# Rules Update January 2020



## Jeremy (Jan 13, 2020)

Good evening, everyone. We have a few additions to the rules to announce tonight. Be sure to read through all of them and let us know if you have any questions.  You can find the full rules by clicking the "Rules" tab at the top of the forum or by clicking here: Rules and Guidelines. Here are the specific updates with some more information:


*Copied text should be in quotes.*

We've had instances where a user will copy/paste large blocks of text into new posts in order to farm bells. This is the inspiration for our new written post quality rule.




			
				1.b. Post Quality said:
			
		

> Large blocks of copied or plagiarized text from external sources not contained within quote tags.




*Posts shouldn't be nothing but constant negativity.*

While it's fine to disagree with someone or be negative about something you don't like, we want TBT to be a generally positive and friendly environment. If we feel someone is being constantly overly negative and bringing down the mood of a discussion, we will ask them to stop.




			
				1.b. Post Quality said:
			
		

> Repeated or constant behavior that is overly negative, toxic, or inflammatory.




*Bumping is no longer allowed in non-trading boards. We also specify what we mean by "bumping."*

The bumping section has been rewritten in list form and one change has been made: bumping is no longer allowed in non-trading boards. If you'd like to revive a general discussion thread, you can always contribute to the discussion instead of simply posting something like "bump." As always, trading threads should not be bumped more than every 4 hours (and less for amiibo cards). We've also specified what we mean by bumping in this rule. Reviving an older discussion thread is still allowed, as long as its topic is still relevant and your post adds to the discussion.




			
				1.c. Thread Bumping said:
			
		

> Bumping on The Bell Tree is defined as posting the word "bump" or other variant for the sole purpose of bringing the thread to the top of the board index for increased visibility. To avoid excessive and unnecessary posting on the forum, users must abide by the following guidelines when bumping:
> Threads in trading boards should not be bumped until the thread is inactive for at least four hours.
> Due to the slower rate of posting in the Animal Crossing amiibo Card Post Office board, threads may only be bumped after eight hours of inactivity.
> The bumping of discussion threads is not permitted; i.e. you may not post solely to bump the thread. You must have something on-topic to say when posting in a discussion thread, and the thread topic must still be relevant.
> Posting a contributory reply in a general discussion thread is permitted and is not classified as a bump, no matter the age of the thread.



We've also removed the part about reviving old and irrelevant threads from the post quality list since this is covered in its own section here.


*Age restriction for registering clarified.*

The forum will stop a user from registering if they're under 13 years old, but it hasn't been in the written rules until now.




			
				1.e. Accounts said:
			
		

> You must be at least 13 years of age to register on and use the forum.




*New written rule about using another person's account to gain bells and collectibles.*

This rule was announced during our Red Balloon World Tour event. Some people may have friends or family that don't use the forum very often. When these accounts are logged into during events and then send all of the rewards to an active user, it is effectively similar to using an alternate account. This is why we don't allow it, as it creates an unfair advantage to the recipient. This will be determined at the staff's discretion. 




			
				1.e. Accounts said:
			
		

> An account that exists solely to benefit another account in terms of bell and collectible gifts will be treated the same as an alternate account.




*Reporting section now defines mini-modding and suggests using Contact the Staff for help.*




			
				1.h. Reporting said:
			
		

> If you have a specific question or concern you'd like to discuss with the staff team, make a thread in our Contact the Staff board.






			
				1.h. Reporting said:
			
		

> Please use the report feature if you see a misplaced thread or any other post that requires attention. Responding to this yourself is considered mini-modding and can cause unnecessary confusion.




*Another suggestion to use Contact the Staff, this time instead of messaging a mod in Discord.*

If a user needs help on the forum, their instinct may be to PM a moderator who's online in the Discord server. Instead, it would be better to make a Contact the Staff thread so all staff members can help you with the problem. This also helps us keep organized and make sure you get the help you need.




			
				1.k. Discord Chat Room said:
			
		

> Our Discord server is not to be used for reporting site issues or concerns. Instead, please make a thread in our Contact the Staff board or use the report feature where applicable.


----------



## Stella-Io (Jan 13, 2020)

Was not aware of people farming bells by copying large chunks of text, wow.

I like that the new bump rule has been added, I've seen people bump -not trading- threads just to bump them with no context to add. Like, I guess it was for visibility.

I do have a question about this one thou. Does this apply to museum shops? Let's say a shop went a long time without any orders so it has been brought down on the board. Is bumping it back up for relevance allowed or is it not considered a trade thread?


----------



## Zura (Jan 13, 2020)

Stella-Io said:


> I do have a question about this one thou. Does this apply to museum shops? Let's say a shop went a long time without any orders so it has been brought down on the board. Is bumping it back up for relevance allowed or is it not considered a trade thread?


Well, I'd think the museum would count as a trading board so I wouldn't worry about that.


----------



## xSuperMario64x (Jan 13, 2020)

Posting about negativity constantly is what the What's Bothering You tread exists for lol  (never not grateful for that thread, feels nice to be able to vent here).


----------



## ali.di.magix (Jan 13, 2020)

xSuperMario64x said:


> Posting about negativity constantly is what the What's Bothering You tread exists for lol  (never not grateful for that thread, feels nice to be able to vent here).


Yeah that is true ^^" I guess that thread and some like threads would be exempt from the rule, as people can probably tell from the title that it will be a generally negative thread.


----------



## Alienfish (Jan 13, 2020)

Stella-Io said:


> Was not aware of people farming bells by copying large chunks of text, wow.


Yeah same.. I def. don't do that and if I need to copy I only do it for myself to like a document so I remember maybe or just, yeah use a quote block and link the sauce if needed.

However though, I think that mini-mod rules is a bit vague and I think it should maybe be "don't respond at all and just report", i mean it's even more confusing if people do and i think some do because just saying you shouldn't is a bit vague plus people might do it still if they don't "know" and you are still "allowed", unless I read it wrong.

Also might want to clarify "negativity", like does it mean you can't post negative opinions or just don't flame which is more obvious? should maybe post like "Don't make negative flame replies only" or such.

Glad with the bump rules, seen a bit too many nontrades getting those.


----------



## duckykate (Jan 13, 2020)

thank you for the new rule about constant negativity!


----------



## Dinosaurz (Jan 13, 2020)

Constant negativity? Whoops looks like I’m getting banned


----------



## Alienfish (Jan 13, 2020)

Dinosaurz said:


> Constant negativity? Whoops looks like I’m getting banned



Same lol, unless they'd clarify what they mean aside from obvious flame troll threads.

Anyway good job staff otherwise


----------



## seliph (Jan 13, 2020)

thank you father jeremy for the negativity rule -praying emoji-

(they're all good additions ofc but especially that one)


----------



## Jeremy (Jan 13, 2020)

Stella-Io said:


> I like that the new bump rule has been added, I've seen people bump -not trading- threads just to bump them with no context to add. Like, I guess it was for visibility.
> 
> I do have a question about this one thou. Does this apply to museum shops? Let's say a shop went a long time without any orders so it has been brought down on the board. Is bumping it back up for relevance allowed or is it not considered a trade thread?



The Museum Shop is a trading board, so it's fine to bump threads in there every four hours!



xSuperMario64x said:


> Posting about negativity constantly is what the What's Bothering You tread exists for lol  (never not grateful for that thread, feels nice to be able to vent here).





Sheila said:


> Also might want to clarify "negativity", like does it mean you can't post negative opinions or just don't flame which is more obvious? should maybe post like "Don't make negative flame replies only" or such.



I should stress that this rule is really only meant for extreme cases and the majority of people won't have to worry about it. Negativity itself is allowed on the forum and it's not our intention to make TBT some sort of super optimistic utopia where everyone has a forced smile on their face. But there's also a point where negativity and pessimism can go too far. For example, if the same user visits multiple threads and is constantly very negative about the topics, doesn't participate in the discussions without reaffirming their overwhelming negative feelings, and constantly steers the discussions back to their own personal opinions, it creates a toxic environment on the forum that we'd like to avoid. A similar rule has already existed in the Discord rules.



Sheila said:


> However though, I think that mini-mod rules is a bit vague and I think it should maybe be "don't respond at all and just report", i mean it's even more confusing if people do and i think some do because just saying you shouldn't is a bit vague plus people might do it still if they don't "know" and you are still "allowed", unless I read it wrong.



This is basically what the rules states. It has always been the case, but we wanted it to be explicitly written. Our warning category is also called "mini-modding," but we never actually used this term in the rules until now.

For those who are unfamiliar with this, we want people to report something that's wrong instead of reply themselves. For example, even with something as innocent as a misplaced thread, a user may have good intentions by telling them that it's in the wrong board, but it actually does more harm than good. We've seen cases where the person gives them the wrong information. Even more common is that the person who made the thread, who's usually newly registered, will repost it in the correct board, leaving us with duplicate threads for the same thing. This is why it's better to simply report the thread so a moderator can move it. The same goes for other things such as a heated argument that's going out of control.


----------



## Alienfish (Jan 13, 2020)

Thanks for clarifying, Jeremy  It makes more sense now and while I understand that "smiling happy place" was not the intended interpret I kinda wanted to make sure because some topics are quite like "fanbase only" and you can't write constructive replies almost at all and people might think said person posts the same content everywhere.

And yeah about the other, I definitely understand, I just think it's best to put it as concretely as possible for the sake of it getting read properly as well. From the Rules "Responding to this yourself is considered mini-modding and can cause unnecessary confusion."  i think is almost more confusion as it it would pseudo-allow people to do it, even though I understand you don't want to write in big red bold letters DON'T POST, but maybe making that text bold or clarifying more. It def.made sense in your example with wrong board like above but yeah just for people think it'd be more alright to do so.


----------



## That Marshal Fangirl (Jan 13, 2020)

Thank you for the clarifications and updates, Jeremy!


----------



## xSuperMario64x (Jan 13, 2020)

Jeremy said:


> I should stress that this rule is really only meant for extreme cases and the majority of people won't have to worry about it. Negativity itself is allowed on the forum and it's not our intention to make TBT some sort of super optimistic utopia where everyone has a forced smile on their face. But there's also a point where negativity and pessimism can go too far. For example, if the same user visits multiple threads and is constantly very negative about the topics, doesn't participate in the discussions without reaffirming their overwhelming negative feelings, and constantly steers the discussions back to their own personal opinions, it creates a toxic environment on the forum that we'd like to avoid. A similar rule has already existed in the Discord rules.



I agree that excessive negativity is unnecessary and even uncalled for. I've seen instances on specific video game discussions where people are overwhelmingly negative about the topic without a clear justification, or they complain just to hear themselves complain. This is a really good rule to add, seeing negativity in places where it shouldnt be just ruins the atmosphoere of an otherwise very friendly forum.


----------



## Alienfish (Jan 13, 2020)

xSuperMario64x said:


> I agree that excessive negativity is unnecessary and even uncalled for. I've seen instances on specific video game discussions where people are overwhelmingly negative about the topic without a clear justification, or they complain just to hear themselves complain. This is a really good rule to add, seeing negativity in places where it shouldnt be just ruins the atmosphoere of an otherwise very friendly forum.



I agree, however as long as you don't go extreme lengths and start flaming people for liking or disliking you should be allowed to have opinions :3


----------



## Zura (Jan 13, 2020)

Dinosaurz said:


> Constant negativity? Whoops looks like I?m getting banned





Sheila said:


> Same lol, unless they'd clarify what they mean aside from obvious flame troll threads.
> 
> Anyway good job staff otherwise



Better be on our best behavior


----------



## xSuperMario64x (Jan 13, 2020)

Sheila said:


> I agree, however as long as you don't go extreme lengths and start flaming people for liking or disliking you should be allowed to have opinions :3



Yeah it just gets annoying when they whine about it. I don't mind people sharing their opinion but when they start to get defensive and go on rude rants then it becomes uncalled for.


----------



## Alienfish (Jan 13, 2020)

xSuperMario64x said:


> Yeah it just gets annoying when they whine about it. I don't mind people sharing their opinion but when they start to get defensive and go on rude rants then it becomes uncalled for.



I think they are being defensive because it's kinda common some places have one "valid/popular" opinion and if you go against that you get kind of attacked so yeah.

Not gonna drag this on though.


----------



## cornimer (Jan 13, 2020)

Thank you for the new rules, some of these were very much needed and it'salways good to have more clarifications  glad to see a rule against excessive negativity as it definitely can ruin the mood of the forum


----------



## Zura (Jan 13, 2020)

Quick question, if someone does bump a non trading board thread, will that post be removed?


----------



## Valzed (Jan 13, 2020)

Jeremy said:


> I should stress that this rule is really only meant for extreme cases and the majority of people won't have to worry about it. Negativity itself is allowed on the forum and it's not our intention to make TBT some sort of super optimistic utopia where everyone has a forced smile on their face. But there's also a point where negativity and pessimism can go too far. For example, if the same user visits multiple threads and is constantly very negative about the topics, doesn't participate in the discussions without reaffirming their overwhelming negative feelings, and constantly steers the discussions back to their own personal opinions, it creates a toxic environment on the forum that we'd like to avoid. A similar rule has already existed in the Discord rules.



Welcome to The Bell Tree Forum! Even though we're totally not a forced optimistic utopia, naturally pessimistic people who are more likely to have a negative view of the world and whose posts will most likely have a negative slant will be considered extreme cases who create toxic environments. However if you can manage to contain your negativity to one and only one single post in one and only one single thread *per day* you will be tolerated... er... we mean welcomed. Also the 20 people who insist on flaming you, the naturally pessimistic interloper, about your negative opinion will not only be tolerated but will be lauded for pointing out your negativity to you and the Staff so you can be dealt with (e.g. singled out in a thread although not actually named and scolded by Staff before being banned) as swiftly as possible.


----------



## Zura (Jan 13, 2020)

Valzed said:


> snip



I think you just met your negativity limit for today. You gotta wait till tomorrow before you can be negative again


----------



## matt (Jan 13, 2020)

Thanks Jeremy for updating these rules.


----------



## seliph (Jan 13, 2020)

leave it to a rule about not bringing negativity to the forum to be met with tons of negativity.



Valzed said:


> Welcome to The Bell Tree Forum! Even though we're totally not a forced optimistic utopia, naturally pessimistic people who are more likely to have a negative view of the world and whose posts will most likely have a negative slant will be considered extreme cases who create toxic environments. However if you can manage to contain your negativity to one and only one single post in one and only one single thread *per day* you will be tolerated... er... we mean welcomed. Also the 20 people who insist on flaming you, the naturally pessimistic interloper, about your negative opinion will not only be tolerated but will be lauded for pointing out your negativity to you and the Staff so you can be dealt with (e.g. singled out in a thread although not actually named and scolded by Staff before being banned) as swiftly as possible.



i don't mean to pry (and this applies to everyone here not just yourself) but if your outlook on life is highly pessimistic and you have a hard time being positive in the majority of situations, you should really seek mental help if possible because that's definitely a personal issue and it isn't a healthy way to live.

someone correct me if i'm wrong here but my interpretation of the rule is that it applies to when people post constant negativity with little to no actual reasoning. for example making several posts saying "x sucks!" "x is bad/unfair!" without giving reasons as to why and shutting down the people trying to help. in this case it's very understandable to not be tolerated because all you're doing is putting something down and creating a negative environment.


----------



## xSuperMario64x (Jan 13, 2020)

seliph said:


> someone correct me if i'm wrong here but my interpretation of the rule is that it applies to when people post constant negativity with little to no actual reasoning. for example *making several posts saying "x sucks!" "x is bad/unfair!" without giving reasons as to why and shutting down the people trying to help.* in this case it's very understandable to not be tolerated because all you're doing is putting something down and creating a negative environment.



This is what I was trying to get at. I'm horrible at using my words lol (thanks ADHD brain)


----------



## Zura (Jan 13, 2020)

seliph said:


> If your outlook on life is highly pessimistic and you have a hard time being positive in the majority of situations, you should really *seek mental help* if possible because that's definitely a personal issue and it isn't a healthy way to live.


Dam, I knew I needed mental help!  Anyways, I think most of the posts here about that rule have been jokes. Mine definitely have been so please don't take them seriously...

- - - Post Merge - - -



xSuperMario64x said:


> This is what I was trying to get at. I'm horrible at using my words lol (thanks ADHD brain)



I feel ya


----------



## Alienfish (Jan 13, 2020)

Zura said:


> Dam, I knew I needed mental help!  Anyways, I think most of the posts here about that rule have been jokes. Mine definitely have been so please don't take them seriously...



Yeah I'm not constant negative either(if it might seem I apologize, I'm a bit cynic by nature) I just wanted to apply to that I think some people get attacked for not agreeing to the general opinion, and of course you shouldn't flame others regardless of their stance about eg. Sw/Sh or whatever but I think some things need to be open to constructive criticism which I hope the case will be as well :3

I do agree posting just "I love x" or "I hate x" in such discussion is definitely not being nice in any way either. Even positive needs good arguments in my opinion and not just because that's the accepted opinion or what might be the case


----------



## cornimer (Jan 13, 2020)

seliph said:


> someone correct me if i'm wrong here but my interpretation of the rule is that it applies to when people post constant negativity with little to no actual reasoning. for example making several posts saying "x sucks!" "x is bad/unfair!" without giving reasons as to why and shutting down the people trying to help. in this case it's very understandable to not be tolerated because all you're doing is putting something down and creating a negative environment.



Yeah this is how I interpreted the rule! I don't think it is meant to single out people who are naturally more pessimistic or are going through something, only people who complain CONSTANTLY about the same thing. 

For example, if Tad was excluded from New Horizons and I went into 15 New Horizons threads and said "this is the worst game ever! I hate New Horizons! How could they do this I can't believe I wasted my money on this game!" I would probably get a warning.


----------



## Alienfish (Jan 13, 2020)

cornimer said:


> Yeah this is how I interpreted the rule! I don't think it is meant to single out people who are naturally more pessimistic, only people who complain CONSTANTLY about the same thing



Yeah, makes more sense. :3 As long as the rule is treated as such it's a good one.


----------



## Zura (Jan 13, 2020)

It's a staple rule that should exist in every form of media. Heck, I even have that rule in my own discord


----------



## seliph (Jan 13, 2020)

Zura said:


> Dam, I knew I needed mental help!



i don't get the joke 



cornimer said:


> Yeah this is how I interpreted the rule! I don't think it is meant to single out people who are naturally more pessimistic or are going through something, only people who complain CONSTANTLY about the same thing.
> 
> For example, if Tad was excluded from New Horizons and I went into 15 New Horizons threads and said "this is the worst game ever! I hate New Horizons! How could they do this I can't believe I wasted my money on this game!" I would probably get a warning.



tbf though you would be absolutely correct


----------



## Dinosaurz (Jan 13, 2020)

Can we still use sarcasm lol


----------



## xSuperMario64x (Jan 13, 2020)

Zura said:


> It's a staple rule that should exist in every form of media. Heck, I even have that rule in my own discord



Yeah I've been the head of a group chat for almost three years now and Ice always been against people being incessantly pessimistic and rude. I've had to boot quite a few people because of this.


----------



## Zura (Jan 13, 2020)

seliph said:


> i don't get the joke


No joke there  people on TBT have proven that I'm too negative and you suggested mental help.

- - - Post Merge - - -



Dinosaurz said:


> Can we still use sarcasm lol



Unless you want to be burned at the stake  Just make sure to put in a huge font size "this is sarcasm".


----------



## Valzed (Jan 13, 2020)

seliph said:


> leave it to a rule about not bringing negativity to the forum to be met with tons of negativity.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Being naturally pessimistic does not automatically mean you are "highly" pessimistic. Seeing a glass as half empty instead of half full is a naturally pessimistic point of view but I doubt you would suggest someone seek mental help for saying that. I myself lean more to a pessimistic point of view. As of today I have yet to meet anyone who has told me I seem "highly" pessimistic. Also naturally pessimistic people sometimes have difficulty expressing themselves properly through the written word. Even if they are in a more optimistic mood their posts may not reflect it. Instead of saying "This game looks great!" they may say "This game doesn't suck as bad as I thought it would." The second sentence clearly does not sound as optimistic as the first yet the pessimistic person is actually trying their best to put their optimism for the game into words. Normal optimism is not a mental health issue and neither is normal pessimism.  People who are overly optimistic may be diagnosed as manic while people who overly pessimistic may be diagnosed as depressed. If a person is either manic or depressed then I would agree that they should consider seeking professional help. 

There have been many, many, many instances on this forum of someone making a post similar to my example above - "This game doesn't suck as bad as I thought it would." - who have had their opinion attacked because it does not match the general tone of "This game is great!" that the thread may have. Anyone - naturally optimistic or naturally pessimistic - would feel defensive if 3,4,5 or more people were flaming them for not thinking the game is great. If a naturally optimistic person tries to defend their opinion they may be able to put a positive vibe into their posts. They may say something along the lines of "Don't get me wrong - I'm totally stoked for this game it's just when I first heard about it I didn't think I would like it." When a naturally pessimistic person tries to defend their opinion they are probably not going to be able to manage to put a positive spin into their reply. Whatever they say will most likely still sound negative even if they are trying their best to explain they feel optimistic. The flaming will continue and the pessimistic person will be blamed for the "toxic" turn the thread took.


----------



## Oblivia (Jan 13, 2020)

Okay, I'm just going to step in before this turns into something more than it needs to!

Yes, it's okay to be more pessimistic or cynical by nature. It would never be our goal nor our place to try and dictate someone's overall personality or outlook. However, there's a big difference between saying something like:

"I'm not really feeling x and think it'd be a huge bummer if x was done with game x. In fact it may dissuade me from buying the game at all."

and:

"I can not BELIEVE they did this with game x! What a crock of ****! This has ruined my entire year and I hate everything I've heard about game x now. What a bunch of idiots the devs must be and they can all go die for all I care."

The second example there is bound to strike a few nerves with people, and rightfully so. There's always a way to state that you're unhappy with something without being negative to the point where it makes others feel uncomfortable, and that's essentially what we want to avoid. If and when multiple members come to us with concerns about the general tone of a series of posts and they're all coming from the same source, that's when we feel we have to step in as we do strive to make sure TBT is a fun and pleasant place for everyone.

As Jeremy said, this isn't something most members will ever have to worry about. If and when we feel as though someone is taking things a bit too far, we would absolutely contact that person prior to taking any official action and let them know so they can have a chance to do things differently.


----------



## seliph (Jan 13, 2020)

Valzed said:


> Being naturally pessimistic does not automatically mean you are "highly" pessimistic. Seeing a glass as half empty instead of half full is a naturally pessimistic point of view but I doubt you would suggest someone seek mental help for saying that. I myself lean more to a pessimistic point of view. As of today I have yet to meet anyone who has told me I seem "highly" pessimistic. Also naturally pessimistic people sometimes have difficulty expressing themselves properly through the written word. Even if they are in a more optimistic mood their posts may not reflect it. Instead of saying "This game looks great!" they may say "This game doesn't suck as bad as I thought it would." The second sentence clearly does not sound as optimistic as the first yet the pessimistic person is actually trying their best to put their optimism for the game into words. Normal optimism is not a mental health issue and neither is normal pessimism.  People who are overly optimistic may be diagnosed as manic while people who overly pessimistic may be diagnosed as depressed. If a person is either manic or depressed then I would agree that they should consider seeking professional help.
> 
> There have been many, many, many instances on this forum of someone making a post similar to my example above - "This game doesn't suck as bad as I thought it would." - who have had their opinion attacked because it does not match the general tone of "This game is great!" that the thread may have. Anyone - naturally optimistic or naturally pessimistic - would feel defensive if 3,4,5 or more people were flaming them for not thinking the game is great. If a naturally optimistic person tries to defend their opinion they may be able to put a positive vibe into their posts. They may say something along the lines of "Don't get me wrong - I'm totally stoked for this game it's just when I first heard about it I didn't think I would like it." When a naturally pessimistic person tries to defend their opinion they are probably not going to be able to manage to put a positive spin into their reply. Whatever they say will most likely still sound negative even if they are trying their best to explain they feel optimistic. The flaming will continue and the pessimistic person will be blamed for the "toxic" turn the thread took.



the "if" in front of my statement was a crucial part of it. i barely know you and was making a very broad statement about anyone who could be reading, not only you personally. sorry if that wasn't clear.

i also specified that i wasn't necessarily talking about you personally because from my own observations, i've noticed in a lot of the instances i'm assuming this rule is referring to the user does have some sort of issue and definitely does need some sort of outlet. that being said not only is being overly negative not a healthy one, but the forums are not and probably shouldn't be used as one in that sense.

fjsdklflk sry oblivia i take like 7 years to proofread my posts


----------



## Zura (Jan 13, 2020)

Thanks for the clarification Obliva!


----------



## Oblivia (Jan 13, 2020)

seliph said:


> fjsdklflk sry oblivia i take like 7 years to proofread my posts



Me too man, me too. You're fine!


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Jan 13, 2020)

I wonder how this new rule applies to political discussions. Also, does this apply to blogs too?

Recently, I made a post in the General Discussion linking to one of my older blog entries and had a few points I didn’t add there, but should’ve added. I don’t know if that would be in violation of the new rule.


----------



## Zura (Jan 13, 2020)

Alolan_Apples said:


> I wonder how this new rule applies to political discussions. Also, does this apply to blogs too?
> 
> Recently, I made a post in the General Discussion linking to one of my older blog entries and had a few points I didn’t add there, but should’ve added. I don’t know if that would be in violation of the new rule.



I think your posts are fine as long as you're not making them to be just negative and/or to make other users mad/retaliate.


Oblivia said:


> There's always a way to state that you're unhappy with something without being negative to the point where it makes others feel uncomfortable, and that's essentially what we want to avoid.


----------



## Jeremy (Jan 13, 2020)

Alolan_Apples said:


> I wonder how this new rule applies to political discussions. Also, does this apply to blogs too?
> 
> Recently, I made a post in the General Discussion linking to one of my older blog entries and had a few points I didn’t add there, but should’ve added. I don’t know if that would be in violation of the new rule.



In general, negativity and even pessimism is fine, so you shouldn't have anything to worry about. A normally levelheaded member getting into a heated debate or getting passionate about something isn't what this rule is meant to address. It's the over-the-top reactions and excessive, relentless negativity that can make an uncomfortable environment.


----------



## michealsmells (Jan 14, 2020)

These are good rules to set into stone! I feel like all of these should be obvious, but people really like to find work-arounds, like with the farming bells thing and the bumpin' rule.


----------



## Alienfish (Jan 14, 2020)

Jeremy said:


> In general, negativity and even pessimism is fine, so you shouldn't have anything to worry about. A normally levelheaded member getting into a heated debate or getting passionate about something isn't what this rule is meant to address. It's the over-the-top reactions and excessive, relentless negativity that can make an uncomfortable environment.



Yeah, fair enough. And I would assume as long as one make it into a topic for mature discussion and not just posting extreme views just to get flame wars etc. would be the case too if I got it right.

Anyway good clarifications by staff and good adds now that I got my answers so hope it'll continue to be a good palce


----------



## Dinosaurz (Jan 14, 2020)

What if my existence makes others feel uncomfortable


----------



## Zura (Jan 14, 2020)

Dinosaurz said:


> *What if my existence makes others feel uncomfortable*



Sometimes it's like that, I know the feeling


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Jan 14, 2020)

I have a question. Do you have the original set of rules back when the Rules and Guidelines were created in 2013? What about the rules from the beginning of 2015? The reason why is because I want to see how much the rules have changed over time.


----------



## Antonio (Jan 15, 2020)

Thank you for adding the negativity rule to the forum. <3


----------



## Dinosaurz (Jan 15, 2020)

Alolan_Apples said:


> I have a question. Do you have the original set of rules back when the Rules and Guidelines were created in 2013? What about the rules from the beginning of 2015? The reason why is because I want to see how much the rules have changed over time.



I miss the special rights for the auctions lol


----------



## LambdaDelta (Jan 15, 2020)

special rights?


----------



## Mayor Monday (Jan 17, 2020)

Excellent! I'm glad mini-moderating has been addressed, too.


----------



## Alienfish (Jan 18, 2020)

Mayor Monday said:


> Excellent! I'm glad mini-moderating has been addressed, too.



I still think they should simply write "do not reply" rather than "it can be confusing" because it indirectly calls to that you can do it in some way, but yeah.


----------



## LambdaDelta (Jan 18, 2020)

I've gotten so many mini-modding warnings/infractions that tbh I'm surprised the clarification wasn't put in until now

I still find them dumb and unnecessary personally, but bleh


----------



## Alienfish (Jan 19, 2020)

LambdaDelta said:


> I've gotten so many mini-modding warnings/infractions that tbh I'm surprised the clarification wasn't put in until now
> 
> I still find them dumb and unnecessary personally, but bleh



Yeah idk if I got a warning but yeah def been told off. Yeah they are dumb so that's why I widh they'd simply write out "don't reply ause we give out warnings" rather than the obviously confusing one. sorry for ranting but people might either a) get confused and reply or b) reply bc they want to help badly


----------



## Zura (Jan 19, 2020)

LambdaDelta said:


> I've gotten so many mini-modding warnings/infractions that tbh I'm surprised the clarification wasn't put in until now
> 
> I still find them dumb and unnecessary personally, but bleh



I've gotten one mini modding warning during the Halloween event because I tried explaining how to upload images from Imgur  then seliph made a thread for that and it was fine...


----------



## xSuperMario64x (Jan 19, 2020)

LambdaDelta said:


> I've gotten so many mini-modding warnings/infractions that tbh I'm surprised the clarification wasn't put in until now
> 
> I still find them dumb and unnecessary personally, but bleh



Yeah I think that like 90% of all the warnings and infractions I've gotten were from mini-modding. It needs to explicitly say DO NOT REPLY so that people know 100% that they should not reply and should instead report.


----------



## Alienfish (Jan 19, 2020)

Zura said:


> I've gotten one mini modding warning during the Halloween event because I tried explaining how to upload images from Imgur  then seliph made a thread for that and it was fine...



Excuse me what the actual ****... that is just messed up modding.

That shouldn't be modding though, I don't see how that was against the rules to explain that, not a lot of people know how to.


----------



## Zura (Jan 19, 2020)

They said it was the way I did it made people uncomfortable so I guess it was my fault


----------



## Jeremy (Jan 19, 2020)

Zura said:


> I've gotten one mini modding warning during the Halloween event because I tried explaining how to upload images from Imgur  then seliph made a thread for that and it was fine...





Zura said:


> They said it was the way I did it made people uncomfortable so I guess it was my fault



I just checked your warning and it could have actually been categorized as a rude behavior warning more than a mini-modding one for the reason you mentioned. Either way, it's fine to disagree with your warning, but calling out others by name isn't necessary.


----------



## seliph (Jan 19, 2020)

Zura said:


> I've gotten one mini modding warning during the Halloween event because I tried explaining how to upload images from Imgur  then seliph made a thread for that and it was fine...



i don't know what you said but maybe it was because i made sure to explicitly state that i wasn't a mod and that i was just making a collection of quoted/linked back staff replies. i also asked a mod before making the thread.

aaa sniped by jeremy


----------



## Zura (Jan 19, 2020)

Jeremy said:


> Either way, it's fine to disagree with your warning, but calling out others by name isn't necessary.



I just know at the time seeing Seliph's thread made me a little annoyed. I'm not angry at Seliph or anything so I apologize to Seliph if Ive offended him

- - - Post Merge - - -



seliph said:


> i don't know what you said but maybe it was because i made sure to explicitly state that i wasn't a mod and that i was just making a collection of quoted/linked back staff replies. i also asked a mod before making the thread.
> 
> aaa sniped by jeremy



Well imgur isn't exactly this sites property so explaining it should be perfectly reasonable for anyone. From what Jeremy said, it was the "way I said it"


----------



## seliph (Jan 19, 2020)

Zura said:


> Well imgur isn't exactly this sites property so explaining it should be perfectly reasonable for anyone. From what Jeremy said, it was the "way I said it"



i was just guessing why my thread was okay to make, jeremy's post wasn't there when i was typing


----------



## Zura (Jan 19, 2020)

seliph said:


> i was just guessing why my thread was okay to make, jeremy's post wasn't there when i was typing



Yep sorry for calling you out like that


----------



## moonbyu (Jan 19, 2020)

god, you don't know how glad i am about that constant negativity rule. thanks for all those other rules too. very cool!


----------



## Blood Eclipse (Jan 20, 2020)

Jeremy said:


> In general, negativity and even pessimism is fine, so you shouldn't have anything to worry about. A normally levelheaded member getting into a heated debate or getting passionate about something isn't what this rule is meant to address. It's the over-the-top reactions and excessive, relentless negativity that can make an uncomfortable environment.



Thank you for the clarification. I was reading on other threads that negativity was now against the rules and I thought for a second that BTF would go down the hill of becoming: 



since negativity can mean a lot of different things to a lot of different people. Glad to know you can still have opposing views and discussions.


Now that I have a better understanding of the rule, I agree that posts like "People who like (X) should die" is highly unnecessary and add nothing to an argument.


----------



## oath2order (Jan 21, 2020)

GOD I'm so glad I haven't been posting recently otherwise I'd think the negativity rule was aimed at me


----------



## The Pennifer (Jan 22, 2020)

The new rules are good! Thanks  
Negativity can be hurtful and tear down ... better to express viewpoints without causing hurt ... text messages can easily be misinterpreted and imply wrong meaning and who wants to hurt or be hurt!?
I admit to being guilty of unintentional hurtful words in the past once or twice, so I apologize for that ... I  you all!


----------



## Seastar (Jan 27, 2020)

Jeremy said:


> *Copied text should be in quotes.*



Does this include threads in The Basement?


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Jan 27, 2020)

Jirachi100 said:


> Does this include threads in The Basement?



I think so, but I think the rule was implemented to prevent people from farming TBT Bells illegitimately. I remember a big case of it a long time ago, but that’s in the past, and it wasn’t done in the Basement.


----------



## Alienfish (Jan 27, 2020)

Jirachi100 said:


> Does this include threads in The Basement?



I don't see people doing it there but unless it's that Wiki game you don't earn bells so. Always good to quote, though.


----------



## Zura (Jan 27, 2020)

Jirachi100 said:


> Does this include threads in The Basement?



I'm sure it's for every board but the basement is also sorta lenient with rules on posts


----------

