As a lot of you guys know by now, I struggle writing rules. I’m looking to get feedback on some rules written by a helpful user, that I really think should be implemented because they are clear and actually show the intent I have.
-
No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee’s rules.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, anti centrist or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and pointing out the failures of our ideological interlocutors. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Be Civil. Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but no personal attacks from either side will be tolerated.
-
No Extremism. Calls for violence, pushing a narrative of religious, gender, sexual or racial supremacy, or any other forms of extremist rhetoric will be met with a permenant ban. Extreme statements which label an entire group are also unacceptable and may result in a temporary suspension.
-
Be Excellent To Each Other. Remember the people you are arguing with are humans, and although you may disagree on the method, we are all looking to make a world where life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is freely available to all.
What do you guys think?
A “no sensationalist titles” rule might be a good one. Otherwise you tend to get posts like “Obama is the anticrist” for wearing a tan suit or using mustard. Or you get posts insinuating that the V.A. is paying for migrant healthcare when in reality the V.A. is paying for processing.
Such a rule might be indistinguishable from a “no low quality news sources” rule.