PCF Rules Discussion Thread

Guess I throw it here as well:

Re: Thread removed

Wow... good thing it is not like the matters I brought forward may have an influence on our game. And it is also not as if the info I used was not publicly available anyway.

Quote Originally Posted by Serica
Hi there,

Your thread 'Kim's sidejob' has been removed from the forum as a violation of rule 2.5:
2.5 - Personal Information
Revealing real world personal information about a forum member, administrator, moderator, Entropia Universe participant, or MindArk or Planet Partner representative is STRICTLY PROHIBITED, regardless of the source, public or private. This includes any information about a forum member or Entropia Universe participant that reveals an individual's legal name, address, occupation or other sensitive or personally identifiable information. All such content will be deleted without notice, and result in a temporary or permanent ban from the forum without notice.
Regards, Serica

Click to expand...

A rule like 2.5 is a very valuable rule, as it protects us from harrassment and real life stuff. If I know that player X is a homosexual, 50-year old, living in his moms basement, then there is no reason why I should share this on a forum. In such cases, this rule makes sense.

It does not make sense, however, in the case where I create a thread about the most visible developer of Planet Calypso, and raise questions about whether these jobs can be combined while performing at both. Especially when all the information in said thread is publicly available to all. One could argue that my thread "revealed" nothing, as the info wasn't "covered" in the first place.

Quite simply, it's an invasion of their right to privacy.

That real world personal information about MindArk or Planet Partner staff, or a player for that matter, might be available somewhere else on the internet is no excuse for making it matter of public discussion on this forum, unless the person concerned chooses to first post about it themselves.

AAArrrrrggggg !

Hanne|SDS said:

Please keep all discussion of the Planet Calypso Forum rules to this thread. Thank you!

You can find the rules here

Click to expand...

I'm a noob to this forum and when i go to see the posting rules using the OP link i get this message:

AWG, you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

Your user account may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Click to expand...

I'm trying to find out when i can add to my selling thread. I have new items that i want to add to the thread but it says i have to wait 24 hours till posting. So where is the time for this 24 hours thing ? is it Calypso time or is it website time ? what time are these rules referring to ?

AWG said:

I'm a noob to this forum and when i go to see the posting rules using the OP link i get this message:



I'm trying to find out when i can add to my selling thread. I have new items that i want to add to the thread but it says i have to wait 24 hours till posting. So where is the time for this 24 hours thing ? is it Calypso time or is it website time ? what time are these rules referring to ?

Click to expand...

Hi AWG, there's a link to the rules at the bottom of each forum page.

This is the particular rule you're referring to though:

3.10 - Bumping of Threads
Bumping of threads is only permitted ONCE in any 24 hour period, and only if the thread has been pushed to the second page of a forum (using default viewing settings). This rule applies especially for the Trading forums. Bumping of threads by friends is NOT permitted at any time.

Click to expand...

So .. for the first bump, it's 24 hours from the time the thread was created.
Thereafter the 24 hour period starts at the time you last bumped your thread.

Thanks ! So the forums here are running by Calypso time then? Also: I click on the link to the rules of the forum of each page and I get the same message as I posted b4 :

PlanetCalypsoForum Message

AWG, you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

Your user account may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Click to expand...

no permission to see the rules of the forum ??

Not sure why you're getting that message AWG, but I'll let 711 (who handles all technical issues) know so he can check it out.

Permissions for the Articles section have been corrected, thank you for reporting.

AWG said:

I'm a noob to this forum and when i go to see the posting rules using the OP link i get this message:



I'm trying to find out when i can add to my selling thread. I have new items that i want to add to the thread but it says i have to wait 24 hours till posting. So where is the time for this 24 hours thing ? is it Calypso time or is it website time ? what time are these rules referring to ?

Click to expand...

Serica said:

Hi AWG, there's a link to the rules at the bottom of each forum page.

This is the particular rule you're referring to though:


So .. for the first bump, it's 24 hours from the time the thread was created.
Thereafter the 24 hour period starts at the time you last bumped your thread.

Click to expand...

Does the bumping rule apply to adding items though?

One could argue that one might as well create a new thread, which would have more visibility. Adding an item and posting about it, keeps the sales section more clean.

I get it though, if you add with the purpose of bumping. Is this a grey zone or a no-no?

Adding/removing items etc for the purpose of bumping several times a day has been tried by some in the past.

I expect someone adding an item to edit their OP .. and either edit their last post if less than 24hrs, or include a reference to it in their next bump.

Spawn said:

I agree with Taco that the thread got taken down way too early. And as if anybody was going to give the guy any money after the first few posts.

also: first post could have been deleted, op warned or banned, and keep the thread alive for discussion.

Click to expand...

A much healthier approach to keeping the community strong. There was nothing wrong with any of the comments made in that thread (some 3+ pages of fun) which were all removed because the first post was against the rules.

Instead all the fun, and all the rep comments (also fun) were removed. I don't think that is how things should be handled here.

When an individual post in a thread violates the forum rules, that post may be edited or deleted as appropriate to enable discussion of the thread's topic to continue.

However, when the topic of a thread is itself a violation of forum rules (in the above case, soliciting members for money), then the whole thread will be removed.

If you want to post in a 'fun' thread, then I suggest you create one in the Fun Stuff section - as Taco has done.

How should someone understand forum rules: 5.5 and 5.6?

Rule 5.5 states:

The only posts permitted in Trading threads are the following:

•Bids
•Offers
•Requests to the thread starter for additional information directly related to item or service offered
•Requests to the thread starter for additional information regarding the auction/bidding/offer procedure
•Retraction of a Bid or Offer
•Threadstarter reply to one of the above


Any posts that do not fit one of the above categories will be deleted without notice. If you wish to discuss the market value of an item or service, please create a thread in one of the following forums: Items, Price Check or General Economy Discussion, as appropriate. Any member found to frequently ignore or abuse this rule risks permanently losing all posting privileges in the Trading section.

Click to expand...

And rule 5.6 states:

Information provided in Trading threads should be kept factual, verifiable and reasonable. This includes information regarding the statistics, qualities or characteristics of an item, past sales, and/or market history. The use of intentionally misleading information or highly debatable, exaggerated or inaccurate claims in Trading threads is NOT permitted, as such claims and comments invite off-topic discussion and violations of Rule 5.5 and will be deleted without notice.

Click to expand...

Yesterday one player created auction with claims that one item costs 37k peds to Tier up. But as i was familiar with Forum rule 5.6 i asked him where does this figure come from, as Entropedia gave slightly different information. I think as forum rule 5.5 clearly says it is ALLOWED to "Requests to the thread starter for additional information directly related to item or service offered". Instead of receiving an answer i got some harsh words about trollin and such. Very soon something weird happened and of the forum Admins stepped in and deleted my question BUT left the OP unchanged.

So my question would be, is it OK to ask questions regarding item for sale and claims made about it (not about pricing of the item ofcourse).

Example:
Snablesnot make sales thread saying "Selling Jester d-1, it takes roughly 5k peds to make it, selling it only for 3k peds"
Is it ok for others to ask, where does this 5k figure comes from?
I fully understand that sale price is the choice of the seller and shouldnt be discussed, but claims as this? If not how can we be sure that Forum Rule 5.6 is not breached?

Rule 5.5's "Requests to the thread starter for additional information directly related to item or service offered" is intended to allow potential purchasers to clarify information about the item offered, not to enable accusations that the threadstarter is violating another forum rule.
I notice that you made it clear that you weren't actually interested in buying the item yourself, so it's not like you were a potential purchaser making a legitimate enquiry.

If you believe a forum rule (including rule 5.6) has been violated, use the 'Report Post' function for a staff member to follow up rather than disrupting the other person's thread.

The Report Post function gives plenty of room for you to explain in detail exactly why you think a particular post is violating forum rules, and all such reports are investigated.

Serica said:

Rule 5.5's "Requests to the thread starter for additional information directly related to item or service offered" is intended to allow potential purchasers to clarify information about the item offered, not to enable accusations that the threadstarter is violating another forum rule.
I notice that you made it clear that you weren't actually interested in buying the item yourself, so it's not like you were a potential purchaser making a legitimate enquiry.

If you believe a forum rule (including rule 5.6) has been violated, use the 'Report Post' function for a staff member to follow up rather than disrupting the other person's thread.

The Report Post function gives plenty of room for you to explain in detail exactly why you think a particular post is violating forum rules, and all such reports are investigated.

Click to expand...

No accusations were made, only question regarding item was posted. And from your post here i understand that there is "unwritten rule" that only potential buyers could post in sales threads, i think being potential buyer depends on the item that is being sold, and before receiving further information it is impossible to tell if you are actually a potential buyer or not.
I wasnt sure that rule 5.6 is violated, i was enquiring for item being sold after the reply i could have been sure that 5.6 is violated, but in no way before getting a reply. If you have logs you could clearly see that my post was a QUESTION and not an accusation like for an exmpale "You are lying! This is not true!!" would be. I received few pm´s about the matter also ingame, saying it was uncalled action from forum moderator, as my post was in no way breaching the written rule 5.5 (surely there might be some unwritten rules...)

So to conclude:
there should be new Forum rule: "5.X In no case you may post in other persons thread unless you are sure you are going to buy his/her item"
Bit silly isnt it?

Serica said:

If you believe a forum rule (including rule 5.6) has been violated, use the 'Report Post' function for a staff member to follow up rather than disrupting the other person's thread.

The Report Post function gives plenty of room for you to explain in detail exactly why you think a particular post is violating forum rules, and all such reports are investigated.

Click to expand...

And until the mods get round to dealing with it, the seller is free to make whatever outrageous claims they want, which could potentially result in another player being conned out of a lot of PEDs.

I don't think that's really a helpful way of handling things.

If the threat of banning rulebreakers from the trading subforums (or indeed the whole forum) was ever carried through, then it might be a more sensible approach.

I don't intend this a comment on the specific case Snable is talking about, but a general point.

Serica said:

Rule 5.5's "Requests to the thread starter for additional information directly related to item or service offered" is intended to allow potential purchasers to clarify information about the item offered, not to enable accusations that the threadstarter is violating another forum rule.
I notice that you made it clear that you weren't actually interested in buying the item yourself, so it's not like you were a potential purchaser making a legitimate enquiry.

If you believe a forum rule (including rule 5.6) has been violated, use the 'Report Post' function for a staff member to follow up rather than disrupting the other person's thread.

The Report Post function gives plenty of room for you to explain in detail exactly why you think a particular post is violating forum rules, and all such reports are investigated.

Click to expand...

So how do you make the determination of intent to buy? Maybe somebody is looking for information so they can budget and buy in the future. Maybe they change their mind about purchasing after the question is answered. Maybe he's asking a general question for the benefit of other buyers. I don't see any rules against that except where you add your interpretation.

I bolded the part that really confuses me though, why should it matter who is making the the legitimate question? By your logic nobody can ask a question unless they have a bid down. Either that, or you're using your subjective interpretation to apply an overly intrusive rule which easily favors anybody making whatever claim they like, no matter how outrageous. If the rule states "Requests to the thread starter for additional information directly related to item or service offered", then what give a mod the right to add intent to buy to the equation? If intent is part of the rule, then make it part of the rule officially. It looks to me like in this case you're simply adding conditions after the fact. I don't understand how you feel this is justified in the name of the rules. Aren't the rules supposed to facilitate good communication, not censor it?

I personally appreciate the time and effort you mods put in here, for free, and giving up your own time, but the more you mod the more it seems like a hindrance to the community and not a help, and you really do come off as a fascists sometimes. Oh wait, did I just break another rule by voicing my criticism? If this part of my post is deleted because I am, then you should understand exactly what I'm talking about.

ok I haven't even posted 10 times on this forum and already am faced with mod idiocity! my participation this forum therefore is over. I'm not interested in yet another frontline on hostile ground.

case in question:

https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forums/newreply.php?p=3456736&noquote=1

I posted a link to a WoW pets site to show how the WoW pet fighting model is the very obvious inspiration for Compets. my first post was removed without any indication whatsoever (which on its own is reason enough for me to leave). I had no clue my post had even been removed (I thought it was a bug with the post approval system), so I posted the same link again - and now I see the link was removed for 3.7 - RECRUITING

a comparison is NOT a recruiting. there is no logical relationship between showing how something originated and wanting to convince people to try the aforementioned out. really, it's insultingly illogical.

ergo, if the people in charge here do not use logic in their decision-making processes, they can do so - but certainly without me.

(and I'm not even going into detail how motherfucking retarded it is to not let people talk about any other mmos here... fucking north korea isn't that restrictive!)

LMTR14 said:

ok I haven't even posted 10 times on this forum and already am faced with mod idiocity! my participation this forum therefore is over. I'm not interested in yet another frontline on hostile ground.

case in question:

https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forums/newreply.php?p=3456736&noquote=1

I posted a link to a WoW pets site to show how the WoW pet fighting model is the very obvious inspiration for Compets. my first post was removed without any indication whatsoever (which on its own is reason enough for me to leave). I had no clue my post had even been removed (I thought it was a bug with the post approval system), so I posted the same link again - and now I see the link was removed for 3.7 - RECRUITING

a comparison is NOT a recruiting. there is no logical relationship between showing how something originated and wanting to convince people to try the aforementioned out. really, it's insultingly illogical.

ergo, if the people in charge here do not use logic in their decision-making processes, they can do so - but certainly without me.

(and I'm not even going into detail how motherfucking retarded it is to not let people talk about any other mmos here... fucking north korea isn't that restrictive!)

Click to expand...

3.7 includes advertising other games. Which is exactly what you did either talking about it, or posting a link. Intentionally or unintentionally is irrelevant.

Perhaps PCF isn't the place for you.

Rgds

Ace

Rules looking sensible at face value, and the judgment passed in their application, are often two different things.

LMTR14 said:

ok I haven't even posted 10 times on this forum and already am faced with mod idiocity! my participation this forum therefore is over. I'm not interested in yet another frontline on hostile ground.

case in question:

https://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/forums/newreply.php?p=3456736&noquote=1

I posted a link to a WoW pets site to show how the WoW pet fighting model is the very obvious inspiration for Compets. my first post was removed without any indication whatsoever (which on its own is reason enough for me to leave). I had no clue my post had even been removed (I thought it was a bug with the post approval system), so I posted the same link again - and now I see the link was removed for 3.7 - RECRUITING

a comparison is NOT a recruiting. there is no logical relationship between showing how something originated and wanting to convince people to try the aforementioned out. really, it's insultingly illogical.

ergo, if the people in charge here do not use logic in their decision-making processes, they can do so - but certainly without me.

(and I'm not even going into detail how motherfucking retarded it is to not let people talk about any other mmos here... fucking north korea isn't that restrictive!)

Click to expand...

There's only a few and pretty simple rules in this community to follow. If you do not like them you are not forced to stay here. The rules are in place to create a better and contributing Entropia community. Most of the rules are created as a fix to previous problems that affected the community in a bad way.

e-lite said:

There's only a few and pretty simple rules in this community to follow. If you do not like them you are not forced to stay here. The rules are in place to create a better and contributing Entropia community. Most of the rules are created as a fix to previous problems that affected the community in a bad way.

Click to expand...

This is the major problem. This as an MA forum is the most popular and go to forum for this game. It is however being over modulated. A post is deleted and the mod posts a reason. There is no ability to question or challenge that reason - the mods are acting as god - is this really what MA are looking for with this forum?

For sure this forum has seriously gone down hill since EF days.

I've not had much interaction with the mods, except Serica, I can say I definitely feel she is way to trigger happy. I think thithis is also the general feel, perhaps she needs a break or something..

But the response is also poor

"If you don't like it then go elsewhere" ;

I even had

"stop wasting my time"

wtf - this is a game forum.

gwit said:

This is the major problem. This as an MA forum is the most popular and go to forum for this game. It is however being over modulated. A post is deleted and the mod posts a reason. There is no ability to question or challenge that reason - the mods are acting as god - is this really what MA are looking for with this forum?

Click to expand...

I guess they must be.
As far as I'm aware, MindArk took over the forum after JohnCapital had resigned, and while I was the sole mod.

The forum rules were originally introduced not long after the forum was first created by MindBuster.
When 711 took it over, they were grouped into categories but essentially have remained unchanged in nature.
And the overall purpose of the rules is codify behaviour that promotes the forum's mission:

Mission Statement said:

The mission of PlanetCalypsoForum is to provide a valuable, informative, constructive, and full-featured community resource for the discussion of Planet Calypso, and Entropia Universe in general, in an environment that is civil, friendly and entertaining for all members and visitors.

Click to expand...

It was inevitable that the membership of this forum would change after the introduction of planets other than Calypso. While some players will subscribe to multiple forum sites, many will find themselves gravitating to just one of the range of different PP forums now available.
Interestingly, some of those forums have nearly identical rules to ours, although arranged and worded slightly differently

As mods, we're answerable to 711 as forum admin, not to the members, as our authority and responsibilities are delegated from him.
What some members may not appreciate is the level of documentation of decisions and actions that happens in the mod's private area.
So, if 711 is asked to review a decision, he can see exactly what we based that on, what rule was applied and why.

When reading the forum rules, do make sure you also read the 'IMPORTANT CAVEATS AND NOTES' section at the bottom too.


Finally, to go back to the complaint made by LMTR14 earlier:
We're here on this forum to talk about Entropia Universe, particularly Planet Calypso, not about other games.
Posts containing references to other games should remain on-topic, and be presented in a constructive context (i.e. suggesting a useful or exciting feature from another game that might be implemented in Entropia Universe). In general, posting links to other games (or the related sites of other games, such as their forums, wikis etc) is not permitted.

Q.e.d. (see my previous post)

e-lite said:

There's only a few and pretty simple rules in this community to follow.

Click to expand...

A few is usually considered approximately Three.

This forum has Forty Eight.

Mega said:

A few is usually considered approximately Three.

This forum has Forty Eight.

Click to expand...

WTF - 48 rules. And we need to remember this is an MA forum. So far as I am aware 711 is only a moderator.

gwit said:

WTF - 48 rules. And we need to remember this is an MA forum. So far as I am aware 711 is only a moderator.

Click to expand...

711 is the admin, that means a lot more than just a moderator

Mega said:

A few is usually considered approximately Three.

This forum has Forty Eight.

Click to expand...

It depends on how you view it. There's only 5 category's of rules. These 5 category's are broken down to paragraphs. Most of the rules are never broken. During my 2 months as moderator so far, it is always the same 3-4 rules that are violated. It is flaming, general trolling, personal insults, disputes and accusations. So if we look at this more realistically there's very few rules that we work with, and these 3-4 rules are very simple to understand.

gwit said:

This is the major problem. This as an MA forum is the most popular and go to forum for this game. It is however being over modulated. A post is deleted and the mod posts a reason. There is no ability to question or challenge that reason - the mods are acting as god - is this really what MA are looking for with this forum?

Click to expand...

Moderators have final say.. in every forum. They are the gods. I don't know what you've been smoking but this is a moderated forum, the rules are there, you've already agreed to them. You have no argument.

The fact that they haven't deleted all your countless threads and posts of grand standing and try to lead a revolt against the moderators is counter to your assertions.