Forum Rules 12 (1 March 2024)

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Added: rule on post coherency / punctuation / spelling, rule on bumping topics.

 

[uk 75]

Sorry, I am a bit dim.
What does "bumping" topics mean in plain English?
If it means restarting old threads I am guilty but it seems a good way of sharing the comnents in them with newcomers.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

It means posting in a topic purely to bring it to everyone's attention without contributing anything meaningful to the discussion.

Posts in topics should have a purpose beyond bumping the topic to the front page, be that an observation or reply germane to the topic, a reference found, a picture discovered.

Yes, you are guilty of this behaviour somewhat, but you do make an effort to create an actual post and reengage with the topic. The particularly irritating behaviour is a no-content post purely hoping to provoke a reaction, especially when its your topic and you keep doing it repeatedly in a short time.

 

[Archibald]

Bottom line: before bumping a thread (very old or not), check whether your post makes sense and has any value.

 

[uk 75]

I have resurrected old threads (not always mine) if I thought the subject might be relevant to topics being discussed now and newer members might find them useful.
I will try and ensure I dont bring back any where others have not contributed some good stuff.

 

[dan_inbox]

Added: rule on post coherency / punctuation / spelling, rule on bumping topics.

Maybe there should also be a reminder rule that fanart, personal model builds, model kits for sale, etc do NOT belong in any other section than User Artwork and Models.

The sloppiness and the spam are on the rise.

Edit: the Marketplace section could also be a home for all kits for sale.

 

[Apophenia]

Maybe there should also be a reminder rule that fanart, personal model builds, model kits for sale, etc do NOT belong in any other section than User Artwork and Models.
..

Does that 'NOT' apply to the Alternative History and Future Speculation section? If so, guilty as charged.

My rationale was that those attachments were attempts to illustrate concepts, not 'artwork' efforts. That said, I'm happy to go back and delete such images ...

 

[H_K]

My rationale was that those attachments were attempts to illustrate concepts, not 'artwork' efforts.

I agree, visuals (of all kinds) are an important part of the Alternative History discussions.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

It is already the case that fanart / non-manufacturer models should be excluded from the core "Projects" topics in most instances. You can report any instances of this with the report button.

An exception would be an attempt to create a 3 view drawing from, say, photos or artwork where no drawing exists, and where it is clearly marked so nobody considers it as an original drawing.

Alternative History - I guess that it makes sense to allow speculative illustrations here.

 

[uk 75]

I have posted models built for me at times to illustrate a particular project and always make it clear that the model is a modern one and not original. But I have not done so in the Projects sections for some time.

 

[dan_inbox]

Does that 'NOT' apply to the Alternative History and Future Speculation section? If so, guilty as charged.

Indeed. I was thinking of the "serious" sections.