TheTankengine wrote: skeptical scientist wrote: Belial wrote:
why rules must be followed
If you can't figure this one out....
I think there are two schools of thought here. One is that rules are rules, and must be followed because they are rules. The other is that rules exist for a purpose, and if no useful purpose is served by enforcing them, they should not be enforced. From your comment, you seem to be firmly entrenched in the first school, but I see no reason why this should be considered "correct" and the other "incorrect"; I think there are advantages and disadvantages to both ways of going about things.
Personally, I quite commonly completely ignore rules I disagree with, or find pointless, and feel entirely justified in doing so, but this is a debate for another thread. In any case, I don't disagree with the intro thread rule, or find it pointless; I would just like to see it enforced in a more lenient, relaxed, and welcoming manner, by mods and non-mods alike.
[snipped="Unnecessarily verbose explanation"]
We do not have rules for the sake of rules. We have rules because we would like to foster the community in a certain direction. Our policies are laid out within the mod forum and the mods have a fairly uniform consensus on how to enforce these rules.
The answer to "Why follow rules?" is simple: there was a good reason for their introduction, and the established members at the time (especially the admins and mods) decided that they were necessary for whatever reason. If you feel that you do not understand the reason behind the rule, then you ought to do some reading, and find the discussion where it was decided to introduce the rule.
If you feel that a rule no longer serves its original purpose, then by all means bring up an individual rule for review, but explain why it is no longer useful, or why it should be restated so that its current purpose is made clear.
Someone of Vaniver's age and post count would, on such well-moderated fora as this, no doubt by now be capable of adding his voice to a reasoned discussion about rule changes (whereas someone as new as myself would find that my opinions were considered less important, owing to my lesser knowledge of the site and it's customs)
In short: questioning individual rules which you understand is one thing, asking "Why follow rules?" is quite another, and disobeying the rules simply because they are rules is wrong.
BTW, I agree about the Turing test though. If a spambot is so good that even hermaj (who eats spambots) or Belial (whom eats humans) cannot tell at first if they are bots, it could prove amusing to keep tabs on it and title it so that other users know what it is, at least as long as it passes for an intelligent person. If it starts getting annoying, then deleting it and all its posts is fairly reasonable.
EDIT: I am not sure if Vaniver is trolling or not, but he is doing a very good job if he is.
The voices in my head tell me that I should write something here. Unfortunately, they won't tell me what to write.