For or Against the New Rule 17 in General Forum Rules?

[Lexie]

Say what you like, we don't care as long as it's non-defamatory, not obscene, and not against the rules.  Post any photos you like, we don't care as long as they're non-defamatory, not obscene, and not against the rules. 

That statment is subjective because someone is writing the rules. Whose definition of "non-defamatory, not obscene" are you basing these judgments on?

But the rule is a General Forum Rule, and it has to be followed like all of the other rules.  This is not about stifling anyone's ability to express themselves, it's about not deliberately offending others. 

Unless you're directly attacking the other poster on a personal level, you should be allowed to voice your opinion without fear of "offending others".  Your statement is plain BIAS!!!.  A signature is just a picture which represents your beliefs, by dictating what people's signature should be you're limiting their freedom of expression.

This forum is made up of hundreds of clever, intelligent members.  It shouldn't be difficult for any of you to find ways to express yourselves and your view point without using offensive images or "anti" images to do it.

Logic dictates that if you have a "Pro" you're going to have an "Anti" so why allow the pro and not the anit.  It's plain BIAS. Why should someone who's Anit have to find ANTOHER way to express themselves and someone who's pro be allowed to show all the pictures they want.

Just one more point; there are 16 other Forum rules in addition to # 17, please take special note of rule #s 6 and 16.

#16 is irrelevant, it deals with usernames, which I agree with, but we're talking about pictures here.

http://theinternetforum.net/royalforum/index.php/topic,15379.0.html
[/quote]

Where's Mediastar?

[harmony]

why allow the pro and not the anit.

yup that's confusing,
ban all sigs, or allow all

[Lucy]

When I had what some might call an anti-Chelsy signature, I was called on it constantly by other members...Even though it wasn't photo-shopped or made up but simply Real photos of Chelsy Davy that didn't show her to her best advantage. It made a lot of people burn with F u r y.

I took it down. Problem solved.

Now I can't use All caps in a Word or Bold letters in part of a Message because some said it upset them. So I stopped doing it.
I give up what disturbs others. What is wrong with expecting others to do it as well?
BTW, I personally have Never complained about another poster's Sig to a Mod or Admin....but plenty have complained bout mine.

[Trudie]

I voted for I think signatures are fine if they are neutral you can express yourself in debate not anti or pro signatures that may offend someone. Which is why I have none.

[Windsor]

Some things are appropriate, others are not! It is just common sense...

[topqueenb]

I voted against. My god it's just a signature.

Starts with signatures, then usernames, then posts, then how to scratch your behind....you get my point.  Though since I'm not one-sided, I get your point too.  It's just a fan board.  There are many others.

[j.smith1981]

I am not gonna vote due to the fact that im not that bothered to be honest i wuldnt knowingly put anything offensive in there anyways and actually pretty relaxed about it aswell, like if it is offensive then fair enough but i very much doubt that mine is.

Its again like the above poster said sorry i didnt quote ya name but its all common sense whats in appropriate for signatures.

I do apologise though if my last few posts have caused offence in anyways feel free to advise me about that, of course.

Thanks,
Jez.

[Countessa]

I have a question. Who decides what is offensive? Some things are obvious but I don't see anything wrong with, say for instance, the many siggies of Kate flat on her back after her disasterous disco charity. I'm going to have to vote against this. Just do it on a case by case basis.

It seems that members are leaving this forum because of these "new rules." I'm still hanging in here even though I have missed my fellow members like hippie_cyndi, varya, wombat and others. After all, varya is the forum member who coined the phrase "Katie Waity" and where has she gone? She's been driven off the forum. I feel there is an effort to drive criticism of Kate from this forum. What's going on?

[teachkid]

Ok, the bottom line is that we're not going to like every signature other people post.  That's a part of life and what makes each person unique.  I am not pro-Kate or anti-Kate, I am pro-William.  I'm a pretty laid back person, but lately this forum has felt more like a middle school/junior high than anything else and I should know since I teach at one.  Quite honestly, I have been more offended by the petty posting and put downs that have been hijacking the threads lately than the signatures.  It reminds me of the cat fights in school.  We're not going to like everyone here or agree with their opinions, but we all need to pull on our grown-up pants and treat each other with the respect we all deserve.  As my grandmother would say, "That's life.  Suck it up."  With that being said, I am respectfully voting against.  I understand where the admins and mods are coming from, but there has to be a better way.  Teachkid   :hug:

[Kim-buh-lee]

I have a question. Who decides what is offensive? Some things are obvious but I don't see anything wrong with, say for instance, the many siggies of Kate flat on her back after her disasterous disco charity. I'm going to have to vote against this. Just do it on a case by case basis.

It seems that members are leaving this forum because of these "new rules." I'm still hanging in here even though I have missed my fellow members like hippie_cyndi, varya, wombat and others. After all, varya is the forum member who coined the phrase "Katie Waity" and where has she gone? She's been driven off the forum. I feel there is an effort to drive criticism of Kate from this forum. What's going on?

Ya this forum is slowly pushing me away too. I actually tried to convince someone to come back here but she said she won't. It's a shame really. Oh well.

In addition, this rule is kind of pathetic. How is it offensive? the Kate "offensive" signatures  should not bother anyone. ppl get offended like they are personal members of Kate's family or have personal relationships with her.

ppl please get a clue: Kate and Chelsy don't even know you exist!!!!!!!!   Sorry to burst your bubble.  :thumbsup:

[leogirl]

:hug:  I've been pushed away from here quite a few times. 2007 was great, but in 2008 it got bad. I rarely post anymore. This place has gotten out of hand with personal attacks. I can understand disagreeing, but name-calling is just sad.  :hug:

I'm against the rule because it is biased and who is deciding what is "offensive"? What offends one person will not bother another person at all. One person will report it and another will copy the siggy into her own profile because she likes it so much.

I suggest banning all royal-related signatures if you're going to ban some. All siggies would have to be neutral in order to make things fair. No pro-anything, no anti-anything.

Otherwise, I suggest renaming this forum "The Royan Fan Forum" and just get rid of anything negative altogether.

[bpwriter47]

i voted against.  too many rules and trying to please a few who complain against many will evidentually put this forum into the ground.  there should be a freedom of speech and people should respect each other whether they agree or not.  Do not take things so personally. 

[~Alice~]

AGAINST! I totally agree with Lexie

Come one people, seriously! Don't we have better things to do here than arguing about Kate and deleting people's signatures? This used to be a fun place but now it isn't like that anymore. Members already left because of the 'Kate-fight' and now one of my best forum friends is probably going to leave because of this new rule. She can't even show her opinion in her signatures anymore. I'm not pro- or anti-Kate so I have nothing against the members who either like or hate her, but I really think the pro-Kates should stop whining now. This has been going on for too long and it should end now! If you don't like somebody's signature then don't read it. And now please don't get mad at me for saying this, because it's kind of like what you people said when somebody was going to leave ("if you don't like rule number 17, then leave"). Well, if you don't like anybody's sig, then YOU leave. Can we please keep things friendly here and try not to chase away more members then we already did. The forum would become a boring place with just a few members left. Don't blame people for their opinions. We live in the 21st century! I think we are modern enough for freedom of speech and ideas. If someone doesn't like Kate. let her. If someone loves Kate, let her! If you have problems with Kate, then just don't post in topics about Kate. I think we are mature enough to respect people's ideas and thoughts. I used to be the youngest member here for a long time and I'm probably still one of the youngest members here. Then why do I get the feeling that I'm one of the few members who act mature? There are members much older than me who are whining about signatures and posts of other members. Please act your age and try to keep it friendly. One of the most beloved members of this forum is about to leave us and that will be my second forum friend leaving (Estrella already left). What am I going to do without my friends? This are people who I always play games with on the forum and people who I can PM if I have boy-trouble or anything like that. I love them and I don't like it if these people get chased away by members who don't have respect for other members.

Can we please put an end to this fight now? Can we please respect other members? CAN WE PLEASE LIVE IN HARMONY AGAIN LIKE WE USED TO DO??

Thank you :notamused:

^ agreed. Otherwise, it drags the board down to a low level, IMO.

And members who have to leave because of this rule, because they don't enjoy posting here anymore doesn't drag the board down to a low level, huh?? :sowhat:

Edit: PS. I'm sorry if my post offends anyone. I didn't mean to offend, just wanted to share my opinion with others. You can't blame me, I'm the sweetest member :angel:

[Objective]

I have a question. Who decides what is offensive? Some things are obvious but I don't see anything wrong with, say for instance, the many siggies of Kate flat on her back after her disasterous disco charity. I'm going to have to vote against this. Just do it on a case by case basis.

It seems that members are leaving this forum because of these "new rules." I'm still hanging in here even though I have missed my fellow members like hippie_cyndi, varya, wombat and others. After all, varya is the forum member who coined the phrase "Katie Waity" and where has she gone? She's been driven off the forum. I feel there is an effort to drive criticism of Kate from this forum. What's going on?

Countessa: not sure if you know, but there is an anti-Kate board, where only negative things about Kate are tolerated, and pleasant things about Chelsy. You might find it more to your taste. :)

Laissez-faire style of anything always results in disparaging dialogue, disruption and dispute - including when moderating boards.

[teachkid]

Alice, I still think you are the sweetest member!   :hug:

[Lucy]

If someone doesn't like Kate. let her. If someone loves Kate, let her! If you have problems with Kate, then just don't post in topics about Kate. [/b]

Wait , please....this problem isn't about Kate
I personally have never complained about a Signature.
Most posters want All Sigs of Clingy Chels to show her as a Saint.That is at the centre of the problem.
I like your idea about not posting in Kate threads if you don't like her but the fact is that most of the people who discuss Kate daily on here don't like her. They have a right to post too.

Congrats on your award, Alice. :congrats:

[Ermilinda]

uh huh.... :sowhat:
........ against.

[IWould]

I am against it even though I am a new member here.  I just posted on a sign that was made for Chelsy yet that's OK to have sign made up in a negative manner...Where's the sign for Waity Katey????  It's not in an avatar of course or siggy so it's ok??????? seriously where is the fairness in pro Kate siggy's ???? and the others can't speak of her unless they're kisses her :censored:  I won't be staying here that long with all the rudeness that comes from other members who think Kate can't do no wrong.

Thanks for being here Royal Forum.

[Countessa]

Countessa: not sure if you know, but there is an anti-Kate board, where only negative things about Kate are tolerated, and pleasant things about Chelsy. You might find it more to your taste.

Laissez-faire style of anything always results in disparaging dialogue, disruption and dispute - including when moderating boards.

Objective, please don't tell me where to go. If you don't like criticism of KM's lazy, free loading lifestyle then you leave. And please stop whining. It won't get you anywhere just like it hasn't gotten Waity Katey anywhere. :Jen:

[drezzle]

I'm not sure how you can say Kate whines when she's never opened her mouth to say anything that I've ever heard?  For all we know she may stutter and stammer or have a lisp, or say ~ya know~ and ~like~ every few words.

[WANDA]

My vote is against,    :thumbsup:

[Objective]

Objective, please don't tell me where to go. If you don't like criticism of KM's lazy, free loading lifestyle then you leave. And please stop whining. It won't get you anywhere just like it hasn't gotten Waity Katey anywhere. :Jen:

I wasn't 'whining' and it's this sort of attacking that starts problems. Please cease and desist. Thanks.

I didn't tell you 'where to go' - where is that in my post? I merely made a suggestion. Just because I don't share your view doesn't mean I don't respect it. I could say you are constantly 'whining' too, but I wouldn't.

Alice: you could lead by example, and not put sarcasm (directed at me) in your post.

[Arubiina]

I have not voted because the Rule #17 applies to fanatics. I do not view myself as a fanatical supporter of a particular royal. Everything should have its limits, including adoration. As for Miss Middleton, personally I am sick and tired of her and her supporters, who view any criticism toward her as jealousy and envy. 

[lisalisa88]

I voted for against--even the pro-Kate supporters can have their opinions re: signatures and avatars.  If someone doesn't like what they read then move on to the next post.  I am for what is right as far as the royal family goes.  Everyone can have opinions re: what they feel for the royal family but to start fights w/each other over something no one has control over, doesn't make sense.  The mods should remove any posts that are engaging in mean spirited communications and if continued, the poster might be banned (and only after given a chance to change).

I read this forum for a few yrs. before I started posting and the only reason I started was because this forum had some really good members (some w/reliable info) re: the royals (British and foreign).  I miss them greatly.  When a forum loses some of its good members due to pettiness then it may lose the attraction it has to get other people to join it.  The mods have to exercise fair judgment re: the rules--you can't please everyone all the time!  As long the banners are not criminal then what's the harm?  I hope no one leaves the forum and some of its good members (Nighthawk, where are you?) come back!  Mods, hold the line steady!!     :catfight:

[Rasta Watermelon]

^^JESNRE KABAN applies around here.