Besides personal attacks, I say anything goes, people don't HAVE to respond to some of the crazy things said by both sides. Of course, the spread of actual misinformation should be kept an eye on, but it would have to be really blatant.
I agree with moderating personal attacks and FUD.
It's hard to understand what's called personal attacks sometimes, though. I haven't run into any issues lately. There are a couple of members on permaband (apparently?) that I seemed to offend with a bit of regularity. Since they're gone, I haven't had any infractions. Mods also have to balance personal attacks vs. flamebaiting tactics too, if you have someone who's always pushing the "notify mod" button because he's a victim. When there's an individual who seems to incur the attacks of numerous members, while not necessarily excusing the attackers, the constant victim should also be held accountable for inciting other members. There are some members who are quite adept at that.
My biggest concern is the off topic posts. IMO this is typically where threads take their turns for the worse.
Example: Someone compares Titan to similar priced dual GPU (legit). Someone touts single GPU superior to dual GPU for scaling and microstutter issues (legit). Someone says Crossfire is worse than SLI (off topic! Start a new thread if you want to discuss SLI vs. Crossfire).
Example: Thread about Tahiti vs. GK104 talks about overclocking (legit). Someone comments on voltage lock on GK104 (legit). Someone mentions "epic fail" blowing up GTX 590's (off topic! The GTX 590 has nothing to do with Tahiti vs. GK104.)
Both of these examples will lead to nothing but bickering and having to sift through the thread for anything meaningful to the discussions at hand. Keeping things on topic will not only reduce the infighting, but keep the threads cleaner and easier to follow, with more information.
Its kind of funny how this is a complaint ONLY when Nvidia threads get crapped.
Yes, politicking creates real issues out of nothing.
Facebook
Twitter