New Rules

[Neil]

In recent times you may agree with my assertion that there have been a spate of inapporopriate posts (by Bobs 'friendys'). I'm sure Nick has things under control, but wondered what people think about adding a new set of more explicit tighter rules to prevent so much spam. The kind of things I'm thinking of are:
Not making an entire (or almost entire) post in capitals as it can be classed as 'shouting' and thus seems aggressive.
Swear words should be * out to ensure this continues to be an friendly environment suitable for any audience.
Suggestions for rules please.

[Hairy Vince]

Neil, I tend to have some sympathy about the language, but the problem there is where do you draw the line with that one?? What is offensive to one may not be offensive to another.

As regards this level of "hoax" people leaving postings, most other forums I am a member of you have to confirm via email before starting posting. That may well eliviate some of the perceived pain.

I would still rather not see any form of censorship (with the exceptions laid out in previous postings - sexist, homophobic postings etc) but I appreciate why you have put this up for discussion.

Vince

[Neil]

The problem is if you don't have any cencorship then the danger is people will increasingly take advantage (like some of the Bob people). It seems that the forum has gradually been reduced in quality owing to a small minority which is a shame.

[DaveD]

I see both sides in this one.

Considering the campaign is largely a serious subject in which many people put a lot of largely sobering amount of time into, I can see the need for some light relief if it is along the right lines and not in any
way offensive.

What would be sad is if this forum is saturated with the Bogus Bobs and largely irrelevant postings which would put off all the people who contribute towards generally very decent and eclectic topics and postings, leaving us with a bit of a mish-mash.


Dave D