Rules updated again


Recommended Posts

Good one Neobond :yes: I didn't think this was really a problem anymore after you and the admins put a stop to the hosting madness a few months ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

removed

I am sorry, but a MOD has no place is just editing a sig, before alerting the member and requesting them to do it... which I would have had no issue doing... that he he took it upon himself to do so that just ****es me off... No offense Neobond, but perhaps you should advise the MODS and what not to request an edit before doing it themselves... its no NeoNazi, its NeoWin

Edited by bangbang023
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sorry, but a MOD has no place is just editing a sig, before alerting the member and requesting them to do it... which I would have had no issue doing... that he he took it upon himself to do so that just ****es me off... No offense Neobond, but perhaps you should advise the MODS and what not to request an edit before doing it themselves... its no NeoNazi, its NeoWin

i think that should be talked over PM. ^^

Good Stuff Bond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.neowin.net/forum/rules.htm

the following was added as 9a.

Forum sigs are to be used respectfully, Neowin already has to display ads to cover the running costs, so don't annoy our members by making your sig into some sort of web ad. (ie: Advertising in your sig is not allowed)

littel broad isnt it. take Space Guy for instence, he has a link to firefox in his sig, that's consiterd an ad technically, although he probably doesnt work for mozilla or anything, he still has a link to it in his sig. would that be consiterd against the rule.

i could take it a step further ad say that any link to anything would not be allowed in a sig, for the same reason. although helpful it may be, it still advertises the site that it links to and brings them trafic

the same thing could be said for logos or slogans for anything, for instance gerry74_ has a picture of homer simpson in his avatar. this is in a way advertising the simpsons. should this be against the rules. its extreme but its entirely possible a case could be made that his avatar is considerd against the rules

just a littel broad is all im saying

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sorry, but a MOD has no place is just editing a sig, before alerting the member and requesting them to do it... which I would have had no issue doing... that he he took it upon himself to do so that just ****es me off... No offense Neobond, but perhaps you should advise the MODS and what not to request an edit before doing it themselves... its no NeoNazi, its NeoWin
Its not something I wanted to discuss in a PM, I would prefer everyone to see the issue, so they know what happened to their sig...

neobond posted the new rule and bangbang explained what happened with your sig in his pm to you. it's the same if you have an obscene sig or avatar

cool rule :yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

littel broad isnt it. take Space Guy for instence, he has a link to firefox in his sig, that's consiterd an ad technically, although he probably doesnt work for mozilla or anything, he still has a link to it in his sig. would that be consiterd against the rule.

i could take it a step further ad say that any link to anything would not be allowed in a sig, for the same reason. although helpful it may be, it still advertises the site that it links to and brings them trafic

the same thing could be said for logos or slogans for anything, for instance gerry74_ has a picture of homer simpson in his avatar. this is in a way advertising the simpsons. should this be against the rules. its extreme but its entirely possible a case could be made that his avatar is considerd against the rules

just a littel broad is all im saying

yeah agreed, it doesnt appear to be much of a problem so i dont see the neede for this rule however who am i to argue ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

point being that he choose mine directly after the posting... the pm came in about 1 minute after the rule... that ****es me off... he could have said, check this out and please abide by it... then I would of had no problem... for him just to go oh, lookie, someones sig thats out of whack by 30 seconds, let me edit it... thats just plain stupid

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks alot (Y)

Now we don't need to see these blinking signatures

"GET FIREFOX - CLICK HERE"

or

"Hukkifaffi webhost/brothel CLICK !"!0948u1"

It's sickening

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good to see this implemented. Does this rule applies to linking to own personal homepages. As soon as I see a No to this question, I will remove the link in my sig (currently clicking the car takes to my homepage) :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with paulhaskew. it's silly anyway- it would make it ok for the big boys like AMD or Intel to get ads in users's sigs but not someone's personal site/startup business to get any exposure without spamming the board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good to see this implemented. Does this rule applies to linking to own personal homepages. As soon as I see a No to this question, I will remove the link in my sig (currently clicking the car takes to my homepage) :)

small ads to personal websites are fine. Your "ad" is really just a signature image which, you feel, represents you and it happens to link to your homepage. That's fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sorry, but a MOD has no place is just editing a sig, before alerting the member and requesting them to do it... which I would have had no issue doing... that he he took it upon himself to do so that just ****es me off... No offense Neobond, but perhaps you should advise the MODS and what not to request an edit before doing it themselves... its no NeoNazi, its NeoWin

Please don't feel offended, I am sure that no offense was intended when the sig was removed. I feel that we have every right to edit your signature if it wasn't complied with our rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i would say an Ad is a link to somthing you can buy (e.g. hosting or web design services)

where as personal sites, dont sell anything.

am i right here ? :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You all know my point is valid, that its much easier to just send a PM and request that the member edit their own sig or whatever to fit in the guidelines of the forum/site.

Just editing without notification, or after the fact is rude, inconsiderate, and not a way something should be done. My link to WinXPCentral was just that, a link to another windows site, that I happen to help run. That i cannot see how it was in violation of the rules at all.

As for the link to my site, outerfx, I could see someone asking that I remove that as I have not reviewed the rules in quite awhile. Sadly mods here seem to act first then let you know what happened, instead of letting the member & mod resolve it in a respectful manner. So yes I am still offended by what occured no matter how small it seems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

good rule, only thing next is to start moderating huge sigs...

is there no way of forcing users to have less then the specified requirements?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the link to my site, outerfx, I could see someone asking that I remove that as I have not reviewed the rules in quite awhile.

small ads to personal websites are fine. Your "ad" is really just a signature image which, you feel, represents you and it happens to link to your homepage. That's fine.
so, wich is it that is not allowed. links to large corperation(this im guessing should be banned), links to members own sites, or links to other tech websites? this is really confusing, clarification is defenentaly needed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.