Misc: Granaboard Rules & Regulations discussion [!OT]

**melfice** · June 24th, 2003, 10:17 AM

Mmm... what about lingeire? for example, how would you rate this? (hee hee hee... you're welcome...)

Click here

(This image is posted just as an example)

**mrwiseman** · June 24th, 2003, 07:02 PM

I'd rate that as NR-13 (though I wouldn't object if it got PG rating by anybody else).

Rule 1.1.2 already talks about the contents of the board being at least NR-13, so I think there's no need to mark them. Still, you could post a courtesy mark if you want.

**One Classy Bloke** · June 24th, 2003, 08:18 PM

Hmm... I mean no offence, but it might be a good idea to place a link to an online dictionary. I had to look up about 7 words when just reading the new rules.

Also, i think your a bit harsh on the Jeohvah Witnesses. Although i don't know as i've never met one. But what i've heard is that they are scared of any other religion, and all religion's believe they are the right one.

Besides from that, the new rules all look good to me. [img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img]

**mrwiseman** · June 24th, 2003, 08:44 PM

LOL, really? I'm sorry; I didn't want to make it too complex, I just wanted to make it precise and clear, and I didn't want to repeat myself using the same words over and over. Can you tell me which rules do you find difficult to read? I'll fix them ASAP. I don't wanna sound like Grandas!!

As for the Jehovah Witnesses: That rule is meant against any sect; I found them very harmful (Jehovah Witnesses, for example, will let their children die because they reject medical intervention; and will not doubt entering a house when a child is alone to try to get him/her into the sect).

**melfice** · June 25th, 2003, 09:14 AM

In fact, i'd keep any board as free of religion matters as possible... Relligion is not to be discussed for it doesn't have a real demonstrable scientifically basis (most of the times), but is much more a question of faith, and beliefs, in other words, a personal choice, and as far it is a personal matter, it should not be allowed to anybody try to influence others to folow this or that relligion, in general, not even sects.

**mrwiseman** · July 5th, 2003, 08:17 AM

So, should I make the new rules official? OCB, don't you want me to reword some of them?

**mrwiseman** · July 7th, 2003, 09:52 AM

The new rulles will be official. From now on, you can suggest and discuss changes for the next update.

**One Classy Bloke** · July 7th, 2003, 07:21 PM

I'm sure it doesn't matter about the tricky words. Not many people read the rules before they enter a message board anyway. I would of posted the words if i didn't get busy with the travelling to New Zealand and then becoming graphically sick yesterday.

**melfice** · July 14th, 2003, 02:33 PM

<blockquote>spoiler (click to view):<hr size="1"><div class="spoiler" id="G5RQRD"> As you may have noticed, we have some new UBB tags, in which you can add this "spoiler" Tag. The trouble seems to be that the Spoiler tag adds JAVASCRIPT stuff to the post, making that a little post contains much more text than we think. So, i'd recomend to use the SPOILER TAG only when the text refered is long enough, and use our current spoiler marking technique for little spoilers, such as...</div><hr size="1"></blockquote>

SPOILER
.
.
.
.
Wiseman is Miguel Perez ( [img]tongue.gif[/img] )
.
.
.
.
EOS

Which uses less code.

Also. It DOESN'T work properly if you are posting MORE THAN 1 SPOILER! it is, 1 spoiler-> fine, 2 spoilers-> bad, useless.