New Forum Guideline?

[Grzrd]

That's enough. Refrain from flaming or trolling in here. Likewise, do not go deleting posts even just to 'placate everyone' -- especially after said spelling error had been corrected.

We are coming up with a policy that says no more pointing out spelling/grammatical errors unless you can't tell what the post is about, in which case you must be polite about it. It's all off topic to roads.

(above quote from New lane configuration at I-84's west end thread)

I assume the following is the new guideline?:

By posting in our forum, you automatically agree to the following:

What's not allowed: ....

-When replying to other posters, messages should focus on the content of the post being replied to, and not its presentation (spelling, grammar, usage, etc.) If clarification is necessary, it should be requested politely and explicitly, instead of with rude or demeaning comments, or with one-word comments such as "What?" or "Huh?"

[Alps]

It is.

[Kacie Jane]

I'm in favor of the new guideline, even though I'm probably among the worst offenders.  But could we also get a corresponding guideline requiring the most basic of grammar rules be followed (i.e. no all caps, putting the kibosh on a certain New Jerseyan's incomprehensible posts)?  My signature becomes a lot less necessary if there are fewer offending posts to comment on.

Edit:  Somehow I missed the guideline on all caps written in all caps.  Whoops.  Point still stands however.

[roadman65]

What about swearing?  Should that not be allowed as well?  Also, mentioning politics should be considered being we have both liberals and conservatives on this forum who often flame out at each other at times.

[Kacie Jane]

Prefacing this by saying I'm obviously not speaking for the mods, just reading the guidelines and remembering past conversations.  But both are mentioned in the guidelines.  Swearing is tolerated in moderation under the admittedly false assumption that we're all adults here.  Politics is discouraged but necessary at times, since it's a bit silly to think you could talk about roads without at some point talking about funding and constructing them and then discussing the politics behind that.

[Molandfreak]

admittedly false assumption that we're all adults here.

It's safe to say a 13-year-old (the youngest that I know was formerly a user) has heard every word in the book, anyway.

[roadman65]

We are all not adults here.  We do have minors on here at times and we all know it as many of us remember ethanman who was only 13. 

Yeah, politics is hard not to talk about not only here, but anyplace, but recently someone brought up a situation where one person (you know who it is as this person is known to have a very short fuse) got upset at someone for posting something about the environment.   That is a bit extreme, and beyond a friendly conversation.  One thing to have a simple disagreement, but some people take things personally and get irate and the flame wars begin and thus the thread gets locked!

I bet we might have more people on this forum, as I have seen some new users post a few times and leave because of the flare ups and sarcasm of two of the regular users here.  It is impossible to read every post, so necroism will happen from time to time.  Sometimes you get users who join, then they see a dead post that has an interesting topic that they would like to become involved with and hopefully make a friend, so they re activate it only to hear from a user or two with that short fuse and being called a name in the process to get them insulted to never post on here again.

Sometimes you even get extremists on here who think that another user is a political rival and speaking as one, but in fact the person was speaking non partisan.  Example, I brought up the fact that I feel that the Orlando Orange County Expressway Authority is going beyond its boundaries, and the one Central Floridan on here who is known to be a hard liberal thought I was speaking on behalf of the Republicans or talk radio when I was not!  In fact in Orlando its not a partisan topic about the toll roads in our area!  Most people whether they are liberal, conservative, black, white, hispanic, or even independent hate the toll roads!   Back in the 90's the the 408 toll road known at the time as the East- West Expressway was called by many people as "The East West Rip Off." It was only here that I ever heard of hating the toll roads as a mere conservative ideal!  Also, for me at the time I thought it was unheard of someone to literally give his life for a government beaurocracy that is not for the purpose of morality, but as a common agency for operations of civil duties, so you know what I thought of that person or people.

I do not spell correctly, in fact some words in the English language are too ridiculous in nature and for me if takes more than a minuet to look up a word for just a simple post here, its not worth it!  Plus many of the things I say are somewhat obvious, but some people at times make a deal of how I said it as well as taking the literal sense of the wording I used instead of its implication.

Bottom line, is if you do not know the person on the other end, do not assume he is a Democrat or Republican because he or she may not be in real life if you met them in person.  In fact that in reality some of the people you argue with here, if you  did meet them in person you would actually get along with them.

[roadman65]

admittedly false assumption that we're all adults here.

It's safe to say a 13-year-old (the youngest that I know was formerly a user) has heard every word in the book, anyway.

Actually that is correct!  Also, I am sure he knows where babies come from as well, but still we are not allowed tell him  either under human rules written into law or not! 

[NE2]

Babies come from broken condoms.

[J N Winkler]

There is an art to discussing politics on this and other forums.  It is difficult to master, but the key points are to focus the discussion on policy, not party; to discuss partisan preferences, when they have to be mentioned at all, in neutral, undogmatic terms; and to limit advocacy to specific policy positions, laying out the justifications for them without endorsing (either implicitly or explicitly) a party that might say it supports them.

The careful observance of these rules has allowed us to have polite discussions on proposals to triple the gas tax (a position I espouse, but which I know attracts vigorous disagreement) or, alternately, to rely on electronic tolling as the principal means of financing new capital construction on the highway system (a position several on this forum espouse, but which I vigorously disagree with).  It is possible, and with skill it is also routine, to disagree without being disagreeable.