New Posting Rules q?

[rich1231]

How can you possibly ask posters not to insult others?

Or is expected to be tea cakes and little pinkies sticking out from now on?

[LordGrover]

I hope you're not criticising a mod ...

[turbobloke]

Is this about the pop-up 'agree to our posting rules' message which popped-up just now?

ETA is everybody getting it or just the Wineho and Level Crossing thread participants (those perceived to have an incorrect pinky angle maybe)?

Edited by turbobloke on Monday 31st March 14:04

[rude-boy]

Oh I like it:-

Posting Rules said:

12. Argue the decision of a Moderator in public. All complaints directed at a moderating decision should be addressed to Paul Garlick

Nothing like free speech and the ability to take criticism is there.

So I have just had to agree to the new rules about not criticising mod decisions to criticize the new rule

Not very impressive, but then I suppose we will have to see how they are worked in practice.

[miniman]

rules said:

Post any material likely to provoke, annoy, upset, embarrass or alarm any other person

rules said:

No part of original PistonHeads discussions should be repeated on, or copied to, other media, websites or forums.

So you'd rather we didn't drive traffic towards PH by mentioning things on other sites?

Bizarre.

[FourWheelDrift]

rude-boy said:

Nothing like free speech

This has always been a moderated internet forum and because of the word "moderated" means it is not a free speech place, never has been. Very few forums are.

[turbobloke]

FourWheelDrift said:

rude-boy said:

Nothing like free speech

This has always been a moderated internet forum and because of the word "moderated" means it is not a free speech place, never has been. Very few forums are.

True enough.

Interpretation is where the issues always arise, but accepting mod discipline is the bottom line (spank me harder Brunhilde)

[Funk]

At this rate, we'll all have to head over to 10/10ths..

[Kermit power]

I've signed up to them, as I couldn't otherwise post questions about them, but I do have some questions... Maybe someone could clarify?

1. Use insulting, threatening or defamatory words, pictures or other communications.

What is the definition of insulting? If I tell Rich1231 he's a plank for missing the "it" out of "Is it expected..." am I going to be banned?

2. Post any material likely to provoke, annoy, upset, embarrass or alarm any other person.

Does this mean we're no longer allowed to debate potentially controversial subjects on here? Or, for that matter, post up the worst of the chav-modded excess from the world of Saxo?

4. Use the forums to harass anyone, including but not limited to posting personal or private information, photos etc without permission from the person to which such information, photos etc relates.

Where is the line to be drawn on this? If I post a picture of Gordon Brown in an anti-government rant, am I going to be banned if I don't get his prior permission?

5. Post any material which infringes the copyright, other intellectual property rights or any other rights of any other person.

Does this mean that anyone pasting from a news article on the Telegraph website for example will be instantly banned?

6. Post links to any site that is unlawful in any way.

I assume this is under UK law? Doubtless there are plenty of regimes which consider the Amnesty International website to be unlawful, so I wouldn't want to be banned for infringing the laws of Myanmar.

8. Post links to commercial websites.

So in addition to not being able to paste from the Telegraph website, we're also no longer allowed to link to news articles it contains, on the ground that the site contains adverts, and is therefore, I assume, a commercial site?

10. Post material or link to any material that is unlawful or which support, promote or incite unlawful acts etc.

So we can't post any material or links to materials discussing, for example, the protests in Tibet, as these are considered unlawful by the Chinese regime?

I'm all for having rules which make this a nice place to be, but could you not either make them far, far simpler, or alternatively more complete?

[tonyvid]

Rules said:

Use the forums to harass anyone, including but not limited to posting personal or private information, photos etc without permission from the person to which such information, photos etc relates.

Awww, no more posting from people's Photobucket or Facebook accounts! That was some of the funniest bits.

[mmm-five]

I suppose we're also not allowed to post a picture of any car as the 'design', 'form', & 'style' would be the intellectual property of another party (i.e. the manufacturer).

So, no links in posts (as we can't say what is & isn't lawful in every possible country from which this forum is accessible), no subtle references to external sites (especially if they have adverts), no links to Nazi-porn...

What are we going to do?

BTW - I didn't see a 'no sarcasm' rule - (or did I?)

[turbobloke]

mmm-five said:

BTW - I didn't see a 'no sarcasm' rule - (or did I?)

If so I trust that a statutory redundancy notice was issued to the rolleyes smiley in a timely manner

[tim the pool man]

As previously mntioned, I had to click "accept" so I could post, but I stopped reading them halfway as they are just ridiculous.
Even my username is now illegal

[Polarbert]

Where was the box to not agree by the new rules? It all seems a bit stupid really. I'd kind of imagine something like this to be what normal everyday life would be like if Hitler now had control.


So this means that we can't link to any other websites? Like Argos or Dixons?

[turbobloke]

Operating any framework including this (new?) one involves discretion and judgement - let's hope these attributes are in good supply and used wisely.

[Scraggles]

just got the new T&C's, interesting read, esp the bit about all posts being the property of the site and not the property of the poster, guess that means any libel is the property of the site and it's responsibility and not the responsibility of the poster ?

Somehow I suspect this might need to be changed ?

[plasticpig]

Kermit power said:

I've signed up to them, as I couldn't otherwise post questions about them, but I do have some questions... Maybe someone could clarify?



2. Post any material likely to provoke, annoy, upset, embarrass or alarm any other person.

Does this mean we're no longer allowed to debate potentially controversial subjects on here? Or, for that matter, post up the worst of the chav-modded excess from the world of Saxo?

Something I am also pondering. Taken literaly this would prohibit the vast majority of posts. After all people post topics to provoke a response.

Edited by plasticpig on Monday 31st March 15:12

[TonyHetherington]

Scraggles said:

just got the new T&C's, interesting read, esp the bit about all posts being the property of the site and not the property of the poster, guess that means any libel is the property of the site and it's responsibility and not the responsibility of the poster ?

Somehow I suspect this might need to be changed ?

Note there's 2 things, T&C's and Posting Rules. (both available at bottom of page).

In the T&C's;

TandC said:

User Supplied Content

The website contains material submitted and created by private and trade advertisers and other third parties. We exclude all liability for any illegality arising from such material, or any errors, omissions or inaccuracies in such material.

[Kermit power]

TonyHetherington said:

Scraggles said:

just got the new T&C's, interesting read, esp the bit about all posts being the property of the site and not the property of the poster, guess that means any libel is the property of the site and it's responsibility and not the responsibility of the poster ?

Somehow I suspect this might need to be changed ?

Note there's 2 things, T&C's and Posting Rules. (both available at bottom of page).

In the T&C's;

TandC said:

User Supplied Content

The website contains material submitted and created by private and trade advertisers and other third parties. We exclude all liability for any illegality arising from such material, or any errors, omissions or inaccuracies in such material.

I think that's what my mum would refer to as having your cake and eating it! Mind you, I never saw the point in having a cake if you weren't going to eat it!

[Polarbert]

Maybe look at it if it was a pretty one?