Jump to content

The "greater rules" of YCM require rewriting


Frunk

Do you agree that "The Rules" of YCM are outdated and require rewriting?  

1 member has voted

  1. 1. Do you agree that "The Rules" of YCM are outdated and require rewriting?



Recommended Posts

It was well over a year and a half ago, in the aftermath of Sartorism, that I personally commissioned the rules. After my return, having only been read about 500 times (between our, at the time, 40,000 member count), I duplicated them and placed them in a total of five locations.

 

Tkill93 provided us with them, which I now understand are a mere copy of a very-commonly circulated set of rules which, it must be said, quite simply were never up to the mark. They are quite literally full of contradictions and potential loopholes that quite simply are not desirable, and therefore, I suggest that they be rewritten and reposted.

 

If none of the current YCM staff are up to the task (in terms of time), I am willing to provide a set of rules derived from our current set for use on a forum of my own, and edit them to apply to this forum. However, I will not start until I have received a response from a representative of the staff.

 

In the mean time, regular members may discuss the prospect of replacing the Rules, and what, if anything, should be included in a revised version?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was confusing' date=' but I agree that we may need a new set, even though Glassy has made an edited version of the current ones. Check General.

[/quote']

 

The placement and titling of that thread leaves a lot to be desired, especially that they somehow act as the "greater rules" (as in, the rules that govern an entire site, not a specific section) of YCM.

 

I am not talking about wishy-washy guidelines, I am talking about rules - the defining of exactly what a member can and cannot do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the site rules could use a make-over and more particularly need to be adapted to the current state of the forum. I wasn´t there when they were made (what was it, 2006 maybe? 2007) but I guess they were fine back then. Now a lot of things happened during that time (card picture policy, new sections, changing attitude of members, ...).

 

So yeah, a revamp is fine for me. If anything, I think the mods should gather and make a new set of rules together, with the suggestions of the other members of course. I think the C/Q/S sections already contain a bunch of ideas and concerns we could use. (I´m officially away and barely online these days (exams) but I can try to help out with some parts.)

The key ideas of the old rules should be kept, edit the contradictory or "out-of-date" stuff and add anything that wasn´t mentioned or developped in the old version (for example new signature rules, rep limit, ...).

 

But in the end I think they should be posted by YCMaker.:cool:

 

 

It should include that thing that Crab Helmet wrote about Q/C/S.

 

Do you mean the short and developped layouts? I think that´s being used in most of the sections now, including General, if that is what you mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i do agree that the rules need revamping. Nothing is more irritating than those who dont know anything about the rules and continue to break them. But i also dont think it is fair to give harsher punishments for the mods to use in those cases, because it leads to more negative emotions here.

 

And the sad thing is that we wont ever really find a balance. :| but i do agree that starting with the base rules is needed... They are truly out of date and style, and they need to be edited to the members of the forum here today. things have certainly changed..

 

i would love to help in this quest in any way possible. though i am not a mod, or anyone of really outstanding stature here on the forum, i would love to be part of the process in anyway deemed necessary. even if that means butting out of this mods only thing.. :D

 

for this idea, who could not support Frunk? :) support from me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest JoshIcy

I'm quite fine with the rules.

Seeing as they are naturally tweaked in each section. It is a sort of guidelines.

With the exception of Rule 20 which is a natural Safeguard. And would be the only one imho, to stay till the end (I have never abused it but it does come in handy).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest JoshIcy

we need mods to in force the rules more strictly

 

If we did, people like you would be banned.

But we're nice...

 

And the only place that needs stricter modding is General.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the site rules could use a make-over and more particularly need to be adapted to the current state of the forum. I wasn´t there when they were made (what was it' date=' 2006 maybe?[/s'] 2007) but I guess they were fine back then. Now a lot of things happened during that time (card picture policy, new sections, changing attitude of members, ...).

 

So yeah, a revamp is fine for me. If anything, I think the mods should gather and make a new set of rules together, with the suggestions of the other members of course. I think the C/Q/S sections already contain a bunch of ideas and concerns we could use. (I´m officially away and barely online these days (exams) but I can try to help out with some parts.)

The key ideas of the old rules should be kept, edit the contradictory or "out-of-date" stuff and add anything that wasn´t mentioned or developped in the old version (for example new signature rules, rep limit, ...).

 

But in the end I think they should be posted by YCMaker.:cool:

 

 

It should include that thing that Crab Helmet wrote about Q/C/S.

 

Do you mean the short and developped layouts? I think that´s being used in most of the sections now' date=' including General, if that is what you mean.

[/quote']

 

If staff members and YCMaker were to actually, physically do it, rather than it simply be suggested that they do it, that would be a good thing. This is, quite literally, the only issue.

 

In response to your statement, I shall reiterate, the rules were commissioned in response to Sartorism, as it was my plan to remain in charge of YCM after it. The nature of the forum has changed and those rules are now weak.

 

The General forum is in fact the place from which the vast majority of my concerns come from, but I disagree that it is the only place requiring stricter moderation, as Icy stated. Every forum could benefit from such, and I see mutual benefit as a "need."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest JoshIcy

Well, I can tell you this much Frunk.

My section is fine, and doesn't have the same issues as the rest of the forum. (I havent seen it in a week though, been on a hiatus from modding).

 

So yeah...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest JoshIcy

Then our moderating style is different.

Sure I get annoyed, but I keep myself on the same level of the member.

 

Well... I digress. This better go to PM/MSN if you wish to continue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...