From the original thread:
View attachment 8372
User states: Rules don't say to not ABUSE therefore it is not punishable. Common sense tells us of course it's punishable. Exploiting rule also applies.
Thanks.
@Festive Steve H Oswald the fact that you decide to ignore what everyone else has said and only decided to bash my comment completely out of context makes your argument irrelevant. If you want to argue with me about what common sense is or not this is not the thread for it.
You seem to be misunderstanding the purpose of my posts here. This is a friendly debate we're having here. You seem to be taking this whole thing much more personally than intended. We're all friends here, nothing anywhere close to "bashing" is going on here. What it comes down to is that your post happened literally hours before the thread was created, and it was the perfect example as to why the rule isn't good. While we're here, though, let's go ahead and pick this post apart.
the fact that you decide to ignore what everyone else has said and only decided to bash my comment completely out of context makes your argument irrelevant.
At the time of me posting my response to you, there were only three other responses, which were indirectly acknowledged. The responses were, "we can't add literally everything to the rules." You'd see my response to this, if you chose to read it instead of actively disregarding it because you were the only person who was quoted. I'll say it again, though, to save everybody the time of scrolling through 4 pages of banter.
I liked Jim's answer of "do not exploit." You don't even need to specifically write out each and every scenario, you just need it to fall under the umbrella of one of our bigger rules. People are a lot more likely to accept, "abusing our firing system to get free freedays." as an exploit than, "oh it's just common sense." All the admins have been interpreting this thread as, "write down more rules forever," when in reality you don't really need to do that. If you can just come up for reasons why something is against the rules given our current ruleset, then it's against the rules, and when somebody is banned you can just point to the rule.
Common sense tells us of course it's punishable. Exploiting rule also applies.
So here's the thing, if a rule falls under the "do not exploit" category, it doesn't need to fall under a "Common sense" category. That's like if your mother caught you doing heroin, and when you ask why you should stop she says, "Because it's extremely dangerous but also because I said so."
If you want to argue with me about what common sense is or not this is not the thread for it.
You know full well that isn't what's being argued here. The whole purpose of talking about what is considered "common sense" is to point out that rules already apply to these situations. There is no need to for a common sense rule. You can't write something down in a rule and say, "okay so you aren't allowed to do this just so everybody knows." and then when somebody breaks the rule say, "yeah it's common sense, bud." It's literally written what the rule is and what the rule entitles. It's not that it's a matter of common sense, it's a matter of a specific rule actually being broken. And would you like to know why I keep bringing up the post you made in the other thread? Because it is evidence that shows this. Jim gives a very reasonable answer as to why abusing !fire is not allowed. He cites an exact rule, and his reasoning makes perfect sense. But then we just go and throw in, "oh it's common sense, that's the rule that would be broken." And the biggest kicker is that it isn't even common sense. A thread had to be made asking whether or not it was against the rules.
I don't know why I'm continuing on replying to this thread. You're clearly not willing to listen and you took every single point I made and simply disregarded them because you didn't like my opinion. And like I said last time, you've already made up your mind.
