KanedaFr wrote:r57shell, what do you want ?
I argue with eke about: is it understandable or not.
If by "I understand" he meant that he just realized what happened - then I think he used bad word.
Then I've described situation in case if he missed twitter message & replies. That's all.
KanedaFr wrote:You want free speech but also strict rules.
May be it's my mistake as for non-native eng speaker + programmer.
I thought "free speech" means freedom, liberty etc.
Also, I thought strict means well defined, certain, precise.
I don't see here any contradiction.
But I see loose variety of interpretation of:
KanedaFr wrote:NOBODY here knows more than someone else, no exception!
Because, for me it's obviously wrong.
Speaking of interpretations:
If you assume comparing whole knowledge... Ok I'll describe it better:
For example someone saying: I know electricity stuff better than you.
One who say it, may probably have 10 year experience with repairing TV, notebooks, PC and so on.
But other one may have 1 year experience in engineering NMOS transistor plates.
Who knows better? Incomparable!
Does it mean no one knows better? No!
Second one better knows NMOS, other one better knows his stuff.
By "whole knowledge" I meant in this example "whole electricity".
But here is trick.
I said that second guy better knows NMOS, and you may think of it as "especial" Narrow topic.
And you may start to believe that you can always say who better knows some very specific topic.
Nope. It's delusion. For NMOS there is even more specific topics inside, and again knowledge of different people related to this topics may vary.
That is why comparison of "whole knowledge" of some topic is same as comparison of some narrow part of it.
KanedaFr wrote:Some members get over it, so I had to add the "don't be moron" rule.
Yet another uncertain meaning.
KanedaFr wrote:Ok, give me yours...and if others members valid them, it will be asked to moderators to handle them
If you trying to say with it, that I can't complain about rules if I can't suggest substitution... You wrong.
Everyone can complain as far as he has reasoning.
My reasoning, in case if you haven't understood:
1) This rule uncertain.
2) Any achievement or success can be interpreted as "look how cool I am"
KanedaFr wrote:What do you want ? apologies ?
No. Apologies was actually outrageous. Without apologies I would keep it inside. But, they provoked me.
They could cause no rage if they wouldn't feels false.
For me, I like rules where it's something like following:
Prohibited posts containing: Violations of law, Spam, Insults, Scam, very low informative (i.e. +1, consisting of only smiles)
Discourage: complaints without reasoning, offtopic.
Note: to avoid mods say "it's not reasoning, it's bullshit."
I would add note: any reasoning is reasoning as far it can be interpreted somehow.
You can accept reasoning or not, it's up to you, but user should provide it.
In other words: jokes (even moron ones), "look how cool I am" is permitted as far as it does not violate other rules.
There are many big forums around, and they somehow alive.
Better example is imageboards where (fix me if I wrong) no moderation at all.