Here We Are - Discussion on Rule 11 changes

[Tobus]

Perhaps we should take it upon ourselves to quote the rules as has been done elsewhere within the forums? For example,

Rule #11 (amended 4 April, 2013)
(for the purpose of this forum, "Weapon" is defined as anything that is designed for, or is used to, injure.)
- The laws governing, and/or the views surrounding, the topics: 1) The 'right to bear arms', 2) The ownership, possession, carry and use of weapons, 3) Hunting, and 4) Self-defense, are specific to each country or region. Any discussion of these topics will be closed or deleted.

Bold added by me.

It is clear that some have taken to violate this very point by specifically advocating their "views surounding...the ownership" of weapons. And so therefore should be "closed or deleted".

I'd recommend deletion of such inflamatory posts, as they appear to be specifically intended to sidetrack this thread, have nothing to do with the OP and are in clear violation of Rule #11.

How's that?

Spartan Tartan covered my thoughts on this. It's pretty clear that Phil's response was an inflammatory venting of his personal feelings on weapons (not just the rule change, but going off on atrocities and such). I don't know how much more obvious it gets that his "views surrounding" weapons is in violation of the new rules. The proper place to post that would have been in the thread where we discussed a possible rule change. Not the new subforum. Our new subforum is now polluted with exactly the kind of stuff we wanted to avoid. And sure enough, it's leading to further discussion on the topic, as Urbane Guerrilla's response shows.

So what do I suggest? Exactly what the rule prescribes. Nothing more.

*edited to add: I suppose you're right - this thread shouldn't have been in that forum to begin with, as it was really more of a commentary on the rule change. I'm glad it's out of the new subforum now.