Policy The Jedi Council Forum Rules Have Been Revised

The Administration has made several changes to the JCF Rules owing primarily to policies necessitated by the Xenforo software, the site owner, and community feedback. These changes are part of an ongoing project by the Administration to update the various rules posts (Such as the disallowed word list, FAQ, etc.) to bring them in line with the current state of affairs. The revisions, already implemented, are publicly viewable here: http://boards.theforce.net/threads/rules-of-the-jedi-council-forums.27141421/

Affected areas include:

• A rule concerning hate speech has been added to acceptable posting guidelines. This is a first step in addressing concerns over sexism in the boards at large, but hopefully not the last one. The new guidelines concern posts which attack a person or group on the basis of attributes such as gender identity, ethnic origin, religious affiliation or lack thereof, race, disability, genetic attribute, or sexual orientation, and should be viewed as an attempt to more easily enforce TOS Clause 2.


• Rules regarding advertising and competitor websites, which have been enforced in compliance with edicts from the site owner, have been added, to provide more clarity. This is probably the second biggest area of revision.


• Rules concerning spoiler content in avatars have been added.


• Rules concerning signatures have been updated to current standards, including advertising.


• Rules concerning filesharing and revealing private information have been updated to be more hip. No, really, we had a Kazaa reference in the old draft. Now we're down with the Facetweets and the Vinechats.


• Links have been fixed.


• Image tag code guidelines have been fixed.


• Miscellaneous minor tweaks concerning wording and formatting.

We will keep you posted on further revisions to other rules and announcements pages as they are implemented. Questions concerning new guidelines can be asked here.

 

I think this could use some work:

1. No posting on behalf of someone who's banned. The point of being banned is that the user is no longer a part of this online forum community and is no longer allowed to interact here. Please note: Contacting the JC staff for information on the ban is perfectly fine, either for the banned user or someone on their behalf but on the other hand, the staff member in question is under no obligation to provide any information to anyone except the banned user.

Most bans are short term, and as such, the majority of people who are banned are still effectively part of the community here. It goes against both common sense and years of practice to say that if someone is banned, they are no longer part of this community. I would say that it applies to permanently banned people, but I think it's untrue for anyone else.

Thoughts on that?

 

I'm pretty sure, since I wrote the last ones, the Kazaa reference was mine.

AND I'D DO IT AGAIN!!!

Really though, my only question is can I finally report people for banning who call the Dallas Cowboys the "Cowgirls?" I'm pretty sure I can clear out the JCC of anyone posting news stories daily in about three days...

 

lol kazaa


Good changes, hate speech part definitely should be expounded on though. I mean no rush. Just casual opinion.

 

Is there a way to see a copy of the rules as they appeared before today's revision?

10. No threads devoted to competitor websites and forums. When in doubt, err on the side of caution and check with the administration before starting your thread.

ah, man, I gotta tell you guys, Outer Rim Sieges has really improved since their debut.

 

I just have a minor suggestion... maybe make the "Posting Rules and Regulations" the first item in the TOS. Having the spoiler policy first is kinda weird. Then, maybe "Moderator Expectations" second. Then, all the stuff that is listed before "Posting Rules and Regulations," and then the "Bans and Moderator Interaction" part, and then the "Last Word" I think it would flow better, and would have the most important information in the front.

 

The rule is intended to convey the point that posting "Well so-and-so thinks x but they're banned" is not permissible - but, yes, there's perhaps room for improvement on the precise wording. I of course do not disagree with your assessment of how 99% of bans play out in practice.

It's sort of our first attempt at really putting teeth on this sort of thing, and MS was fond of this approach because it addresses some of the concerns from both the sexism thread and some of the more heinous remarks made in, say, the John Boyega thread. There's naturally room for improvement and we appreciate specific feedback.

http://web.archive.org/web/20140702...ds/rules-of-the-jedi-council-forums.27141421/

I can also reproduce the post ITT if folks want, but the formatting might be weird.

That's perhaps something we can work with, if you compare the archived version you'll notice that we kept the ordering from the previous iterations of the rules, as that was our general guide for organization.

 

I think removing that second sentence would be sufficient improvement. The first sentence gets the point across (at least to me), and there's really no way around it. If someone's banned, you can't post for them. Not much room for exception there.

 

I disagree harpua, the spoilers tag should go first and foremost given the site has seen, and will continue to see, an influx of traffic related exclusively to the Sequel trilogy (and in the absence of SW.com forums).

 

Question about links. I am confuse. Sorry about it. Allowing some external links or not?

I like the new changes.

 

But is that really more important than posting rules? Should that really be the first thing people see in the rules? I don't think so, personally.

 

It's a business that's linked to the TFN mainpage, at a time when message boards are passe. I would make the same call.

 

I think I got it thanks.
One more question. Well if you get a PM from an user for a problem from a board you don't know; should we just no really step in and help if you there is a problem or contact to the mod who knows very well that area?
Are going to still keeping the extra mod territorial section?
I am asking because since my boards are practicable quiet. I can help at times in others boards when I can.

 

I have a query.

I get that "bandwidth leeching" is a thing, but how does it actually work? How does the problem manifest itself.

 

posting pictures from another site... "hotlinking." It's best to get yourself an image storage/sharing account, like imgur, photobucket, etc and save the pictures there, before posting here.

 

Thank you, harpua.

Does not really answer my question.

 

If only a someone had invented a search engine to provide answers to these complex answers?

 

Pffft Ender sigh dude sigh.

Sith-I-5: Sometimes when you link a photo directly from another site so it can be seen here, you're stealing someone's bandwidth. Depending on the site you're linking the photo from, that can be a problem for them. Most usually it's a problem if they're a smaller site, because they have limits as to how much traffic they can get by their hosting provider. So they might be getting these warnings from their provider saying their bandwidth quota's been used up, and the owner of the site might be confused cuz they can't understand why they're getting so much traffic.

Sometimes it's an issue; sometimes it's not. You'll notice a lot of major websites these days (Cracked.com, i09, etc) sometimes hotlink photos. Which they shouldn't. But it's one of those not very nice things everybody does, either because everybody else is doing it or (in many cases, like your own) they don't realize they're doing it. Internet bandwidth has improved over the years though, so it's not as major an issue as it was 5 or 10 years ago.

But I would argue taking a photo from someone's site and hosting it on your photobucket or whatever image-hosting site is worse, in many cases, because then you're just stealing someone else's picture. Unless you give them credit or ask permission or something.

Ah the "rules" of the internet wild west.

 

Dear god, when the last time we did anything related to spoilers? The rulebook probably had a lot of dust and cobwebs on it.

 

Thank you, Barriss'.

 

does this mean we can't mock fat people anymore?

 

Is it ok if we make fun of Newbies for not knowing what laserdisc is?

 

Beezel.

 

So when moderators insult me can I insult them back?

 

No.