MeatLoafFan Posted:

Fine. How about, examples of what a shock picture would consist of?

You’ve never seen a shock picture? Seriously? This term is somehow unknown to you?

MeatLoafFan Posted:

How about there’s a clause such as “Regardless of the above definitions, if you have posted an obvious shock picture, we will ban you”.

Then people would **** that the rule isn’t creating a solid line, but instead defining a very foggy one, and pretend they don’t have a sense of when they’re pushing it, blaming it all on a moderator’s (always incorrect) decision. Having “examples of rulebreaking” followed by “And we’ll ban you even if these examples don’t apply” is functionally equivalent to not having the examples.

MeatLoafFan Posted:

That’s not creating a solid line, it’s creating a very foggy one, people have a sense of when they’re pushing it, and it’s still the moderators complete choice.

The reason people are calling for more exact rules is to make it less “the moderator’s complete choice.” That is, generally, the purpose of written law – to remove the chance for abuses of power from those who adjudicate and enforce the law. In normal society, when we’re talking about people’s actual lives and rights, I’m generally in favor of limitation on executive power. In an online game’s trolling RP forums… less so.