User blog comment:Obi the LEGO Fan/Policy discussion/@comment-5772846-20140125153203

I'll add my own thoughts, even though I mostly agree with Apple... :P

If I don't say anything about the rule, I agree with the rule.

General Policy

 * "All bad language is unacceptable. The bad language will be defined by the administrators/moderators, not by the user using the language. If you are unsure if a word is bad, then just do not use it." There's actually a really easy way to define the language: the filter. If the word is blocked, the word is unacceptable. About what words should actually be unblocked/blocked... mostly it's okay. However, "crap" should be unblocked. IMO. Also, while this rule is part of the general policy, it applies to chat as well, so the filter principle still works. In actual editing and blogs, I suppose it's up to admins to decide what is language.


 * "Do not troll or tease other users. Trolling is when you make fun of other users, or do things just to get them upset. This is completely unacceptable, and will not be tolerated." Take out the bit about teasing. Mean-spirited teasing is trolling.


 * "Any subjects that typically cause flame wars should be avoided. This includes subjects like politics and religion." As far as I'm concerned, if a discussion in no way violates any rules, it should be allowed. So any political or religious discussion should be allowed to continue unless users request that it stops, or it starts to break rules.


 * "If a user requests that you stop doing something, then you are required to stop unless there is a good reason you should continue. Also, if a user continually makes unreasonable requests, then the situation will be resolved by an admin." This one I don't really understand. It's a good principle in theory, however, too often it doesn't really work. I mean, what constitutes a "good reason"? Also, the part about an admin resolving situations... mods have that ability as well. :P

1. They must have a point: do not submit pointless, spammy content. 2. Keep them clean: do not post any content that is suggestive, graphically violent, or profane. 3. Be civil: do not insult people, start flame wars, be excessively negative or in any other way be uncivil. 4. The administrators reserve the right to delete content that they believe violate these rules. If your content was deleted, do not repost it."
 * "When creating blogs or forums, or when posting on blogs, forums, and message walls, there are a few rules to remember.

1: A LOT of blogs are "pointless" or off-topic. A good example is my blog about the sandwiches. :P It could be "pointless" and off-topic, but it wasn't harming anything, and I disagree with BCG's decision to disable commenting. Only if a lot of seriously spammy blogs are made in rapid succession, clogging up wiki activity, should there really be action. Also, blogs with just, for example, a ":P" in it should be deleted... however, my blog, which was written out and made for a purpose, albeit an off-topic one, should be allowed. Just my opinion. We need to be more lenient with this sort of thing.

The rest of that rule is fine :P

Nothing to say about editing policy.

Chat Policy

 * "Controversial issues such as politics and religion may be discussed in private and public chat to a limited extent, but if the discussion becomes hostile or creates a disturbance in chat, the discussion may be immediately stopped by a moderator." Per what I said in my general policy section, only if the conversation is breaking rules should it be dispersed. Same as any other conversation, really: I don't see how politics and religion should be treated any differently.


 * The bit about mods following policy and stuff is all cool. However, while it's not cool to ban people as a joke, kicking should be taken more leniently. It's not the end of the world if someone is kicked as a joke.

So there. My thoughts. :P