So, Id like to debate the rules...

Or is that already going too far for this forum?

do you want to have a real discussion about what is going on or just have everyone pretend this is a happy fun place?
See, you've already broken a promise, simply because you can not gurantee everyone a fun place without giving everyone narcotics.

When you eliminate all dissenters then you have some sort of bizarre orwellian forum- is that really what you want? really?

So, the short (and I hope safe) answer is.... I agree.....let's just say voicing a bit of anger is justified at this point, I think???

Two (or three) main differences

1. There 7 rules, 6 are pretty much the same as before, rule 7 has been "tweaked" to
now state:

- Comments meant to be destructive to the community, any individual within the community, the game company, or its staff.

The key interpretation would be when a comment becomes "destructive" as opposed to just
negative.

2. An explicit series of actions for rule violation.

Any action requires two levels
It has to flagged by a moderator, then SOM will look at it.

Then there would be an escalating series of actions starting with a mere warning ending
in getting booted. By the 2nd strike you already into a ban, the third strike and you are out.

3. Then there is a purpose/promise about being fun which has nothing much to do with the rules
or rule enforcment but will probably, and already has drawn comment.


So will there be an appeal process for all this?

Hmmm...two "Orwellian" references by Salty in the last 24 hours or so. Interesting.

Hmmm...two "Orwellian" references by Salty in the last 24 hours or so. Interesting.

If the censorship fits...