If that's your logic then should we first do psyche evaluations on recruits?

Wouldn't mind it, as the fact that you have money doesn't also make you an immature asshole, BUT being a donator, and being agreed on that you fit into the ideology of our community does give you the right to vote on the rules that you are going to enforce :)

Just because people have money doesn't give them the ability to vote, being an administrator does, which comes from donations and good standing. People who have their admin removed do not get the right to vote, therefore it keeps the "immature assholes" out.

Yeah, I'd agree with you on that point. I don't think every admin there was 100% qualified. I personally think that the rule should be kept as it is because of the psychological effect it leaves on the players. If you see a vague rule, you're a little more scared to try going around it because you don't know if you can get away with it, like you can with rules that are specific.

In the instance of sprays, people have put gore on because they knew our rule said no porn, but nothing about gore, so they used that specification to have leverage. But, if they don't know if it's allowed, it'll at least put a thought in their mind of, "Is this going to get me banned," which is really what I think should be happening. People should think about their actions more than they do now. Granted, as you've seen, it won't work a lot of the times, but it'll at least give us an idea of who even gives a damn about the rules, and those who were putting those sprays are the same ones that I'd have already punished if I were on at the time, since they're the same ones who don't actually give a fuck whether what they're doing affects other people.

At the same time, I could also see a more specific rule being helpful, but keep in mind that just like the actual law, the more specific you try to make it, the more rules you'll need to put in to truly stop people from finding any loopholes, meaning it'll just start a cycle of expanding rules, which may sound good, but it's really not. No player is going to want to sit through 100+ rules just to play JB. Then, nobody will read or care about the rules (except admins of course).

Beep boop.

This is 100% completely the point.

6 Pages, 54 Posts, Damn.

False. Once again, there is a no smart ass rule.

Once again, if you believe the no smart ass rule is relevant, why even change it in the first place, as it is adding unnecessary complication to the rules when it's covered anyway?

You have a very good point, except that the smart ass rule is the hardest to enforce, as almost nobody ever listens to it in Jailbreak. I mean, it sort of goes against the point of jailbreak, which is to deceive prisoners so you can kill them and get one of them LR. The one that I think you should be trying to use is that being an asshole can get you banned. However, that's also hardly enforced by a lot of the admins.

So, neither of those rules will really help the case very much. As I said before, I find it to be a problem of admins not listening or paying attention at admin meetings rather than it being a problem of an improper rule.

Beep boop.

Once again, more than enough people misinterpret the rule, thus there must be specification as there was previously. Add the specifications back. Moot wrote an example of a rule in his first post, and that is how it should be. All other reasons in my main post also apply to this notion.

As for the no smart ass rule, it prohibits any loopholes around rules. (Obviously) (I don't even know why I have to point that out to you...)

The rule we have in place at least allows the admins who actually do pay attention and know how to work with people, a broad basis to go on to allow the server to be kept at an acceptable limit when it comes to offensive content (this includes in chat and on mics, not just sprays)

Beep boop.