Cynthia

I'm just stating what I did because I foresee people using the loopholes in the new rule to give reasons to report people out of spite or disliking something.

You misinterpreted what I said. I was disappointed in the people making a NEED for such new rules, not the rules themselves. I actually support the idea.

Two new rules in less than a week, rather sad if you ask me.

Behavior like this that results in things getting stricter and stricter...

For the safety of the people, who are posting it obviously on a computer their parents may have access to, and obviously anyone in the world can see what they posted, it'd be wiser not to encourage them to admit to such things. Also I did say the age difference is different in some areas.

I never told him off, I said I disagreed with it.

A post saying not to post?

I understand it was also because of them trusting them, and other reasons. I may ask them later, thank you YokaiKnight.

Well also considering having sex under 18, (16 in some areas) is against the law... You'd think we wouldn't ask people to tell us if they did so, as a majority of users on this forum are not legal to have sex...

What do you mean?

I don't think this is an appropriate question to ask...

Okay, just to point something out to people. I do NOT think this means that any confrontational post is subject to a rule violation. If a topic about a site update is made, it's obvious that it has to address the whole forum. Also if someone makes a topic saying something like, "I love you all," but doesn't make it an "ATTN," topic, or make a title meant to address anyone, or the entire board, it's NOT a violation. Also any confrontational post is NOT a violation, that would mean if ANYONE disagreed with anyone else and said so, that it would be warn worthy. That would be like this: Person 1: "I like Barrack Obama, I think he's a good president." Person 2: "I disagree, I think McCain would have been a better president." That, although it's targeting the person above them, is NOT a violation, it's a disagreement. I can already foresee people using this misinterpretation of the rule to get topics they dislike closed, and people they dislike warned.

One last thing I like to point out. When people say how no one cares about Lyle, and how he's just after attention off of this site, and sometimes on it, and yet whenever he makes a topic it quickly becomes the most popular topic of the night. So I guess people just like to say someone's seeking attention, but still give it to them anyways? Irrelevant to this discussion, but probably not as irrelevant as Hika's post.

Now tell me, who are those people specifically? You need some people to confirm this to back up that argument. I want a list of people who feel they were acting like jerks that are offended by this. You can't say yourself either, because that would just be you trying to back up your own argument. I've seen topics along the lines of. "I love all of you!" That's addressing everyone, therefore it would be an "ATTN," topic too. The point is you can't be so strict about it.

I think you're taking advantage of interpretation of the rule. The rule was not to make "ATTN," topics. This topic was made not addressing anyone in specific, and not the board as a whole, as you can't prove Lyle's intentions were to address the board as a whole in the original post. You can't be so strict about it.

Lyle never said in his original post that this was about FESS. Secondly, the announcement board isn't the only source of serious discussion. It's meant for a staff member to announce something. Discussion of it should be done elsewhere. In fact the announcement board was specifically made to give updates on the site, not discussion of anything else. Where did you get this idea that serious discussion could only commence in the announcement board?

I don't think Lyle intended for such a literal interpretation.

I wouldn't say it's topics like this that cause the tenseness, so much as people coming in and saying, "this topic is stupid/pointless," that causes it. Sure these kinds of topics cause it a little, but it's the people who post inside a topic that gives it its value.

The irony is all you people complain saying this topic is adding to this "tenseness," and yet you keep posting in it to tell people not to post in it...

Once again. "Ignore." If everyone ignored it, it wouldn't happen.

To be honest, and not to be mean, but you pointing out a topic isn't needed, and that you shouldn't say things are tense all the time, is sort of adding to the topic. So really it's a contradiction then... You're trying to say not to bring it up, by bringing it up. The topic is already here, it's not just going to vanish from memory now.

Actually I did, however more goes on than just what is announced.

Still don't see it. We have no way to determine how many will be active, and how many will leave in the first month or so. Not to mention we didn't see if the current moderators can handle it.

Don't put yourself down like that.