A Possible Change In The Rules - RatSkep tangent

[pErvinalia]

So tell me, revvie, who decides what constitutes an attack? Where does the line between valid criticism of a group or ideology and personal attack begin? I'd sure like to meet your objective, flawless arbiters of justice.

Oh, wait.

Anyone expecting moderators to be objective robots is living in an alternate universe. It may surprise some people, but mods are human too. We all have our subjectivity. The FUA is there to try and minimise that subjectivity as much as possible, but there is always going to be context to a discussion that can't be codified in the FUA.

I await the robots.

[leo-rcc]

You posted this rule in this very thread.

What are you talking about? I haven't posted any rules from ratskep.

http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... 67#p563067

Huh?!? I only discussed my understanding of the fua rule.

You said we were taking our information only from disgruntled Ratskep members and when I point out to you that you were one of these information sources you move the goalpost that it was just your interpretation of it and not the actual rule.

[Imagination Theory]

You posted this rule in this very thread.

What are you talking about? I haven't posted any rules from ratskep.

http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... 67#p563067

Huh?!? I only discussed my understanding of the fua rule.

You said we were taking our information only from disgruntled Ratskep members and when I point out to you that you were one of these information sources you move the goalpost that it was just your interpretation of it and not the actual rule.

But that's true. He said the rule as far as he understood it.

[Tigger]

I though it was amusing that this post

[...]I await the robots.

Was immediately followed by one from Leo.

[Imagination Theory]

I though it was amusing that this post

[...]I await the robots.

Was immediately followed by one from Leo.

Hmm, Why? I don't get it. :sighsm:

[maiforpeace]

I though it was amusing that this post

[...]I await the robots.

Was immediately followed by one from Leo.

Hmm, Why? I don't get it. :sighsm:

Leo likes robots.

[leo-rcc]

[Imagination Theory]

I though it was amusing that this post

[...]I await the robots.

Was immediately followed by one from Leo.

Hmm, Why? I don't get it. :sighsm:

Leo likes robots.

Oh!

[Imagination Theory]

Have you built any,or helped to build any robots?

[leo-rcc]

Have you built any,or helped to build any robots?

http://www.team-rcc.org

Combat robots mostly, but also maze solvers, longjumping robots, highjumping robots, swimming robot (didn't work). I used to participate in Robot Wars for BBC and Five TV, as well as BNN for the Netherlands.

[Tigger]

I though it was amusing that this post

[...]I await the robots.

Was immediately followed by one from Leo.

Hmm, Why? I don't get it. :sighsm:

Sorry. Here's me assuming prior knowledge! My bad.

[pErvinalia]

Have you built any,or helped to build any robots?

http://www.team-rcc.org

Combat robots mostly, but also maze solvers, longjumping robots, highjumping robots, swimming robot (didn't work). I used to participate in Robot Wars for BBC and Five TV, as well as BNN for the Netherlands.

Cool!

[pErvinalia]

You posted this rule in this very thread.

What are you talking about? I haven't posted any rules from ratskep.

http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... 67#p563067

Huh?!? I only discussed my understanding of the fua rule.

You said we were taking our information only from disgruntled Ratskep members and when I point out to you that you were one of these information sources you move the goalpost that it was just your interpretation of it and not the actual rule.

I don't even know what we are talking about here. You said I posted a "rule". I didn't. I posted my understanding of it. My care factor is only just above zero. *Man you guys have got some cool smilies here!!

[Robert_S]

rEvolutionist, I don't recall anybody portraying the mods at ratskep (other than you, of course) as an "evil bunch of anti-free speech dictators." However, you can put me down for uptight, close-minded, rigid, irrational and rather cowardly.

Cowardly?!? FFS.

I think that many of us think that strong people do not need to cower from controversial viewpoints and differing opinions. In fact, I think that strong people welcome the opportunities to substantiate, as best as they can, their ideas, and welcome chances to justify what they believe and how they came to believe what they do.

You're right. We're all so weak over there. Thanks for setting us straight.

As was pointed out earlier in this thread, the rule against group attacks came about because the users demanded it.

[Imagination Theory]

rEvolutionist, I don't recall anybody portraying the mods at ratskep (other than you, of course) as an "evil bunch of anti-free speech dictators." However, you can put me down for uptight, close-minded, rigid, irrational and rather cowardly.

Cowardly?!? FFS.

I think that many of us think that strong people do not need to cower from controversial viewpoints and differing opinions. In fact, I think that strong people welcome the opportunities to substantiate, as best as they can, their ideas, and welcome chances to justify what they believe and how they came to believe what they do.

You're right. We're all so weak over there. Thanks for setting us straight.

As was pointed out earlier in this thread, the rule against group attacks came about because the users demanded it.

Isn't it known as "GS rule"?