Quote:
Originally Posted by Curtis
I'm not addressing this to BruceM, but to the forum members at large, since I've seen this in another current thread:
Posts have numbers attached to them. When referencing posts, please mention the post number, not the page, and most particularly not the position on a page.
Why? Because there are many possible settings for number of posts per page. Mine is set to 50, which means this thread is still on the first page, and BruceM is refering me to a page that doesn't exist. I have no way of knowing how many posts are on one of BruceM's (or knockahoma's, or RonCo's) pages, so I have no idea which posts he's trying to bring to my attention.
On the other hand, the post numbers are universal, so if I refer someone to Post 33, he'll go to the same post I'm looking at. Simple and elegant.
The rule does not, but the post containing the rule has two titles saying that the thread originator is talking specifically about how to treat NEW members, and within the body of the text he writes:
"…we'd like to make a public request to the veterans of the forum to treat newcomers with respect. We're having all too many cases where new forum members feel attacked or belittled by aggressive forum vets."
And later, "…we really can't afford to have new forum members getting a bad impression of OOTP because they were heckled on our forums for failing to use the search engine or asking a question deemed unimportant by forum vets."
These tend to put an impression in readers' minds that new members ARE being singled out as a protected class. On the other hand, "So, effective immediately, we are asking ALL [emphasis added] forum members to follow that old adage, 'If you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all.'" seems to make clear that, while the impetus for the new rule is to protect new members, this 'no hunting' zone applies to even the oldest crustacean in the forest.
|
Point taken on your part one - will do in the future. Thanks for pointing that out.
I don't get that impression at all, and maybe some other readers don't either. So your universal use of
readers is wrong. Refer to yourself since that's the only one you can truely speak for.
I don't see a lot of senior members speaking down to each other, but I do see senior members speaking down to new members. I think the rule is justified. I see it as they are trying to do something positive to improve the forum, not single anyone out as protected. If you see it that way, fine, that's your perception of it.
Nitpicking at the wording isn't productive. Anyone who reads the rule hopefully will get the gist of its meaning - be nice; period. I don't think that's asking too much at all.
Instead of trying to turn this into something it's not - namely saying it shows preferential treatment, try to apply the rule in general - be nice to all forum members, whether you agree with them or not. I'm guilty of that myself in the past and have been making a concerted effort to improve. I hope others will follow along the same path.