In the vulgarity portion of the rules, there is nothing that mentions avatars or signature lines. In the past, I have had some avatars which I knew were a bit stupid which were up for a while before I was asked to remove them and happily complied. Then, as most moderators probably remember, I got really pissed off when my Hunter Thompson quote with auto censored PG words was voted on to be unacceptable.
Here's my problem. I have no issue with an absurdly censoring set of rules. After all, this site was turned into a profit machine, and you can't offend your customers. But to be blunt, the rules here, as they stand now, amount to an issue of popularity and political correctness voting of the moderators when it comes to avatars and signature lines. People with more PG13+ avatars and sig lines than I ever had have had no problems. This is really, really stupid and unfair.
Why does this go on? Would it be too hard to write something in about avatars and sig lines with nudity, sexuality, profanity to include the PG words that BF auto censors, and political view points?
The BikeForums Team
-adv-
This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content here.
Thanks, Mich. You can be sure we'll be doing some hard thinking and major discussion about your point.
Michigander
Thanks.:)
monogodo
Thanks, Mich. You can be sure we'll be doing some hard thinking and major discussion about your point.
Why? It should be a given. On the forum where I'm a Super Moderator, the same rules that apply to posts apply to avatars and signatures. If either is in violation, they are removed by the Admins/Super Mods, and the member is PMd with the reason. Since it's impossible for the Admins/Super Mods/Mods to catch them all, they also rely on the members reporting each other. The rules are clearly posted in the Forum Rules, which are linked to in the PM to the member. Moderation of the Avatars and Sigs should be done fairly and equally, without regard to the member's status or standing within the community or history within the community.
Michigander
Thats great for you, but as I specifically laid out in my original post, that's not how it's worded in the rules here, and that's not how it's enforced.
monogodo
Thats great for you, but as I specifically laid out in my original post, that's not how it's worded in the rules here, and that's not how it's enforced.
I'm agreeing with you. What I have issue with is donnamb's post stating that they'll be thinking hard about it and discussing it. There should be no need to "think about it" or "discuss it."
All rules should be enforced fairly and equally by all admins/mods. If they've set precedents by asking you to change your avatar/signature, or by deleting your avatar/signature, then they should be holding every one of us to that same standard. If they've chosen to relax those standards, they should let us know that they've done so.