually asked about whether that word had become un-disallowed recently, and was told no. So until somebody tells me otherwise, it's whore = ignore. ** = no.
  19. Dark Lady Mara Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 19, 1999
    star 7
    The original TOS was written around 2000 or 2001 by Vertical, Darth Sebious, and probably a couple of others I'm forgetting as a replacement for the way-too-brief (but funny) rules we had on the new user registration screen prior to that point. I'd like to give myself some credit for it too, but let's be honest, I think I did maybe five words. :p So essentially, it was moderating team-generated. There were, however, a few rules in particular which were handed down to us by site management that we weren't allowed to dispute. The most (in)famous and drama-provoking example was Josh Griffin's decision that fan fiction posted on this site couldn't contain anything even implicitly suggestive of gay relationships. This rule was later upheld by Philip Wise. A number of users were opposed to it, including some moderators, but the owners didn't consider the matter open for discussion. Fortunately, the number of rules like that are in the minority. The more mundane stuff, like no "add me to your WUL" threads, no user appreciation, caps on social groups, and so on was mostly all mod-generated because the owners never really got down to that nitty-gritty level of moderating. Josh was more present on the site than the current majority owner, but his presence was more a matter of posting in PSA than actually writing rules for the boards.
  20. deltron_zero Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 1, 2002
    star 6
    can we say attention ho?
  21. harpua Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 12, 2005
    star 9
    Whore whore whore... merry x-mas....
  22. ophelia Cards Against Humanity Host. Ex-Mod

    Game Host
    Member Since:
    Jun 25, 2002
    star 6
    There you go. There is nothing in the disallowed word list against saying that. :p

    And d_z, I believe that was the exact phrase I wanted to use, and was told not to. I'm leaving it for an admin for now, though. Let them make the call on the booty, so to speak.
  23. rhonderoo Former Head Admin

    Member Since:
    Aug 7, 2002
    star 9
    The term whore was on list when I started but used as an insult only, but saying "whoring services to the competitor" or something is one of the things in context. "Ho" was also on the list, and really it wouldn't be used as anything but an insult... as it's slang, and all that. The term "attention whore" was also used in JCC when I was modded so I'm not sure how it got to be okay, other than maybe it's part of the vernacular in there. Technically calling someone that is a flame. I'm okay with not allowing it, along with "ho", as it probably never leads anywhere good.


    BTW, the JCC mods are re-working the rules now in our forum. Three things we're discussing is the relaxation of the "WUL" threads, "user appreciation" and "parody" threads, with obvious exceptions, of course. For example, we'd like to say WUL threads that just discuss them are okay, but no "ADD ME TO YOU WUL!!!" threads, i.e. WUL "pimping" as they call it in Fan Fic.

    User appreciation threads in some form have crept in the JCC, but it's hard to totally disallow threads on that basis as the community is smaller and we know each other well these days. So ideas on that would be great. For instance, we now have/had five threads about a user in BB, and looking at them, they'd be considered user appreciation, and especially when the forum was more bothersome that way, it was warranted that all threads of that sort be locked, and too many would still be bad. If we got technical, any thread with a user's name in the title would be locked under the old user appreciation rule, I guess. Funnily enough, user depreciation threads never seemed to be outlawed. :p Something else we should probably change.

    On parodies: I don't see the odd funny one as bad, and sometimes they are a lot of fun. But if it gets out of hand to a spree, it's spam and a bannable offense. That's what we're thinking now.
  24. Andalite-Bandit Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 25, 2005
    star 6
    What if somebody is talking about Santa and in the context of this Santa conversation utilizes the well known Santa catchphrase of "Ho ho ho!" ?

    Can you make an exception in the rules that you can use this word if referencing the Santa quote?

    Santa is a very popular mythological figure that children enjoy, surely such a family friendly and wholesome character is not considered to be profane!
  25. rhonderoo Former Head Admin

    Member Since:
    Aug 7, 2002
    star 9
    Most definitely, Andandandadalight. That would be what we would call one of dem dere "context" things.
Moderators: JoinTheSchwarz, LAJ_FETT, Ramza
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.