# New Sitewide Rules



## pjk (Aug 23, 2010)

We have put together a new set of rules that apply to the entire site. Please read them, understand them, and obey them - they exist for a reason.

You can read them here. If you have any questions, comments, or concerns, please reply to this thread.


----------



## ianini (Aug 23, 2010)

These are great new rules! But I had one question about the infraction/point system:

I got banned for posting in the banhammer thread and I have an infraction that is worth 5 points. Do these point accumulate over time, or just go away after a set period of time and you start out fresh?


----------



## DavidWoner (Aug 23, 2010)

ianini said:


> These are great new rules! But I had one question about the infraction/point system:
> 
> I got banned for posting in the banhammer thread and I have an infraction that is worth 5 points. Do these point accumulate over time, or just go away after a set period of time and you start out fresh?



They are always visible on your record but become inactive after some time. For instance "Multi-posting - 2 points, 7 days" means you get 2 infraction points that expire after 7 days.


----------



## pjk (Aug 23, 2010)

If you had 5 points worth of infractions, you would be banned. This means they are expired now, hence why you aren't banned:


> In most cases, these infractions will expire after a certain amount of time, depending on the nature and severity of the rule that was broken.




Edit: David beat me to it.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Aug 23, 2010)

ianini said:


> These are great new rules! But I had one question about the infraction/point system:
> 
> I got banned for posting in the banhammer thread and I have an infraction that is worth 5 points. Do these point accumulate over time, or just go away after a set period of time and you start out fresh?


From what ive read it looks like they expire.


> (points expire after a set amount of time, up to the moderator that created the infraction).


----------



## FatBoyXPC (Aug 23, 2010)

> Discussion about where to buy knockoffs (including V-cubes) is not allowed.



Do you mean we cannot discuss where to buy V-Cubes, or do you mean talking about V-Cubes knockoffs?

Edit: You also forgot to make the Member Introductions a link  I appreciate the fix, and will this be one of those "check here to agree" type things when a new user signs up, or is the new user expected to find the rules page?


----------



## pjk (Aug 23, 2010)

fatboyxpc said:


> > Discussion about where to buy knockoffs (including V-cubes) is not allowed.
> 
> 
> Do you mean we cannot discuss where to buy V-Cubes, or do you mean talking about V-Cubes knockoffs?


That means no discussing knockoffs (Vcube discussion is allowed, I was simply using vcubes as an example). I can see how that would be confusing. I will correct it.

Edit: It now reads:


> Discussion about where to buy knockoffs is not allowed.


----------



## Dene (Aug 23, 2010)

I wonder how these rules apply to off-topic?


----------



## ExoCorsair (Aug 23, 2010)

Use common sense. Just because a header reads "Stay on topic" doesn't mean that it doesn't apply in the off-topic forum.


----------



## Owen (Aug 23, 2010)

> This is not a place for memes.



Well, that's new.


----------



## ThatGuy (Aug 23, 2010)

> Discussion about where to buy knockoffs is not allowed.



Since some knock-offs come from China, is it also not allowed to ask about where cubes can be bought (from a store) in China? Because my mom's in China right now and a asked her to get me some 3x3x7s and Guhongs and she said that knockoff V7s can be found also sold in those places. So by asking about where I could buy Chinese brand speedcubes in China would also indirectly point to the location of knockoffs wouldn't it?


----------



## Kirjava (Aug 23, 2010)

These rules are much more comprehensive, I approve.

However, I do often multiple post. I don't think this should be a problem, since when I do it I am always adding new content that is different from the previous post. Having a new reply also allows others to see that new content is available in the thread. I bump oldish threads, too - but it's for the sake of not needlessly fragmenting information. 

I don't think the rules are targeting this behaviour specifically since I always thought what I was doing was within reason. I assume you'll take that into account when moderating. Just wanted to make a note of it.

Please let me know if what I've been doing isn't allowed anymore though.


----------



## ~Phoenix Death~ (Aug 23, 2010)

> 3. No Advertising
> Blatant advertising is rude and inappropriate. Additionally, the advertising of commercial sites, goods, or services unrelated to speedsolving is prohibited (exception: Off-Topic Discussion).


Is my signature okay?


----------



## Cyrus C. (Aug 23, 2010)

I agree with Kirjava. Often, I make a thread, and in a couple days it goes off the first page. If I add new content, I like to make a new post, or else the new content will go ignored.


----------



## ExoCorsair (Aug 23, 2010)

@ThatGuy: As long as the knock-offs are not specifically mentioned, I don't see a problem with it.

@Kirjava: The way you have been posting has been and still is fine. Keep it up. :tu

@~Phoenix Death~: Yeah, I'd say that your signature can be considered advertising but erm... it is cube-related, so I would consider that okay.

@Cyrus: Bumping to add new information is fine. Under the new rules, only bumping for attention is not (at least as I interpret it).


The issues that ThatGuy and ~Phoenix Death~ brought up are ones that should be discussed with other mods, but I don't foresee any issue with either.


----------



## qqwref (Aug 23, 2010)

The rules seem strict (not that I'm not fine with them). There are some rules that sound like they are suddenly creating a strict prohibition against things that do have legitimate uses: "I'm leaving" threads, cross-posting, +1ing, long/overexcited thread titles, image macros. I'm not saying these things are always good - in fact they're usually used in a way nobody would want - but I think the rules should reflect the idea that it is in the community's best interest for moderators to carefully consider whether reported posts help or hurt the forum, rather than act exactly according to the letter of the law.

Incidentally, posts that only contain "OMG" or "LOL" are almost never flaming. It would make sense to consider that spam, but if someone posts one of those or a similar acronym it's usually intended as a chatroom-like immediate response, and not as an insult.

About the "no knockoffs" rule: how strict are we talking? The two ends of the spectrum are (a) please don't talk about V-cube copies, and (b) if you mention or link to any puzzle produced by someone other than the original inventor or their company, your post will be deleted or heavily censored. Personally I lean much toward the (a) side. I respect puzzle inventors and patent holders as much as many others, but I can also see that it would significantly hurt the speedsolving community to prevent discussion of knockoff puzzles, if the knockoff puzzles are indeed better for speedsolving than the originals (e.g. Rubik's brand vs Haiyan/AV/F2/C2/GuHong/...).


----------



## Chapuunka (Aug 23, 2010)

qqwref said:


> About the "no knockoffs" rule: how strict are we talking? The two ends of the spectrum are (a) please don't talk about V-cube copies, and (b) if you mention or link to any puzzle produced by someone other than the original inventor or their company, your post will be deleted or heavily censored. Personally I lean much toward the (a) side. I respect puzzle inventors and patent holders as much as many others, but I can also see that it would significantly hurt the speedsolving community to prevent discussion of knockoff puzzles, if the knockoff puzzles are indeed better for speedsolving than the originals (e.g. Rubik's brand vs Haiyan/AV/F2/C2/GuHong/...).



I definitely agree with this. I've always compared the issue to TP: they're mostly about the hardware (modding, collecting, etc.), whereas we're all about the speed portion. If a cube is better for cubing, it would be more beneficial to talk about it. But maybe I'm looking at this the wrong way.


----------



## ~Phoenix Death~ (Aug 24, 2010)

Chapuunka said:


> qqwref said:
> 
> 
> > About the "no knockoffs" rule: how strict are we talking? The two ends of the spectrum are (a) please don't talk about V-cube copies, and (b) if you mention or link to any puzzle produced by someone other than the original inventor or their company, your post will be deleted or heavily censored. Personally I lean much toward the (a) side. I respect puzzle inventors and patent holders as much as many others, but I can also see that it would significantly hurt the speedsolving community to prevent discussion of knockoff puzzles, if the knockoff puzzles are indeed better for speedsolving than the originals (e.g. Rubik's brand vs Haiyan/AV/F2/C2/GuHong/...).
> ...



Edited: I agree with qqwerf also.


----------



## Edward (Aug 24, 2010)

The only one I have a problem with is the rule about image macros (yeah you know why). Images aren't abused that much here. Is there a need to be that harsh?

Everything else I'll try my best to follow strictly.

@Pheonix Death: If you read the rules, "+1" posts are not allowed. +1 is the same thing as "This."


----------



## Cyrus C. (Aug 24, 2010)

I think +1 posts should be allowed in some instances, along with a lot of other things in the rule. You might want to add somewhere that there are exceptions, and the exceptions are decided by the moderators.


----------



## ~Phoenix Death~ (Aug 24, 2010)

Cyrus C. said:


> I think +1 posts should be allowed in some instances, along with a lot of other things in the rule. You might want to add somewhere that there are exceptions, and the exceptions are decided by the moderators.



Yeah. +1 is just a way of saying "I support and/or agree with this person" along with other stuff.


----------



## Sa967St (Aug 24, 2010)

rules said:


> *Examples of Spam Posts and Threads*
> -Threads with titles containing excessive characters/punctuation.
> -Posts with blatant disregard to spelling and grammar. This is a forum, not a chat room.


Yes! Thank you! I get so sick of seeing thread titles with 3 questions marks in a row and seeing posts from people that repeatedly ignore spelling and grammar.


----------



## jms_gears1 (Aug 24, 2010)

Cyrus C. said:


> I think +1 posts should be allowed in some instances, along with a lot of other things in the rule. You might want to add somewhere that there are exceptions, and the exceptions are decided by the moderators.



I dont think that these rules are meant to be like "THIS IS FOR EVERYCASE RAWR"

More like when used correctly then its fine. The reason that they have to be strict about the rules is because people have been abusing the site quite a bit recently. 

However i think that if someone says +1 then explain why they agree, a forum is a place for discussion not just saying, "yea am agree but am not explain reason why"


----------



## Dene (Aug 24, 2010)

ExoCorsair said:


> Use common sense. Just because a header reads "Stay on topic" doesn't mean that it doesn't apply in the off-topic forum.



I didn't mean it in that sense. What I mean is that off-topic has kind of been a place to spam a bit on the odd occasion for no reason other than to make pointless posts. I don't see this as harmful as long as it is in the off-topic section where people can ignore it if they like, and posts don't count towards post count, for those of us that really care about our post counts (I will get third place back!)


----------



## ExoCorsair (Aug 24, 2010)

@qqwref: The thing is, those "don't post X" rules are in there because these posts were, more often than not, inappropriate for the threads they were in and/or did not contribute anything to the thread. These two points are the main reasons that these restrictions exist now.

If these posts happen to be appropriate for their thread (I imagine that 'this' and '+1' posts may be appropriate some poll or voting thread), then I doubt they will be modded.

As far as knock-offs go, the V-cube ones were the only example specifically mentioned in any draft of the rules, and I am led to believe that that rule was crafted with only that example in mind. I think that it would be hypocritical and silly if the intent was leaning towards your 'option b', considering that the hardware forums is littered with shops selling these puzzles. So, I too lean towards your 'option a'.


@Dene: If you want to go make an image macro thread there, go ahead. Off-topic Discussion will likely not be moderated much more than before. Mods have to use common sense too.


Every mod is probably going to have his/her own interpretation of the rules (however slight), so I can only speak for myself... did I turn into a spokesperson for this or something?


----------



## JeffDelucia (Aug 24, 2010)

Sorry but what does "image macros" mean?


----------



## Chapuunka (Aug 24, 2010)

JeffDelucia said:


> Sorry but what does "image macros" mean?





Urban Dictionary said:


> A internet forum phrase originally coined in Something Awful forums (like nearly every other internet phrase, really), this is an image with a (hopefully) funny phrase relating to the situation in the thread. They're usually intended as offensive, but are generally seen as a rather low form of "entertainment" and don't generate much heat in a flame war unless the person or thread it's aimed at is particularly sensitive.
> Thread Topic: cute kittens
> PostWhore: "My cat is really cute!"
> Joe Poster: "My cat is also very cute."
> Poster X: image of a man in spandex with the words "THIS THREAD IS GAY" superimposed over it


----------



## PeterNewton (Aug 24, 2010)

I don't agree with a bunch of this stuff but usually I'm not the one doing the stuff in question 
So who's going to be enforcing all this? Seems like a lot of work for you mods. GL.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 24, 2010)

Edward said:


> The only one I have a problem with is the rule about image macros (yeah you know why). Images aren't abused that much here. Is there a need to be that harsh?


Personally, as a SS member, I'm kinda tired of seeing random images in on-topic discussions. It's not cool when 3 kids like anime and constantly have sub-memes that no one else understands nor cares about.
Off-topic? I'm totally up for misc images. My definition of 'off-topic' includes things actually in said section, and fail threads that either should not have been made, or should be in off-topic. (although I do try to limit this )



~Phoenix Death~ said:


> Cyrus C. said:
> 
> 
> > I think +1 posts should be allowed in some instances, along with a lot of other things in the rule. You might want to add somewhere that there are exceptions, and the exceptions are decided by the moderators.
> ...


Although I've probably +1'd a handful of times throughout my posts, I have to say that they've been used way too much here.
At the very least, if you *have* to "+1," have the decency to pretend you care enough than to merely write that; perhaps comment also on WHY you like the idea.


----------



## PeterNewton (Aug 24, 2010)

Stachuk1992 said:


> ~Phoenix Death~ said:
> 
> 
> > Cyrus C. said:
> ...



Lets say someone writes a big speech on why hybrid cubes are awesome. He/she has already justified the point. The poster who says +1 doesn't need to say why he/she likes the argument; it's a vote of support for a particular perspective.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 24, 2010)

PeterNewton said:


> Lets say someone writes a big speech on why hybrid cubes are awesome. He/she has already justified the point. The poster who says +1 doesn't need to say why he/she likes the argument; it's a vote of support for a particular perspective.


You do know that threads actually have a rating system, right?
Like, you can actually rate threads. 

We should do this more often - I'm just as guilty.
Go to the top of the page, on the right, just above the first post, and you'll see "rate this thread."
I just did so, for example.


----------



## ExoCorsair (Aug 24, 2010)

PeterNewton said:


> I don't agree with a bunch of this stuff but usually I'm not the one doing the stuff in question
> So who's going to be enforcing all this? Seems like a lot of work for you mods. GL.



With what do you disagree? Here's your chance to provide some input on the new rules; it's not like they're set in stone forever.


----------



## Rikane (Aug 24, 2010)

I've seen some forums have individual post ratings. Maybe this could work too? One in particular that I remember (but not where it's from) has it just under the spot where we have the skype, youtube, facebook things and it has +x or -y depending on the ratings and possibly the names of people who upvoted.

I have no idea how much work this requires, but it's just an idea.


----------



## iasimp1997 (Aug 24, 2010)

*Good rules.*

These rules seem okay. But are occasional sarcastic/amusing pictures allowed? I'm pretty sure you all know what I mean... A good example could be the "What does IDK mean?" thread.
I'm just glad we aren't getting banned for putting "Christian Cuber" in our signatures.
:tu


----------



## ExoCorsair (Aug 24, 2010)

Rikane said:


> I've seen some forums have individual post ratings. Maybe this could work too? One in particular that I remember (but not where it's from) has it just under the spot where we have the skype, youtube, facebook things and it has +x or -y depending on the ratings and possibly the names of people who upvoted.
> 
> I have no idea how much work this requires, but it's just an idea.



You mean, a system like Stack Overflow?




iasimp1997 said:


> These rules seem okay. But are occasional sarcastic/amusing pictures allowed?



I'd try to limit them to the Off-Topic Discussion forum, if you must use them. Generally speaking, these images don't contribute anything meaningful to the threads that they're in otherwise.


----------



## Rikane (Aug 24, 2010)

Yeah, I guess, but for each post individually. I can't, for the life of me, find out where I saw it. Unfortunately, I guess I won't be much help unless I can find the forums I saw it on again.


----------



## krnballerzzz (Aug 24, 2010)

Finally, something that will hopefully help restore speedsolving to what it once started as, a friendly place to talk about cubes! Gone are the days of Youtube like threads where people constantly troll each other and create a negative environment~


----------



## Ton (Aug 24, 2010)

> Respect Others' Intellectual Property
> Do not promote stolen/copied/knockoff products. Most puzzle makers have patents on their products, and it is against the law to steal or remake their idea as your own. Discussion about where to buy knockoffs is not allowed.


As you know I am strongly Rubik's minded, but not allow to discuss "knockoff" products is not possible to judge in many cases
If you are strict you can only talk about the Rubik 3x3 , in addition the moderator have to check for each puzzle who is the inventor .

I admire this goal, but what the above in your mind when you wrote it?
What was the intension of this rule?


----------



## brunson (Aug 24, 2010)

Ton said:


> > Respect Others' Intellectual Property
> > Do not promote stolen/copied/knockoff products. Most puzzle makers have patents on their products, and it is against the law to steal or remake their idea as your own. Discussion about where to buy knockoffs is not allowed.
> 
> 
> ...


In the past I've always made the distinction based on the existence of a current patent.


----------



## shelley (Aug 24, 2010)

PeterNewton said:


> Stachuk1992 said:
> 
> 
> > ~Phoenix Death~ said:
> ...



Even if you agree with the content of someone else's post, surely you must have at least some unique perspective to contribute aside from mindlessly typing two characters. If you honestly don't have anything more to add, you might as well refrain from posting.


----------



## iasimp1997 (Aug 24, 2010)

ExoCorsair said:


> iasimp1997 said:
> 
> 
> > These rules seem okay. But are occasional sarcastic/amusing pictures allowed?
> ...



I didn't word that correctly. Say if there's a thread like "What is the best cube????????"... Sarcastic comments/pictures etc. would be permitted?


----------



## PatrickJameson (Aug 24, 2010)

iasimp1997 said:


> ExoCorsair said:
> 
> 
> > iasimp1997 said:
> ...



No. The mods will deal with the thread title. If you think the thread is silly and the OP shouldn't have his question answered seriously for whatever reason, just don't post.


----------



## Radcuber (Aug 24, 2010)

Question: Is crap a rude/offensive word?


----------



## ~Phoenix Death~ (Aug 24, 2010)

Radcuber said:


> Question: Is crap a rude/offensive word?



Not really. As long as you put a good limit to it. A lot of people say it. Stuff like b, f, and sh, or more offensive.


----------



## pjk (Aug 24, 2010)

Among everything that has been said: simply think before you post. Ask yourself: is this reasonable? Does it help anyone? Will it get me help? These rules exist to make speedsolving.com a better place. If you simply read and understand them, your intuition will tell you whether your post is worthwhile (you shouldn't have to ask: does this fit within the rules?). We aren't here to correct everything you do, make it easy on us and think before you post. It is simple.

Let's invite anyone and everyone to join our community, and welcome them to it. We were all noobs at one time, respect them, help them. No one is perfect. One thing that makes our online community unique is that a lot of us meet in person at competitions. Don't change the way you act because you're online.


----------



## Sakarie (Aug 24, 2010)

I'm not so sure about the rule against "search for it"-replys. When some people can't get enough of the "what is a good 3op guide", then you should be allowed to just answer that. Sometimes questions aren't worthy of getting a proper answer.


----------



## pjk (Aug 24, 2010)

Sakarie said:


> I'm not so sure about the rule against "search for it"-replys. When some people can't get enough of the "what is a good 3op guide", then you should be allowed to just answer that. Sometimes questions aren't worthy of getting a proper answer.


Link them to the solution and tell them how you found it so they know for next time. If they do it repetitively, report the post telling why you reported it, and we will take necessary action to prevent the user from continually asking questions that can easily be searched for.

We do send PM's to every new member telling them to search, but even with this (and a reminder before they create a topic), people still don't read it and follow the rules.


----------



## Stefan (Aug 26, 2010)

Can we get a rule against excessive quoting? Like quote trees and annoying full-quotes?


----------



## maggot (Aug 26, 2010)

as sarah stated, post with disregard for grammar and spelling. i feel sorry that my english is not the best, many times when im tired. so, should i not make posts because my english is poor? i have to point out that while a lot of people speak english very well, there are some member that like to post here that have question or comment to make but they do not have english as first language. or am i misunderstanding? 
another topic is discussion of v-cube knockoff. are we only talking about making topics of these knockoff? or is this also includes discussion of knockoff but in a general way? like for example, there are people that talk about they have YJ supercube and compare it to vcube that most people use... i have seen such post as, well, my YJ 5x5 turns better than your vcube and you practiced with it at the competition. is this not allowed? i have made posts such as, YJ 4x4 core misalignment/explosion problem in general discussion where OP asks about the cube from people who own it. am i wrong to do this? 
thank you ^^; i like the new added rule. hopefully people will not make thread that is annoying or bump meaningless thread to answer questions asked over 2 year ago by member who dont even cube anymore lol.


----------



## Stefan (Aug 27, 2010)

maggot said:


> or am i misunderstanding?



"Posts with blatant disregard to spelling and grammar."

Someone just having trouble with English isn't "blatantly disregarding". It means people like that American who never bothers to capitalize "I" or the start of a sentence.


----------



## brunson (Aug 27, 2010)

maggot said:


> as sarah stated, post with disregard for grammar and spelling. i feel sorry that my english is not the best, many times when im tired. so, should i not make posts because my english is poor? i have to point out that while a lot of people speak english very well, there are some member that like to post here that have question or comment to make but they do not have english as first language. or am i misunderstanding?



As Stefan already pointed out, if English isn't your native language or you just have trouble with it we ask is that you do your best, we're not going to hold it against you. Your best seems to be pretty good, except for your blatant disregard of the shift key. Proper capitalization makes reading your posts easier.



maggot said:


> another topic is discussion of v-cube knockoff. are we only talking about making topics of these knockoff? or is this also includes discussion of knockoff but in a general way? like for example, there are people that talk about they have YJ supercube and compare it to vcube that most people use... i have seen such post as, well, my YJ 5x5 turns better than your vcube and you practiced with it at the competition. is this not allowed? i have made posts such as, YJ 4x4 core misalignment/explosion problem in general discussion where OP asks about the cube from people who own it. am i wrong to do this?



From what I understand, the YJ infringes on the current valid patents of Verdes and his V-cubes. I will give infractions for any discussion of patent infringing knockoffs, especially discussion of where to buy them. When Verdes' patent expires, I will no longer do so. If YJ were to demonstrate that their design is materially different from Verdes and would be patentable in its own right, then the same.


----------



## masterofthebass (Aug 27, 2010)

brunson said:


> From what I understand, the YJ infringes on the current valid patents of Verdes and his V-cubes. I will give infractions for any discussion of patent infringing knockoffs, especially discussion of where to buy them. When Verdes' patent expires, I will no longer do so. If YJ were to demonstrate that their design is materially different from Verdes and would be patentable in its own right, then the same.



The rules say you aren't allowed to discuss where to get them.


----------



## FatBoyXPC (Aug 27, 2010)

masterofthebass said:


> The rules say you aren't allowed to discuss where to get them.



Or to promote them. If wanted to take to sort of an extreme, posting a review about how good a knockoff is could be taken as "promoting."


----------



## jms_gears1 (Aug 27, 2010)

fatboyxpc said:


> masterofthebass said:
> 
> 
> > The rules say you aren't allowed to discuss where to get them.
> ...


but then saying how bad they are would do the exact opposite.
IMO reviews are not promoting them, just stating whether they are good or not, would not be promoting them.

slightly off-topic: Has anyone tried to sanction YJ yet?

EDIT: does this mean kir has to stop being Kir?


----------



## FatBoyXPC (Aug 27, 2010)

jms_gears1 said:


> but then saying how bad they are would do the exact opposite.
> IMO reviews are not promoting them, just stating whether they are good or not, would not be promoting them.



Hence the "taken to an extreme."


----------



## radmin (Sep 2, 2010)

masterofthebass said:


> brunson said:
> 
> 
> > From what I understand, the YJ infringes on the current valid patents of Verdes and his V-cubes. I will give infractions for any discussion of patent infringing knockoffs, especially discussion of where to buy them. When Verdes' patent expires, I will no longer do so. If YJ were to demonstrate that their design is materially different from Verdes and would be patentable in its own right, then the same.
> ...



If you are going to have a rule like that there needs to be a taboo list. 
Cubes on the lit need documentation that they are in fact knock offs. 

Just because some people on a forum believe a patent was infringed doesn't make it so.


----------



## DavidWoner (Sep 2, 2010)

radmin said:


> Just because some people on a forum believe a patent was infringed doesn't make it so.



How about if the inventor of the product says it's a knockoff, and has asked us not to post where to buy the knockoffs? Is that good enough for you?



Rules said:


> c. Worthless Replying
> Don't reply to a post unless you have something of value to add to it. Replying with "+1" or "go search for it" is not allowed, as it does no good for the topic creator or the community. If you see this behavior and would like to respond to it, see: 1e. "Regarding Backseat Moderation".



As a reminder, this includes using Let Me Google That For You.


----------



## radmin (Sep 2, 2010)

DavidWoner said:


> How about if the inventor of the product says it's a knockoff, and has asked us not to post where to buy the knockoffs? Is that good enough for you?



If that's the case, post the request with the cube's entry in the taboo list. Simple.


----------



## Stefan (Sep 2, 2010)

DavidWoner said:


> How about if the inventor of the product says it's a knockoff



Yeah cause he has no reason for wishful thinking whatsoever. They should simply show an independent expert's opinion or better court ruling stating that for example the YJ 4x4 and 6x6 and the Maru 4x4 are illegal (I picked these cause they differ from the V-cube design), and where (as they have patents for 51 of the world's 200+ countries). All I've seen so far is claims and intimidation.

Though the point here that I think radmin was trying to make is: How do we know what we can talk about here? Are you going to punish someone for talking about a cube *he* didn't know *you* consider illegal? That's where his proposed taboo list would help. So we don't have to guess what you think.



DavidWoner said:


> Rules said:
> 
> 
> > c. Worthless Replying
> ...



Bawww. Why? As long as it's done properly (i.e. the google results are helpful), I find that ok. And much better than giving them a direct link, teaching them nothing.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Sep 3, 2010)

StefanPochmann said:


> DavidWoner said:
> 
> 
> > Rules said:
> ...


Yes, when one sees a post that is quite easy to Google for, then while it may be taken as a slap in the face if they choose to perceive it that way, the root cause to respond with a LMGTFY link is to teach. Whether that post is to be a slap in the face or not should be evident in the rest of the post. If the rest of said post is blank, then one should not assume hostility.


----------



## qqwref (Sep 3, 2010)

StefanPochmann said:


> DavidWoner said:
> 
> 
> > Rules said:
> ...



Strong disagree. LMGTFY is little better than linking to a page with the text "YOU ARE AN IDIOT LOLOL" in a large flashing font with bright colors. If you want to tell people to use Google, why can't you link to the Google search itself? It sends the same message without being an ass about it. Here's the thing: sometimes people other than the intended recipient (for example, I) will click on a link to see if someone has found an cool site that they didn't know about. I don't want to be treated like a moron just for believing in good faith that someone like you might actually have an interesting link to post.

Besides, how is posting a LMGTFY link any better (or any different, even) than just saying "check Google for it" or "use the search function"? Again, same message, but you are being an ass about it. If you honestly think that a worthless reply is made less worthless by also being condescending, I do not know what to tell you.


----------



## uberCuber (Sep 3, 2010)

StefanPochmann said:


> Can we get a rule against excessive quoting? Like quote trees and annoying full-quotes?



I second this. I am tired of having to search through ridiculously long quotes to find the one or two sentences that the reply is actually referring to. And even if the entire quoted post is relevant to the reply, there is absolutely no need to repost the entire thing. When you quote something, the quote box links back to the original post.


----------



## PatrickJameson (Sep 3, 2010)

uberCuber said:


> StefanPochmann said:
> 
> 
> > Can we get a rule against excessive quoting? Like quote trees and annoying full-quotes?
> ...



If quote trees get excessive, they will be included under rule 2a(spam) and either be modified or deleted. The first thread provided by Stefan was previously closed. I've edited the other link just to be consistent.


----------



## uberCuber (Sep 3, 2010)

PatrickJameson said:


> uberCuber said:
> 
> 
> > StefanPochmann said:
> ...



I figured that quote trees would already be targeted by the rules; my comment was more directed at the annoying full-quote part, when someone quotes a single, long post when it isn't at all necessary to make people look at the entire post again.


----------



## PatrickJameson (Sep 3, 2010)

uberCuber said:


> PatrickJameson said:
> 
> 
> > uberCuber said:
> ...



There are many examples of what is considered spam in the appendices of the rules. These are mere examples. As PJK stated before, intuition should guide you and everyone else on the forum. It's all about severity. If the post is huge, then sure, we can edit/PM the user/give infractions if it is extreme.

If PJK wants to add a specific example about quote trees/annoy quotes, that's fine. But we won't start adding every single thing that you could possibly do wrong. That would be quite a long list that would never be complete.


----------



## Stefan (Sep 3, 2010)

qqwref said:


> LMGTFY is little better than linking to a page with the text "YOU ARE AN IDIOT LOLOL" in a large flashing font with bright colors.



Alright, won't use lmgtfy anymore and only use direct google links, but only for the sake of the bystanders. I see no problem with making someone aware that he's an idiot.



qqwref said:


> how is posting a LMGTFY link any better (or any different, even) than just saying "check Google for it" or "use the search function"?



1. It makes sure that a reasonable search exists and works (sometimes people say "search!" and even I have trouble actually finding it even when I know what they mean).
2. It makes sure they see that this reasonable search exists and works.
3. It answers their request.



qqwref said:


> Again, same message, but you are being an ass about it. If you honestly think that a worthless reply is made less worthless by also being condescending, I do not know what to tell you.



What is your solution then? How would you reply?


----------



## Kirjava (Sep 3, 2010)

What cube should I get? What's the best method? Should I get the LanYan or wait for the Guhong6? Should I get it assembled or DIY? What lube is the best? What tension should I set my cubes to?

A disturbing amount of questions that can simply be answered with "whatever lol". This happens all too frequently.

Is this not obvious? Does anyone else feel these threads dilute information and lead to a complete lack of substance? Maybe I'm just annoyed by the poor wording of these questions hiding the true intentions the author had in mind to ask. On the other hand, maybe they actually think a best cube exists.

I doubt rules changes could cover questions that have no real answer. I don't know if I even want them to. I'm just ranting.


----------



## BluePi1313 (Sep 5, 2010)

Wait, if we are not allowed to talk about KO cubes, that means we can't talk about the maru 4x4, and 3x3s, right? (if that is right, please make this as an exception, I was just asking a question)


----------



## senopath (Sep 6, 2010)

Exception? NO.
The rules has to be consistent.
If we are not allowed talk about KO that means including all 3x3, except rubiks brand, and this forum will become like twistipuzzle, which is 'not speedsolver orientation' but 'inventor orientation'.
That's su*k for speedsolver.

P.s.: My english is su*k, is it better if I'm not posting?

EDIT: Why vcubes KO got cencor but the others not? just wonder..


----------



## qqwref (Sep 6, 2010)

Maybe we should just say "don't discuss V-Cube knockoffs" as the rule, if the exception in practice is going to be "anything but V-cube". It would be a lot more clear that way. I think nobody wants this forum to be as restricted as twistypuzzles is.


----------



## hawkmp4 (Sep 7, 2010)

senopath said:


> Exception? NO.
> The rules has to be consistent.
> If we are not allowed talk about KO that means including all 3x3, except rubiks brand, and this forum will become like twistipuzzle, which is 'not speedsolver orientation' but 'inventor orientation'.
> That's su*k for speedsolver.
> ...



Knockoffs are puzzles that infringe patents. Not all 3x3s besides Rubik's brands are knockoffs.


----------



## senopath (Sep 7, 2010)

qqwref said:


> Maybe we should just say "don't discuss V-Cube knockoffs" as the rule, if the exception in practice is going to be "anything but V-cube". It would be a lot more clear that way. I think nobody wants this forum to be as restricted as twistypuzzles is.



Yuph..
Then why vcube got cencor but the other not?



hawkmp4 said:


> senopath said:
> 
> 
> > Exception? NO.
> ...



Ask Ton for that.


----------

