[Cspace]

The 'images of real-life violence or death' rule has been amended to the following:

Images Of Real-Life Violence Or Death: Even though it could sometimes appear in the news, this should not be viewed by the younger age group here. The posting of any dead people (from war or anything else), anyone pointing a real gun at another person (a toy or a gun in a movie or game is usually okay if not exceedingly graphic), or anyone who has been terribly injured by violence does not belong here. The posting of a dead or obviously injured person will result in up to a 10-day suspension after a warning, and the posting of a real gun being pointed at a real living thing other than game animal will result in up to a 7-day suspension after a warning. The post may be deleted in either case. The posting of a target in a known movie is fine. If desired, you may post someone hunting a game animal (like a deer), but please do not show the dead animal. Paintballing photographs are fine, regardless of how painful, you brought it upon yourself .

[Xemem]

...what was the rule before?

[Baseballl]

9 Day suspension without a warning. (16 days for the human one)

[Jake]

what happenned?

[Xemem]

so this basically breaks it down more and makes more specific disciplines for violation of different aspects of the rule?

[Baseballl]

Same rule, but it was relaxed.

[Star Jedi]

Basically, the rule was changed from the old one to the new one because it was a bit old.. So it was revised a bit The things that changed are the 16 day suspension to 10 days for posting a dead or obviously injured person and from 9 days to 7 days for posting a real gun pointed at a real living thing.

Although, it says no suspension should be given without a warning given out in the open first

So yeah, like Base said, it was relaxed a little.

[Xemem]

Rite then...I understand now.

It may behoove me to actually read the rules some time, lol. I usually, go off the idea that just about all forums below, certain um...ratings, operate off a similar set of rules.

[Raktor]

/me doesn't agree with the game animal thing, poor deers

[Goto]

And I think there should be an amendment that allows the shooting of people that make bad puns.

[Kimojuno]

And I think there should be an amendment that allows the shooting of people that make bad puns. 

Yes like this: I one knew a man from nintucket....

[Joseph]

Well, thats a good rule, I guess. But maybe you should ammend it again to say that you need to post a warning in your post and then give a link to the picture... not actually posting it.

[darkaao]

The website under my sig dosent have eny pictures of death, or enything really really bad for that matter....but still im removeing it, just so i dont get into trouble...

[STOPTHATPIG]

Cspace its wrong your promoting animal abuse i disagree its ok to point a gun at animal
tht should be changed

[Cspace]

Cspace its wrong your promoting animal abuse i disagree its ok to point a gun at animal
tht should be changed

If we were to enforce the idea that hunting is wrong, with respect to the freedom we try to provide it would be borderline censorship. Simply because it's allowed doesn't mean the site promotes the idea, it's just that we have the option available for the sake of providing freedom of expression within logical bounds. Showing a hunter doesn't really hurt anyone unless there is some negative connotation that transcends the concept itself (such as a related message that is blatantly offensive).

If one wishes to debate against hunting, then the door is open to you in the Debate Forum.

However, that's a topic on which the community as a whole will not have a set view. Not allowing such images would set a stance in an issue that isn't really in our domain, so we generally allow it for the sake of expression.

(and in case you're wondering, I don't hunt)