Wxo
Member
|
It's not that I found a wording loophole, its that the staff are confused about their own rules. I believe the rule was created to stop all the petitions being created in the aqw section. Not to mention that rule was in the AQW section, not the general rules.
The fact that the quote, "Petitions are not allowed to be posted in any forum on the forums. They are also not allowed to be promoted via signature , homepage link or via the PM system." was used, it lead me to asking where did this decision came from and was it inappropriate.
The rule was either misunderstood by the other staff reading them or mis-written. If that is so, they are allowed to use the "staff have the final say" to say that they are right anyway? Not to mention that I didn't put "click here" or anything of that nature in the sig. I simply linked it, leaving it to the user to click it if they were interested. I was advertising, just simply attaching a link to my sig. I'd very well understand that if I put "Click here to join our bludrutbrawl petition, then I'd understand. But since the word "petition" was used, that confused the staff member into thinking that no petitions of any sort were allowed on the forums instead of its original purpose, taking care of the threads in the aqw section. Spammy threads in the aqw section, in which the rule was created, is inappropriate. Deleting sigs that have little to do with the purpose of the rules isn't appropriate in my opinion.
I don't believe petitioning in it's self is deemed inappropriate, but spamming the threads with them is. I don't mean to sound stubborn or argumentative; I just wanted to share what my opinion on the matter was.
But for the most part, my question was answered. Can this please be locked?
< Message edited by Wxo -- 7/9/2010 11:57:56 >
|
Printable Version
Icon Legend
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread
