Limmiegirl (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | {{Forumheader|Wiki |
+ | {{Forumheader|Wiki discussion}} |
<!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ --> |
<!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ --> |
||
Revision as of 05:29, 22 July 2014
Note
Please know that this is in NO way for personal gain. As reasons and explanations will be noted.
Thank you.
Chat Rule #7
Being a dick. As a guideline, don't go out of your way to irritate others. (And especially do not try to test the admin's and/or chat moderator's patience and/or limits.) Vicious abuse is grounds for sanctions.
Reasons
1. Unprofessional - "Dick" is basically 2 things, a name or profanity. In this case its profanity. I don't believe its a good way to represent Nukapedia by using "dick" as a rule or policy. It can be frowned upon by some.
2. Unclear - Some may not understand the rule. "Don't be a dick". What does that mean? If it means to not irritate others as the rule further explain, why not just use that instead of "Don't be a dick"? Being a dick can be a wide range as well. Is profanity being a dick, or ignoring, or....etc? In general, it doesn't have a clear definition.
3. Unnecessary - The chat rules are great without Rule #7, as all the other rules clearly explain what not to say or do. In my opinion its an extra unneeded charge in a case of an offense.
Possible Solutions
1. Removal of Chat Rule #7
2. Change of term of Chat Rule #7 (Not using "being a dick")
Closing
All in all, I believe these are simple- yet fair reasons to do something about Rule #7. Look at the list of rules, then look at Rule #7, its an outlier. Think about the causes and effects, then come with a vote. Thank you.
- I dont see any need to change it. The rule is a bit of our culture here, and the term "being a dick" is well defined both there and at the source. Agent c (talk) 20:22, July 18, 2014 (UTC)
- We've been over this before. It's fine as it is. Great Mara (talk) 20:25, July 18, 2014 (UTC)
While I am seeing your personal opinions on the matter, I have to ask what the catalyst was that brought you to writing out this forum, and if you have examples as to how this rule is more detrimental, rather than positive. I am not overly fond of the rule myself, as I am never a big fan of leaving rules vague and open to misconstruing. However, we almost never have any issues with this rule being enacted, and so I am not seeing a tangible reason as to why it should be changed or outright removed. 
Some Assembly Required! 20:28, July 18, 2014 (UTC)