I have noticed disregard of rule-breaking in one particular manner here...

[jaqie]

As seen in this thread:
http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2183935&enterthread=y
and many others, it seems that the rule:

Do not use our Forums to post any material, or links to any material, which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law.

is being allowed to be broken constantly. Is this intentional?

As you can see, the people there are being quite derogatory and misrepresenting me in many ways. According to the guidelines/rules, this is unacceptible, is it not?

 

[KK]

Quit your crying and leave.

 

[jaqie]

*pouts* NO!
Really, I just want the rules to reflect the enforcement, or vice versa, that's all.

 

[WelshBloke]

Originally posted by: jaqie
*pouts* NO!
Really, I just want the attention.

fixed

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Can we add a poll to this thread to get an idea of the general concensus? I'd have to imagine that the vast majority of posters here don't care that it happens, since I've seen it happen quite a few times in my time here and this is the first complaint I have ever heard about it.

And jaqie, no offense, but as a new member, it seems extremely disrespectful for you to come in and immediately demand that the forum rules be changed to accomodate something that no one has complained about before you (that I know of). You've been here less than a month; perhaps you should take some time to get to see how the AnandTech Forums work before you gripe about the community. That's just a personal comment; again, I mean no disrespect.

 

[vi edit]

I'm just really missing where the problem is.

Are you upset that:

a) somebody changed your post in a "fixed for accuracy manner"
b) changed it into more of a sexual connontation
c) both of the above in combination

?

Speaking to an individual level, item "a" is pretty trivial one. The edited quote wasn't an attack against you nor was it really even anything that really fits any of the criteria in the rule you quoted IMHO.

When it comes to item "b" that's very hard to judge. It's an off topic internet forum at 1:00AM. Things can be pretty liberal. There wasn't anything in there that went grossly over the line given the type of topic it was.

Now summing it up in "c"...grow some thicker skin

Have some fun. You are going to get misquoted and have your words taken out of context and spun at times in pretty much any "off topic" forum. That thread was mostly light hearted which is really what we look at when it comes to moderation of threads/posts. It was a thread about porn on a computer so there is going to be a bit of a sexual slant to the posts in general. It wasn't like the thread was originally about pictures of his kids and somebody started talking about porn. I see no need to take action against anyone.

 

[JJChicken]

Originally posted by: vi edit
I'm just really missing where the problem is.

Are you upset that:

a) somebody changed your post in a "fixed for accuracy manner"
b) changed it into more of a sexual connontation
c) both of the above in combination

?

Speaking to an individual level, item "a" is pretty trivial one. The edited quote wasn't an attack against you nor was it really even anything that really fits any of the criteria in the rule you quoted IMHO.

When it comes to item "b" that's very hard to judge. It's an off topic internet forum at 1:00AM. Things can be pretty liberal. There wasn't anything in there that went grossly over the line given the type of topic it was.

Now summing it up in "c"...grow some thicker skin

Have some fun. You are going to get misquoted and have your words taken out of context and spun at times in pretty much any "off topic" forum. That thread was mostly light hearted which is really what we look at when it comes to moderation of threads/posts. It was a thread about porn on a computer so there is going to be a bit of a sexual slant to the posts in general. It wasn't like the thread was originally about pictures of his kids and somebody started talking about porn. I see no need to take action against anyone.

Damn I know a nice post when i see one :thumbsup:

 

[jaqie]

Not upset. if you read the thread (I don't blame you for not) you would see that this is only about the rules - and them needing some maintainence to how things are enforced in practice here, that's all. Sorry I had not made it more plain, I thought I had it clear in my original post here.

It is not as small as just the misquoting, again in that thread you can see that I didn't really care about that in particular. It is about several rules not reflecting how things are done here. I am not demanding anything, I am requesting that the rules be made more in-line with how things are enforced here. Another good example is the price quotes, I see so many people (including myself) who are new posting a thread asking what their stuff is worth and then it getting locked. I myself spent over an hour reading the ToU and rules and though it was posted as a rule in FS/FT to not ask for price quotes, the general rules said nothing about it at all, so I assumed that meant none in FS/FT, as many other new posters seem to think.

Is a little maintainence on the rules too much to ask? I didn't think so, and still don't.

 

[olds]

Originally posted by: jaqie
Not upset. if you read the thread (I don't blame you for not) you would see that this is only about the rules - and them needing some maintainence to how things are enforced in practice here, that's all. Sorry I had not made it more plain, I thought I had it clear in my original post here.

So now it's a Mod call out?

 

[jaqie]

*sigh* it's a request for maintainence on the rules, nothing more nothing less, as I had just explained.

 

[JujuFish]

Originally posted by: jaqie
*sigh* it's a request for maintainence on the rules, nothing more nothing less, as I had just explained.

The issue at hand is that there was no rule broken, like you seem to think.

 

[vi edit]

To use your own comment on speeding in an analogy -

The posted speed limit on most interstates is 65. A lot of cops won't blink twice if you do 70. It's breaking the law, but it's not enough to worry about. But at least the rules are there to be enforced if needed.

Moderation is much like that. There are some things that we'll let slide just because we don't want to be overlords even though the rules technically allow us to be.

You can have two extremes of forums - absolute anarchy and chaos, or sterilized to the point where nobody posts anything out of fear of moderation. We try to ride the median between the two while allowing some freedom without it being chaotic.

Going back to the speeding analogy - if you are doing 70 in a 65 it's probably no big deal. Doing 80 in a 65 and you aren't going to be met with the same lenience.

 

[LLCOOLJ]

Originally posted by: jaqie
*sigh* it's a request for maintainence on the rules, nothing more nothing less, as I had just explained.

One would think somebody would get a little more established before they start issuing demands. Not a good way to endear yourself to others IMO.

 

[olds]

Originally posted by: LLCOOLJ

Originally posted by: jaqie
*sigh* it's a request for maintainence on the rules, nothing more nothing less, as I had just explained.

One would think somebody would get a little more established before they start issuing demands. Not a good way to endear yourself to others IMO.

Unless, it's not their first account...

 

[jaqie]

vi edit: I just would like the rules to more closely match the enforced rules here, that's all. Just requesting that the rules have a bit of maintainence, nothing more.
The rules were last edited 3/19/2008, and it's plain that at least my other example of it is the best example I can think of, that it says nothing against asking for how much comp parts are worth, and many new folk get a locked thread because they are asking that. That's it, that's not a lot to ask, is it? I would just like the rules to reflect the enforcement more closely. And no, I'm not trying to get it changed for me because I already learned both of the things here, about the no posts asking for what comp parts are worth and about misquotes, I am trying to help other noobs that read the rules and don't see anything about it in the general rules thinking its ok.

 

[jaqie]

Originally posted by: oldsmoboat
Unless, it's not their first account...

No, it isn't, by a long shot. it is however my first account on these forums.

 

[Markbnj]

Just let this die and sink into the bitbucket. No amount of active recovery is likely to succeed. A passive approach is your only chance.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: jaqie
Not upset. if you read the thread (I don't blame you for not) you would see that this is only about the rules

If you are going to quote me, at least don't f$%k up the quote.
See anandtech rules:
Do not use our Forums to post any material, or links to any material, which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law.

No, its about you acting like a cry baby. Using VI's analogy, your that guy that wishes he could write speeding tickets, but you can't and obviously with good reason.

Bill

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: jaqie
As seen in this thread:
http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2183935&enterthread=y
and many others, it seems that the rule:

Do not use our Forums to post any material, or links to any material, which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law.

is being allowed to be broken constantly. Is this intentional?

As you can see, the people there are being quite derogatory and misrepresenting me in many ways. According to the guidelines/rules, this is unacceptible, is it not?

In the example I saw, the poster who modified your quote wrote "fixed" underneath it.

IMO, that disclosure indicates (s)he modified your original remarks and thus is not misrepresenting you.

If your remarks are quoted and modified without such disclosure, you then have a case for misrepresentation.

In our social forums here at AT, to quote a poster and say "fixed" is quite common. So, I see nothing unusual here.

Fern

 

[jaqie]

Originally posted by: Fern
In the example I saw, the poster who modified your quote wrote "fixed" underneath it.
IMO, that disclosure indicates (s)he modified your original remarks and thus is not misrepresenting you.
If your remarks are quoted and modified without such disclosure, you then have a case for misrepresentation.
In our social forums here at AT, to quote a poster and say "fixed" is quite common. So, I see nothing unusual here.
Fern

Thank you very much for the concise, firm answer one way or the other, that is just what I was hoping for on that issue.
I'll drop the thread with one final request for a bit of maintainence on the rules/guidelines as to the issue I posted above citing the lack of a "no price checks anywhere on AT forums" in the general rules thread.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: jaqie

Originally posted by: Fern
In the example I saw, the poster who modified your quote wrote "fixed" underneath it.
IMO, that disclosure indicates (s)he modified your original remarks and thus is not misrepresenting you.
If your remarks are quoted and modified without such disclosure, you then have a case for misrepresentation.
In our social forums here at AT, to quote a poster and say "fixed" is quite common. So, I see nothing unusual here.
Fern

Thank you very much for the concise, firm answer one way or the other, that is just what I was hoping for on that issue.
I'll drop the thread with one final request for a bit of maintainence on the rules/guidelines as to the issue I posted above citing the lack of a "no price checks anywhere on AT forums" in the general rules thread.

Your request is noted.