AUP revamp

[LiteracyScaresMe]

In light of recent events and previous concerns, I think that it's about time to revamp/update the AUP.

For one, the 'Light swearing' rule is virtually nonexistent anymore. Though it's still written, no one has been following or enforcing it for a looong time now.
I stand corrected on this, because I was lame and didn't read the rule right. (Haha, whups.) Apparently harsh swearing is deemed acceptable if it's not used in a personally offensive or attacking manner. But it's suggested that users maintain minimal swearing.

For another, the advertising of other chats/chat sites isn't explicitly stated in the rules, although people have been banned for advertising. As a courtesy to the users, and to the staff who has to enforce the rules, I believe it should be made clearer as to what is acceptable or not.

I think I remember Gui saying a revamp was in the works, but that was months ago, and I haven't seen any changes since.

What do you guys think? Yay/nay? What should be added or absolved from the current AUP?

[Murk]

Ban swearing outright and enforce it seriously

[LiteracyScaresMe]

Ban swearing outright and enforce it seriously

I'd agree with this more if this was Neopets or something along that line, but it seems like the majority of our users are at least 15+ years old, with a considerable amount of an adult population.

I don't see how light swearing (Hell, damn, crap, ass...at worst, 'shit', maybe) is that much of a problem.
Speaking as someone who swears like a sailor, hah.

I remember at one point, I got kicked from CC for using the word 'bastard' in an inoffensive context. This was several years ago, and not on tK, but that's still a bit of an extreme restriction on swears. Just to provide an example. :x

[Murk]

So it's pretty obvious that people can't handle adult words appropriately

[Pink]

Wow, Lit. You're awesome. Such a go-getter! I'm rooting for you!

Hahaha. I'm sure I can come up with some ideas.

[Pink]

Honestly, I really don't see any problem with swearing whatsoever.
However, the harassment rules have been a little wonky---perhaps a more clear definition or a more tightly upheld definition might work.
Also, the warnings thing---I really feel as if that should be upheld and there needs to be a better go-to concerning punishment. Sid is right, dealing with things has been a real problem because of people constantly being rerouted. Perhaps before banning, it should be made clear what a user is doing and why. In other places, the cause for the ban was also coded in so that when you banned, you could put in an explanation as to why and how long.
I think doing so would clear up a lot of issues.
Also can we get rid of the color bar? waitthat'snotrelated

Umm. Also, the fact that people ban or can ban out of nowhere makes it hard for the accused/offending user to get screenshots. And, as such can be tampered with either way, it's best that both sides have a record so that any disputes can be dealt with a little more fairly.

[LiteracyScaresMe]

It was pointed out to me that I misread the first rule.
So, the swearing rule isn't really an issue. Fixed the first post.


Also, this is something that's coming to mind from an incident months prior, but I think we should have a policy on picture/art 'theft'. I know that's a touchy issue with a lot of people, especially with artists on tK. I had a friend who commissioned artwork from an outside artist for her character and had another user on tK take the picture from her profile, edit it slightly, and use it as their own. Users are also prone to taking an image someone else is using and make a new character with the same image, or with slight alterations. I remember Wolfprince's old profile picture being used in at least 2 or 3 other users' profiles. Or...variants of it, anyway.
Crying out 'copyright infringement', as I know some artists can be prone to do, doesn't work on a place like tK where there's no profit being made off of the artwork. But I do think there should be some image protection rules or something in place.

[KitDreamer]

^
This

[Terness]

Definitely yay. I don't know how strict we are about too much OOC in rp rooms, but that's about the only thing that bothers me. Because there's a vague line to what's a lot and what isn't.

And near naked furries bother me too, so do profiles that state 'in the works, here's a picture' and have said near naked furry. But alas, I don't think we can ban for poorly done characters.

[Xachariah]

I have a problem with Elysia_Raupe/Snow_Flake. The skirting of the AUP by going "hey, this picture is too mature for tK! So ask for it!" is really just... ugh.

[Rook]

We deal with art theft as best we can when it's brought up to us.

Same for inappropriate pictures; we can't open every single one, it has to be pointed out.

Perhaps a thread could be set up where you can point these out and the staff will first investigate then remove the content that's out of line.

[Inquisitor]

We deal with art theft as best we can when it's brought up to us.

Same for inappropriate pictures; we can't open every single one, it has to be pointed out.

Perhaps a thread could be set up where you can point these out and the staff will first investigate then remove the content that's out of line.

His problem is actually the fact that she dodges the entire system by simply stating "it's inappropriate, so ask for a link"

[Inquisitor]

Reposting this from another forum. This was all loosely and vaguely done, and definitely not what I would want to see in any final draft, but I already had my ideas written down and on hand so I'll post them for dissection or whatever. Also note that some of it is tongue-in-cheek or at least my usual brand of humor.

The Imperium of Man is beset on all sides...I beseech the High Lords to ai

Whoops, wrong rant. Anyway, theatrics aside. I'm sure everyone here knows who I am. I've always been a thorn in your sides and an instigator and all, but, today I'd like to discuss some issues, as I see them, in no particular order, and elaborated as much as I feel about them. Feel free to dissect and discuss, I'll be giving my opinion and ideas as an outsider of course.

Rules, Punishments, Staff Guidelines, and issues of clarity

This has always been a very big problem for me, so I'll tackle it as I see fit.

Rules: There's a lot of problems here. Some of the rules are outright silly( the cursing clause was a main offender, I believe) . However, the recent pattern has been in bettering this, and, the rules as written have been worked on and bettered. A lot of fat has been cut away which is good, leaving us with a good core that needs to be expanded and worked upon more.

However, there are some issues with this – and that has to deal with how they're written, considered, and perceived. The way I see it, there are two ways to look at the rules – the rules can be Concrete, or they can be Abstract. Each of these systems of thinking have issues of their own, and benefits.

A concrete rule set should be simple, but defined. The current rule set is flexible – and the problem with this is that it can be stretched. The AUP should be refined to if, not fewer rules, more well defined, established, and laid down rules. If it's not an issue not covered by the rule, you shouldn't need to stretch it any. This is not to say, however, that the rule needs to cover every single nuance of it – I.e., a complete list of what's considered 'heavy swearing'. Common knowledge should be used here. (I won't bring up the stupidity involved with the “tits” incident.)

Abstract is, as I see it, what the Keep has now. The rules are viewed as loose guidelines and can be stretched to cover any number of things. This, I believe, is an issue that will come up in the punishment section I'll be writing next.

There in lies the issue of clarity. The rules at the moment are ill-defined if not completely non-existent. While I realize it is impossible for the rules to be all inclusive, it should try, it should be an easy to find link in the chat, on the front-page, and when a new handle is created. (Actually, is it possible for it to be linked to IP so you only get to look at it once?)  As I found out today, the harassment clause has been removed, and then Fahd (and nearly myself) were charged with it. This shouldn't happen – the rules should be very, very clearly defined, for both the user AND the staff to see and adhere too. Confusion over what rules have been broken should NOT happen.

Now, the obvious issue here is as this: abstract rules allow for people to get nailed if they do something obscene to get canned anyway, without a rule to break it up. Concrete rules gives people like me the chance to push the envelope and see how far we can get and just stay on the right side of the rules.

Punishment and Staff Problems: Hooooo boy now here's a fun one we all know and enjoy very well. Now, the problem here is simple – there seems to be no guidelines for protocol when it comes to punishing folks. At all. Every moderator seems to have their own idea on what should be enforced, and how harshly it should be enforced. Now, this is a big problem for quite a number of reasons – how are the users supposed to know what's acceptable when one moderator tells them to cut it out and another ignores it or, hell, actively takes part in it?

There needs to be, like the rules, clear cut guidelines. If someone breaks a rule, there shouldn't be any confusion about enforcing it. There shouldn't be moderator discretion (excluding obvious severe cases). There should be a decided upon standard, where if a rule is broken, said rule breaker receives a punishment based on what they did, not how much they are well liked or disliked, or a previous case. It should be established that such-and-such rule leads to such-and-such punishment.

Now, what this does, is it stops from situations like my hilarious copy/paste that led to me getting banned for 10-days, and then an attempt to get it changed to 30 days because of a previous banning. It should be a simple guideline that states “Dropping vulgar/obscene whispers/links/etc leads to a 30-day ban.” End of story. Moderator should know this without having to speak to the other mods or getting confused.

The guidelines for this punishment don't necessarily need to be made public. If everyone knew that breaking Rule X led to getting kicked out for 1 day, each and every day, it may not bother them at all. So keep it unknown – I would also propose a tiered system (also well defined). A 3 day ban and a repeat offend gets a 10-day, then a 30 or a perma, or etc. You understand the meaning, of course. Severity denotes how many second chances you get, if any.

Leaving punishments up to moderator discretion only leads to cries of abuse and the general population being rather unhappy. Some mods may be much more strict then others, or not strict at all. The problems from such are obvious.

Summary: The rules should be clearly defined and easily accessible. The punishments for these rules, while not necessarily open to public view, should be easily accessible to the moderator staff and enforced as such. Moderator discretion should be summarily executed, before it's corpse is repurposed for rationing.

Issues with Staff, Public Discourse, and Courses of Action

Abuse of Power: This is an issue far too common place on tK and it needs to stop. There's a lot of grumblings from people about it. Moderators, far too often, flaunt their power – threatening with kicks or bans any action they dislike, without citing rules or with any real reason. I won't name names, but it happens a lot more than I'd like.

Public Discourse: Another one. Far too often, a moderator says “stop doing that” to someone (with or without reason). Someone eventually gets kicked or banned – people begin to question why, possibly saying it was unfair, or wanting clarification on what just happened. And far too often, the moderator is quick to stifle public discussion.

Just because there is a dissenting opinion or people are unhappy with the choice of actions the mods took doesn't mean that the moderators should begin to shout and kick them (unless, of course, they're aiding or abiding the heretic. In which case, immediate executions are in order.). I've been faced with this a lot of time. Public discussion is not bad. In fact, this is good – it shows what needs to be changed or made more clear.  Which brings me too...

Courses of Action: Lots of people don't know what their options are once they're banned, or where to go to discuss bannings, rules, or other things. The staff is so quick to shoot down any discussions that no one really knows what to do. So, for this, I propose, either a repuporising of the politika forums or a new forum created that's linked in the chat and on the front page. Give people a place to freely discuss the moderators, rules, bannings, and problems out in the opening. Keep it moderated and monitored. Allow grievances to be filed with moderators out in the open – that way multiple people can come forth if they have similar complaints and/or want to start a discussion on just about anything. While the majority of people are stupid and deserve no say in anything, a public forum will go a long way of keeping connected to the disillusioned user base.

A Lack of Moderators: Self-explanatory. Syn, Drew, Ezra, Rook, and Irra are hardly around, if ever or at all. Six is on later when he can due to being in Romania. There's a rather large gap where the chat is pretty much completely without staff for the most part. Way to fix this is rather obvious as well.

Summary

The rules need to be refined and established clearly where everyone can see them. Guidelines need to be set up for how rules should be enforced, and what sort of punishments should be doled out. Curb moderators flaunting power, as well as establish  lines of public communication to air grievances and discuss politics. Possibly, hire more staff.

If I think of more I'll add more. Until then, discuss.

[Inquisitor]

1. The Keep AUP

1. Users of the Keep are asked to keep profanity to a minimum.

Light swearing is acceptable, both in character and out of character. Light swearing includes words "ass," "damn," "hell," "bitch," and other swear words that aren't considered harsh swearing.

Harsh swearing is acceptable in and out of character. Harsher swearing is considered to be the words "fuck," "cunt," and the like. Room names and User names MAY NOT contain harsh profanity.

2. Profiles may not knowingly contain links to pornography or otherwise sexually explicit materials.

Profile pictures CANNOT show bared crotches or genitalia for males or females, and it cannot show a fully bare female chest. Such pictures, or profile text, depicting such a scene will be considered Advertising for Cybersex and is extremely frowned upon. An Admin or Moderator will request the picture or profile to be edited, or possibly removed, dependent upon content. If the User refuses, the Administration (Admin and Mods alike) will /kick or /ban dependent upon repeated offenses/level of transgression.

Bandwidth Theft: Taking content (such as pictures) from a website without permission from the content owner is illegal. Users found stealing bandwidth (by reusing the same content but still retaining the original url without permission) will be subject to temporary or permanent suspension of access to the Chat. We recommend users find a free picture hosting site if they are unable to host images with their own resources.

3. Real Life (RL): Users found promoting Real Life hate campaigns will be permanently banned.
Hate campaigns include sexism, racism, and homophobia, but are not limited to being those alone. Keep in mind that telling a story about a hate campaign (In Character) is acceptable if the players involved agree; for example, a fictional story about racism between elves and orcs is an example of something that is acceptable.

Please remember, In Character (IC), and Out Of Character (OOC) are two separate things.

It is also forbidden for a user to make Real Life (RL) threats against another user. Punishment for this will be given according to the severity of the threat, and the number of threats the threatener has made before, and whether or not the party threatened wants to make a complaint.

*** In ALL cases of Real Life (RL) hate campaigns and threats, proper authorities may be contacted at the discretion of the administration.

4. Cyber sex or 'cybering' is STRICTLY FORBIDDEN in all public rooms, this includes whispers.

Any sexual contact with a player who is a minor (under the age of consent) in their country/state is strictly prohibited in all rooms, both public and private. Punishments for this will suit the transgression, and will lead to banishment and in extreme cases the involvement of appropriate authorities.

5. Public room tags will not contain any information of an inappropriate or solicitous nature.

This includes, but is in no way limited to, tags that state or imply the user is looking for sex, seeking sexual roleplay, providing or offering sexual content. It is at the discretion of the staff as to what may be considered soliciting.

Rooms tagged as (Private) are still subject to the rules of the AUP, and are afforded no rights of a private room. Please use the /private command to make a private room. Unsuitably named rooms will be removed at the discretion of the staff after a warning.

6. Respect each other's privacy Out Of Character (OOC).

This applies to all users of The Keep. Repeated requests to another player for OOC information (ICQ #, AIM, MSN, Yahoo!, email address etc.) that they do not want known, will be considered harassment, and will be treated as such.

This also applies to any Real Life (RL) details a person wishes to keep private, and any form of behavior that would be considered harassment in Real Life (RL). Refrain from posting personal information about other users, such as pictures, addresses, numbers, or any detail that one could reasonably request remain private.

7. Attempted abuse of The Keep's Machine Spirits by use of port scans, probes, uses of known network security tools or otherwise seeking of security flaws in The Keep or any of the infrastructure supporting it without express permission from the Adeptus Mechanicus and The Keep's appointed tech-priests will be subject to mind-cleansing and repurposing into a servitor.

Administratum forces will also be notified of your tech-heresy.

Likewise user/s who attempt what may be construed as a Denial of Service attack on the network, or any attempt to disrupt the service through any security flaw or otherwise will be subject to permanent banning. ISP and Federal officials may also be notified.

8. Any user who uses The Keep for the purposes of spamming will be subject to kicking or any other punishment deemed appropriate by the administrative staff.

Spam being defined as the repetitious posting of nonsensical or meaningless letters, numbers, text or URLS. Please also refrain from randomly capitalizing letters in your posts, using font colours (like white text on a white background or bright green) that are difficult to read.

9. Any user who persistently talks (as opposed to whispers) Out Of Character in In-Character only rooms will be asked to role-play.

Failure to comply may result in a warning, kicking, or mind-cleansing.

10. Any user who purposefully bypasses an ignore by any means in order to continue bother, harrying, insulting, or otherwise abusing another user will be charged and subsequently punished for harassment.

Harassment is herein defined as any user who purposefully goes around an ignore by either logging onto a different handle or by asking another user to harry another user (henceforth: the victim). This also means, however, that the victim MUST TAKE all necessary measures in order to stop the harassing user, including /ignoring the user. If you refuse to /ignore the offending user (and especially if you continue to fire back at the offending user), you are not subject to the harassment clause.

11. Grievances, problems, suggestions, clarifications, or any other type of complaint or question in regards to the rules, or the moderating staff, should be posted in the (Politika) section of The Keep's Forums.

This is not to say that one cannot argue or air complaints, but the (Politika) should be used to air grievances formally in the forums so others can add their experiences properly, and moderators can respond in a timely and public manner.

This forum can be used to make complaints about a rule, a moderator, a moderator's action, a user's actions, or what you believe should be made into the rules. This forum is for open discussion but your must argue CIVILY. Those who abuse this forum may lose their privileges and/or complete a mandatory sentence in a penal colony.

(Politika Link)

Some of this is obviously tongue in cheek. Rules 1-9 are largely unchanged; they're good, and solid. I deleted the unnecessary bit about cursing at users in rule one, and in rule 2, changed the language from “...female nipples...” to “...fully bared female chest...” due to a complaint made by H. Rules 11-12 were added in by me; rule 11 was previously part of the AUP and seems to have disappeared so I rewrote it. 12 is not as much of a rule as a “Miranda Right”  sort of thing, so people know their recourse. Which brings me too...

Redesigning and Reclassifying the Keep Politika Forum

As it is, the Politika forum is under utilized and rather pointless. I'd like to see a link in the AUP leading directly to the Politika forum. If I remember correctly, this forum needed some form of registration. That should be thrown out. The forum should be repurposed with stricter rules for civility and no shitposting allowed.

Users should be allowed to post the following:

-Complaints about the staff
-Complaints about rules
-Complaints about abusive users (we may toss this one out if it proves to be stupid and leads to far too much clutter)
-Complaints regarding the severity of punishments
-Complaints regarding the leniency of punishments
-Suggestions for rules

All things should be confined to one thread where applicable. Moderators should try and actively post in threads, regarding them or other staff, or to discuss problems. I would also propose that a special title of some sort be added under the Username of those who moderate the chat.

THIS IS NOT AL ALTERNATIVE TO CHAT ROOM DISCUSSION. No moderator should tell a user to drop something in chat and “take it to Politika”. Politika should be used for moderators and users to air grievances and discuss issues at leisure, so everyone can get a say in, rather then it being drawn out in chat where it may go unnoticed and heard.

Channels should be open between users and moderators so there are no disillusioned moderators and no users who feel they go unheard for too long.

Moderator Guidelines

These will be very vague and very broad until I feel like describing them/can think straight.

-Moderators cannot overstep this boundaries! I cannot stress this one enough because it happens allll the goddamned time. It is a huge issue. I have seen the moderators on many occasions telling users to quiet down/shut up/stop typing without breaking any rules simply because they were carrying on an unpopular discussion or something the moderator personally disagreed with. If not, they would create a rule for no reason.

-Moderators must have a reason for their actions. This ties into the same thing as above. I have been kicked for making fun of someone for absolutely zero reason.

-Moderators must be unbiased. I've seen this one a lot, as well. A “problem” user or someone the moderators disagree with hammers or threatens a user by taking a rule to an extreme and doesn't punish for the others. Often enough, there are other people doing the very same in the same room and only one is signaled out. Moderator favoritism is bad.

-Moderators must not be given full discretion over their own power. It will be abused. Moderators must use their powers only within the the power granted by the AUP or extenuating circumstances. Flouting their power or picking out their own punishments is unacceptable.

-Moderators should act respectful. Patronizing a user because he disagrees with your actions is childish and unacceptable.

Punishment Guidelines

This is another big one. There are no clear-cut guidelines to what is punishable and what is not, which means that mods often threaten, boot, and ban people for any increments of time as they desire because there is no set standard. Because of this, I think we need to set something down in stone for all mods to follow. As I am not experienced with the former guidelines I know float around but are unwritten, so I'd like support here. Common sense should be simple enough here.I'll be listing the rules and what I would recommend.

1. If a person curses harshly in extremis (I.e., continually dropping f-bombs, usually along side harassing someone, should probably be rarely, if ever, enforced):
   - A verbal warning to curb language
   - At most, a day/few hour ban if a user refuses to stop, and I mean it has to be pretty bad.

2. If a person repeatedly posts inappropriate pictures/refuses to comply:
   - A warning, removal of picture
   - A 3-day ban, escalating until the user is obviously too stupid to function and must be removed
3. Rarely used, but this should only STRICTLY apply to obvious hate campaigns. You must be promoting hate on a racial, sexual, or other level. Not claiming that someone is starting a hate campaign because they jokingly say “black people can't swim” or call Drew “gaydrew”.
   - 30-day ban.
   - If the user refuses to lessen after this, or is so extreme, a permanent ban. The user is drafted into the Imperial Guard and sent to a far-off campaign.
   - Rule does not apply when used against heretics, xenos, witches, or mutants.

4. This one is embarrassing enough as is when caught, and usually happens when someone drops a whisper, because of this:
   - If it's a whisper, give a warning, and then a 3-day ban.
   - If it happens again, a 30-day ban, followed by a perma. The user is executed for their obvious worship of Slaanesh.
   - If a minor is involved, an instant permanent ban. Suffer not the pedophile to live. This should count for characters under the age of 18.
   - If the users are clearly cybering directly in public, go directly to a 30-day or permanent banning.

5. Delete the room, and:
   - Warn the user not to do it again.
   - If they do so once again, warn once more and issue a 3-day ban. Escalate from here.

6. If a moderator is called in because of this, the action should be as follows:
   - The offending user is warned to stop and, depending on severity, issued a 1-day ban.
   - If the action is repeated, immediately escalate to another warning and a 10-day stint in a Magistratum holding cell.
   - The user clearly cannot stop himself from harassing users for their personal information. The user is permanently banned and exiled.

7. Tech-heresy.
   - The user is permanently banned and repurposed into a servitor.

8. Spamming strains the precious Machine Spirits and bugs the shit out of everyone else. However, this should not include 1-3 lines of all-caps, because that is ridiculous. The moderators seem to have this one in the bag, other then the overreacting of people using caps lock a bit.
   - A warning, followed by a kick if it's not malicious.
   - Malicious spamming, I.e. flooding, is met by immediate summary execution. Permanently banned.

9. Annoying. Users should be:
   - Warned.
   - If they refuse to comply, a kick.
   - If they still refuse to comply, kick again, warn of impending doom.
   - If they still refuse to comply, the user is tossed into a Magistratum holding cell and interrogated. 1-day ban.
   - If, after returning from their ban, the user insists on OOCing and complaining, warn and kick as usual, followed by a 3-day ban. I don't believe this warrants anything more severe then this, just keep 3-day banning them until they wise up. Or break a more severe rule warranting a stronger punishment.

10. Harassment. The victim of harassment must exhaust all necessary means in order to stop the offending user, primarily the use of the /ignore function. Refusal to use the /ignore function should be met with laughter and jeering. If, however, the offender does go beyond this to continue harassment...
   -  A warning, followed immediately by a 10-day ban.
   - A 30-day stint as forced labor in the Hive's forges
   - The user is jettisoned out of the airlock, summarily executed, or burned at the stake. Permanently banned.

11. Not really a rule, shouldn't be enforced at all. Users should just be reminded to post at the Politika forum.

Conclusion

The AUP is largely fine – the problem lies within the moderating staff, or lack there of. The moderator staff, by and large, has too much power and not enough regulation. The solution is to limit the moderator power to enforcing the rules rather then regulating behavior and the chat. What goes on outside of the Keep is not a concern, and what happens outside of the AUP should also be left alone. The moderators should only enforce the rules. Stopping arguments (unless they break the aforementioned rules) or breaking up debates should not be allowed.

Public lanes of communication should be opened, noted, and advertised through out the chat. Users should know of their recourses and their ability to question and influence the staff and the rule set. Moderators should not decide punishment themselves except in extenuating situations, other wise they should adhere to preexisting guidelines to be decided upon, like the ones I wrote.

I also believe an I.A. Man should should be established (a Lord Inquisitor, if you will), a liaison for the users and the mods, someone who is responsible for regulating moderator and administrator actions and making sure no one is abusing their powers.

[Pink]

Ha ha. Wow, Dan. You came prepared.

[Rook]

We deal with art theft as best we can when it's brought up to us.

Same for inappropriate pictures; we can't open every single one, it has to be pointed out.

Perhaps a thread could be set up where you can point these out and the staff will first investigate then remove the content that's out of line.

His problem is actually the fact that she dodges the entire system by simply stating "it's inappropriate, so ask for a link"

That was included in the 'Point it out and we'll deal with it.'

[Inquisitor]

We deal with art theft as best we can when it's brought up to us.

Same for inappropriate pictures; we can't open every single one, it has to be pointed out.

Perhaps a thread could be set up where you can point these out and the staff will first investigate then remove the content that's out of line.

His problem is actually the fact that she dodges the entire system by simply stating "it's inappropriate, so ask for a link"

That was included in the 'Point it out and we'll deal with it.'

Oh ok.

Personally, though, I think that's an issue. I largely think the Keep should be separate from things that go on outside of it, but yeah. I just think it's a dangerous gray area there. (But we all know that bitch has porn pics)

[Xachariah]

I have pointed it out. Snow_Flake's entire character set, as far as I know, has that in their profile.

[LiteracyScaresMe]

Sweet Jesus, Dan. You've been waiting on the right moment to bust this out, eh?

[Soja]

I have pointed it out. Snow_Flake's entire character set, as far as I know, has that in their profile.

For fuck's sake, do something about these cunts. There's not much of a difference between parading a link to a pornographic image in one's profile and saying "MY PICTURE IS AGAINST THE RULES OF THIS SITE SO PM ME FOR THE LINK :33333".

This is subversion. It's circumventing. It's against the damn rules.

She's not the only one.

If you're going to ban certain members for having distasteful imagery in their publicly visible picture hosting account, you'd better be prepared to do the same thing to individuals that flagrantly and with flippant disregard for the rules openly distribute links to pornographic material.

[Auvic]

For fuck's sake, do something about these cunts. There's not much of a difference between parading a link to a pornographic image in one's profile and saying "MY PICTURE IS AGAINST THE RULES OF THIS SITE SO PM ME FOR THE LINK :33333".

This is subversion. It's circumventing. It's against the damn rules.

Oddly enough, Soja, there may not be a truly justifiable way to go about all of this.
In the same way that prostitution is banned in a great many states, if a chick really wants to go about it, she can claim to do 'website design' and do 'home visits' and the like. Etc, etc.

Circumvention? Yes - but I don't believe the law is actually able to legitimately pull those people aside.

Most I could say, I think, would just be to add an addendum to that 'pornographic' picture' bit, and say that you can't in any way 'solicit attention' to said pictures, whether directly or indirectly.

[Vivi]

We need it a bit clearer on what is soliciting too actually. In the MH earlier there was some dude looking for "ladies over 18" that I would have just loved to get rid of, but given that he didn't state what for other then to "chat" I didn't really feel I could get rid of him, though, lets face it, the odds of that person handing out his msn for chats with ladies over 18 for anything else is slim to none.

I'd be lying if I said I wasn't just waiting for him to say something he shouldn't have. After, of course, I told him what he was implying he wanted wasn't really something he should be trying to get from here...

[Pink]

Why can't people just keep their dicks out of this roleplaying site?
Seriously, just...is it THAT hard not to use the place for sexual purposes?

[Xachariah]

Also: Apparently, what needs to be done to get anything done against Snow_Flake is that somebody needs to log asking for and receiving the picture-link.

[Dalton]

The yiffers are still here? Have you guys tried my earlier suggestion to deal with them?