Our community goals and rules

Did any of you read the FAQ referenced in the welcome message?

  • I read the FAQ
  • I did not read the FAQ

0 voters

I tried to actually codify our real philosophy on the forum, as it had evolved over the last decade on the original forum. I really want this community to grow and thrive, but not stop being what it’s always been.

So read the FAQ and let me know if you think it’s missing something important.


As someone who doesn’t participate much, this was a good read, and made me want to check out the forum more.

I will point out that it is a FAQ in only the loosest sense of the term.

The software seems to hard-code a “FAQ” in, but the example they posted was more like that and not like an actual FAQ.

The one issue with Discourse is that it hard codes a lot of things like that. It’s good from the perspective of intelligent defaults, but it’s also bad in the sense that some things are inexplicably nonconfigurable.

I don’t know if I can safely rename it, so I left it as-is for now.

Just think of it as a FAQ in the GameFAQs sense and you’re fine. All checks out.

Does the “don’t post someone else’s content without permission” apply to, say, embedded Youtube videos? Or is that sufficiently covered by Youtube’s content permissions?

That’s some CYA default language.

I will amend it.


Yeah, that’s some bullshit default text they include because they actually care about copyright. We don’t GAF. Get your pirate on.

1 Like

I heartily support the inclusion of the phrase “Fuck nazis” in our official FAQ. Thank you.


My sentiments exactly.


That is a thing of beauty.

I have read the FAQs now, I like them, though. I respectfully disagree on one point. Playing devils advocate is literally how I learn to make my own positions robust. That said I will respect your FAQ and refrain from doing so here.

It’s fine to approach a problem from a non-held position to examine it, so long as it’s clear that you’re considering avenues of attack and not fighting FOR the devil’s position.

The line is when defense of the devil is persistent and aggressive.

I then ask, may I continue to do the devils advocacy I’ve been doing in the past, here? I usually make it very clear I don’t support the position I’m taking, I’m just trying to fix up what I see as holes in the argument by exploiting them as the opposition, then learning from what I and others come up with.

Absolutely OK. I’ll amend the policy to be a bit more specific there.

If you’re unsure, ask yourself how you would feel if your post was featured on the front page of Fark.

A Long Time Ago In A Galaxy Far Far Away

Directions unclear, had sex with white supremacists.


I think this bit was more to prevent people from doing I’ve of two things:
Needlessly continuing an argument, like denying climate change is affected by humans for example, by “playing devil’s advocate”. The issue is resolved already.
The other is when someone is arguing badly and being a moron, then suddenly throws out “Oh, but I’m just playing devil’s advocate” in an attempt to wiggle out of what they were saying, after being trounced.

I think that, if you’re going to be playing devil’s advocate, you need to say so up front.

I’m uncertain about the “its okay to disrespect fascists” part, not because I think it shouldn’t be the case, but because what policies are and aren’t “fascist” is a subject of great debate. There are many who consider the income tax “fascist.” I think we need to be more articulate, not because I think any current users would be confused, but so that new Forumites will be warned before they start trouble.

Don’t make me bring back the rule banning stupid arguments about semantics. If you don’t know what a word means, check the dictionary. If you disagree with the dictionary, you’re wrong.