Forums: Rockclimbing.com: Announcements:
Changes to Forum Rules
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Announcements

Premier Sponsor:

 


Partner j_ung


Dec 22, 2008, 10:05 AM
Post #1 of 16 (2975 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18689

Changes to Forum Rules
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Hi all,

I've made some minor changes to the Forum Rules. I want to stress the word "minor." This isn't so much anything new as it is a couple tweaks and a couple clarifications. For the time being, I'll leave the new stuff red, so you can easily see what it is.

Thanks a ton.
J


sungam


Dec 22, 2008, 10:38 AM
Post #2 of 16 (2962 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26608

Re: [j_ung] Changes to Forum Rules [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

In reply to:
Bandwidth and Performance Saving
Threads that have more than 1,000 posts or 10,000 views may be locked to maintain optimal system performance and preserve bandwidth. When this is done it will be indicated as such and you're welcome to start a similar discussion again. Posts made with the explicit goal of soliciting multiple short responses ("Post Whoring") may be locked or removed to preserve bandwidth.
Yh...You... you wouldn't!
Would you?


GeneralZon


Dec 22, 2008, 10:57 AM
Post #3 of 16 (2956 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 9, 2008
Posts: 273

Re: [sungam] Changes to Forum Rules [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Your climbing partner thread is being threatened!!!!

Damn you dictators of moderation!!!!Sly


Partner j_ung


Dec 22, 2008, 11:05 AM
Post #4 of 16 (2954 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18689

Re: [sungam] Changes to Forum Rules [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

LaughLaugh

I wouldn't. It's just there to cover us if it's ever needed. Your partner thread, the BET, blah, blah... they're all safe.


churningindawake


Dec 22, 2008, 11:07 AM
Post #5 of 16 (2952 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 4, 2007
Posts: 5292

Re: [sungam] Changes to Forum Rules [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

sungam wrote:
In reply to:
Bandwidth and Performance Saving
Threads that have more than 1,000 posts or 10,000 views may be locked to maintain optimal system performance and preserve bandwidth. When this is done it will be indicated as such and you're welcome to start a similar discussion again. Posts made with the explicit goal of soliciting multiple short responses ("Post Whoring") may be locked or removed to preserve bandwidth.
Yh...You... you wouldn't!
Would you?
No he wouldn't!


churningindawake


Dec 22, 2008, 11:07 AM
Post #6 of 16 (2951 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 4, 2007
Posts: 5292

Re: [j_ung] Changes to Forum Rules [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

j_ung wrote:
LaughLaugh

I wouldn't. It's just there to cover us if it's ever needed. Your partner thread, the BET, blah, blah... they're all safe.
Thank you!


sungam


Dec 22, 2008, 11:10 AM
Post #7 of 16 (2948 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26608

Re: [j_ung] Changes to Forum Rules [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

j_ung wrote:
LaughLaugh

I wouldn't. It's just there to cover us if it's ever needed. Your partner thread, the BET, blah, blah... they're all safe.
Thank godJ_ung


Gmburns2000


Dec 22, 2008, 12:01 PM
Post #8 of 16 (2931 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15164

Re: [sungam] Changes to Forum Rules [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

sungam wrote:
In reply to:
Bandwidth and Performance Saving
Threads that have more than 1,000 posts or 10,000 views may be locked to maintain optimal system performance and preserve bandwidth. When this is done it will be indicated as such and you're welcome to start a similar discussion again. Posts made with the explicit goal of soliciting multiple short responses ("Post Whoring") may be locked or removed to preserve bandwidth.
Yh...You... you wouldn't!
Would you?

Doesn't sound so minor after all, does it? *gulp* Shocked


htotsu


Dec 22, 2008, 1:16 PM
Post #9 of 16 (2896 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 10, 2005
Posts: 673

Re: [Gmburns2000] Changes to Forum Rules [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Gmburns2000 wrote:
sungam wrote:
In reply to:
Bandwidth and Performance Saving
Threads that have more than 1,000 posts or 10,000 views may be locked to maintain optimal system performance and preserve bandwidth. When this is done it will be indicated as such and you're welcome to start a similar discussion again. Posts made with the explicit goal of soliciting multiple short responses ("Post Whoring") may be locked or removed to preserve bandwidth.
Yh...You... you wouldn't!
Would you?

Doesn't sound so minor after all, does it? *gulp* Shocked

That part isn't red, so I have to presume it isn't new. Sungam just chose (for some reason) to post about that part in this thread. It would easily suggest to anyone who doesn't actually click on the link that it is one of the changes to which J_ung refers, but, if red = new as indicated, it is not.


(This post was edited by htotsu on Dec 22, 2008, 1:17 PM)


Gmburns2000


Dec 22, 2008, 1:20 PM
Post #10 of 16 (2890 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15164

Re: [htotsu] Changes to Forum Rules [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

htotsu wrote:
Gmburns2000 wrote:
sungam wrote:
In reply to:
Bandwidth and Performance Saving
Threads that have more than 1,000 posts or 10,000 views may be locked to maintain optimal system performance and preserve bandwidth. When this is done it will be indicated as such and you're welcome to start a similar discussion again. Posts made with the explicit goal of soliciting multiple short responses ("Post Whoring") may be locked or removed to preserve bandwidth.
Yh...You... you wouldn't!
Would you?

Doesn't sound so minor after all, does it? *gulp* Shocked

That part isn't red, so I have to presume it isn't new. Sungam just chose (for some reason) to post about that part in this thread. It would easily suggest to anyone who doesn't actually click on the link that it is one of the changes to which J_ung refers, but, if red = new as indicated, it is not.

AHHHH!!!

Makes me wonder how he got that in there to begin with.


Partner j_ung


Dec 22, 2008, 1:33 PM
Post #11 of 16 (2889 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18689

Re: [htotsu] Changes to Forum Rules [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

htotsu wrote:
Gmburns2000 wrote:
sungam wrote:
In reply to:
Bandwidth and Performance Saving
Threads that have more than 1,000 posts or 10,000 views may be locked to maintain optimal system performance and preserve bandwidth. When this is done it will be indicated as such and you're welcome to start a similar discussion again. Posts made with the explicit goal of soliciting multiple short responses ("Post Whoring") may be locked or removed to preserve bandwidth.
Yh...You... you wouldn't!
Would you?

Doesn't sound so minor after all, does it? *gulp* Shocked

That part isn't red, so I have to presume it isn't new. Sungam just chose (for some reason) to post about that part in this thread. It would easily suggest to anyone who doesn't actually click on the link that it is one of the changes to which J_ung refers, but, if red = new as indicated, it is not.

You presume correctly! It's not one of the changes. Been that way all along.


sungam


Dec 22, 2008, 8:48 PM
Post #12 of 16 (2788 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26608

Re: [j_ung] Changes to Forum Rules [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

It's pretty basic, really. I had never read the rules before.


Partner j_ung


Dec 24, 2008, 7:07 AM
Post #13 of 16 (2597 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18689

Re: [sungam] Changes to Forum Rules [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I'm shocked. Tongue

Funny thing is, take a look at the page-view count on the forum rules page. We have tens of thousands of people who have posted in the forums since that page went live. Laugh


sungam


Dec 24, 2008, 7:53 AM
Post #14 of 16 (2593 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26608

Re: [sungam] Changes to Forum Rules [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

minus there number of times you've viewed it while editing, and the two times I've seen it, and the mods seeing it, and we can see that wolfgang is actually the only person to have read them.


brutusofwyde


Dec 25, 2008, 1:24 PM
Post #15 of 16 (2488 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 3, 2002
Posts: 1473

Re: [sungam] Changes to Forum Rules [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

"No pedophilia.
References to pedophilia can only be made in a factual context or in discussion of certain political and social issues. Outside of those limited contexts, Rockclimbing.com will have a zero-tolerance policy to pedophilia and any reference thereto will be removed without explanation. This may include jokes that we deem to be in exceptionally poor taste."

I guess my name for a grainy climb up around Sonora Pass, "Pet a File" is out the window then. Not to mention this post...

never mind... I was never here...


Partner j_ung


Dec 25, 2008, 4:22 PM
Post #16 of 16 (2470 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18689

Re: [brutusofwyde] Changes to Forum Rules [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

brutusofwyde wrote:
"No pedophilia.
References to pedophilia can only be made in a factual context or in discussion of certain political and social issues. Outside of those limited contexts, Rockclimbing.com will have a zero-tolerance policy to pedophilia and any reference thereto will be removed without explanation. This may include jokes that we deem to be in exceptionally poor taste."

I guess my name for a grainy climb up around Sonora Pass, "Pet a File" is out the window then. Not to mention this post...

never mind... I was never here...

I specifically changed the forum rules to what they are so they'd be more relaxed and posts like yours would not be against them. I felt the previous wording left too little room for interpretation.


Forums : Rockclimbing.com : Announcements

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook