Guidelines Updated

[dcdeb]

Hi all,

 

This is just a reminder that the forum guidelines are periodically reviewed

and updated, and that you should take a minute now and then to

glance them over here:

 

http://www.mikafanclub.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1304956

 

Recent updates are highlighted in bold text -- they've been

updated today to include an item limiting the use of multiple

accounts on the forum for inappropriate reasons (for example,

trying to avoid disciplinary action).

 

As always, you comments/feedback are welcome!

 

dcdeb

[cheeseygoodness]

i don't think i ever knew these existed.

 

but it's all good to know

[mika-fan1001]

thanks

[Mika4Life13]

thanks

thanks deb

 

 

omg yourpostcount

[racinghorse83]

Relating to this, avoid spreading propaganda of any organizations, movements,

religions or political parties. This includes using avatars and signatures,

other symbols, texts and links to websites, to advertise principles related to

such groups. (QUOTE from guidelines)

 

is this because of the fights started through the athiest and christian threds? will these threads be closed or something?

[Mika4Life13]

Relating to this, avoid spreading propaganda of any organizations, movements,

religions or political parties. This includes using avatars and signatures,

other symbols, texts and links to websites, to advertise principles related to

such groups. (QUOTE from guidelines)

 

is this because of the fights started through the athiest and christian threds? will these threads be closed or something?

That brings up a good point racinghorse83 !

 

I'm curious too, deb.

[babspanky]

Relating to this, avoid spreading propaganda of any organizations, movements,

religions or political parties. This includes using avatars and signatures,

other symbols, texts and links to websites, to advertise principles related to

such groups. (QUOTE from guidelines)

 

is this because of the fights started through the athiest and christian threds? will these threads be closed or something?

 

As I understand it, it's the avatars and the signatures that or not allowed. This is due to the fact that your avatar and sig goes with you whichever thread you are in, therefore people who may choose not to read the Christian or athiest threads cannot avoid sigs and avatars (which may offend) in other unrelated threads.

 

This does make sense to me as it means that those who don't agree with the contents of a thread can just ignore it and it will have no impact on the forum in general, whereas if people include their beliefs in their sigs or avatars, this would no longer apply.

[Niki27]

As I understand it, it's the avatars and the signatures that or not allowed. This is due to the fact that your avatar and sig goes with you whichever thread you are in, therefore people who may choose not to read the Christian or athiest threads cannot avoid sigs and avatars (which may offend) in other unrelated threads.

 

This does make sense to me as it means that those who don't agree with the contents of a thread can just ignore it and it will have no impact on the forum in general, whereas if people include their beliefs in their sigs or avatars, this would no longer apply.

 

*nods*

Babs' got it right, this is exactly what it means. And no, it isn't because of any fight inside of a particular thread

[Louiza]

Hi all,

 

This is just a reminder that the forum guidelines are periodically reviewed

and updated, and that you should take a minute now and then to

glance them over here:

 

http://www.mikafanclub.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1304956

 

Recent updates are highlighted in bold text -- they've been

updated today to include an item limiting the use of multiple

accounts on the forum for inappropriate reasons (for example,

trying to avoid disciplinary action).

 

As always, you comments/feedback are welcome!

 

dcdeb

 

thanks Deb:thumb_yello:

[Soaring Simpson]

Relating to this, avoid spreading propaganda of any organizations, movements,

religions or political parties. This includes using avatars and signatures,

other symbols, texts and links to websites, to advertise principles related to

such groups. (QUOTE from guidelines)

 

*nods*

Babs' got it right, this is exactly what it means. And no, it isn't because of any fight inside of a particular thread

 

That's what I hoped it meant- but it's not what it says. You have to take out "other symbols texts and links..." or say "...avatars and signatures which include symbols, texts...." to make it mean what Babs said.

[Niki27]

I think the formulation is fine as it is... I mean, it'll also avoid abuses like people starting to post "VOTE FOR X" pictures or messages in random threads for example. Remember we always take a decision using a case to case approach, it's quite clear we won't blame people for posting a link to the PETA website in the PETA thread, for example, if it's what you're scared of BUT it would be totally different if they started advertising the organisation all over the forum (And I know PETA might not be the best example but it's the first that came to mind, sorry )

[racinghorse83]

ok. that makes sense. thanks 4 clearing that up.

[Christine]

This guideline was in place before the atheist thread was created and there were no disagreements in the Christian thread at the time (that I was aware of).

 

There were some complaints that the addition of the rule was not explicitly brought to everyone's attention so it's been bolded now so hopefully everyone will see it.

[Kelzy]

Relating to this, avoid spreading propaganda of any organizations, movements, religions or political parties. This includes using avatars and signatures, other symbols, texts and links to websites, to advertise principles related to such groups.

1; Propaganda: information that is spread for the purpose of promoting some cause.

 

2; Advertise: Call attention to/Make publicity for; try to sell.

 

3; Principles: Statements or descriptions of what should or should not be done.

 

So, it's all fine as long as people are NOT trying to convert others to their belief/electoral party.. Don't Preach - Don't tell people what they believe in is wrong.

 

(and, btw, certainly don't CONDEMN other's beliefs because they are not your own.)

 

Soooo..

This could be offensive:

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y263/vanessa01grumpy/mccainforpres.jpg

 

This shouldn't be

http://designbrawl.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/john_mccain_doesnt_know.jpg

 

This could be offensive:

http://aboulet.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/burn_in_hell.jpg

 

But, this shouldn't be:

http://skopun.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/i-believe.jpg

 

This guideline does not say that absolutely no siggy's or avvies relating to personal beliefs cannot be used, only that you cannot use it to attempt to convert someone who is not of the same belief.

 

Secondly, If the MFC is to completely ban religious avvies and siggys (like it appears to have done now) then you might want to rethink wishing anyone a Merry Christmas or Happy Easter.

 

In case it offends.

[violet_sky]

 

Secondly, If the MFC is to completely ban religious avvies and siggys (like it appears to have done now) then you might want to rethink wishing anyone a Merry Christmas or Happy Easter.

 

In case it offends.

 

Probably not relevant here, but this made me think of a random conversation I witnessed last winter, when some random woman told another one that her company had re-named their company X-Mas party into smth like 'winterly get-together' (I don't know how to translate it properly) due to a JW's employee who said she wouldn't attend a X-Mas party.

I was very close to publicly at that bus station. I'm not quite sure what my point is here, and I'm not really neutral about that group, so I better shut up now.

[Kelzy]

Probably not relevant here, but this made me think of a random conversation I witnessed last winter, when some random woman told another one that her company had re-named their company X-Mas party into smth like 'winterly get-together' (I don't know how to translate it properly) due to a JW's employee who said she wouldn't attend a X-Mas party.

I was very close to publicly at that bus station. I'm not quite sure what my point is here, and I'm not really neutral about that group, so I better shut up now.

 

Politically correct etc.

I wouldn't go to a BBQ party called "Satanist's Summer Spit"

It would need to be renamed so that I went there under false pretenses

[sariflor]

1; Propaganda: information that is spread for the purpose of promoting some cause.

 

2; Advertise: Call attention to/Make publicity for; try to sell.

 

3; Principles: Statements or descriptions of what should or should not be done.

 

So, it's all fine as long as people are NOT trying to convert others to their belief/electoral party.. Don't Preach - Don't tell people what they believe in is wrong.

 

(and, btw, certainly don't CONDEMN other's beliefs because they are not your own.)

 

Soooo..

This could be offensive:

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y263/vanessa01grumpy/mccainforpres.jpg

 

This shouldn't be

http://designbrawl.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/john_mccain_doesnt_know.jpg

 

This could be offensive:

http://aboulet.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/burn_in_hell.jpg

 

But, this shouldn't be:

http://skopun.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/i-believe.jpg

 

This guideline does not say that absolutely no siggy's or avvies relating to personal beliefs cannot be used, only that you cannot use it to attempt to convert someone who is not of the same belief.

 

Secondly, If the MFC is to completely ban religious avvies and siggys (like it appears to have done now) then you might want to rethink wishing anyone a Merry Christmas or Happy Easter.

 

In case it offends.

 

 

 

Am I missing something?

 

You post, under the definition for "advertise", to call attention to. Surely that is what a siggie is doing? Otherwise it's pointless to have it there.

The whole idea behind a signature is to have people look at it, and that is done by drawing attention to it.

 

Hence why the guidelines would include the "religious signatures scenario".

 

 

To be honest, and without wanting to offend anyone, I am getting fed up with this battle.

Why is it such a big deal to not have religious or political siggies on a fanclub forum?

Have we all lost the plot?

Last time I checked, a fanclub forum was not the best place for people to be venting religious and political beliefs- This would be better done elsewhere.

 

Some people have actually said that the only reason why they come onto the MFC is to speak to their buddies in the christian thread- Well, if that really is so, why not just take the discussion elsewhere, to a place where you feel like you can say what you like, and forget about mfc?

 

Would that not be better than having this futile battle about what should be rightfully allowed and what not?

I just don't get it.

 

 

 

 

[Sarahlou1973]

Am I missing something?

 

You post, under the definition for "advertise", to call attention to. Surely that is what a siggie is doing? Otherwise it's pointless to have it there.

The whole idea behind a signature is to have people look at it, and that is done by drawing attention to it.

 

Hence why the guidelines would include the "religious signatures scenario".

 

 

To be honest, and without wanting to offend anyone, I am getting fed up with this battle.

Why is it such a big deal to not have religious or political siggies on a fanclub forum?

Have we all lost the plot?

Last time I checked, a fanclub forum was not the best place for people to be venting religious and political beliefs- This would be better done elsewhere.

 

Some people have actually said that the only reason why they come onto the MFC is to speak to their buddies in the christian thread- Well, if that really is so, why not just take the discussion elsewhere, to a place where you feel like you can say what you like, and forget about mfc?

 

Would that not be better than having this futile battle about what should be rightfully allowed and what not?

I just don't get it.

 

What you say makes perfect sense. At the end of the day, this is the Mika Fan Club. Yes, there are a number of random, generic chit-chat threads, but surely there are other forums/websites where more specialised debates and discussions could take place.....would a member of a Christian forum/chatroom/website (if there is such a thing) start a topic chatting about Mika? I don't know, possibly.... At this rate, the internet will soon end up with the same threads, discussions and debates taking place on different websites....then it will become overloaded and explode. Then what will we all do??

 

I don't get it either....

[sariflor]

What you say makes perfect sense. At the end of the day, this is the Mika Fan Club. Yes, there are a number of random, generic chit-chat threads, but surely there are other forums/websites where more specialised debates and discussions could take place.....would a member of a Christian forum/chatroom/website (if there is such a thing) start a topic chatting about Mika? I don't know, possibly.... At this rate, the internet will soon end up with the same threads, discussions and debates taking place on different websites....then it will become overloaded and explode. Then what will we all do??

 

I don't get it either....

 

 

Thanks Sarah.

 

Just to clarify on my earlier post, I would like to say that I don't have a big issue with there being a particular religious thread, like the christian one, if people want to go in there and discuss their beliefs, etc, but I do have a problem when they start trying to claim their "rights" to have their religious sigs/messages all over the forum.

 

And because it would seem that many of them or some of them are thinking along those lines, maybe a different approach would make sense, and for religion & politics to be completely banished from the board.

 

 

[Christine]

Nico asked for an explanation as to why these guidelines were added. I want to remove this discussion from the Christian thread and address it here.

 

For me this issue is not a matter of what is or is not offensive. It's about not subjecting other members to political, religious or other organizational propaganda because that is not the purpose of this forum.

 

I don't want to be told on every single thread of a Mika fan club to vote for Obama or that Jesus is the Light any more than I want to be told to come make a purchase at http://cheapgoldwatches.com/. It's tantamount to spam and we don't allow spam.

 

I agree with Kelzy's examples of what is acceptable and what isn't for politics. I asked a member to remove her signature that was a call to vote for a particular candidate but if she'd replaced it with the candidate's photo only that would have been fine and I should have been more clear about that.

 

I believe it was GhostsintheRadio who said that there are or hypothetically could be things on the forum that offend her but if she complained about it, she would not be accommodated. But that is not necessarily the case.

 

There is always stricter criteria for what is acceptable placed on signatures and avatars versus posts and threads. Threads that are clearly labelled give members the option to avoid discussions that make them feel uncomfortable. We have also asked users to remove or amend avatars and signatures that contain questionable language or sexual references.

 

Threads serve the purpose of engaging other members in discussion which is the object of this forum and the reason people join. As Sariflor said, the purpose of avatars and signatures is simply to draw people's attention. Things that we will let slide in the context of a discussion are not necessarily appropriate to be displayed all over the forum.

 

I believe that people's right to enjoy the forum without being subjected to messages they don't want to be subjected to supercedes an individual's right to display whatever they want all over the forum.

 

I signed up to MFC to talk about Mika. I also enjoy quite a few other topics that come up on MFC but there are some I wish to avoid and I should be free to do so.

[racinghorse83]

thanks for clearing that up.

[nico_collard]

What you say makes perfect sense. At the end of the day, this is the Mika Fan Club. Yes, there are a number of random, generic chit-chat threads, but surely there are other forums/websites where more specialised debates and discussions could take place.....would a member of a Christian forum/chatroom/website (if there is such a thing) start a topic chatting about Mika? I don't know, possibly.... At this rate, the internet will soon end up with the same threads, discussions and debates taking place on different websites....then it will become overloaded and explode. Then what will we all do??

 

I don't get it either....

 

Righto then... Mika fan club... so maybe we should stop talking about other things and make this compeltely focused on Mika. After all, this is why we all originally came here.

 

And I think it is entirely possible that a member of a Christian forum might start a thread about Mika. Christians have other interests other than religion I would think.

 

I'm sure you're not interested, but I found a Christian forum where they're talking games and all sorts of fun stuff...

 

 

And as you point out, the internet is being filled up with the same threads... how about we get some of those cleaned up?

 

 

And what will we all do if the internet died?

 

I guess that would be a sign for us to all go do something RL related...

 

I personally think we'll run out of IP addresses before the internet crashes...

 

Nico asked for an explanation as to why these guidelines were added. I want to remove this discussion from the Christian thread and address it here.

 

For me this issue is not a matter of what is or is not offensive. It's about not subjecting other members to political, religious or other organizational propaganda because that is not the purpose of this forum.

 

I don't want to be told on every single thread of a Mika fan club to vote for Obama or that Jesus is the Light any more than I want to be told to come make a purchase at http://cheapgoldwatches.com/. It's tantamount to spam and we don't allow spam.

 

I agree with Kelzy's examples of what is acceptable and what isn't for politics. I asked a member to remove her signature that was a call to vote for a particular candidate but if she'd replaced it with the candidate's photo only that would have been fine and I should have been more clear about that.

 

I believe it was GhostsintheRadio who said that there are or hypothetically could be things on the forum that offend her but if she complained about it, she would not be accommodated. But that is not necessarily the case.

 

There is always stricter criteria for what is acceptable placed on signatures and avatars versus posts and threads. Threads that are clearly labelled give members the option to avoid discussions that make them feel uncomfortable. We have also asked users to remove or amend avatars and signatures that contain questionable language or sexual references.

 

Threads serve the purpose of engaging other members in discussion which is the object of this forum and the reason people join. As Sariflor said, the purpose of avatars and signatures is simply to draw people's attention. Things that we will let slide in the context of a discussion are not necessarily appropriate to be displayed all over the forum.

 

I believe that people's right to enjoy the forum without being subjected to messages they don't want to be subjected to supercedes an individual's right to display whatever they want all over the forum.

 

I signed up to MFC to talk about Mika. I also enjoy quite a few other topics that come up on MFC but there are some I wish to avoid and I should be free to do so.

 

I didn't see that you'd discussed it here...

 

The bold bit: I don't see it that way... to me it's always been a way to show your personality and what you like... If I wanted to preach aboput something, I'd get on my soapbox and do it.

 

I personally don't want to be told over and over again that Mika is so fabulous and sweet and innocent, but you don't hear me complaining about it.

 

The thing that people seem to miss (or maybe they see it, but choose not to acknowledge it) is that besides the avatars, we keep it in the thread. You don't see us bringing up religion in any way except if other people are discussing it.

 

Fine. If you don't want religious avatars and sigs, that's fine. We don't have to agree with it. To me it seems like it's gone further than just discussing avatars and sigs.

 

 

I still don't understand exactly why the mods decided it needed to be in the guidelines. Was it that someone complained? Did someone decide that religious and political avatars and sigs shouldn't be on here? What is it? I don't understand what brought you to the point that you decided to add it to the guidelines.

[Christine]

The thing that people seem to miss (or maybe they see it, but choose not to acknowledge it) is that besides the avatars, we keep it in the thread. You don't see us bringing up religion in any way except if other people are discussing it.

 

Fine. If you don't want religious avatars and sigs, that's fine. We don't have to agree with it. To me it seems like it's gone further than just discussing avatars and sigs.

 

Well it hasn't gone beyond that for me. And while I can't speak for the other mods' personal views on this topic I don't think any of us intend to take it further in terms of moderating discussions on MFC.

 

I get people mentioning to me privately that they aren't impressed with some of the discussions they've witnessed that stem from religious beliefs. But that's to be expected. As Niki has pointed out, we come from very different cultural and religious backgrounds and people are going to have varying senses of what's appropriate to discuss publicly in relation to religion in the same way people have varying senses of what's appropriate to discuss publicly about sex.

 

People are going to get judgemental about what they see in a Christian or atheist thread just like people get their knickers in a knot when there are discussions about Mika's body. We can't control other people's minds, just ask that we be civilized to one another when voicing different points of view.

 

I still don't understand exactly why the mods decided it needed to be in the guidelines. Was it that someone complained? Did someone decide that religious and political avatars and sigs shouldn't be on here? What is it? I don't understand what brought you to the point that you decided to add it to the guidelines.

 

It started with the religious avatars and it came up when it did because the avatars started surfacing when they did. We are perpetually dealing with these issues of what constitutes solicitation/selling/spam/propaganda which all boil down to the same thing IMO.

 

I already mentioned that I don't want to be confronted with these messages in every single thread on MFC and I'm not alone. This was brought to my attention by several other people.

[sienna]

To find a mutually value system, when we come from so many different cultures and backgrounds is nothing less than an artwork!

 

You moderators are doing an excellent job.

 

That’s all I wanted to say for now!