Pages:
Author

Topic: Unofficial list of (official) Bitcointalk.org rules, guidelines, FAQ - page 44. (Read 1068574 times)

global moderator
Activity: 4018
Merit: 2728
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
I voted to stickie

However,

4. No referral code (ref link)

Its sad the children have ruined this in the way they did. 

You can post ref links but only if it's relevant to the thread. Ie if someone asks what is the best dicesite people can post their ref links for PrimeDice or whatever.
hero member
Activity: 1008
Merit: 502
I voted to stickie

However,

4. No referral code (ref link)

I am so mixed about this. As the absolutely most prominent site for bitcoins talk and chatter. We all understand a good portion of this industry (Outside of trading) is based on referrals. I find it both hard to accept and a blessing that this rule exists. I would say there should be a section for this, however it would also be useless. I think people should have the ability to post their referral link if posting about a site that works for them. Unfortunately the spamming cant be controlled. It is a real crap house of indifference when it comes to referral links.

Its sad the children have ruined this in the way they did. 
-ck
legendary
Activity: 4088
Merit: 1631
Ruu \o/
I think this was adequately addressed with this in fact:

No "official" set of rules was ever published, because if rules are set in stone, then people will come up with clever ways to bypass them, and then complain when a moderator takes action.
This is so true it's scary. I think it's important to point out that it's even more important to stick to the "spirit" of the rule rather than to the letter of the rule. There will always be a roundabout way to interpret rules that make it such that you're sticking strictly to the letter of the rule, even if you're clearly crossing the boundary. To that end, the rules should also stipulate that someone trying to get around the rules by sticking to them on a literal level while clearly infringing on what the rule was intended to prevent, is also not allowed.
Added in Rule 23 with an example:

Quote
23. When deciding if a user has broken the rules, the staff have the right to follow their interpretation of the rules.[e]

Quote
23. This rule is meant to prevent from users exploiting possible loopholes in the rules or some interpretations that follow the literal meaning of the rule rather than the meaning of what it truly wanted to prevent.
global moderator
Activity: 4018
Merit: 2728
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
I think that was stated because, for example, if the admins state making shitposts exclusively in off-topic is likely to get you banned people will then try avoid making shitposts in offtopic and do them in the alt coin sub or whatever etc. The rules aren't there to try purposely catch people out but to limit people bending the rules or attempting to bypass them and limit people from attempting to protest their innocence by trying to bring up technicalities because of "the rules".
legendary
Activity: 3318
Merit: 2008
First Exclusion Ever
Maybe because it's unofficial?

This is great. I think the list should be vetted by forum administration and stickied.
I think that's intentional there is no comprehensive rulebook.
Why so?

No "official" set of rules was ever published, because if rules are set in stone, then people will come up with clever ways to bypass them, and then complain when a moderator takes action. This is however a very good thread to read to find out in general what you can and can't do. I do believe it should be stickied, but kept as "unofficial"

I think Badbear said something similar to the bolded part before. Personally, if the list is here and available I think it should be stickied as I think it would be more helpful for users and staff than actually abused, though obviously some will try get around the rules, but the mods and admins still have the right to interpret the rules as they see fit.
Yeah why tell people all the rules? It is better to punish them arbitrarily and keep everyone on their toes and fearful of repercussion. After all we wouldn't want you to be stuck in a situation where you might have to enforce written rules uniformly in a way everyone understands.
global moderator
Activity: 4018
Merit: 2728
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
Maybe because it's unofficial?

This is great. I think the list should be vetted by forum administration and stickied.
I think that's intentional there is no comprehensive rulebook.
Why so?

No "official" set of rules was ever published, because if rules are set in stone, then people will come up with clever ways to bypass them, and then complain when a moderator takes action. This is however a very good thread to read to find out in general what you can and can't do. I do believe it should be stickied, but kept as "unofficial"

I think Badbear said something similar to the bolded part before. Personally, if the list is here and available I think it should be stickied as I think it would be more helpful for users and staff than actually abused, though obviously some will try get around the rules, but the mods and admins still have the right to interpret the rules as they see fit.
hero member
Activity: 574
Merit: 500
CoinBooster Rep
Why isn't this stickied yet?
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
I'm really quite sane!
Just to show off how anal I can be, here's a typo:

Quote
Q: What is the draft feature on these forums?
A: When you write a post or a PM and click preview, the post gets saved into the Draft page. Same as when you click post (even if an error that prevented the poat from being posted appeared such as "The last posting from your IP was less than 360 seconds ago."), send a PM or save an edited post.
global moderator
Activity: 3794
Merit: 2612
In a world of peaches, don't ask for apple sauce
Forgot about the list, yet again Grin. Updated one rule to clarify what it meant:

Quote
16. Do not have more than one active sales topic in the Currency exchange board. [3]
global moderator
Activity: 3794
Merit: 2612
In a world of peaches, don't ask for apple sauce
Another suggestion: it's ok to post dox as long as it isn't off topic.
Will add it to the FAQ later.
legendary
Activity: 1974
Merit: 1030
Another suggestion: it's ok to post dox as long as it isn't off topic.
global moderator
Activity: 3794
Merit: 2612
In a world of peaches, don't ask for apple sauce
Suggested a german translation here [1] and took the liberty to add words which make clear that not only a new account is not allowed but only the use of an existing different account.



[1] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9034497
Sorry, forgot about this thread for a while. Edited the rule a bit, thanks for the suggestion:

Quote
25. Ban evasion (using or creating accounts while one of your accounts is banned) is not allowed.[e]
copper member
Activity: 1498
Merit: 1528
No I dont escrow anymore.
Suggested a german translation here [1] and took the liberty to add words which make clear that not only a new account is not allowed but only the use of an existing different account.



[1] https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9034497
legendary
Activity: 1974
Merit: 1030
Good point, added rule 25 with an explanation:

Thank you. Already translated to es.
global moderator
Activity: 3794
Merit: 2612
In a world of peaches, don't ask for apple sauce
There's nothing about ban evasion in these rules. Is it intentional? Or everybody overlooked it? Tongue
Isn't that kind of self explanatory? If you escape prison and they catch you, they put you in for a longer amount of time.

I agree it is, but sometimes it's useful to point to a specific written rule. You might recall that my motivation to the spanish translation was to be able to tell a troll what the rules were. Ok, now that troll has been permabanned but he keeps on creating new accounts, and there's no specific written rule to point to. Self-explanatory and all that, yes, but these people have a… err different mind set Smiley.
Good point, added rule 25 with an explanation:

Quote
25. Ban evasion (creating new accounts when the old one is banned) is not allowed.[e]

Quote
25. If you get banned (temporary or permanently) and create a new account to continue posting / sending PMs, it's considered ban evasion. The only exception is creating a thread in Meta about your ban.
legendary
Activity: 1974
Merit: 1030
There's nothing about ban evasion in these rules. Is it intentional? Or everybody overlooked it? Tongue
Isn't that kind of self explanatory? If you escape prison and they catch you, they put you in for a longer amount of time.

I agree it is, but sometimes it's useful to point to a specific written rule. You might recall that my motivation to the spanish translation was to be able to tell a troll what the rules were. Ok, now that troll has been permabanned but he keeps on creating new accounts, and there's no specific written rule to point to. Self-explanatory and all that, yes, but these people have a… err different mind set Smiley.
global moderator
Activity: 3794
Merit: 2612
In a world of peaches, don't ask for apple sauce
There's nothing about ban evasion in these rules. Is it intentional? Or everybody overlooked it? Tongue
Isn't that kind of self explanatory? If you escape prison and they catch you, they put you in for a longer amount of time.
legendary
Activity: 1974
Merit: 1030
There's nothing about ban evasion in these rules. Is it intentional? Or everybody overlooked it? Tongue
full member
Activity: 251
Merit: 100
Sigh... Sometimes there is a fine line between trolling and just plain funny...  Tongue
global moderator
Activity: 3794
Merit: 2612
In a world of peaches, don't ask for apple sauce
the link on ranks should be updated to this one: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1861412
as it explains legendary and has the scammer tag removed. Looks like an overall update.
Will change it tomorrow, a bit too tired and lazy to do it now.
Done, sorry for the delay.

Also, added one question to the FAQ on account of a flood of PMs regarding such matters:

Quote
Q: Do you moderate/delete (possible) FUD, accusations and untrue information?
A: No. We don't have enough time to check every single piece of information and verify the validity of the sources. Also, just like scams - too much room for bias and abuse.
Pages:
Jump to: