[s]Goal: 100,000 New Goal: 200,000[/s] New Goal: 250.000

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

*makes use of the distraction to [PG-13 violation warning commencing!]*

 

crap, second one in 2 minutes...

[mmeeshal]

I'm grateful for the PG-13 sign. XD

[paetric]

We hatezzzz it, hatezzzz the signzzzzz

[mmeeshal]

I don't. If it wasn't in effect, I wouldn't come here, and that would be a big bummer for me to lose a good half of my regular social interaction.

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

never agreed more with anything anyone has ever said, paet.

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

also, nice impression.

[mmeeshal]

I probably would have used "s" instead of "z," but I concur.

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

[paetric]

I don't. If it wasn't in effect, I wouldn't come here, and that would be a big bummer for me to lose a good half of my regular social interaction.

 

Rules tend to drive more people away.

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

and invite breakage...

[paetric]

I've been known to fracture a law or two in my time.

[mmeeshal]

I don't. If it wasn't in effect, I wouldn't come here, and that would be a big bummer for me to lose a good half of my regular social interaction.

 

Rules tend to drive more people away.

I can understand where you're coming from, but I personally think rules are more fair to everyone. This way, everyone has a fair choice in whether or not they can interact and get involved.

 

You don't have to worry about alienating someone who won't be comfortable if everyone's talking about stuff they don't want to hear about....

 

And then the people who do want to be able to talk uncensored can always PM, find each other on Facebook, MSN, AIM, Yahoo, Google+, whatever.

 

With no censoring or rules, it reduces the people who CAN come here. With rules, it reduces the amount who WANT to. I think there's a big difference between the two.

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

seems like half the point of laws is to make it more fun to be bad.

[mmeeshal]

I never feel that way.

[paetric]

I respect your position but disagree. It can be argued that your position is better since I'm still here posting. It's mostly b/c of the underage people that the rule is in affect for.

 

But I think we would see more people posting and I disagree that uncensored post drive people away.

 

You would have groups that don't allow it and groups that do. Look at the Browns in the WT as an example. They are as exclusive as you can get, yet you find people that go and join them. There would be no difference with rated R posts and pg-13 posts.

 

But like I pointed out, it's mostly for the under age people anyway, so it's never going to change.

[Leelou]

Still awake. :)

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

you naughty girl

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

and the rules aren't consistent boardwide. you've seen terrible language is mafia, surely.

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

but this is a different place, and i know how to respect the letter, if not the spirit, of the law.

[mmeeshal]

I respect your position but disagree. It can be argued that your position is better since I'm still here posting. It's mostly b/c of the underage people that the rule is in affect for.

 

But I think we would see more people posting and I disagree that uncensored post drive people away.

 

You would have groups that don't allow it and groups that do. Look at the Browns in the WT as an example. They are as exclusive as you can get, yet you find people that go and join them. There would be no difference with rated R posts and pg-13 posts.

 

But like I pointed out, it's mostly for the under age people anyway, so it's never going to change.

I totally understand what you're saying and I think for the most part I agree that it wouldn't hurt numbers or activity if this site were to lose its PG-13 rating and go uncensored.

 

To the underlined, I just wanted to say I disagree with that. Maybe not in general, but it definitely does bother some people. Or at least, it bothers me. I can't speak for anyone else, but some people I know on here, and others that have joined since Brandon took over WoT and were Brandon's fans first and live in Utah and have the same values and beliefs as I do, would likely back me up on this. If I didn't know for sure that I could post somewhere without encountering stuff I'd rather avoid, then I wouldn't come here, plain and simple. I wouldn't be able to, I wouldn't feel comfortable.

 

Again, in general you're right, but I look at it as a matter of fairness, rather than numbers. It doesn't seem fair to cut people off from something that could be potentially life-changing (as Dragonmount has been for me) just because people like running wild. XD

 

I mostly just wanted to respond to the underlined, so that's all. XD

[mmeeshal]

and the rules aren't consistent boardwide. you've seen terrible language is mafia, surely.

They are, as far as I know. It's just hard to enforce that particular rule all over, and people slip up or it goes unnoticed or whatever. I never like it, but it's rare enough that raising a stink isn't worth the trouble.

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

i've read some very very bad language in the mafia games teh JN play. worse than i would use.

 

ok, that's not true. but as bad.

[paetric]

and the rules aren't consistent boardwide. you've seen terrible language is mafia, surely.

They are, as far as I know. It's just hard to enforce that particular rule all over, and people slip up or it goes unnoticed or whatever. I never like it, but it's rare enough that raising a stink isn't worth the trouble.

 

I wouldn't say it goes unnoticed as much as people look the other way. Unless they want rid of you, then they will cause a stink over it. I know this first hand.

[mmeeshal]

@Cindy, yeah, the JN folks primarily play on JN, which is uncensored, as far as I know, so obviously it's a lot harder to watch yourself when you're used to being able to say whatever you like in a mafia game. XD It doesn't change the rules, as far as I know. People just let it slide, like Paet said, because A) they know it's an adjustment for the JN guys, and B) most people don't have a problem with it anyway.

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

true.