|
Post by Ninmast on Oct 16, 2007 20:02:41 GMT -5
That sounds really good to me.
|
|
|
Post by The Silent Orator on Oct 16, 2007 20:42:13 GMT -5
I could've swore I posted something to GB's post, summarizing that long stuff into one compact rule...
Either somehow posts are getting randomly deleted, someone's messing around, or quite a few of us members are imagining things...
|
|
|
Post by Ninmast on Oct 16, 2007 20:56:21 GMT -5
When did you make the post, roughly?
|
|
|
Post by The Silent Orator on Oct 16, 2007 22:24:23 GMT -5
I dunno... after 3:30 though, because that's when I got home. Maybe I typed the post, didn't press reply because of a distraction, and navigated away after coming back to the tab minutes (or hours) later...
|
|
|
Post by Ninmast on Oct 16, 2007 23:12:34 GMT -5
That's a valid possibility. Well, at least you know it wasn't me! I was picking up groceries then! ^_^
|
|
|
Post by The Silent Orator on Oct 17, 2007 7:12:58 GMT -5
Not to mean to continue the off-topicness... but do any of the staff members here go to the proboards support forum? It may be a topic that could possibly have a need to be raised in there (or maybe they are addressing it themselves).
I'll try finding a way (again) to shorten that double-posting rule while still keeping it in essence... if I get time in college. I don't have free time today, as I have to do this presentation during my break... *rolls eyes*
|
|
|
Post by Ninmast on Apr 1, 2008 12:43:03 GMT -5
After reading through the rules, the reason they haven't been implemented is that you haven't finished your rewrite. The Roleplay rules are still not done.
|
|
|
Post by Teh Donut on Apr 2, 2008 13:09:36 GMT -5
Ah, I wasn't aware I hadn't finished them...I'll get back on that then. My next post in this thread will be my revision.
|
|
|
Post by Ninmast on Apr 2, 2008 13:27:16 GMT -5
Excellent, I look forward to it.
|
|
|
Post by Teh Donut on May 4, 2008 5:01:34 GMT -5
True to my word, Roleplay Rules have been finished. View the new complete and finished list of rules here. Good day.
|
|
|
Post by Ninmast on May 4, 2008 18:26:18 GMT -5
You said without or without the consent of the players in the rule concerning plot-based autos. I also think the Stay in Character portion could really use some clarification. Other than that, sounds good to me.
|
|
|
Post by Teh Donut on May 5, 2008 2:41:04 GMT -5
Heh, thanks for catching that. It was somewhere around two in the morning when I typed this.
The error is fixed, and I suppose we could pull the old example back in.
|
|
|
Post by Ninmast on May 6, 2008 11:54:54 GMT -5
In reading through the thread again, I realized (in addition to the epiphany that there are people who think that no religious discussion should go to not even the remotest trace of religion at all just like athiests have warped Freedom OF Religion in the Constitution into Freedom FROM Religion) that you never included the exception for double-posting below, shortened or otherwise. Right, I was kinda thinking that there should be somehting like that. Any suggestions on what to put/ how to say it, though? I'm burnt out from class at the moment... Hmm, how about this? "Double posting is prohibited on the boards, except under the very rare instance where it is used for important updates. An "important update" constitutes as: A relevant edit or addition to a character profile. (For example, a previously incomplete character finished, or a major flaw fixed) New information on the subject of the thread. (Not spam or unimportant side details, actual information.) A notification in a RP discussion thread stating the RP in question has begun. This type of double posting is also above the necroposting rule, but only on the character edit/update post. Please do not abuse this rule and make up a character edit just so you can bump his/her/its thread. If you have a relevant reason to bump your character profile, and it does not pertain to the double posting exception statement, please contact a staff member." Suggestions? Those are really the only instances I can think of where it is acceptable.
|
|
|
Post by Beanybag on May 6, 2008 18:14:04 GMT -5
Do we really need to cater to the over sensitive atheists to the point to not allow any religion into any aspect of EAB? That isn't a rhetorical question btw, I'm actually asking if you all think that it is in fact necessary to do so.
Also, keep in mind that while EAB respects the rights of the Constitution on these forums, a private and online forum need not adhere to the rights and rules in the U.S. Constitution whatsoever, only the federal law that applies to the internet. o=
|
|
|
Post by Teh Donut on May 6, 2008 20:18:12 GMT -5
We don't cater to atheists. We create nice celebratory threads that proclaim " MERRY CHRISTMAS", and would certainly allow "Happy Hanukkah" and "Huzzah for Ramadan" threads if they were created. If you want to be [insert religion] and proud, then go right ahead and say a little something in your signature and such. Heck, we even have dc talk with the quotes of "Jesus" around here... However, we're not going to discuss or debate religion as a whole or any specific religions, in any way, shape or form. Like the rule says, it just leads to trouble. That's right...but we adhere to the Constitution. It makes the question of "what do the rules say concerning my rights" moot. Thank you Ninmast. I'll add that in sometime tonight. Or you can, if you feel like doing it before me. Whichever.
|
|