Show me the rule

[Beavah]

This may be very unpopular, but as a rule, there should be no eponymous threads.

 

Yah, so I must be new to da forums, eh?

 

When we run into da folks who are always tryin' to pass off some new bit of urban legend "rule" about scouting, our typical response is "Oh, really? Can yeh show me where that is written down?"

 

So, can yeh?

 

 

[FScouter]

Article XI, Section 44, paragraph 9 of the Offishall Forum Rules: "There shall be no eponymous topics".

 

We moderators make 'em up whenever needed.

 

[packsaddle]

Yeah, this came up possibly before Beavah joined the forums but I remember at least one situation where something similar happened with regard to a thread that focused on another outspoken member who no longer posts here, at least not that I have noticed for quite a while. It's a judgment call but if the thread title can stand better without a personal reference, it might be viewed as less of a 'stick-in-the-eye'. But I have heard the 'Eponymous Thread' rule before. My 0.02

 

Edit: I should add that I asked OGE about this when I first saw the thread title. I wasn't sure what to think about it at the time and I wasn't sure about my memory of the 'rules' but I am the one who called his attention to it.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[SSScout]

Electronic young equine rodent?

[NJCubScouter]

Above the thread list for the Issues and Politics forum is a "Disclaimer" with a link to the "rules of decorum" for the forum. Clicking that link brings you to a post from 2002 from Terry, the owner of this web site (and let's not allow the fact that he does not throw his weight around this forum to let us forget that he IS the owner of this web site, and we are his guests). That post states in pertinent part as follows"

 

"I will enforce two rules (maybe more later, at my discretion ;-):

 

1. Keep the debate honest.

2. Treat each other with respect.

 

... basically, act Scout like."

 

Additionally, Terry has appointed several moderators and has empowered them to enforce the rules and generally "keep order." I'm guessing that the moderators see threads (especially in Issues and Politics) that have a user's name in the title as infringing on Rule Number 2, treat each other with respect. If that is indeed their view, I agree with them. While many of the I & P threads tend to stray into personalities rather than the positions being taken, these particular threads automatically focus attention on a particular poster and almost guarantee that the thread will be about that person rather than the issue itself. They also sometimes hold a person up to ridicule, which I think was the case with the most recent example. So I think this type of thread does tend to breed disrespect for other posters and therefore falls well within the moderators' discretion in enforcing Rule Number 2.

[Eamonn]

"So, can yeh?"

Nope!

But...

I'm kinda happy to go along with what NJCubScouter posted.

A lot of what isn't acceptable isn't written down as something that might be termed a rule but the way I see it we don't need a big book of rules.

Ea

 

 

[OldGreyEagle]

basically it's a rule because I say it's a rule

[JoeBob]

My thanks for the vocabulary lesson.

I'm not too proud to admit that I had to look up 'eponymous'.

[evmori]

I love a dictatorial democracy!